Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cmu-cs-edu1!hua
From: hua@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA (Ernest Hua)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: re: The Moral Vacuum (especially for Ken Arndt)
Message-ID: <240@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 18-Apr-85 01:41:39 EST
Article-I.D.: cmu-cs-e.240
Posted: Thu Apr 18 01:41:39 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Apr-85 03:31:17 EST
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 89

___________________________________________________________________________

> > quotes showing discussion of possible inconsistencies of anti-
> > abortionists who bomb abortion clinics.
>
> { From: arndt@lymph.DEC }
>
> The above dialog is VERY interesting.  The reposter directly above believes
> we must all obey the LAW even if we hold to other moral views.  The LAW is
> the final court of appeal - not conscience!!

Preliminary question:  Whose conscience should we base the "final court
of appeal" on?

> Never mind that this kind of thinking stands against yonks of moral
> philosophy throughout the history of mankind, or that it displays a child-
> like 'faith' in the rightness of the LAW and complete ignorance of how it
> is formulated or what it is based on.

Ken, please tell us what "yonks of moral philosophy throughout the history
of mankind" are violated when The Law is the basis for the "final appeal".
(Of course, do give us more than just one-sided moral philosophies.  In
other words, do not confine your examples to just Christian philosophies or
European philosophies or whatever.)

Please also specify how this "displays a child-like faith in the righteous-
ness of The Law and complete ignorance of how it is formulated or what it
is based on."  (ie. What exactly do you think the law is based on?  How
does the acceptance of The Law as the final authority show a child-like
faith, based upon your previous answer?  ...)

> HE APPEARS NEVER TO HAVE HEARD OF 'UNJUST' LAWS, EITHER TODAY OR IN THE PAST
> (SUCH AS THE AMERICAN DEC. OF INDP.)

Of course there are unjust laws.  I am against a lot of laws.  I think
the abortion law is unjust; women should be able to have abortions up
until the moment of birth.  (This is my opinion, of course.  If laws
of your liking gets passed, and I think they are unjust, based upon
what you have said thus far, I am perfectly justified in bombing the
legislature because they have passed an unjust law ... IN MY OPINION.
I do not see how my opinion is any more righteous than yours, or the
mad bombers.)

> According to him, all a dictator has to do is pass a LAW that the LAW can
> no longer be changed or resisted and hey presto!  Captive nation.

That is why the US government is not a dictatorship.  It has a special
attribute called balance of powers (many other technical phrases
possible, any political scientists know of the correct term/usage?).
In short, this is for protecting the nation from your suggestion.

> WHAT THE HECK WERE WWII AND THE WAR CRIMES TRIALS ALL ABOUT????

They were tried according to OUR laws.  If they won the war, they
would not have been tried because they did not commit any crimes,
according to THEIR laws.

> Remember, "I was just following orders.", is not a defense!!!!!

Depends upon the frame of reference and situation.  If the person
has no other alternatives (e.g. wife held hostage, etc...), I do
not think he will be canned.  On the other hand, if he DID have a
reasonable choice in the matter, he probably would pay for it.  Of
course, this also depends upon the extent of the damage that he
could have suffered compared to the extent of the damage he caused.

> Back to my point - make it legal to bomb abortion clinics!!!!!!!
> The poster above should have no trouble with that once it is LAW.
> He even, if he were a member of the police, protect those who do the
> bombing, eh?

I prefer to make it legal to mutilate ... ugh! did I say that
nasty word again?! ... I mean "bomb" ... your house.  :-)  I
should have no trouble with that; or anything else which hinders
people like you who have no respect for the opinions of anyone
but yourselves.  YOU are the one that display great signs of child-
like faith.  One of the things that one learns when one grows up
is the lack of absolutes in a pluralistic society.  You haven't
the foggiest idea what that means ... yet.

Of course, if you are joking about making it legal to bomb
abortion clinics, please ignore this post; I really cannot
tell whether you are serious or not, given the situation &
context.
___________________________________________________________________________

Live long and prosper.

Keebler { hua@cmu-cs-gandalf.arpa }