[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [microsound] http://courses.ats.rochester.edu/nobis/papers/abortion_and_animals.html
- To: microsound <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [microsound] http://courses.ats.rochester.edu/nobis/papers/abortion_and_animals.html
- From: Michal Seta <mis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 22:32:16 -0500
Someone should go and a field recording of this one:
On Tue, 05 Nov 2002 19:12:17 -0500
Matthew 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
>
>
--
../MiS
Michal Seta http://creazone.eworldmusic.com/doc/mis
CreaZone http://www.creazone.com
No One Receiving http://www.noonereceiving.32k.org
upcoming release:
NOR - "The Release of the Wandering-Eyed Girl"
http://www.grainofsound.com
------------------------------