Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84 chuqui version 1.7 9/23/84; site daisy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!hplabs!nsc!daisy!david
From: david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.politics,net.legal
Subject: Re: Re. Mike Huybensz's comments on Vet kills baby
Message-ID: <68@daisy.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Feb-85 02:54:25 EST
Article-I.D.: daisy.68
Posted: Tue Feb 26 02:54:25 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Feb-85 09:38:05 EST
References: <699@decwrl.UUCP>
Reply-To: david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter)
Organization: Daisy Systems Corp., Mountain View, Ca
Lines: 15
Xref: utcs net.religion:5603 net.politics:7585 net.legal:1463
Summary: 


Mr. Arndt takes issue with Mr. Huybensz' comments on Infanticide.  Infanticide
has been practiced by many cultures.  Our culture is not one of these.  Just as
we see infanticide as immoral, so too would other cultures see our permitting
"excess" infants to live be immoral.

Does that make it "right" to kill unwanted new-borns?  No.  "Right" and "wrong"
are defined by the culture in which one is embedded.  In our culture,
infanticide is defined as "wrong."

The planet has a finite carrying capacity.  Some method must be found for
insuring that we do not exceed this capacity.  Infanticide is, to me, an
unpalatable approach.  Would Mr. Arndt care to propose another approach?
(Preferably one demonstrated to work and more acceptable than the [proven]
method of infanticide.  Celibacy has been proven to NOT work.)