Hey, I'm famous! (blush) Yeah, I know, that and $1.89 will get you a cup of coffee, etc.

Another thought that occurred to me in rereading my original comment: We all acknowledge that, while everyone knows somebody whose chain-smoking uncle lived to 102, the overall correlation between smoking and bad health is obvious enough (and was years before the Surgeon General ever got involved -- cigarettes were called "coffin nails" in the 1930s) that it requires willful denial to uphold the premise that smoking is not intrinsically harmful.

By now it's accepted that one doesn't even have to be a smoker oneself to be harmed, if one is put into situations where secondhand smoke is prevalent. It's ironic that some of the most strident enemies of secondhand smoke are those who think nothing of the familial costs of upending the societal expectation of chastity.
craig | 01.31.07 - 3:52 pm | #

I've often felt that zealous, obsessive opposition to smoking, zealous support of animal rights, etc. (both often coming from the political left), are causes shaped from a kind of surrogate morality or substitute morality. Deep, deep down the left knows a great shame in its support of abortion rights, in my estimation. So the left turns up the heat on these pet causes (Free Tibet!), to kid itself that it has restored its piety.
Leif | 01.31.07 - 5:24 pm | #

Alternatively, Leif, one could say that such causes aren't shaped by a substitute/surrogate morality, but by plain old morality. In other words, that people who are strongly: anti-smoking, pro-animal rights, or in favor of freeing Tibet from Chinese domination do so out of their own genuine sense of morality, instead out of some bizarre and guilt-ridden attempt to delude themselves. Otherwise, might as well argue that "zealous, obsessive opposition" to abortion is really just the result of knowing great shame from the support of (whatever), and all this abortion fuss is is an attempt to kid oneself . . .

But that would just be silly.

Seriously. Some folks think a tiny embryo is a person. Some people think a gorilla is a person. Presumably here's someone out there who thinks that gorilla embryos are people . . .
Dan S. | Homepage | 02.01.07 - 12:50 am | #

No Dan, gorilla embryos are gorillas. And turtle embryos still inside their eggs are turtles, which is why there are laws on Florida beaches not to disturb the eggs/nests and limits on lights and noise around nesting grounds. I have no problem with protecting the turtles, but we should offer the same (or greater) protection to human embryos because they are human. (and no snarky comments about low lights around pregnant women! :)
ann | 02.01.07 - 3:40 pm | #

Dan S.,

My point is that it's quite easy for your average middle class white college student to get all worked up about the injustices suffered by Tibetans, the injustices perpetrated by "Big Tobacco", etc., because it doesn't require any real sacrifice in his/her life; all one has to do is shout "Free Tibet!".

Opposition to abortion does require something from the above-mentioned college kid; it requires responsibility in one's sexual conduct, it requires understanding that a one-night stand may lead to a life-long responsibility for a child.

Dan, it's proven that the embryo very early on in gestation has a beating heart. So, It's a human embryo with a beating heart.
There is no such thing as a human embryo with a beating heart that is not a living human being.
Leif | 02.03.07 - 2:25 pm | #

Leif, I think you do a real disservice to people who genuinely believe in the causes you mention and devote their time and money to promote their beliefs. Please don't be so uncaring about people who do a lot of good, whether you believe in their causes or not.

I agree with your "opposition to abortion" paraqgraph, by the way. Although I must point out that a lot of us pro-choicers don't actually spend much time thinking about abortion (and for practical matters, in my case, that's what using two methods of birth control every single time can do).

I'm an ethical, agnostic, liberal feminist who cares deeply about animal rights and devotes time and money to the same. Please don't belittle my beliefs with nasty accusations about claiming to know what shames me only in the context of your beliefs.

I do my best to be respectful of the posters here, and I would really appreciate you trying to do the same, Leif.
Terezia | 02.03.07 - 6:21 pm | #