Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxt.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!houxm!mhuxt!js2j From: js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: why is it? Message-ID: <1271@mhuxt.UUCP> Date: Thu, 7-Nov-85 09:46:36 EST Article-I.D.: mhuxt.1271 Posted: Thu Nov 7 09:46:36 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 10-Nov-85 15:58:09 EST References: <957@gitpyr.UUCP> <966@gitpyr.UUCP> <1236@mhuxt.UUCP> <451@cylixd.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 39 > >> >Perhaps you can explain to me why you view the death of a mindless mass of > >> >cells as being of some moral consequence? [Myke] > >I have yet to see a non-religiously-based reason *why* a foetus at this > >stage of development deserves protection under the law. > >interested in hearing *why* various pro-lifers do) [Jeff Sontag] > > I have yet to see a sound, non-religiously-based reason why *your* life > deserves protection under the law. I certainly could not provide one. You mean that if your religion didn't recognize murder as 'wrong', you couldn't think of any reason why it should be illegal? All other considerations aside, surely you recognize the fact that a society in which murder was commonplace and accepted would lack any semblance of stability. I'm sure you'll also concede that most people dislike the prospect of being murdered. What could be more natural for them to get together and agree not to murder each other, and furthermore, to seek out and discourage murderers? > If I were to explain why your death, or mine, would be of "some moral > consequence," the explanation would have a religious base. If I were > to explain why torture is wrong, or theft, or slander, or any other > moral outrage, I would provide an explanation that was, at its core, > religious. I know that a religious explanation is not satisfactory to > someone who is not religious, but I do not know how to defend a moral > position apart from religion. > Well, if you're interested, might I suggest that you go to a library and look up a subject called 'humanism'. > I suppose we could discuss the metaphysical bases of morality at great > length, and I would be willing to do so, but *that* discussion belongs > in net.philosophy, not net.abortion. > That discussion died out in net.philosphy a few weeks ago. > charli -- Jeff Sonntag ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j "What would Captain Kirk say?"