home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu!ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu!sulkom
- From: sulkom@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Mark Sulkowski)
- Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism
- Subject: Re: Active vs. Passive Injury of Others
- Keywords: Ayn_Rand,Abortion,Georges_Sorel
- Message-ID: <C1895I.D38@acsu.buffalo.edu>
- Date: 21 Jan 93 23:28:00 GMT
- References: <1993Jan18.062405.14670@midway.uchicago.edu> <1993Jan18.071103.16379@midway.uchicago.edu> <C162Hr.32B@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1993Jan21.192730.7421@mks.com>
- Sender: nntp@acsu.buffalo.edu
- Organization: University at Buffalo
- Lines: 27
- News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41
- Nntp-Posting-Host: ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu
-
- In article <1993Jan21.192730.7421@mks.com>, hugh@mks.com (Hugh Brown) writes...
- >In article <C162Hr.32B@news.cso.uiuc.edu> pjnelson@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (nelson peter j) writes:
- >The Objectivist position (elaborated only by Peikoff in lecture as far
- >as I know) is that abortion even up to birth is legitimate but
- >indicates a certain immorality (for lack of a better word) because the
- >woman could easily have decided much earlier than that late date.
- >As such, it is indicative of a failure to think or decide.
-
- Okay. Makes sense.
-
-
- >Clarification on entity in this context: entity refers to the
- >separateness and independence. (please do not misconstrue me
- >to mean that 3-year-olds are not independent thus abortable.)
- >The fetus is attached to the mother and cannot live without her.
-
- Wait a minute. You just said that abortion "even up to birth"
- involved immorality because it could have been done earlier. But
- then you seek to justify abortion by bringing up the notion of
- entity. Is a late abortion a little immoral or not immoral at all?
- If it is not immoral, why should a late abortion even have a tiny
- hint of immorality?
-
- Do you see my point? Explanation?
-
-
- Mark Sulkowski
-