Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-darts!umina
From: umina@darts.DEC
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Discussion vs. Convincing
Message-ID: <217@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Jan-85 17:09:50 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.217
Posted: Mon Jan 14 17:09:50 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jan-85 04:52:27 EST
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 43


I'm not sure this is going out correctly, but here goes.
 
I do not see how you can determine that he has made up his mind and therefore
he is unconvincable and therefore he should not be permitted discourse with
the group.
 
The fact that his committment is apparently as strong as yours may in fact
make him as unconvincable as you are.  The fact that you will never convince
him of your point of view is not a valid disqualification from the discussion.
 
Discussions do not always occur between people who have not made up their 
minds.  One gets the impression that you are afraid that his committment to
his beliefs is an impediment to your progress in the 'selling' of your point
of view to the audience.  So be it.  That is what dialog is all about.  I would
say that he is doing a fairly good job to get you so frustrated.
 
And now that I have said my two cents on that, here's how I feel on the issue:
 
1.	You would never convince me of your position that abortion is anything
	less than murder.
 
2.	Bombing abortion clinics (provided no one get hurt) is merely property
	destruction.  I wonder if Hitler had put his camps in the city if they
	would not have been bombed also.  That's why they were remote.  If on
	a jury, I would never convict an abortion clinic bomber as I feel he
	is going to the aid of the defensless.
 
3.	I am sure the loss we, as a society, would have been at a loss had
	you been an aborted fetus.  You are obviously intelligent, and a 
	contributor, and may someday be responsible for improving the human
	condition.  One wonders just how many others, the Bachs, Eiensteins,
	etc... have not been allowed the chance to contribute, and how things
	would be today if they had
 
4.	This issue is somewhat like gun control.  Either you believe that
	freedom is best served by people having guns or you dont.  Abortion
	is similar.  Either you believe its murder and those who do it, or 
	condone it, or allow it to happen without resisting it will answer
	for their actions or you don't. (Wonder if you believe in God ?)
 
 
Len