"J. Clarke" wrote in message ...
David Hall wrote:

He also believes he doesn't have the right to use the force of law to
make others live by his beliefs.

So if I believe that forcing people of other races into slavery is "a bad
thing", I certainly shouldn't try to "use the force of law to make others
live"
by this belief. If I believe that people of the Jewish religion shouldn't
be gassed by the government, I certainly shouldn't try to "use the force
of law to
make others live" by this belief. Certainly if I believe that killing
women for showing their faces in public is wrong, I shouldn't try to "use
the force
of law to make others live" by this belief. Just which beliefs do you
think CAN be given the force of law?

People who do force their religion on others are called fanatics, or
maybe Ayatollah.

I hate to burst your little anti-religion bubble, but opposition to
abortion is not a religion or a religious belief. Just because many
religious people share that belief doesn't mean you can't reach that
conclusion logically and without any leaps of faith. In fact, there is no
logic to a legal structure that says you can't kill a baby 1 second after
it has been fully delivered, but it is just fine 5 minutes earlier. I do
not know of any logical argument that can find the point prior to birth
that the mass of cells becomes a human being. So if it appears logical to
you that the mere occurance of delivery annoints the child as a human
being then you are the religious one relying on a leap of faith for your
position. Otherwise, let me know, via logic, when that moment arrives that
the non-sentient mass of cells becomes a human being.

You see, this is not something that is amenable to logic, so it is perforce
religious on both sides of the aisle even if not tied to a specific
denomination. Regardless, I think you will find very few atheists opposed
to abortion.

Personally, some anti-abortion whacko murdered a friend of mine--as far as
I'm concerned the whole lot of you deserve to rot in Hell. I don't notice
pro-choice types going around shooting people who disagree with them.


First, my condolances on the loss of your friend. I do not condone
such actions.

I also don't consider myself an anti-abortion "whacko". In fact, if
anything, I am an anti-abortion hypocrite. That is because even though
I do believe that abortion is the killing of innocents, I am not out
on the streets protesting or otherwise taking actual action to try to
stop it. I am like many northerners or semi-abolitionists of the
pre-Civil War period. They knew slavery was wrong but they continued
to peacefully co-exist with, socialise with and do business with slave
owners and those who did not want to end slavery. They may or may not
have looked the other way if they thought an "underground railroad"
station was operating in their neighbor's home. I am not sure how to
evaluate the actions of people like John Brown who took violent action
in support of his beliefs that slavery was wrong or of people who took
violent actions to try to save individual Jews from death in Germany
or German occupied territories. The vast majority of people at the
time thought of John Brown as a wacko activist who deserved to be hung
for his cruelly violent actions that resulted in the deaths of quite a
number of people, active in slavery or not. Many still do, though many
consider him a hero. It often depends on the historical perspective of
the practice that was being violently protested.

As to atheists being opposed to abortion all I can say is that I am
not a religious person. My parents sent me to a Methodist Church while
I was growing up, but they never went. We certainly never discussed
religion at home. I haven't been in a church other than a couple of
weddings and a couple of funerals in over 30 years. I never took
either of my two children to church and as far as I know they have
never attended a church service (they are 24 and 25 years old). Now I
am not willing to call myself an atheist (as I percieve that to mean
you are actively against any religion), I do not believe that my
position on abortion is the least bit driven by any religious leanings
on my part. It might, however, be colored a bit by the realization,
looking back a bit on my family history, that I could not exist if
abortion had been easily available in the past. I know that my mother
fit the classic definition of an abortable child (born to a 16 year
old girl who was the daughter of a white share cropper in the
backwoods of West Virginia in 1928). It doesn't take much imagination
to realize that she was not the first (or for that matter the last) in
my ancestory (including me) that would have had a high likelyhood of
being aborted if it had been as accepted and as available as it is
today.

Dave Hall