[Vision2020] Roger's Confusions about My Position on Abortion

[lfalen]

Nick
My point was that the point at which a fetus becomes a person can not be pin pointed with any degree of accuracy. While conception (as you pointed out can also be variable) it is more precise that any other alternative.
I will agree that animals posses intelligence, the ability to reason, emotions, and in some cases a sence of right and wrong. I do not view this as a justification to place them on an equal plane with humans, but I am not going to get in to a philosophical discussion on it.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: nickgier at roadrunner.com
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:17:42 -0800
To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
Subject: Roger's Confusions about My Position on Abortion

> Hi Roger,
> 
> If the conservative view is the traditional view, then my view on abortion is conservative.  My article on abortion (<www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/abortion.htm>) is clearly divided into a historical part and a philosophical part.  In the first part I demonstrate that our religious, moral, and legal traditions support a position similar to Roe v. Wade, that the fetus becomes a person late in fetal development.
> 
> In the philosophical part I do not argue from religion as you claim; rather, I present scientific evidence from fetal development and match that with a definition of a person as one with brain development qualitatively different from animals, a position that has essentially been held since Aristotle. There are no mental gymnastics here, but simply a straightforward forward argument.
> 
> With regard to the charge of "murder of the unborn," you have not presented any rational arguments except a guess that "conception is closer to the demarcation point."  When you present an argument for a human person at conception, then we can have a debate.  Until then you have no moral or legal grounds for your position.
> 
> By the way, the more I learn about animal intelligence, the more unsure I am of the tradition position that persons have mental lives qualitatively different from many animals.  What this does of course is to confirm the animal rights position and my vegetarianism.  Stay tuned for a column on the mental gymnastics of those amazing animals--parrots and crows to chimps and whales.
> 
> Thanks for the dialogue,
> 
> Nick
> ---- lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote: 
> > Chas
> > Your present logical reasons for being pro-choice. Arguing at what point life begins is a valid view. Conception is closer to set demarcation point, even though that to can be variable, as Nick pointed out. Using religion or legality is not valid. Nick has used these arguments. You can justify anything with some religious view. In Germany under the Nazis it was legal to kill Jews. For my self, I think both Pro-choice and Pro-life take it to the exstemes.
> > On the death penalty, in my view the execution of innocent people is the only vaild argument against it.
> > Roger
> > -----Original message-----
> > From: Chasuk chasuk at gmail.com
> > Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:14:09 -0800
> > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Humane Interrogations Work
> > 
> > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:25, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > As for your moral superiority tone, I don't think the mental gymnastics you go through to justify the murder of the unborn, helps your virtue.
> > > 
> > > Statements like this always puzzle me.  Do you really believe that
> > > pro-choice advocates sit up at night devising justifications for the
> > > slaughter of babies?  We are, or have been, the proud fathers,
> > > mothers, grandfathers, and grandmothers of babies.  We are, or have
> > > been, the doting uncles and aunts of babies.  If this isn't true
> > > today, it will be in the future, for most of us.
> > > 
> > > Speaking for myself, it is a matter of not attributing human
> > > characteristics to non-human creatures, and an embryo or a fetus isn't
> > > a human being, but a human animal at a stage of development somewhere
> > > between implantation and birth.  Fertilization transforms the joined
> > > ovum and sperm into a zygote, not, magically, into a miniature person.
> > > 
> > > if I believed that embryos or fetuses were miniature people, I would
> > > be shouting, "Embryos and fetuses are people!"  -- with a nod to
> > > Robert Thorn/Charlton Heston.
> > > 
> > > I do marvel at the mental gymnastics performed by most conservatives.
> > > They lament the termination of embryos/fetuses, but they embrace
> > > capital punishment, knowing that sometimes innocent men and women are
> > > being murdered -- creating widows, widowers, the fatherless, the
> > > motherless, and orphans -- because apparently this sort of collateral
> > > damage is acceptable.
> > > 
> > > Conservatives have funny ideas about virtue.
> > > 
> > > Chas
>