Re: [microsound] http://courses.ats.rochester.edu/nobis/papers/abortion_and_animals.html

["s. arden hill" <s_ardenhill@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Lance, I really think you should consider what your saying. would you rather 
go back to taking about who is nn? or what everybodies top 5 albums ther 
listeningt o right now? than being informed about how stupid humans can be, 
and how we might prevent further inhuman acts towards animals, people and 
nature.

>can someone please get rid of this guy?
>hey listen, take it off list or this is just so much spam.
>besides all of us animal beating carnivores might get offended......
>  Matthew Waterhorse <matthewwaterhorse@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
>wrote:http://courses.ats.rochester.edu/nobis/papers/abortion_and_animals.html
>
>Abortion and Animal Rights:
>
>Related, but Importantly Different, Issues
>In a recent letter (August 2001, p. 5), a ?Veg-News? reader asked why she
>does not see the vegetarian and animal rights communities taking a stand
>against abortion. She said it seems to be a "great contradiction" to 
>respect
>animal life, but to not equally respect human life by opposing abortion. 
>She
>asked that this issue be addressed. I would like to do so.
>
>
>Those who challenge the status quo regarding our society's consumption and
>treatment of animals do this from a wide variety of moral and philosophical
>perspectives. But all within the movement agree on this: a fundamental evil
>of animal agriculture and a diet and lifestyle that involves animal 
>products
>is that they cause pain, suffering, and early death that is totally
>unnecessary, for both animals and humans.  The conviction that evils like
>these should be opposed and that we should bring an end to them is what
>motivates and unites many people in the vegetarian and animal rights
>community.
>
>
>Should these people also be motivated to oppose abortion? Unfortunately, 
>the
>safest answer seems to be this: no and yes. The answer is not simple 
>because
>abortions affect two importantly different kinds of fetuses: those that can
>experience pain and those that cannot.  Scientific evidence suggests that
>early fetuses, those in the first trimester and slightly beyond, cannot
>experience pain since they lack the necessary neurological development.
>Although reliable data is hard to come by, most fetuses that are aborted 
>are
>early fetuses.Since they cannot experience pain in the procedure, the
>vegetarian and animal rights advocate's opposition to unnecessary pain and
>suffering does not apply here since there is no pain and suffering to
>oppose.  There is no "great contradiction" here.
>
>
>While most abortion providers will not perform abortions past the fourth or
>fifth month (check your yellow pages under ?abortion?) and so there are
>relatively few later-term abortions, there are strong reasons to oppose
>later-term abortions due to the fetal pain and suffering. While probably no
>abortions are taken lightly, these definitely should not. The vegetarian 
>and
>animal rights advocate should find these abortions morally troubling,
>considered in themselves.
>
>
>We might, however, suspect that in many, if not most, cases of later-term
>abortion that the woman's health or safety is in question, or that the 
>fetus
>is aborted to prevent a very unfortunate future from befalling it due to
>disease or serious disability. While the pain and suffering of the fetus is
>very bad (although it might be preventable with anesthesia), these cases of
>later abortion might be permissible, given the complications of the case 
>and
>that others? interests are at stake as well.Later-term abortions done for
>trivial reasons (if abortions are ever done for trivial reasons) are likely
>to be morally inexcusable from many vegetarian and animal rights
>perspectives, since they cause serious pain and suffering without adequate
>justification or need.
>
>
>There are other arguments for and against abortion that I can only briefly
>address.  Some ask, ?How would you like it if you had been aborted??
>suggesting that this shows that abortion is wrong.But one can ask right
>back, ?How would you like it if your parents had used birth control?? Since
>most don?t view birth control as immoral and the arguments are parallel,
>this shows this anti-abortion argument to be weak.
>
>
>It is often said that "all fetuses have a right to life," but this is just
>another way of saying "it's wrong to kill fetuses.  "If it's wrong to kill
>fetuses, why is this so (and which ones)?Unfortunately, groups that oppose
>abortion tend to not address these questions and, when they do, fail to
>realize their best answers imply that living beings that are more conscious
>and sentient than human fetuses -- animals -- have a "right to life" as
>well.  Since anti-abortionists tend to be opposed only to the ending of
>fetal lives and indifferent to the tragic lives and brutal deaths of farm
>animals and fur-bearers, it's a serious misnomer to call them "pro-life."
>
>
>On the other hand, pro-choice groups tend to refuse to admit that some
>choices of abortion result in intense pain and suffering for some fetuses.
>They stubbornly uphold a woman's right to choose to abort at any time and
>for literally any reason (or none whatsoever), no matter the consequences
>for the fetus, including late-term ones.Anyone convinced, as vegetarians
>are, that causing unnecessary pain and suffering is seriously wrong cannot
>accept an unconditional pro-choice position, one that gives infinite moral
>weight to a women's right to choice so that fetal pain counts for nothing,
>morally-speaking.
>
>
>However inadequate most debate of the morality of abortion is and however
>muddled most common arguments for and against abortion are, at least it is
>an issue that there is public debate over and that most people believe is
>important.  Politicians' fates can be sealed by their views on abortion.
>Will there ever come a time when a "litmus test" for a candidate's 
>viability
>is whether he or she believes that animals have the right not to be eaten,
>worn, or experimented on?  Will there come a time when campaign
>contributions from the meat industry will be viewed with as much suspicion
>as those from "Big Tobacco," as they both peddle products known to be
>harmful to human health?Vegetarian and animal rights advocates hope that
>their work makes it all the sooner that the answer to these questions is,
>?Yes.?
>
>
>Many vegetarian and animal rights advocates have likely been asked why they
>don't spend their efforts on supposedly "more important" issues, such as
>abortion.This question, of course, presumes that abortion is a ?more
>important? moral problem.  I have argued that since most aborted fetuses 
>are
>not conscious and so cannot feel pain, the two issues?abortion and animal
>rights?are importantly different and so indifference to some kinds of
>abortions is consistent with a commonly-held motivation for advocating
>vegetarianism and respecting animals.
>
>
>For those fetuses that can feel pain, this is a serious issue, one that
>should not be dismissed. However, the number of these fetuses is tiny,
>compared to the tens of billions of animals slaughtered each year and the
>vast numbers of humans who unnecessarily suffer as a consequence of eating
>them.  Also, there already are a large number of defenders of these 
>fetuses:
>whether they will be able to convince a critical political mass might 
>depend
>on their substituting reason for their current rhetoric.
>
>
>Since abortion already is a public issue, the best thing vegetarian and
>animal rights advocates can do is continue striving to make their issues a
>common topic of public debate and scrutiny.  We do this by educating people
>about the horrors of factory farming, the utter lack of necessity for any 
>of
>its products, the unreliable of animal-based medical research and product
>testing, and the health benefits of a vegan diet.  Given the huge numbers 
>of
>animals and humans that are harmed by this system and whose lives would
>change for the better were it abolished, it?s not clear that there?s
>anything ?more important? to be done.
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Unlimited Internet access for only $21.95/month.  Try MSN!
>http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>website: http://www.microsound.org
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Lance Grabmiller
>www.praemedia.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now

_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online 
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

------------------------------