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