Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: inconsistencies
Message-ID: <3555@alice.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Apr-85 00:30:21 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.3555
Posted: Thu Apr 11 00:30:21 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 11-Apr-85 05:08:14 EST
References: <328@ttidcc.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill
Lines: 30

>> If the government were rounding up random citizens and shooting them,
>> and people started bombing the executioners' offices, would you
>> say that they shouldn't do that because it's illegal?  Have you
>> heard of Auschwitz?

> Calling in visions of the attempted genocide of the Jews to illustrate a
> point about abortion is tenuous, and you know that.  You don't even have
> to reach that far for an analogy.  The jews were viable organisms -
> independent people. And the Nazi's were gonna do away with them _all_.

No it's not tenuous.

Various people have tried to convince me that legal abortion
is equivalent to government-condoned slaughter of one and
a half MILLION innocent human beings a year.

I am saying that if you really believe this, then you have
no choice to believe that the situation is indeed comparable
to the atrocities committed by the Nazis before and during
World War II.

That is why, when someone tells me that millions of people
are being murdered a year, but violent protest is inappropriate,
my response is: "If you really believe what you're saying,
then of COURSE violent protest is appropriate.  On the other
hand, if you really believe that violence is out, then
you don't really think abortion is murder."

Please note that I am equating two beliefs, and not saying
anything about whether or not I hold either one.