From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Greetings
Date: 7 Jan 93 13:51:34 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, noonan@mksol.dseg.ti.com (Michael P Noonan) writes:
>In article <29225@oasys.dt.navy.mil>,
>bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense) posts for Chris Lyman:

>|>               Imo, the evolution/creation debate is yet another
>|> facet of what seems to be a cultural war between the radical and/or
>|> religious right and the progressive and/or humanist left.  I am
>|> particularly struck by the similarity of mindsets between
>|> creationists and anti-abortionists.

>Here it is once again assumed that all anti-abortionists are religious
>zealots.  I am an atheist, anti-creationist, and anti-abortionist.

First off, I don't think Chris is maligning anyone, as he is talking
in the general sense. That you happen to fall outside the norm for
those holding your position is a fact even you must admit. The majority
of pro-life/anti-abortion supporters are from the rr (religious right),
and Chris' observations hold true for them (the majority). We have had
one other who claimed to be an atheist (saying you are anti-creationist
is redundant, BTW:) but he apparently has religious views, as expressed
in his opinions and what he chooses to contest in his posts. (he's known
as DoDie, aka Doug Holtsinger, just so he can't say I tried to malign
him behind his back! :] )

>You attack a position by maligning its supporters.  This is, IMO, a
>poor tactic and detracts from the discussion.  This is slightly ironic,
>since your post is directed against such tactics.

Touchy, aren't we? All Chris said is that there seems to be a similarity
between creationists and anti-abortionists, in the general sense. There
is, as, in general, they are the same people. AMAZING!!! :)

>|> I will leave my implied analogy to anti-abortionists as an exercise
>|> for the reader. :-)

>I, for one, fail to see the connection.  I don't disbeleive Creationism
>because its supporters are idiots.  I disbelieve Creationism because
>there is no evidence for its veracity.  I do, however, welcome the
>presentation of new evidence should it become available.  Facts are
>welcome in any debate.

If you had read the passage closely, you would see that the lack of
evidence provided is similar to the lack of evidence presented by pro-lifers
in t.a. IOW, their facts don't measure up with reality, and in the end
it boils down to "I believe, so therefore it is so." But I agree that
new *facts* are welcome in any debate. Misinformation, on the other
hand, will be thrown out.

>I understand your outrage.  Indeed, I feel much of it myself.  I
>think we must refrain from dismissing a certain viewpoint merely
>because idiots espouse it, however.  You will find that there are
>idiots in every cause.

These same idiots probably think that 0+0=0. You'll find that I won't
dismiss this viewpoint merely because they also espouse it. I have yet
to see a compelling reason to support anti-abortion statutes, although
there is a plethora of good reasons to support the choice of abortion.
(A little note here, this is only one choice, if someone chooses to
bring to term, that's fine with me.)

Ron                          Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
			     The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
			     Make a U-turn to God.
The irony is priceless.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion