[Vision2020] A Woman's Right to Choose (where she shops) Hangsinthe Balance

Phil Nisbet pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com
Wed Jan 18 17:48:44 PST 2006 

Joe and Nick

You might enjoy reading this from the Israeli debate on abortion.  It has 
different reasoning than Nick's but comes to some interesting similar 
conclusions.

http://www.vbm-torah.org/halakha/abortion.htm

Phil NIsbet


>From: joekc at adelphia.net
>To: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A Woman's Right to Choose (where she shops) 
>Hangsinthe Balance
>Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 19:53:45 -0500
>
>This is a good response, Donovan!
>
>First, you answer my first question with a 'No.' You think that some of the 
>disagreements in the abortion debate are moral disagreements -- not just 
>metaphysical disagreements.
>
>Second, you note that there are two issues here: a moral issue, and a legal 
>issue. As you see it, one might think that abortion is immoral yet say that 
>abortion should not be illegal.
>
>Since I was raised Catholic yet remain a liberal I tend to agree that such 
>a view is not contradictory. Clinton held such a view but some folks used 
>it against him. So I wonder about opposition to the view.
>
>Best, Joe
>
>---- Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Hi Joe,
> >
> >  I do not believe in making  abortion illegal not because it is or is 
>not a human being. I think it  is obvious that it is a developing human. To 
>me, life is so precious  that if there is any possibility it could be a 
>person, it is worthy of  saving. With perhaps the exception of the Bush 
>administration, most  people value life enough to error on the side of life 
>when there is any  question.
> >
> >  My opposition to illegalizing abortion  rests in two facts. First, 
>giving the government control of our  reproductive freedoms WILL result in 
>the government eventually abusing  that power, such as forced abortions. 
>And second, it is impossible to  force anyone to carry a baby to term if 
>they truly do not want it  without stripping people of  basic human 
>freedoms of what   we, eat, consume,  where we go,  how we  behave etc. In  
>other words, it  is not  enforceable without stripping humans  of all that 
>is valuable and makes life worth living.
> >
> >   _DJA
> >
> >   PS, I am still waiting for response on why I, a poor American, should  
>subsidize your more costly preferences in a free marketplace economy?
> >
> > joekc at adelphia.net wrote:  Today I asked this question in my 
>undergraduate seminar on Action, Ethics, and Responsibility:
> >
> > Is  the disagreement about abortion primarily a disagreement about moral 
>  claims or a disagreement about metaphysical claims (one with ethical  
>implications, no doubt)?
> >
> > We all agree -- I think -- that  innocent persons should not be 
>needlessly put to death. Isn't one  primary disagreement in the abortion 
>debate about what it means to be a  person, which is a metaphysical 
>disagreement? (I'm not trying to  diminish the claim but to locate it.)
> >
> > Best, Joe
> >
> > ---- J Ford
> >  wrote:
> > > Just for the sake of clarification ONLY, what does this mean:
> > >
> > >
> > > " I find it interesting that you  believe so much in a woman's right 
>to
> > > choose to abort a fetus, OR ANOTHER DEVELOPING HUMAN..."
> > >
> > >
> > > J  :]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: Donovan Arnold
> > > >To: Nick Gier , vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A Woman's Right to Choose (where she shops) 
>Hangs
> > > >inthe Balance
> > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:18:15 -0800 (PST)
> > > >
> > > >Nick,
> > > >
> > > >  I find it interesting that you  believe so much in a woman's right 
>to
> > > >choose to abort a fetus, or  another developing human, but yet at the 
>same
> > > >time oppose her right to  shop at a store of her choosing, like 
>Wal-Mart.
> > > >
> > > >   It just seems ironic, doesn't it?
> > > >
> > > >   Mind you, I am opposed to legally preventing abortion. But if I 
>had to
> > > >prioritize limiting a women's right to choice, it would be to limit 
>her
> > > >options to a kill a developing human being over that of where she 
>buys
> > > >hamburger buns.
> > > >
> > > >   Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > >   -DJA
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Nick Gier  wrote:    Greetings:
> > > >
> > > >   Before this goes out to the usual venues, I wanted Visionaries to 
>have
> > > >a first read if they wish.  If you find typos or more substantial  
>points
> > > >to debate, let me know.  I'm glad that I can spell that  last phrase 
>better
> > > >than Doug Farris.
> > > >
> > > >   A WOMAN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE HANGS IN THE  BALANCE
> > > >
> > > >   By Nick Gier
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >           During  his confirmation hearings many Americans were 
>relieved
> > > >to hear that  John Roberts believes that the Constitution contains a 
>right
> > > >to  privacy.  He also considers Roe vs. Wade to be “settled  
>law.”  In
> > > >recent hearings to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the  Supreme 
>Court,
> > > >Samuel Alito agreed with Roberts on the first point but  not on the 
>second.
> > > >
> > > >  O’Connor is the author of the significant  proviso “no 
>undue burden,”
> > > >which limits the state’s power to restrict a  woman’s 
>right to choose.  In
> > > >one decision O’Connor ruled that it  was indeed an 
>“undue burden” that a
> > > >woman must get her husband’s  permission to have an abortion.  
>In a dissent
> > > >in the 3rd  District Court of Appeals Judge Alito argued that any 
>state has
> > > >a right  to require a woman to do just that.
> > > >
> > > >   A right of privacy is not specifically granted in the 
>Constitution, but
> > > >it is strongly implied therein.  Americans have an inalienable  right 
>to
> > > >hold their own beliefs, to act according to the dictates of  their 
>own
> > > >consciences, and the “right . . . to be secure in their  
>persons, houses,
> > > >papers, and effects. . . ” (4th Amendment). The right  of 
>privacy follows
