home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!sdd.hp.com!nigel.msen.com!heifetz!rotag!kevin
- From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
- Subject: Re: a woman'right, not a common good..
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.174010.543@rotag.mi.org>
- Organization: Who, me???
- References: <1992Oct31.130332.4612@verifone.com> <1992Nov7.222723.15802@ncsu.edu> <adams.721328207@spssig>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:40:10 GMT
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <adams.721328207@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
- >dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
- >
- >>In article <1992Oct31.130332.4612@verifone.com>
- >>ron_s@verifone.com writes:
- >>
- >>> It is not the province or business of government to legislate
- >>> morality,
- >>
- >>So I take it you're an anarchist. Say goodbye to murder, rape,
- >>and robbery laws.
- >>
- >Sorry, but you missed the issue, I think. Murder, rape and robbery all
- >infringe upon my rights (life, bodily autonomy, property). There are NOT
- >moral issues.
-
- Are you saying there is nothing immoral about murdering, raping or robbing?
-
- >They are situations where a right is removed by force.
-
- Rights are, however, just encapsulations or manifestations of prior moral
- decisions. Without the moral goals of minimizing murder, rape and robbery,
- respectively, rights to protection against those transgressions would never
- have been established.
-
- >Consensual actions between two adults ARE not the same.
-
- That, too, is a moral pronouncement. Many reasonable people would disagree
- with your statement above, on grounds of ethics.
-
- - Kevin
-