Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihnp1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihnp1!dolan From: dolan@ihnp1.UUCP (Mike Dolan) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: killing human beings Message-ID: <215@ihnp1.UUCP> Date: Thu, 8-Mar-84 12:31:43 EST Article-I.D.: ihnp1.215 Posted: Thu Mar 8 12:31:43 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 9-Mar-84 02:11:14 EST Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 71 For the record, I am serious in my question about the killing of human beings. What I was responding to is the notion that we might go ahead and admit that an unborn child is a human being, but hold to the position that we can use a different set of standards when deciding to kill him/her. I probably should have included the portions of the article that I was responding to, but I didn't have immediate access to it. My apologies. The point that I am very serious about is the notion that we might use different standards for allowing human beings to live. As soon as I or anyone else decides that we have the right to choose to allow a particular class of human beings to live or die, the door is opened to arbitrary choices about the right to live. We can decide that human beings over age 65 should be "terminated" (a favorite word of pro-abortionists). We can decide that anyone with cancer should be killed. We can decide that anyone with a physical malformation should be killed (then we get to decide what constitutes a sufficient malformation). This is the basic point of the pro-life segment: No one has the right to arbitrarily take another human life. If a life-threatening situation exists, the right of self-defense comes into play (such as in a tubal pregnancy). These are all standard laws of our society. This is why we pro-lifers make such a point about the unborn child being a human being with all the rights of any other human being. No one has ever shown that an unborn child is not a human being. There seems to be little argument that a newly born child is a human being with the right to live. No one has ever pointed to something during development within the womb and said that that is where the "blob" became a human being. So the pertinent points seem to be: a. All human beings have the right to live. b. An unborn child is a human being from the moment of conception with the right to her/his life. c. Human beings only forfeit their right to live when they place the physical life of another human being in danger. ------------ As an interesting additional point: Some pro-abortionists claim that they are saving the child from a life of being unloved. It is difficult to reconcile that opinion with the fact that the most miserable, crippled, orphaned child in the streets of Calcutta fights with everything he/she has in a daily struggle to cling to his/her life. ------------- An additional point: It is a well-known debating technique to impune the integrity/intellectual ability/sincerity of an opponent when one finds it difficult to oppose the other's arguments. For all of us: Please, let us concentrate on the points each of us is trying to make. Leave the name calling out of our debates. And if we make mistakes in interpreting what each other is saying, let us acknowledge and correct those mistakes cheerfully. Even though I have never met any of you personally and disagree with some ideas, I have high regard for you as individuals. Let's keep this friendly! Y'all have a good day, Mike Dolan AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL ihnp4!ihnp1!dolan