(Fwd) Continued Discussion
Ian & Pam Dorion dorioni@ipa.net
Thu, 19 Feb 1998 14:33:19 -0600 (00887941999, 199802192035.OAA29240@siren.ipa.net)
> TILL
> I am swamped with work to do. Would anyone on this list care to respond
to
> this letter from the dean of a Bible college? He raises the issue of
where
> atheists <yawn> find a basis for Morality.
LINGLE
> Dear Mr. Till,
>
> Following is my message of April 2, 1997. I would still be
> interested in a response if you would care to make one.
>
> Dear Mr. Till,
>
> I read with interest your response to me of October 29 in which you
> defended the unfortunate necessity of abortion. (I can't believe how
> fast time flys. Sorry for not getting back to you sooner.) You
> raised a number of questions that challenged my thinking and that
> seem to indicate you have considered the issue at length.
IAN 2/19
Dear David,
I am probably not the best person to answer this for Till but I do agree
with
him as I am sure others do. Hopefully others will also answer this post.
>
LINGLE
> As you might expect, I take issue with the conclusion that abortion
> is necessary to prevent over-population. When society gives up the
> basis for morality, then immorality becomes common. "Unwanted"
> pregnancies are are a natural consequence of throwing off healthy
> moral restraints.
IAN
To start with, you are of the opinion that everyone has the same morals.
You probably also think that everyone should have the same morals as you.
This is not necessarily the case. Even then, ""Unwanted" pregnancies are a
natural consequence of throwing off healthy moral restraints," is not a
true statement. Just think of all the unwanted children who have been born
because of Pope John-Paul II, Mother Theresa, and the RCC. Surely many,
maybe most unwanted pregnancies in this country are caused by unmarried
couples having sex. Who's fault is this? Most of these people have gone to
church, probably Sunday school as well. Maybe men like you preached against
unmarried sex and maybe you haven't. If you did, what did you say? IT"S A
SIN! Then you no doubt demonstrate against sex education in school.
I'm with you if you want to teach abstinance as the first line of defense
but there is a hell of a lot more that needs to be taught because everyone
is not going to buy it. They need to be taught why they should abstain and
I don't mean telling them it's a sin and that the big bad bogeyman in the
sky is going to get them. Teach them about pregnancy and disease. Teach
them about birth control and safe sex. And emphasice abstinance.
LINGLE
As a society, we want our sin but not any
> consequent responsibilities that hinder our self-centered
> life-styles. I think you can call abortion a necessity only if you
> are already committed to the opinion that men and women should be
> able to seek sexual gratification in a wanton manner. (Obviously, my
> remarks and conclusions are made from within a theistic worldview.)
IAN
Wrong. Abortion will be necessary until such time as you take the sin out
of sex and teach sex as a natural human function.
>
LINGLE
> You raised the issue about the precise timing and mechanism of
> "ensoulment". E.g., for maternal twins, does the soul divide when
> the zygote does? etc. These are questions that merit careful
> consideration. Please allow two brief observations. First, because
> we do not know or undertand or have a "scientific" explanation of
> ensoulment does not mean it does not happen or that man has no
> everlasting spirit.
IAN
I don't know anything about ensoulment either but I'm not going to be long
winded about it.
LINGLE
There are even material phenomena which
> science cannot explain (such as gravity, or, what holds atoms
> together). Second, if we may not or do not know precisely when
> ensoulment occurs, this would seem to argue for extreme caution in
> taking life that is human, regardless of its stage of development, as
> opposed to reckless abandon in the taking of life, which, whether you
> admit it or not, is exactly what is happening. (For what
> its worth, it should come as no surprise that those who have little
> or no respect for human life have little regard for truth, as witness
> the recent confessions of a leading advocate of partial birth
> abortion.) But of course I am again speaking from within a theistic
> fram of reference.
IAN
I would like to suggest that you read the Penteteuch and Joshua.
Apparently, you have not done this and just skipped to the NT.
LINGLE
This frame of reference means that there is
> something special, some would even say sacred, about human life. If
> there is no God, what makes you or me any different or better than
> my son's pet gerbil? Which brings me back to the fundamental
> issue.
IAN
Good question. Not much in reallity. Have you ever heard of God killing a
gerbil? can you quote the chapter and verse? I've heard of God killing men
and I can quote the chapters and verses of which there are many.
>
LINGLE
> All of the discussion about abortion comes back to the issue of
> values. What is the standard for deciding right from wrong, fair
> from unfair, etc.? Or, more specifically, as a professing atheist,
> what is your standard or basis for ethical decisions? If there is no
> God, then what is your basis for calling anything right
> or wrong? You are offended that a God who sovereignly created life
> would choose to take life, seemingly judging this to be wrong. But if
> this is wrong or unfair, then wrong or unfair by whose standard? And
> why that standard?
IAN
Since you brought this subject up, I would like to play for time and defer
to you. Tell me about your standard or basis for ethical decisions are.
>
LINGLE
> You have graciously taken time to respond to my previous letters, and
> I thank you for your time. If you have taken time to read to this
> point, I am hopeful that you might be willing to provide for me an
> answer to this issue of an ethical standard. From an atheist's
> perspective, what is the basis for deciding ethical issues?
IAN
You first. If you are a Christian, I presume you get them from the Bible
so I will expect you to quote chapter and verse.
In closing, my views on abortion are these:
1. A woman does not get a tax deduction for being pregnant.
2. If you wish to make abortion illegal, you will have to give women a
tax deduction for being pregnant.
3. Once you do this, the Government will have to keep track of every
woman's menstral period.
4. Once this is done, it means that every time a woman misses a period
and then starts up again, we will have to have an investigation (perhaps
murder).
Oh please, save me the trouble and stay out of these women's bedrooms.
Ian Dorion
dorioni@ipa.net
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
> David Lingle
>
> Farrell Till
> Skepticism, Inc.
> jftill@midwest.net