In a message dated 9/6/03 5:33:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> But there *are* circumstances under which I *would* kill.� Just not > religiously motivated ones.� My own survival, and that of my children, > would be the prime motivating factor in any killing I did. > Not that I agree with this point of view, but... I imagine Paul Hill would say, if you saw a man about to shoot a child, would you shoot him to save that child? And if so, what is the difference between shooting a man about to shoot a living child and shooting a doctor about to perform an abortion? The obvious difference is, abortion is a legal medical procedure (whether or not you agree that it SHOULD be legal, under every state law, it IS) and shooting a doctor is murder. But that's a legal argument, not a moral one. For me, the moral argument is, a man with a gun about to kill someone is a clear and immediate danger, and perhaps cannot be stopped by any other means. A doctor, even one preparing to enter an abortion clinic to perform an abortion, is not at that moment a threat to anyone. He can be argued with. Killing him in order to stop him from doing something later is not responding to an IMMEDIATE threat. That's a huge difference. Tom Beck www.prydonians.org www.mercerjewishsingles.org "I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the last." - Dr Jerry Pournelle _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
