From: Yak Wax (yakwax@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Mar 04 1998 - 12:47:18 MST
Reilly Jones wrote:
> I, too, should know better. These discussions invariably boil down to
> taking an obstinate stand on definitions, and I've rarely seen
anyone truly
> rationally consider the issue at a deeper level than convenience on
the
> pro-death side and religious dogma on the anti-death side. I know we
don't
> diverge on the polycentric approach to the issue, the best argument
will
> come from tracing the evolutionary consequences within many different
> jurisdictions, each approaching the question as seems best.
Here's an 'evolutionary' approach:
We've developed away to terminate pregnancy, thus pregnancies will be
terminated.
The problem with 'ethics' and 'morals' is they're just conversations,
there exists no reality behind them. You can think something's
"right" and I can think something's "wrong." Maybe one of us will get
lucky and be able to get some force behind our argument - hold a gun
to some people's heads until they agree. Frankly, it achieves nothing.
Answer me a simple question - why are you anti-abortion? You argue
about "self" and "development" but why do you consider it wrong? Do
you have a reason? Is it a religious thing? Is there something
missing in your life that you have to replace with a sense of moral
worth? Do you have too much free time on your hands?
--Wax
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:41 MST