From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Subject: Re: RE: The Ultimate Hypocrisy
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Organization: Indiana University Cyclotron Facility, Bloomington, Indiana
Distribution:  world
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 23:06:28 GMT

In article <23DEC92.15522078@vax.clarku.edu>, hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes...
>In a previous article, graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM) wrote:
> 
>>Ah, but what about voluntary amputations.  Suppose I'm a productive
>>member of society, and due to an unfortunate turn of events, I end up
>>with a leg that no longer works, and in fact, produces a significant
>>amount of chronic pain... so much so that I can no longer work, nor
>>can I be the husband or father I once was.
>> 
>>In short, I can no longer earn a living, nor can I be as _responsible_
>>as I once was.
>> 
>>So, I'm left with sucking blood from a welfare system (and perhaps
>>Social Security), just to eat, BECAUSE I can find no surgeon that can
>>see things AS I SEE THEM, and refuses to give me a stump that produces
>>hopefully less pain, and will fit in an artificial leg, allowing me once 
>>again, some semblance of "normalcy", and returns me to a _productive_ life.
>> 
>>Shouldn't this be a matter of my "choice", considering the alternative
>>cost to the rest of society (at least those that give in to extortionists
>>and pay taxes)?
> 
>You have as much right to choose amputation as a pregnant women does to choose 
>abortion.  You do not have a right to force a physician to amputate your leg, 
>just as a pregnant women cannot force an unwilling physician to perform an 
>abortion on her.
> 
>>And what about any "pain" that I may feel afterward?  Is it not possible
>>that many people that have abortions suffer some type of emotional
>>"pain" later on?
> 
>It's possible.  It's true that many women suffer depression after child birth. 
>Do you think we should we outlaw giving birth based on this?

No.  I wasn't suggesting this anyway.

> 
>>My point, which I hope is understandable, is this...
>> 
>>My understanding of this whole "choice" thing is that a women should have
>>absolute rule over her own body (which by the way, I agree with).
>> 
>>So, why shouldn't I have the same absolute rule over mine?  
> 
>I think you should.  

Thank you.  Just tell that to my physicians :-(.

> 
>>You really can't argue that in one case the person is causing themselves
>>permanent and irrevocable disability.  That may also be true of the 
>>women who chooses to abort, although it may be emotional rather than
>>physical.
>> 
>>However, there are other "precedents" in our society that would make this
>>an inequality.
>> 
>>Voluntary or "elective" amputation is a good example, I think.  What's more,
>>one could argue about whether or not my leg that is amputated
>>is a "human being".  It should be obvious to most, with NO twisting of
>>terminology, that cutting off a leg is not the end of a human being
>>(ie mine), but aborting a child in the womb simply IS.
> 
>Many people will disagree with you on this.  Fetuses are aborted, not 
>children.  They may be human, but are they human beings?  There is a 
>difference.

I'm not interested in opinions.  Exactly what distinguishes a pre-birth
fetus from a post-birth infant, in terms of definition of "human-being"?

I want a biological, objective distinction here, not a philosophical one.

An amputated limb will not become an individual human being.  An 
un-aborted fetus _will_.

>>There is no difference in terms of survivability between me, the amputee,
>>or the mother, who had her child aborted.  We both are still alive.
>> 
>>My leg isn't, and the child isn't either.  But one at least had the
>>_potential_ of a _thinking_, sentient human being, whether one chooses
>>to call it a human being in or out of the womb.
> 
>Every egg and sperm cell has the potential to be a thinking, sentient human 
>being.  Should we outlaw menstruation and masturbation?

No.  But I see no reason to go back to the sperm and egg.  My points were
based on a post-concieved organism, that of the fetus.  This is really
old, but I'll repeat it too.

An egg will not become a human being until AFTER conception.

A sperm will not become a human being until AFTER conception.

There are no philosophical gymnastics necessary to see this.

>>Jim Graham 
> 
>				.... Heather.

Jim Graham 

        -> ->Disclaimer: I do not speak for my company. <- <-
                          Neither do they speak for me.
 ______________________________________________________________________
| Internet: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu                              |
|           dolmen!jgraham@moose.cs.indiana.edu                        |
| BBS:      The PORTAL DOLMEN BBS/ParaNet ALPHA-GAMMA (sm) (9:1012/13) |
|            (812) 334-0418, 24hrs.                                    |
|______________________________________________________________________|