 |
 |
As everybody else is saying this time round exactly what they said last time round I thought I might as well too. This is a meaningless argument. In the final analysis both the pro life and pro choice arguments are based on an act of faith. No one has as yet been able to determine when human life begins and it is highly unlikely that anyone ever will. The pro life camp argue that you cannot condone the wholesale killing of human beings. The pro choice camp argue that we are not dealing with human beings. NEITHER side can prove its basic tenet, hence my comment that each is based on an act of faith. The rights and wrongs of abortion will not be, CAN NOT BE, resolved by this forum. Therefore any time spent discussing it/ arguing about it/ bickering about it, is not only time wasted but also an unnecessary cause of stress in a community that has a notoriously bad stress response. I am not suggesting that we should not debate the rights and wrongs of using the tissue which results from an abortion. (Whatever its pre-abortion status, tissue is its post abortion status ). I am merely pointing out that it is more productive to separate the issues. I think the pro choicers will find that a great many pro lifers have already separated the issues in their minds and would be happy to discuss how to deal with aborted tissue without being ridiculed for holding a belief that there is an issue at all. It is a fact that there is an issue. It is not going to go away because we don't think it should exist. In terms of being resolved it is only an issue for the pro lifers (I presume that it is already resolved for the pro choicers). However, its resolution will affect society as a whole so it is reasonable for pro choicers to become involved in the arguments. As it cannot be resolved by establishing as fact exactly when we become human I would suggest that if the pro choice camp wants to have any meaningful involvement in the discussion they need to stop talking as if they have a monopoly on reason, acknowledge that their beliefs are simply that - beliefs - not the laws of the universe, and argue the case for foetal tissue/stem cell/whatever research on some other grounds than their belief that the foetus is not human. (NOTE: I am not saying that the pro choice position is invalid - only that it is not relevant of those in the pro life camp who are the ones who need to work out their position on the use of foetal tissue - and consequently it becomes a divisive distraction.) And now - back to sleep - Yawn Dennis +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dennis Greene 50/dx 37/ onset 32 There's nothing wrong with me that dealing with PD won't fix! email - [log in to unmask] Website - http://members.networx.net.au/~dennisg/ (most recent update -Nov 5, 1999) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++