Debate : 7142


Off-Topic / Debate / 7142	7141 \| 7143

Subject:	Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Fri, 10 Nov 2000 18:23:01 GMT
Viewed:	744 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: > With all due respect to Kyle, whose credentials on the subject of sex's > "purpose" I have yet to read, this quote proposes a rather arbitrary view. > Who is Kyle to say what "sex is supposed to result" in? Sex is supposed to > result in sex, and pregnancy sometimes occurs as well. So you're stating that sex is an end to itself, and pregnancy is an occasional accident? So basically...we accidentally have a population of some 6 billion. I can't agree. Though sex has its own individual merits, the obvious natural purpose is reproduction to further the species (from whatever perspective of origins you carry). > Abortion, in the > case of a non-sentient embryo (that is, prior to brain activity), is no more > "cowardly" than the use of a condom or the pill. Once the embryo achieves > brain activity, the choice becomes quite a different subject. > The removal of a non-sentient tissue structure from the body of a woman > who doesn't want it inside her is not murder. Is the fact that it is non-sentient make it non-human? And what do you believe about euthanasia for so-called 'vegetables' hooked up to machines? They aren't sentient either, but they're clearly human. Does it line up? Lots of people on the pro-choice side try to excuse the abortion issue as a religious issue. Though many faiths are against abortion, its not purely a religious issue, its a human rights issue. -Tim

Message has 4 Replies:

		Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
(...) Perhaps you should try listening to "Unplugged" by Spirit of the West, for a view of it :) Some of us think that it is NOT up to the government to make a decision on the matter. It is a _personal_ choice, and one that if you are wise, you (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
(...) I didn't state that very clearly, and I apologize. I meant that the sole purpose of sex cannot be identified as reproduction, at least not among species able to choose when they want to copulate. (...) Let me be clear--the fact that it is (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
(...) In general, yes. (...) It has certainly been known to happen. (...) Yes! (...) Why not? It seems rather obvious to me. If not, then what guiding force do you attribute it to? (...) There is no such thing as natural purpose. Intelligences are (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
(...) How about thinking about how many child do you want for your entire life, and just compare it with the number of times you supposed to make sex with your partner..:-) Selçuk (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
(...) With all due respect to Kyle, whose credentials on the subject of sex's "purpose" I have yet to read, this quote proposes a rather arbitrary view. Who is Kyle to say what "sex is supposed to result" in? Sex is supposed to result in sex, and (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

279 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search