home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!dtix!oasys!bense
- From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: Who are you guys?
- Message-ID: <29625@oasys.dt.navy.mil>
- Date: 12 Jan 93 20:18:38 GMT
- References: <markp.726777200@joplin.wri.com> <markp.726862548@joplin.wri.com>
- Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
- Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD
- Lines: 32
-
- In talk.abortion, markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) writes:
- >In <29611@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense) writes:
-
- >Glad to see you concede that the "it's my womb, I can kill ANYONE I find
- >in there for ANY reason" argument is tommyrot.
-
- Have conceeded nothing, merely kept it short.
-
- >A first stab at defining what makes us human is "reasoning, free-willed
- >individuality." (From this follows our rights: right to life, right
-
- Stab?!? Geez, so violent! ;-)
-
- >to free speech, etc.) But we also regard newborn infants as human (I
- >hope!); and they sure aren't reasoning. We can reconcile this fact
- >with the above definition only by expanding that definition of
- >humanity (and the possession of human rights) to include the potential
- >for reasoning, free-willed individuality. Newborns have this potential --
- >and so do z/e/f's.
-
- I see one immediate problem--you confuse the biological definition of
- human with its generic definition. They are not the same. A single cell
- on your body is human. But it is not human (if you see what I mean:).
-
- As for the rest, I see no reason to extend any protections to those
- not considered human beings, especially while they're leading a parasitic
- existance using a human being.
-
- Ron Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
- The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
- Make a U-turn to God.
- The irony is priceless.
-