Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!decwrl!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!think!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf
From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Let's play with context!
Message-ID: <660@mit-vax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 18-Aug-85 05:30:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-vax.660
Posted: Sun Aug 18 05:30:24 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 23-Aug-85 07:30:19 EDT
References: <597@mit-vax.UUCP> <931@bunker.UUCP>
Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 94

In article <931@bunker.UUCP> garys@bunker.UUCP (Gary M. Samuelson) writes:
>> ... nobody has a "right-to-life" necessarily. Nobody. The government
>> gives it to some, and takes it from others.
>
>That's not the theory on which our government was founded.  (If it's
>the theory on which our government now operates, more's the pity.)
>
>	"We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are
>	created equal; That they are endowed by their Creator with
>	certain inalienable rights; That among these are life, liberty,
>	and the pursuit of happiness;  That governments are instituted
>	among men to secure these rights."

Once again, I speak on behalf of my deleted text: some people forfiet
their right to life. Others never have it (most of them are not US
citizens!).

On this specific point, though: where does this paragraph mention
embryos, fetuses (feti?) or "the unborn". For that matter, where does it
mention women? Also, why did it take over a hundred years for these
"inalienable" rights to transcend skin color?

More's the pity, Gary.

>Your theory (not that it is original with you; I mean "yours" in the
>sense of that which you espouse) says that whatever the government
>does is justified, simply because the government is doing it.

Sorry, that's Matt's theory. I said that the government can revoke a
person's "right to life" if it wants to. I didn't say it was right. "All
men [people?] are created equal..." what are they before they are
created? Nothing. My liver is human tissue -- is it a "man"? No. A fetus
is human tissue -- is it a "man"? [To sum up many previous arguments, no
`ad hominem' flames, please] No.

>You, by the single statement above, have condoned South Africa's
>apartheid, Iran's Khomeini, the USSR's Gulag, and, of course,
>US involvement in Korea, Viet Nam, Grenada, and Central America.

Oh, go away. Maybe next week you'll call me a Satanist. I suggest you
check your facts with Don Black and Ken Arndt: I'm a commie spy.

>> If you are going to wave a
>> white banner in the air and "fight for the cause of human life", you've
>> got a lot of work ahead of you before you even get to the abortion
>> issue.
>
>That sounds like more I-don't-want-to-hear-it.  Still, you may be
>right.

I AM right. There is a LOT of injustice in the world. It's all nice and
good to cry for the hapless embryos of this world -- but there are a lot
of FULL GROWN PEOPLE who would benefit from a little support as well.
It's not clear that fetuses are "human" or have any "rights". It IS
clear that El Salvadorian civilians have a right to life... what have
you done to get our troops (er... `military advisors') out of El
Salvador?

>Apparently, some people, like yourself, need to learn some
>basics about rights.  (Lesson one: if rights exist at all, in any
>practical sense, they exist independent of whether any particular
>government respects them.)

A friend of mine told me:"Don't fuck with cops. If they want you,
they'll get you."

I've found this to be true. I have discovered that anybody, at any time,
can have be charged with SOMETHING. The police (read government) can
come and get you ANY time. Sure, you may not end up on death row, but
they can make your life unpleasant. If you don't believe me, be rude to
the next cop who pulls you over for speeding.

A friend of mine accidentally set off the sprinkler system in his dorm
by burning a test he'd failed. A revengeful MIT administration had him
charged with ARSON. A Cambridge court narrowly found him not guilty.
Makes you wonder...

>What you said is profound, in that it has far reaching implications,
>but profundity by itself is not sufficient to recommend a position.

What I said is that the government is all (yeah, what Matt said!) We
have to fight for our rights. A lot of people lose their rights every
day. I have trouble getting overly concerned for "the unborn."

"Who Polices the Police?"

-- 
Charles Forsythe
CSDF@MIT-VAX
"We pray to Fred for the Hopelessly Normal
	Have they not suffered enough?"

from _The_Nth_Psalm_ in _The_Book_of_Fred_