Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!mhuxv!mhuxh!mhuxi!mhuxm!mhuxj!houxm!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rlgvax!plunkett
From: plunkett@rlgvax.UUCP (S. Plunkett)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Litmus Test for Pro-Life Sincerity
Message-ID: <431@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 7-Feb-85 11:20:58 EST
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.431
Posted: Thu Feb  7 11:20:58 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 9-Feb-85 07:53:31 EST
References: <582@charm.UUCP>
Distribution: net.abortion
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 36

> 		--Bill Softky:
> How many of you have held-- or even thought of holding-- funeral
> services or Last Rites for an abortion?... For a stillbirth?... For a
> miscarriage?... For the menstrual flow from The Pill?
> Since The Pill does discharge fertilized ova in their first month,
> how many of you have campaignd against *it* as actively as you campaign
> against abortion?  How many of you send monthly condolence cards to
> women on the Pill?  How many of you have taken it?
> In short-- If you can indeed prove through your actions that you respect
> and honor the life of a fetus (even in the first trimster) as much as
> you honor an adult human life, then I respect your opinion.  If not, then
> I smell a double standard.

All this is nonsense.  The difference between involuntary abortion
and abortion-on-demand is more important than the similarity,
because the difference is a moral one, whereas the similarity is
merely empirical and problematical.  (Problematical in that although
it is known zygotes can be destroyed by natural processes, it is not
always known when; there is no such question in the deliberate removal
of a viable fetus.)

By the implied empirical standard the above writer is trying to foist
onto anti-abortion advocates, it is the net effect that should govern
our behaviour.  That is, the death penalty cannot be given, we
cannot go to war to protect liberty, we cannot even defend ourselves
against immediate deadly threat; that human life is to be honored
above all other considerations.  All of this is bosh, as it is not
simply a question of life vs. death, it is also who does what to whom
and why?

So it is that we should honor not merely human life, but innocent human
life.  A fetus is necessarily innocent.  And should innocent human
life be taken notwithstanding this protection, it would ordinarily
indicate an even greater need to protect what life already exists.

..{ihnp4,seismo}!rlgvax!plunkett