NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/talk/abortion/28553

Text File | 1992-07-23 | 3.5 KB | 81 lines

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!mips!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!bru!bmc
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Cameron)
Subject: Re: NEWBIE ALERT! (was Re: Supreme Court)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (/home/bmw/usenet)
Organization: Mayo Foundation, Rochester MN. Campus
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 18:19:10 GMT
Lines: 68

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Stephen A Chaney) writes:

|> Could there be no difference between the taking of the "life" of a
|> human fetus and that of an animal one?
|>

If we are avoiding religious and moral specifications, and looking
purely at the "science", then, we need to accept the idea that life
is determined by a cell's ability to utilize energy (cellular
respiration). A cell that is not using energy is not alive.

|> Well, is there a difference between killing an adult human and an
|> adult cow? In America, there is: one is of the HUMAN species and the
|> other is not.
|>

Two minor points,
    1) the fact that a human is a member of homo sapien and the
       cow is not holds true in places other then america.

    2) again, if we are to look at this issue purely in a scientific
       manner, there can be no difference between the termination
       of a human life or the termination of a bovine life.

|> Since we know the human fetus is a member of the human species (well,
|> many pro-choicers tend to forget that, given that they continually
|> mix & match human fetuses with monkeys & chimps), by scientific facts,
|> it is a provable fact, and not a religious issue.
|>

This is true, but the idea that a fetus holds any value or the idea that
a fetus may hold more value then the adult is a religious/moral issue.

|> And when the Supreme Court wakes up and realizes that scientific fact,
|> legal abortion will begin seeing its days numbered.
|>

The fact that a human fetus is a member of the human species is of little
relevance to the scientific validity of abortion.

Scientifically, the validity of abortion should be determined by the
effect abortion would have on a species' evolutionary survival. If
abortion is an invalid practice, then it would have a significatly
decrease the evolutionary success of a species (i.e.: the species
would become extinct).

Now, since a number of species "practice" abortion, infanticide
and homosexuality in responce to detremental environmental pressures,
it would appear that these have a positive rather then negative
effect on species survival. That by insuring the survival of the
breeding pairs this year, thus increasing the chances of offspring
next year, a species has a better chance of long term survival then
if it were to invest limited resources in the young at the the cost
of the breeding pairs.

This is also observable for humans. The only difference is that
because humans are able to manipulate their environment and are
(perhaps) more aware of their social interactions, the triggers
for abortion include social pressures as well as the more purely
environmental ones (shelter, food, water).

--
--Bruce
-----------------------------------------------------
Bruce M. Cameron        [e-mail]
Mayo Foundation            voice: [phone]
200 1st St SW            fax:   [phone]
Rochester, MN 55905        ARS -- WD9CKW