becca

ps: I saw the movie 3 times.

Thats all Ms. Gruwell, I admire you most for such a great teacher even though i was not one of your student.

“This emotive subject …hinges on one simple fact. Individuals who find abortion acceptable, do NOT recognise the humanity of the unborn baby. Would their arguments still hold water if the baby had already been born and was then of course wholly recognisable as a human? Out of sight, out of mind!”

This argument breaks down on two counts. First, the sperm and the egg are both every bit as “human” as the post-fertilization developing fetus. Should we protect the “rights” of the ejaculated sperm cell, too? And second, if you wish to characterize the fetus as A human BEING instead of just human (as in the case of the sperm cell), this characterization is a matter of definition and convention, just as is the practice of accepting the baby as a person only after it is born. The egg and the sperm cells can each survive outside the protective environments of their respective human “host” bodies for about the same amount of time as could the fetus at most stages of development. It is for this reason that the rights of the female who carries that fetus are of primary concern for those not defining the fetus as a separate viable human being.

Some of your other answers are also a bit weak. You imply that the strength of our economy is so superior to theirs that they pale in comparison. Take a look at our economy this past week (and probably for the foreseeable future, as well) and the picture changes a little. And then take a look at theirs. It is clearly on the rise for the reasons stated in any rationale for a Chinese product boycott. If you look at trends and directions rather than a static picture of “the way things are right now,” the picture gets a little clearer, and more typically represents the viewpoint that there is a change forthcoming, which will be detrimental to our economy, our competitive capabilities in a world economy, our future, and our best interests in perhaps every way imaginable.

But your most troubling statements are the following: “A boycott against China because of its military or economy is like a boycott against a dog for having a flea. The Chinese would laugh it off as you would a threat of boycott from your three year old.”

Those two statements are troubling for two very different reasons. The first is essentially correct, as I see it. It will be difficult to rationalize and execute, and they will TRY to laugh it off. But it is a faulty comparison. The better analogy, I feel, would be that the boycott for military and economic reasons is more like a boycott against the OWNER of a dog, for allowing it to have a life-threatening flea infestation. Which, of course, today can be viewed as a degree of animal cruelty, considering all the preventatives that are easily available.

But the second statement is the more troubling of the two. Comparing our boycott threats (and any other commentary) as similar in importance to those of a crying infant, is probably a statement of fact regarding the Chinese government’s lack of concern for our opinions, attitudes, interests or economic concerns. They won’t really need us for too much longer. They will be all too eager to soak up the so-called foreign oil we are in such a hurry to divest ourselves of. And with it, their economy will grow at an astronomical rate.

That is why a boycott is all the more important right now, while they still do labor under the illusion that they need our buying power.

Dan

I will try to boycott all Chinese products, even though I know it will be very difficult to do so. I would also like to find someone who is creating T-shirts to publicize this cause, or to begin crating them myself if no one can be found to have already begun this tactic.

Dan