Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site gatech.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!gatech!owens
From: owens@gatech.UUCP (Gerald R. Owens)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: alternatives...(population stress reactions)
Message-ID: <6412@gatech.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Apr-84 13:12:53 EST
Article-I.D.: gatech.6412
Posted: Mon Apr 23 13:12:53 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 24-Apr-84 19:27:06 EST
References: <830@psuvm.UUCP>, <6349@gatech.UUCP>, <885@dciem.UUCP>
Organization: Georgia Tech School of ICS, Atlanta
Lines: 46

***********Quote from Mr. Taylor************
I think that the raging about abortion and choice has been addressing
the wrong issues.  It DOESN'T matter whether we label the fetus as human.
We (generically) kill humans quite happily, either deliberately through
sanctioned wars, less deliberately by allowing unsafe conditions to exist,
or by pure accident.  We also kill other animals (and vegetables) so that
we may live (or live more comfortably than we might otherwise do).  Seen
from the viewpoint of a God who might have some proprietary interest, or
of an extra-terrestrial doing a little research, why should we assume
we have more rights than they, other than the purely selfish motive?
***********End of quote*********************

If we simply intend to kill, then yes, this discussion is a waste of
time.  If human life is no more valuable than anything else, then
distinctions are silly.  However, we behave in ways that seem to
belie that.  Why bother with murder?  Why bother about those kids in
the first place??  i.e. why worry about suffering if their lives are
no more valuable than a snail darters?  Is there anybody out there
who truly wishes to live in a society where lives are held to be of
little value?  Of course, such a society has not existed for long.
one may quote pragmatics, but why should we have a society at all, then?

******Start of quote*******
There are at least two contrasting approaches to the moral issues:
(i) Stick to your principles, even at the cost of your life -- and the
lives of those around you;
(ii) Adjust your behaviour to the circumstances.

The choice depends on whether you think THIS life is the only one you
have, and whether you think you have the right to force others to
rely for their survival on your belief.
******End of quote********** 

I naturally choose (ii), since that is one of the distinguishing
features of the human race.  If I am not mistaken, the Pro-choice people
adhere to (i), sticking to their principles of free choice, even at the
cost of the lives of others (although they do not explain why THEIR
comfort and convenience should dictate the death of an innocent human
being like the fetus).  Oh!  Was I supposed to choose the other way??
But good government and good religion has always had, as their goal, the
adjustment of behavior if other people would be hurt by it.  That is, to
me, the essence of civilized behavior.

				Gerald Owens
				Owens@gatech