From: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The Right to Exist
Date: 8 Apr 92 01:49:27 GMT
Reply-To: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <1992Apr7.141153.5249@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) writes:

>> The right to exist is supreme above all other rights. Without the
>> right to exist, no other rights are possible, including the right
>> to freedom. Without existence, freedom is not possible. All humans
>> should have an equal right to exist, and since the right to exist
>> is supreme, no human can deny another human the right to exist,
>> unless their own existence is threatened. 

> In order to hold this position consistently, you must also affirm 
> that an individual has no right to use lethal force to defend
> against a rapist unless it is clear that the attacker also intends
> to murder.

Rape implies the use of force, which may result in the death of
the potential rape victim. Therefore, a potential rape victim would 
be justified in using deadly force against their attacker.

> This follows if you believe the right to exist takes precedence
> over the right to the freedom of bodily autonomy.

The potential rape victim's existence is being threatened, and so
they should have the right to use deadly counter-force.  

> I might add that your premise, as worded, would also preclude the
> use of lethal force by a law enforcement officer in protecting
> an innocent victim from attack, as long as the officer was out
> of the line of fire.

A human may assign their right to self-defense to another human,
in whole or part.

> I take it you are anti-war, under all circumstances?

No. For the purposes of self-defense, war is appropriate. 

> You would rather be enslaved than violate the right of another 
> to exist?

No. Enslavement implies the use of force, which may result in death.

>> The right to exist includes the right not to be killed by others, 
>> and the right to receive support from others, but it does not 
>> necessarily include the right to expect support from others. 

> I'm not sure what you mean by this.

It is the essence of my argument. I have the right to exist. No person
should be allowed to prevent other people from supporting me. If I am
dying, then no person can prevent a doctor from healing me. But, I
cannot force any person to support me against their will. I should not
be able to force a doctor to heal me.

>> The fetus either has rights, or it does not. 

> Since a fetus is not a person, 

Irrelevant. All human life should have the right to exist. A fetus is a 
human life, and therefore it should have the right to exist.

> and it poses a risk of terminating
> the existence of the woman (who IS a person), it has no rights.

The existence of the woman is not always threatened by the presence
of the fetus. When the woman's life becomes threatened by the fetus, 
then she should have the right to kill the fetus. She cannot kill
the fetus simply because it "may" threaten her existence in the distant 
future. 

No human should be allowed to kill another simply because they
"may" be threatened in the distant future. For example, I cannot kill a 
reckless automobile driver because they may crash into me in the distant 
future. I cannot kill a person who threatens to kill me in the
distant future. I may kill them if they threaten my immediate
existence. 

>>                                              If the fetus has any 
>> rights, then it must have the right to exist, and this right is 
>> equal to that of any other human being.

> You make quite a leap here. Why would its rights be equal to a born
> human being? 

A fetus is no less human than any other human life. If it is not a human 
life, then what is it? All humans should have the same right to existence. 

> Nature itself destroys around 30% of all fertilized 
> eggs. 

A human should not be forced to support a fertilized egg. But, a human
should not be allowed to kill a fertilized egg, since it is a human life, 
and the egg has the right to exist. When a fertilized egg dies naturally, 
it is not killed by the woman, it dies from a lack of support. 

A fertilized egg in a petri dish has the right to exist, and no human
should be allowed to kill it. But no human should be forced to support its
existence, and no human can prevent other humans from supporting the
egg. Humans may leave the egg to die from a lack of support -- humans 
do not cause the death of the egg by not supporting it. I cannot cause
the death of another person by not supporting them. 

> The fetus is contained within a _woman_, whose pain and risk 
> should be considered in assigning any rights to an entity which
> resides within her body.

A human should not be forced to support another human against their
will. But, the fetus has the right to exist, and so it cannot be
killed. 

>> Abortion kills the fetus, and it prevents the fetus from receiving
>> support from others. Therefore, abortion violates the right 
>> of the fetus to exist.

> You still haven't addressed the woman in this picture. 

The woman should have the right to refuse to support the fetus. But no
person should be allowed to kill the fetus, or to prevent others from
supporting the fetus. 

> Until you
> show that bodily autonomy is subordinate to the right of others
> to exist in all circumstances, 

Define "bodily autonomy".

> and prove that a fetus should have
> rights equal to any other human organism, you've proved nothing.

I cannot prove that a fetus should have the same right to exist
as other humans. Nor can I prove that I should have the same right to
existence as the fetus, or any other human life. 

No human can judge the value of another human life, because a
value judgement is merely an opinion, a subjective judgement, 
which is valid only to oneself. No person should be allowed to kill
the mentally retarded, or the autistic, or humans born without a brain, 
simply because their lives are not valued by some persons. A human 
can only judge its own existence, not the existence of others. A fetus 
is the only human life who is fit to judge its own existence. By killing
a fetus, a person has denied the fetus its right to exist, and therefore 
has denied the fetus its right to judge its own existence.  
Newsgroups: talk.abortion