In each case the premise is true, but the conclusion doesn't follow. --CGE
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Stephen Philion wrote:
> CJE wrote: That Jews have been severely persecuted does not justify
> the oppression of Palestinians; that women have been oppressed does
> not justify the ending of human lives.
>
> ---a rather incoherent comparison? no one, save the most fanatical
> Zionist would argue that the murder of a Palestinian is a murder of a
> human being and should be punished as such. As a matter of fact, it is
> safe to say that Israel has laws that encode the act of murdering any
> already born person on Israeli soil as an act of murder. However,
> there is wide disagreement on the issue of whether or not an abortion
> is 'murder' and very little agreement with the proposition that it
> should be punished as capital one murder (which is all it could
> possibly be after all, the planned and carried out murder of an
> innocent person, eh?)
>
>
> ---That seems clear enough that many defenders of abortion as ethical
> have been forced to argue that abortion doesn't end a human life
>
> --utterly off topic. the reasoning is quite simple actually. If you
> ask the average person if there should be a heavy punishment for the
> crime of murder, they will say yes there should be. That is across
> religious and non-religious. They will disagree on the laws, but for
> persons born who are murdered, they agree there should be x,y, and z
> types of classifications and x,y, and z types of punishment.
>
> Now, take the same group of people and ask them if they believe that
> abortion should be considered, legally, murder. you will find some
> agreement until you get to , 'should people who commit this act of
> murder be charged with murder?' then you will find lots of opposition.
> the idea is, of course, ludicrous. think of all the christian
> republican women who would be on death row (if we support the death
> penalty for murder) or in jail for long terms. then think of all the
> women who would go abroad to commit murder, come back, and not be
> punished for committing murder of an American citizen. Or think of
> the many foreigners who commit this act of murder in the US in jail or
> death row for committing murder.....
>
> only a religious fanatic could agree that such policy would be
> desirable, let alone feasible. yet it is the only logical conclusion
> from the proposition, "abortion is murder".
>
> in a secular country we have no choice but to accept that different
> people have very different opinions about whether or not an abortion
> is an act of murder and therefore it is impossible to legislate laws
> restricting abortion as an act of murder. It is possible in a
> religious state to do so, indeed it is not at all uncommon. But in a
> secular state, the proposition is utterly irrational. The same cannot
> be said about prosecuting the murder of a born person as 'murder'. On
> that you find nearly unanimous agreement, the murder of a born person
> is a murder and should (as we would expect from a coherent legal
> system) be punished as a crime of murder.
>
> Ultimately that is the only issue at hand and the anti-choice movement
> is keenly aware of this. The rest is a cover for this reality,
> ideology as it were.
>
> steve
>