"Still, the welfare of the child should be considered, BUT it should not be the issue as to whether or not to abort. IF it was the issue, then we would be very similar to the Nazis in trying to create a superior race of humans."

What I was trying to convey was that it is possible to agree with Nazis about some things without being totally committed to all of the policies of Nazism. Hitler liked Wagner. I like Wagner. Does this mean that I agreed with Hitler that he should try to take over the world by military force? Well, in a word, no!

I am in favor of improving the human race. That does not mean I am a Nazi. That's all I had in mind when I brought in Hitler and his overcoat. What a strange tangle that remark got me into! And if I didn't have an overcoat I would probably use Spanish moss, if there was any at hand. Scouts learn to build shelters from materials likely to be avalibale in the woods. That's taking responsibility for your own welfare and the welfare of others. Seems like a good idea to me.

I think that Ann Coulter's remark, "Conservatives believe in God. Liberals believe they are God", illustrates one of the dangers of religious belief. To the extent that a religious person believes that God is responsible for some undesirable state of affairs, to that extent he will be unlikely to seek remedies himself. I think the history of science bears this out. Religion has frequently opposed scientific investigation, as for example in opposing the dissection of human bodies.

You said,

"You have now changed positions. Originally you stated that keeping yourself dry and warm is your responsibility. Now you are stating that keeping all people dry and warm is all people's responsibility. If you truly believed this, you would not have been concerned with keeping yourself dry and warm, as did the Hitler and the Nazis, but you would instead have stated your situation as being one of finding someone else who has no means of keeping dry and warm and assisting said person."

Somehow you have misunderstood me. I don't see exactly how this happened. Let me just state my position. I believe in taking responsibility for my own welfare and happiness. I also believe in helping others achieve their welfare and happiness. Do you see any fundamental contradiction here?

In my position statement on cloning and stem cell research I suggest something I call "noetic value". This refers to the kind of extra value living things have over non-living things, and the kind of extra value highly intelligent living things have over not-so-intelligent living things, and the extra value conscious beings have over less aware beings. The ethical problems involved in abortion also are present in questions of the death penalty and euthanasia, as you correctly point out. As much as I would like to I can't create a perfectly consistent and invulnerable theory of how best to bring about a perfect world in one post on The Truth Tree! But we are all working on it, and I find that very encouraging!

"... and surely you wouldn't oppose shooting a bear."