----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: The American Political Landscape Today


On May 16, 2005, at 1:29 PM, Dan Minette wrote:

> From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>>> The point is, most Americans believe that abortions should be illegal
>>> some
>>> of the time.  Most Democrats support the legality of all abortions,
>>> even
>>> for development beyond viability.
>>
>> One quibble here. Even after being born, you can't really argue
>> convincingly that a human infant is "viable". Without active, constant
>> nurturing it's dead, and that need for nurture goes on for about two
>> years, at minimum, after birth.
>
> OK, then you are arguing for a different dividing line.  I was
> thinking of
> viability as a biologically independent organism (no direct,
> continuous,
> connection to the bloodstream of another), and you seem to be arguing
> for being able to carry one's own weight.  If one wishes to argue for the
> rights of a mother to kill their one year old, then that would be
> consistent with arguing for the right to kill a post-term undelivered
> fetus.

>I'm not arguing for that at all; I'm just suggesting that the test of
>"viability" is somewhat vague.

I realize that you were arguing somewhat hypothetically concerning my
definition.  I was pointing out the result of using two different terms of
viable.

>Are there better tests? Possibly. Maybe an EEG that confirms what we
>could call consciousness can be used. I really don't know *what* kind
>of test would suffice.

>What I'm pretty sure of is that there's a lot of arbitrary thinking
>afoot when discussing pregnancy and birth. There are some who contend
>that life begins at conception, and yet they celebrate birthdays as
>being *genuine* anniversaries of the beginning of someone's life. That
>to me is an example of how an arbitrary idea clashes with observable
>behavior, which suggests at least one intellectual inconsistency.

What inconsistancy?  It celebrates an arrival date, not the beginnning of
life. I don't think that anyone really argues that a embreyo is not
alive....the arguement is that they are not human...with the rights of
humans. Mothers and fathers are usually very excited about quickening, I
can tell you that.  I know that Teri thought our three children were alive
before they were born....she had the bruises to prove it.


>To me abortion is a personal decision. I don't expect it to be an easy
>one when we're talking about a fairly anatomically developed fetus, and
>I am proximally sure that legislatures need to keep their mitts out of
>the oven entirely. We can't even agree, in many cases, on what basic
>terms mean, such as "life" or "viability" (or "self-sufficiency", to
>look at it another way), and of course there's the elephant in the room
>-- what "human" actually means, when it starts, etc.

But, there is a very very simple definition that is being ignored..location
in DNA space defines species.  If you use a functional capacity definition,
then you either include adults of other species or exclude a significant
fraction of humans that are now alive.  What's wrong with arguing that
humans are those animals that are in the human region of gene space?

>and since laws require either consensus or submission to arbitrary
decisions made by
>others, there would be no benefit to be found in illegalizing *any* kind
of
>abortion.

What about civil rights laws that overturned the so called "right of free
association?"  There wasn't a consensus on those.

>It makes a lot more sense to me to address the causes of unwanted
>pregnancy and strike at the root; the causes could be social, personal,
>or may other things, and probably are fairly intricate, not the kind of
>thing that can be addressed by a single law or any other simplistic
>solution.

I'd agree with that.  I have little patience with folks who are pro-life
but won't agree to decrease abortions that way.

Dan M.


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to