From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: "Harmless Slavery"
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:21:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: midway.1992Apr8.232158.4945
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Apr7.143159.3082@macc.wisc.edu>
heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) writes:
>In article <1992Apr7.012438.4785@midway.uchicago.edu>,
>eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley) writes...
>>In article <1992Apr6.162732.3920@macc.wisc.edu>
>>heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) writes:

>>>I promise that I am not, have never, and will never 
>>>be in favor of limitting a woman's right to self-determination unless 
>>>I feel I have to.

>>Pro-lifers who would forbid abortion from fertilization would say the
>>exact same thing, I suspect.

>Irrelevant.

>>>You have nothing but my word on this.  Since you 
>>>don't know me I guess that's not worth much.  Never the less, it's the 
>>>truth.

>>I believe you.  I just don't think that means much.

>Well, some people have said that men who favor limits on abortion 
>rights just want to oppress women.  In fact, I think that's how this 
>thread started.

Okay.  Probably missed that due to spring break.  For the record: I
don't think there's anybody on t.a. who actively *wants* to oppress
women.  I do think there are a couple (not many) who simply don't care
at all whether or not they do, but I don't count you among them.

>>>You chose to delete the part of the message in which I explain why I 
>>>think it's *the* issue.  I am not if favor of abortion on demand up to 
>>>the moment of delivery.  (I had thought that this is something most 
>>>people would agree with.)  It seems incredible to me that anyone might 
>>>think that a (Geez what word can I use?  Fetus?  Baby?) fetus/baby 
>>>becomes a human being at the instant his big toe exits the womb.  
>>>Clearly he's entitled to *some* protection before that.
 
>>The argument (which I personally do not agree with) is that the
>>woman's right to freedom takes precedence over the fetus's right to
>>life, even if the fetus is a person.

>>>It is rational, therefore, to believe that we as a society have to 
>>>place *some* limits on a woman's right to self-determination.  Not 
>>>because we're looking for ways to 'enslave' women but because we want 
>>>to protect what we believe are humans in need of protection.

>>It only makes sense if you think that life is more important than
>>freedom.  Some people don't.

>Some people might beliewe that for *them*, *their* life is more important 
>than *their* freedom.  But they have no right to decide this for other 
>people.  You can't generalize the statement that freedom is more 
>important than life.  (Though it certainly would decrease our prison 
>population.)  

Why can't you generalize the statement "freedom is more important than
life"?  Mind you, I don't believe it.  But I don't see it as logically
inconsistant or any such, just wrong.  And I (or someone who
*believes* that freedom is more important than life) could well argue
that *you* have no right to decide that "life is more important than
freedom" for other people.

>>>So, the question becomes "When does the fetus start deserving 
>>>protection?"  I don't believe that there are any logical arguments 
>>>that can be made for protecting a fertilized egg.  (Though I do 
>>>recognize the religious arguments I don't subscribe to them.)  The 
>>>argument that a fetus deserves protection no sooner that when it 
>>>developes a cerebral cortex seems reasonable to me.  I'm been watching 
>>>for a reasonable rebuttal to that one.  (Maybe no logically based 
>>>rebuttal is possible.  If so I'll have to change my signature.)

>>I personally think that the earliest possible moment is when
>>myelination (myelin sheathing around axons of nerve cells which
>>increases speed and decreases signal loss) starts in the fetus's
>>brain.

>This seems reasonable too.  I was going to ask you when this occurs 
>but I've decided not to believe anything I read in t.a.  (Not that I 
>think you'd make stuff up - but it's better to do a little research.)

I've got the data (roughly 24 weeks), but if you do the research,
would you please post the data you find?  Corraboration and more facts
are always useful....

--
"Facts are facts, as the saying is."                        - Smollett

Pro-Choice       Anti-Roe                             - E. Elizabeth Bartley
Newsgroups: talk.abortion