home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!ray
- From: ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer)
- Subject: Re: Christian Pro-Choicers
- Message-ID: <1993Jan24.074631.25266@netcom.com>
- Organization: Netcom. San Jose, California
- References: <lm16jfINNe66@ar-rimal.cs.utexas.edu> <adams.727758048@spssig> <lm1g5pINNegu@ar-rimal.cs.utexas.edu>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 07:46:31 GMT
- Lines: 29
-
- brinkley@cs.utexas.edu (Paul Brinkley) writes ...
- >Your stance seems to indicate that rights are attained upon that moment
- >when the fetus can be proven to be able to survive outside the womb, if
- >I paraphrased correctly. My current counter-argument is that this is a
- >bit too arbitrary of a line on which to base something as valuable as a
- >human life. An aside: How exactly does one prove viabilty outside the
- >womb?
-
- Well the obvious answer is to remove the fetus from the womb and see
- if it survives. This has the added benefit of solving the women's
- problem as well.
-
- And while viability may well be somewhat arbitrary, there is NO line
- that is otherwise. Every dividing line between rights and non-rights
- is going to be somewhat arbitrary. The next best thing may be to pick
- a line that accomplishes the most good.
-
- > My stance, in that light, is non-religious (unless
- >someone can point out any flaws in my reason): A fetus' liberty is as
- >equally valuable as that of anyone else, and furthermore, when one or
- >the other's liberty must be compromised, the law should choose the least
- >restrictive course.
-
- But you haven't been arguing for the liberty of the fetus. You've
- been arguing for the right of one person to use the body of another.
-
- --
- Ray Fischer "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth
- ray@netcom.com than lies." -- Friedrich Nietszsche
-