[CS-FSLUG] Consider this before you vote!!

[Aaron Patrick Lehmann]

On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 01:33:54PM -0400, Fred Miller wrote:
> A baby by 11 weeks old.
> 
> Fertilization: a new and unique person.
True.

> Heart is beating (since 18-25 days).
Irrelevant, as people with pig's hearts are still people.

> At 40 days, brain waves have already been recorded.
Irrelevant, unless you believe that the plug should be pulled on those who have
experienced brain death, but are kept alive by machine.

> The baby squints and swallows.
Irrelevant, as a person could be blind and fed by IV.

> The baby can kick and make a fist.
Irrelevant, unless quadruple amputees are less human.

> The baby has fingerprints.
Irrelevant, for the same reason as the above statement.

> The baby is sensitive to heat, touch, light and noise.
This is interesting.  If a person was completely unable to sense the outside
world, would he still be worthy of human consideration?  Would the only sort of
consideration possible be a mercy killing?  Would the person notice the
difference?

> The baby suck his thumb.
How does this relate to the child's humanity?  Chimpanzees suck their thumbs as
well (http://www.billybear4kids.com/Rozi/RoziPandu.html)

> All body systems are working.
Irrelevant, as we have developed a clever technology to deal with partially
working or non-working body systems.  We call it medicine.

> The baby could fit comfortably in the palm of your hand.
Irrelevant.  Being small and cute does not give something a right to life
anymore than being large and ugly does.

Now, before I incite a flame-war for my response, I'd like to explain myself a
bit.  I am anti-abortion (I do not say pro-life, because i haven't yet made a
decision as to my beliefs regarding capital punishment).  I believe that
abortion is wrong, because it is a killing of a person for a reason
unsanctioned by the Bible.  In order to show that I'm right, I'd have to show
that both the fetus is a person, and that it is not among the classes of
things the Bible says we can kill.

What makes a person?  I think that a person is a creature of a type that can be
reasonably be expected to develop human-normal level intelligence, or has
human-level intelligence already.  Thus, I am opposed to killing fetuses that
do not pose an untoward danger to their lives, or the lives of others.  I will
make an exception to this for fetuses that have committed murder, treason, or
are soldiers of a country with which mine is at war, because these are the
current Biblical sanctions our society uses (although I'm not sure about the
treason one; is it Biblical?).  In the past, it would have been acceptable to
abort a fetus for being a witch, and adulterer, a blasphemer, or a Canaanite,
amongst others.  I am also opposed to killing retarded people, intelligent
robots and animals, and ETs.  Of course, the aforementioned exception applies
to these as well.

Basically, my point is that only the first reason in the list holds any water
at all, and thus is the only one that should be used.

Aaron Lehmann
-- 
Why do the Democrats complain about Nader losing them Presidential elections?
Republicans don't complain about Libertarians.