[Vision2020] Compassion for All Life

[Sunil Ramalingam]

Since Tony objects neither to the execution of the wrongly convicted nor the 
deaths of innocent victims of our wars abroad, he isn't a supporter of 
innocent life either.

Sunil


>From: Scott Dredge <sdredge at yahoo.com>
>To: Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Compassion for All Life
>Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 10:51:05 -0800 (PST)
>
>Tony,
>
>Not flat Tony.  Right on target.  Your answer is "No, the government should 
>not be allowed to
>   strap me to a gurney against my will and take half of my liver to save 
>me
>   in the name of "compassion for all life".  Funny how things change when 
>it's your body in the mix.
>
>-Scott
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>To: Scott Dredge <sdredge at yahoo.com>
>Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 11:42:13 AM
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Compassion for All Life
>
>
>
>
>DIV {
>MARGIN:0px;}
>
>
>
>Hey Scott, how's it hanging?  Say, in your
>hypothetical scenario, are there perhaps thousands of individuals and 
>couples
>waiting in the wings to donate a liver to you should I refuse?  Oh my, how
>inconvenient when our metaphor falls flat.  In the case of abortion, of
>course, there are literally thousands of folks waiting around the block to 
>adopt
>the little human being in question, so the bio mother's decision to not be
>involved in it's raising would not condemn it to death.
>
>
>
>Really Scott, no bobbing and weaving is required to
>defend the right to life of innocent babies, just a modicum of sensitivity 
>and
>vision.
>
>
>
>Best,  -T
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>
>   From:
>   Scott Dredge
>
>
>   To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>
>   Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 10:03
>   PM
>
>   Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Compassion for
>   All Life
>
>
>
>
>
>   Tony,
>
>You
>   can oppose abortion all you want.  The fact is that whether or not
>   abortion remains legalized or whether it is completely banned will not
>   directily impact you.  You personally gain no rights nor lose any rights
>   as abortion restrictions ebb and flow.
>
>But would your position on
>   "compassion for all life" change at all if you were affected?  For
>   instance, let's say that I need half of your liver to survive because 
>for
>   [insert any reason] my own liver is failing.  Let's say that an 
>operation
>   to split your liver carries no more risk of death to you than that of a 
>woman
>   in child birth.  Let's also say that the recovery time from this
>   operation is no more burdensome than what women typically go through 
>from late
>   term pregnancies through child birth.  Your liver will regenerate back 
>to
>   full size 6 months after the operation.  The question then I have for 
>you
>   is this: should you be allowed to make the choice of whether or not to 
>donate
>   half of your liver to save my life or should the government be allowed 
>to
>   strap you to a gurney against your will and take half of your liver to 
>save me
>   in the name of "compassion for all life"?
>
>Looking forward to your
>   bobbing and weaving response - if you have any response at
>   all.
>
>-Scott
>
>
>   -----
>   Original Message ----
>From: Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>To: Nick
>   Gier <ngier at uidaho.edu>
>Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Sent: Friday,
>   January 26, 2007 5:42:19 PM
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Compassion for All
>   Life
>
>
>
>
>   Nick, your revered logic would dictate to me that
>   the ONLY species out of how many millions on this planet that is capable 
>of
>   sending space probes beyond the solar system, composing great works of
>   literature or carving David from solid marble, is reasonably viewed as
>   superior to the other lesser endowed species.  Is our existence no more
>   remarkable than a muskrat when we can compose poetry or construct the 
>Twin
>   Towers?
>
>
>
>   Yes, human being is a biological category, but
>   one of extraordinary uniqueness, endowed over and above the others in a 
>myriad
>   of ways.  They are also, according to our Declaration, deserving of and
>   endowed with, certain unalienable rights, one of which is the right to
>   life.  And therein your dilemma.  You can cling tenaciously to an
>   irrelevancy, are they persons or non persons, but you cannot deny their
>   humanity.  It seems Nick, that you pick and choose which written
>   declarations you will adhere to.  I suppose we all must.  Is the
>   Supreme Court the entity I most trust in deciding these matters, or do I 
>rely
>   on the wisdom of those who drafted the Declaration of Independence and 
>our
>   Constitution?  Guess I'll stick with the latter.  You apparently
>   prefer the former, as is your right.  I will continue to oppose the
>   premeditated killing of innocent human beings, but I am willing to agree 
>to
>   disagree with you if you choose a different path.
>
>
>
>   Sincerely,
>   -Tony
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>=======================================================
>  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
>=======================================================