Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site charm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!mhuxj!mhuxi!charm!slag
From: slag@charm.UUCP (Peter Rosenthal)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: laura's axioms
Message-ID: <317@charm.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10-Apr-84 14:19:21 EST
Article-I.D.: charm.317
Posted: Tue Apr 10 14:19:21 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Apr-84 07:30:46 EST
References: <7455@watmath.UUCP>, <3722@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: Physics Research - AT&T Bell Labs MH
Lines: 26

YANBO         

	To assume that any question has only absolutely right
and wrong answers is a mistake.  Every act a person takes
engenders an uncountable number of consequences. Some
of these consequences are good for some people but bad for
others.  Some are good for most people.  Some stink for
most people.
	To say that "abortion is wrong" is to ignore
the circumstance of each separate situation in favor
of the all encompassing generalization.  I find this
dangerous.  It makes much more sense to me to look
at serious problems with an open mind.  To use
the contexts of previous experiences and future
possibilities not as dogmas but as guidelines.  

	I don't believe that we will ever know
what is absolutely right or wrong. The best we
can do is continually reevaluate our understanding
in terms of our circumstance.  That is why 
things aren't black or white.


	I think its a cop out to ignore the many
sides of a question by forcing a pure evil versus
pure good answer out of it.