 |
 |
Dennis is correct in his summation of this debate. The real question is -- when does human life begin? Charles Meyer says he takes great offense at my husband's comparison to the killing of the Jewish people during Hitler's reign because he thinks we are comparing "tissue" to human life. What Charles does not understand, but Dennis does, is that we believe that the fetus IS human life. This debate will just continue to go round and round with no one changing anyone else's mind. I am very sad, however, that so many on this list seem to believe that morality is relative and that, as Joan Carol Urquhart states: "Anyone with a heart would agree that to alleviate human suffering, at any moral sacrifice, is good and right." Joan, you have just justified Columbine -- after all, those young men were suffering and they chose the killing of their classmates and themselves to alleviate their suffering. And by the way -- Charles -- what about the physicians in Hitler's Third Reich who used the infirmed and young children for the purpose of medical research? God forbid that we should ever justify such crimes! On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 00:27:01 +0800 Dennis Greene <[log in to unmask]> writes: > Important as this issue is, I suspect it is undebateable in this > forum. I > say this because the two sides are arguing about totally different > things. > > It seems to me obvious that if an embryo is a separate human life, > killing > it is the same as killing any other human and the debate should be > about > whether we as a society can justify institutionalising the killing > of large > numbers of our population in order to maintain the living standards > of the > rest of the population (not to mention the health of some of that > population). > > It seems to me equally obvious that if an embryo is not a separate > human > life, but merely a piece of human tissue in the same way that a > kidney, > liver, cornea, lung or heart is human tissue then the debate about > aborting > such tissue is meaningless and the debate should be centered on the > ethics > of organ transplant. > > What is not obvious - to me or anyone else- is which of the above is > correct. In the absence of a definitive, indisputable, 'moment of > becoming > human' we each form our own opinion. What then seems to happen is > that when > these (in broad terms) two bodies of opinion clash, each dismisses > the > others primary position (the humanity or otherwise of an embryo) as > being > ridiculous and then, claiming the moral high ground, proceeds to > conduct the > argument relevant to their own position. With one side debating > genocide > and the other tissue transplants it's no wonder the debate is making > no > progress. > > So it might help take some heat out of the discussion if we keep in > mind > that there are two debates rolled into one; that however well > argued, and > passionately believed in, our own viewpoint (whichever it is) rests > on an > unprovable premise; and that stating that premise as if it were an > absolute > does not make it so. > > It seems likely that this debate, both here and in society at large, > is > going to continue - could we, at least here, treat each other with > respect. > > > Dennis. > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Dennis Greene 49/dx 37/ onset 32 > There's nothing wrong with me that a cure for PD won't fix! > email - [log in to unmask] > Website - http://members.networx.net.au/~dennisg/ > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++