Re: Restored (and a final story for Luke and Daniel)

Jim writes:
<< In these cases I don't think, then, that common sense is a "method" of
any sort. The phrase "common sense" seems to apply to the mundane facts you
make reference to, not the way we manipulate these facts. >>

I think you're being too narrow with your understanding of the phrase.
("The problem was difficult at first, but I used a little common sense and
worked things out.")

Jim suggestions:
<< What would be helpful is if you could spell out how "common sense" leads
one from "belief that life begins at birth" to "abortion is not morally
acceptable."

<<What you'll find is that the chain of reasoning really has nothing to do
with any kind of logic internal to the facts presented, but rather with the
actual rhetoric of the abortion debate and propoganda used by both sides to
win the public over to their opinion.>>

If a fetus at three months or weeks is a human, fully and entirely,
deserving the same legal and other rights and protections, to abort a
pregnancy is to commit a murder.

If a fetus at three months or weeks is not a human, but a still-undeveloped
mass of tissue with the potential to become human, it can be removed to
prevents its Becoming.

I have always considered this -- the difference in belief concerning the
beginning of life and human sanctity -- to be the bottom-line. Arguments go
nowhere without facing it, and the rest of the respective positions manifest
naturally from it. Thus the pro-lifers refer to the killing of "babies"
while that word is not used by the pro-choice.

-robbie

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Sat Jul 19 00:59:59 2003