Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2(pesnta.1.2) 9/5/84; site scc.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!decwrl!sun!idi!pesnta!scc!steiny From: steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Re: Are Laws what is really needed? Message-ID: <525@scc.UUCP> Date: Sun, 28-Jul-85 01:44:25 EDT Article-I.D.: scc.525 Posted: Sun Jul 28 01:44:25 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 1-Aug-85 20:18:01 EDT References: <509@scc.UUCP> <1001@umcp-cs.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Don Steiny Software Lines: 106 > > >... Anti-abortionists promote legislation to prohibit > >abortion because of their inability to convince people of the > >merits of their arguments. > > "Anti-discriminationists promote legislation ... because of their > inability to convince people ...". Again, the laws provide a means of revenge, not control. People who are discriminated against want to have some means of enforcing changes. Fetuses have no interest in such things, because because even if you do believe they feel discriminated aginst, you will never convince me of that. > Seriously folks, similar arguments > were heard a few decades ago, but we all (except libertarians and a > few other dogmatists) reject that line of argument now. "WE ALL"!! My, who could you mean? Everyone on the net? Everyone in the world? Everyone that is you? > And part of > the reason discrimination came to be seen as wrong was the existence > of the laws. How do you know that? What does discrimination have to do with it anyway? I distinctly remember the civil rights movement. I remember living in the South before the civil rights movement began, and "colored" bathrooms. You might be shocked to know that the human rights fairy did not come from the sky and initiate legislation that ended discrimination. Cities were in flames, it was a violent period. Many people were killed on both sides. The long and the short of it is that black people TOOK their rights and they were not handed to thems. Fetuses are incabible of it. Perhaps a good way to clarify who or what has "rights" is to specify that whatever it is has to ask for them. That would certainly make sense in history. Women don't really even have equal rights and they have been working hard for them for a long time. > Of course, a lot of convincing people has to occur before > the anti-abortionists could get any laws passed -- fortunately. I hope > that some convincing will occur on both sides and they meet somewhere > near the middle (somewhere near MY position! :->). > That is also not true. Every year, and I mean every single year, certain legislators in California tack an anti-abortion amendement to the California state budget. The amendment does not allow the state to fund abortions. the fact that 58% of Californians believe that the state should pay for abortions as part of basic medical care, a percentage that has been INCREASING, does not alter the behavior of the legislators. It is passed every year, because by now eveyone knows it is blatently unconstitutional and the courts through it out every year. That is just expensive harrassement as far as I am concerned. Legislators can make laws about anything they please. > > Convincing is important, but so is passing laws, at least once a critical > level of consensus is reached. I won't say what that critical point is, > but it's definitely NOT unanimity, and probably not even close. > > --Paul V Torek, author of "How to Win Enemies and Infuriate People" What is the purpose of the laws? Who would they benefit. Fetuses don't count, because I cannot ask them how they feel about things. Shit . . . I don't think people should blow their car horns. I have read studies that show that in areas where people are not permitted to user their car horns there are less accidents. If I decided that I had some God given duty to make the world right, I am sure I could work myself into a tizzy every time a car horn beeped. There is a well known prayer, used by AA among others: Lord give us the courage to change the things we can the strength to accept the things we cannot change and the wisdom to know the difference. There has been a steady increase in the number of people that believe that Medi-Cal, the California state medical aid program for poor people, should pay for abortions on demand. 8% over the last five years. I am saying that it points to a fundemental weakness in whole pro-life logic. The movement is not only failing to convince pople that their position has merit, people who originally saw merit in the pro-life postion are revising their opinions. If the pro-life people cannot even convince others that there is anything wrong with abortions, why try to pass laws? Will people suddely be convinced or will they think the government is more stupid than ever? -- scc!steiny Don Steiny @ Don Steiny Software 109 Torrey Pine Terrace Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060