Text 13917, 115 rader
Skriven 2005-07-04 03:08:24 av Stephen Hayes (5:7106/20.0)
Ärende: Re: LIBERALS READY TO ABANDON US RIGHT TO ABORTION
==========================================================
* Forwarded (from: LIBRARY_FMY) by Stephen Hayes using timEd/2 1.10.y2k.
* Originally from Steve Hayes (8:8/2003) to All.
* Original dated: Sun Jul 03, 03:29

From: Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@hotmail.com>

On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 02:20:28 GMT, usenet@mantra.com (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote:

>Liberals ready to abandon US right to abortion 
>
>By Gaby Wood in New York
>The Observer
>Sunday, July 3, 2005
>
>Last autumn, in the midst of a presidential election,
>America's Democrats were fighting furiously to protect
>what they described as a constitutional right -- to have
>an abortion. 
>
>But in an extraordinary turn of events, some argue that
>it is the single issue standing in the way of their
>election prospects. They are daring to say what once was
>regarded as heresy -- that it is time to let the argument
>go. 
>
>Abortion may still be the most divisive issue in the US,
>but in a move indicative of creeping conservatism,
>Democrats now seem happy to amend -- even relinquish --
>their position on it. 

I have always been puzzled by the notion that the idea of a "right to
abortion" is a liberal one. 

I remember how shocked i was the first time i encountered it, having fled from
South Africa a month earlier, one step ahead of the Security Police, being
hounded, like many other liberals, for opposing the ethnic cleansing that was
part and parcel of the implementation of the policy of apartheid, having been
officially warned by a magistrate in terms of the Suppression of Communism Act
(which was being used to suppress liberalism) not to engage in activities that
were calculated to achieve any of the objects of communism (such as a
democratic non-racial South Africa), and being told by him that my membership
of the Liberal Party must surely count as one of those activities.

So, being regarded as an enemy of the state (enemy of the state number 1648,
according to the Security Police files now lodged in the Sate Archives because
of my liberalism, I thought I was a liberal and knew what liberalism was. 

So this is what I wrote in my diary the first time I saw "the rightto
abortion" being described as "liberal".

4-Feb-1966, Friday

I woke up relatively early, and while eating breaksfast discussed
with Eric an article in yesterday's "Sun" on the subject of
abortion. The thing that struck me was that it spoke of the
"liberal and enlightened practice of legal abortion" and "a human
approach unaffected by moral attitudes" which sounded completely
nonsensical. As they put it the whole thing sounded to me like
fascist piggery based fundamentally on the idea that if the
existence of another person causes me inconvenience or discomfort
then I am morally justified in trying to get rid of the other
person. And here the fact that many of the people involved (in
abortion) were married women who already had children would seem
to indicate a certain amount of selfishness. And once having
established the practice that it is all right to get rid of
inconvenient individuals in some circumctances, then the way is
open for doing it on others. If unwanted babies are to be
disposed of in this manner, then why not euthanasia, which could
rid society of the mental defective and the physically deformed,
and possibly the old people who can no longer look after
themselves and so become a burden on society. The practice might
be extended to social misfits as well -- those who, while having
no obvious physical or mental defects, nevertheless fail to
adjust themselves to society. Political deviates would be the
next on the list. Why, we'll be back to the good old days when
Jews were liquidated in the gas chambers. Of course the good
doctor in Aberdeen might say that in a liberal and enlightened
country things couldn't escalate like that -- but do we live in a
liberal and enlightened society? And of course a humane approach
must not be affected by moral attitudes. How lovely for Mr
Vorster, I am sure. We can embark at once on a humane and
enlightened programme for all Bantu women who become pregnant.
Humane, because most of them have starving children already , and
another mouth to feed when there is not enough food as it is
could cause them worry, and damage their mental and physical
health and well-being. And the world will have cause to be
grateful, because we are solving the problem of overpopulation by
a liberal and enlightend practice of genocide. The foregoing, of
course, is an extensive exaggeration of what the article actually
said. But such escalation would really be perilously easy.
Perhaps there is something in human rights after all; if it were
enshrined in law the illiberal, unenlightened and inhumane idea
that every human being from the moment of conception, had "an
inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

---

I regarded legal abortion as fascist piggery then, and I've seen no reason to
change my mind. It is not, and never has been, "liberal". It goes against
everything that liberalism stands for, 






-- 
Steve Hayes
Web: http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm
     http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius
___ NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
 - Origin: The South African Internet Exchange (8:8/2003) 

--- WtrGate v0.93.p9 Unreg
 * Origin: Khanya BBS, Tshwane, South Africa [012] 333-0004 (5:7106/20)