Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!laura From: laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: getting at roots of abortion Message-ID: <4156@utzoo.UUCP> Date: Mon, 30-Jul-84 17:42:38 EDT Article-I.D.: utzoo.4156 Posted: Mon Jul 30 17:42:38 1984 Date-Received: Mon, 30-Jul-84 17:42:38 EDT References: <938@shark.UUCP> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 56 Ah, Brian, but you didn't keep asking why! Now you are off and talking about ``society defining itself''. Where did this come from? I can tell you one thing -- soceity does not go about defining itself -- somebody makes some generalisations about society, publishes them, and that gets to be what society is about. Is there really ``the ME generation?'' what about ``the silent generation''? William Buckley says that he is a member of the silent genration, and he sure isn't silent. So we need a definition of society. How about this: A society is a collection of individuals who are held together either by force or threat of force by certain ruling individual(s), or by voluntary association. Not that that was not an ``xor'' up there. Now you have a definition of society which does not go about asking whether every individual is a member. You can assume that all teh members of a society are there either because they are forced to be there whether they want to or not, or because they want to be there. You would then have to look at which laws have proven appropriate for voluntary associatings on individuals. The other thing to consider is that though new babies do cost money, there is a lot of money in North America which would voluntarily go (ie we don't need state supported housing for babies that are allowed to go to term rather than aborted) to feed and clothe North American babies. To begin with, there are a lot of parents who want to adopt, and even if you decided to exclude them for some reason, there are a lot of charitable organisations which regularily collect a lot of money and do various things with it. This money could be directed towards orphans at home as easily as orphans abroad. Indeed, there are a good many people who do not wish to support programs of foreign aid who would be willing to support programs of domestic aid. I do not know about the Unites States, but in Canada it was calculated (by someone I do nopt recognise and who may be lying) that if all the money that was spent by the various provincial public health agencies was combined with the money which the Pro Life groups have spent on promoting their cause there would be enough money to raise every aborted fetus in Canada, with a good bit left over. Of course, the figures will we as inexact as such figures always are, but it makes you stop and wonder. How much are those unwanted fetuses actually going to cost us anyway? Laura Creighton utzoo!laura