Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!matt
From: matt@brl-tgr.ARPA (Matthew Rosenblatt )
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: more on feminism
Message-ID: <2873@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 5-Nov-85 17:14:31 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.2873
Posted: Tue Nov  5 17:14:31 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 8-Nov-85 05:42:27 EST
References: <2415@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1982@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 47

>   By Matt's reasoning (in which you can state that someone isn't "equal"
> if doing so causes you harm), we can simply claim that women "shouldn't"
> be treated equally, because doing so would cause problems. [RICH ROSEN]

This is a part of Mr. Rosen's article to which I did not respond earlier,
so I will respond now:

AT LAST MR. ROSEN HAS HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD!  He understands precisely
what I mean when I say that the feminist principle of equality cannot be
taken as an absolute, because to do so would cause problems.  IF APPLYING
THE PRINCIPLE IN A PARTICULAR AREA WOULD CAUSE MORE DAMAGE THAN GOOD,
THE PEOPLE HAVE A *RIGHT* NOT TO APPLY IT IN THAT AREA.  Isn't that just
common sense and good civics?

Example 1:  ABORTION.  Now, there are many arguments for abortion on
demand not based on equality.  But if the only justification for abortion
on demand were the so-called "equal access to pleasure" for women and men,
we would weigh the benefits of equality to the 1.5 million women who get
abortions against the damages of death for the 1.5 fetuses who get aborted.
If we then concluded that the evil of 1.5 million fetal deaths outweighed
the relief provided to the 1.5 million women, this would be an area where
the value of EQUALITY would have to yield to the value of LIFE.

Example 2:  MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE.  As I've written before, feminist-
inspired easy-divorce legislation has backfired.  Designed to "liberate"
those women whose marriages were not allowing them enough room to "grow"
and "fulfill themselves," this legislation has done so -- for SOME women.
Far more women, however, who were benefiting from the legal protection of
divorce-only-for-cause, have lost that protection, they and their children
suffering a drastic drop in living standards after divorce.  There you go
-- equality in the opportunity to leave a marriage has hurt more women
than it has helped.  In this area, the value of EQUALITY should yield
to the value of PROTECTING THE WEAK.

My point is, and always has been, that if you take ANY value, even 
the ones I believe in (viz., Truth, Justice, Freedom, Ivy and the
American Way), and hold it as an absolute, nullifying any competing
values that get in its way, you can do more evil than good.

						-- Matt Rosenblatt

----------
"Once to every man and nation
 Comes the moment to decide,
 In the strife of Light and Darkness,
 For the Good or Evil side."  
				-- Lowell