> > > >from the basic American belief that people are  autonomous beings, 
>which
> > > >means that they have a right to determine  their own lives without
> > > >government interference.
> > > >
> > > >  During the  Alito hearings there was grandstanding from both sides 
>of the
> > > >aisle,  but the worst offender was Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.  
>Coburn
> > > >repeatedly said that the science of fetal development should compel 
>the
> > > >Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs. Wade. To bolster his  argument 
>Coburn
> > > >added he had delivered 4,000 babies in his career as an  
>obstetrician.
> > > >
> > > >   I’ve taught over 6,000 students and I hope that they have 
>better
> > > >reasoning skills than the good senator.  Coburn stated that the  
>early
> > > >fetus has brain waves and a heart beat, but animal fetuses have  
>these as
> > > >well.  What makes humans morally and legally different  from animals 
>is
> > > >that they are persons, not just biological  entities.
> > > >
> > > >  Our moral, religious, and legal tradition has  held that persons 
>are
> > > >rational beings, who are able to determine their  own lives 
>significantly
> > > >different from the ways they guide their  children or control their
> > > >animals.  Several footnotes to Roe vs. Wade  reference this long 
>tradition,
> > > >and I believe that the justices had  sufficient reason to rule that 
>the
> > > >early fetus is not a person.
> > > >
> > > >   At the beginning of the third trimester, the fetal brain undergoes
> > > >explosive brain development. At 25 weeks the brain cells are very  
>poorly
> > > >connected and the neocortex, the center of higher brain  function, is
> > > >undeveloped.  At 33 weeks those same cells have  thousands of 
>connections
> > > >and the neocortex has the six layers of the  mature brain.
> > > >
> > > >  This brain is significantly different  from most animal brains, 
>which can
> > > >form the physical basis for  protecting the legal rights of a 
>“beginning
> > > >person,” a being with a  serious moral right to life.  This 
>argument is far
> > > >superior to  fetal viability, a criterion that, as Senator Coburn 
>pointed
> > > >out, is  vulnerable to technological advances in preserving the lives 
>of
> > > >premature fetuses. Fetal brain development will not change except for
> > > >major and immoral genetic engineering.
> > > >
> > > >  My argument gives  expectant mothers the same six months’ 
>freedom from
> > > >state interference  but with a stronger legal foundation. The is also 
>a
> > > >nice logical  symmetry between starting a person's life at this point 
>and
> > > >then  legally ending it when the brain no longer functions. 
>It’s also
> > > >imperative to note that 88 percent of all American abortions occur  
>within
> > > >13 weeks of conception, long before any major elements of a  person's 
>life
> > > >develops.
> > > >
> > > >  Anti-abortionists claim that abortion  causes health problems for 
>women
> > > >who submit to them.  These same  people, however, do very little to 
>support
> > > >the social services and  accurate information that would make 
>abortions
> > > >safer, earlier, and  rarer, as is the case in most other 
>industrialized
> > > >countries.  For  example, in Belgium and the Netherlands there are 7
> > > >abortions per 1,000  women as opposed to 23 per 1,000 in the U.S.
> > > >
> > > >  The most  horrendous effects on female health are found in 
>countries that
> > > >do not  allow reproductive freedom, and the Bush 
>administration’s
> > > >restrictions  on family planning in foreign aid are making this 
>problem
> > > >worse.   With a little over half the population, Brazilian women have 
>more
> > > >abortions than American women do. Eastern Europe has the highest rate 
>  in
> > > >the world: a staggering 90 unsafe abortions per 1,000 women.   
>Generally
> > > >speaking, the rate of abortion appears to be directly  proportional 
>to the
> > > >restrictions placed on sex education and  reproductive freedom.
> > > >
> > > >   As we acknowledge the  33rd  anniversary of Roe vs. Wade  on 
>January 22,
> > > >we should heed the heed the results of a recent Harris  Poll: 70 
>percent
> > > >said that they would oppose Alito if he intends to  overturn this 
>landmark
> > > >decision. The choice for America is clear.   We can continue to 
>protect a
> > > >woman’s right to determine her own life,  or we can deny her 
>this right and
> > > >force her to face unhealthy and  sometimes deadly alternatives to 
>safe,
> > > >legal abortions.
> > > >
> > > >   Nick Gier taught religion and philosophy at the University of 
>Idaho for
> > > >31 years.  For more on the topic see
> > > >www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/abortion.htm.
> > > >
> > > >   _____________________________________________________
> > > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > >                http://www.fsr.net
> > > >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > 
> >¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >---------------------------------
> > > >Yahoo! Photos – Showcase holiday pictures in hardcover
> > > >  Photo Books. You design it and we’ll bind it!
> > >
> > >
> > > >_____________________________________________________
> > > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > >                http://www.fsr.net
> > > >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > 
> >¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's 
>FREE!
> > > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
> > >
> > > _____________________________________________________
> > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > >                http://www.fsr.net
> > >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > 
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> >
> >
> > _____________________________________________________
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > 
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Photos – Showcase holiday pictures in hardcover
> >  Photo Books. You design it and we’ll bind it!
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list