Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rosevax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!mmm!rosevax!carole
From: carole@rosevax.UUCP (Carole Ashmore)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: A reply to Dave Messer on the humanity issue
Message-ID: <215@rosevax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Oct-85 10:25:39 EDT
Article-I.D.: rosevax.215
Posted: Mon Oct  7 10:25:39 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 05:48:41 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: Rosemount Inc., Eden Prairie, MN
Lines: 50


Dave Messer gave us a short contribution to the abortion argument
suggesting that we should disallow abortion until we have a consensus
on the issue of whether the fetus in human.  I'm too busy to reform
the world this morning, so I'll leave out the diatribe on the
immorality of morality by consensus.  However, it is long past time
for someone to say that THE MORALITY OF ABORTION DOES NOT ULTIMATELY
REST ON THE HUMANITY OR INHUMANITY OF THE FETUS.

One of the basic tenets of my moral code, and it is one shared
by many people, being based on rather fundamental human psychology, is
that NO PERSON HAS THE RIGHT TO ANY USE OF MY BODY WITHOUT MY CONSENT.
This is the principle on which we outlaw slavery, the principle on
which we outlaw rape, the principle that makes us reject medical
experimentation (even in a good cause) without informed consent, etc.
etc. etc.  My body is MINE.  In a more basic sense, my body is ME.  It
does not belong to a government, a husband, a passing stranger with a
gun, a social do-gooder, or a fetus.  

I find the notion of any breach of this moral principle both repugnant
and dangerous.  Repugnant because I have a respect for the dignity of
each individual human being, and dangerous because a weakening of this
principle can lead so easily to the type of society where individuals
have no dignity left, but are seen only as means to someone else's
social ends.

The one area where people find the application of this principle most
difficult is the area where a life is at stake, as in the case of
abortion.  However, most of us manage.  If my sister will die without
a kidney transplant, and I (the only possible doner) refuse, will you
force me?  I'm sure you will try to persuade me.  You may avoid me in
the future as an inhuman monster, you may write vile letters about me
to the newspapers.  BUT, are you willing to use force?  Are you
willing to live in the kind of society where the police come to my
house and drag me kicking and screaming to the hospital to 'donate' my
kidney?

I contend that even granting the fetus full human rights does not
grant it the right to the use of my body without my consent.  My right
to the control of my body should be protected by law and this means
legal abortion.  Now, beyond the mere legality of abortion, the issue
of the degree of humanness of the fetus is of course quite important.
If the fetus is not human abortion is and should be regarded as a
matter of convenience, a back up method of birth control.  If the
fetus is human a woman's decision on whether to abort is a complex and
morally charged one and you would be right in doing all you could to
persuade or shame her into not doing it.


					Carole Ashmore