From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Subject: 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 08:37:00 GMT

In article <342@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) writes...
>In article <1992Dec8.191700.19308@afit.af.mil> wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick) writes:
>#
>#In article <294@blue.cis.pitt.edu> sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
>#| Any choice the pregnant woman wants to make.
>#
>#Any choice?  About anything?  Really?  You wouldn't care to narrow that 
>#focus a tad, would you?  What is the policy of the AMA or the thinking 
>#in medical ethics about voluntary amputations, for example?  Are such 
>#even permitted?  
> 
>Any choice about her pregnancy.  I made the mistake of believing that
>you were bright enough to follow context.  My mistake.

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)?

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?

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?  

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.

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.

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.                                    |
|______________________________________________________________________|


Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12693 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11107 alt.politics.clinton:19394 alt.politics.bush:15266 alt.politics.homosexuality:8724