home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!yktnews!admin!The-Village!waterbed
- From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
- Subject: Re: Abortion and Infanticide
- Sender: news@watson.ibm.com (NNTP News Poster)
- Message-ID: <1992Jul23.064942.9735@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 06:49:42 GMT
- Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
- Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
- Nntp-Posting-Host: waterbed.watson.ibm.com
- Organization: The Village Waterbed
- Lines: 33
-
- In <1992Jul23.040407.24647@ncsu.edu> dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
- > In article <1992Jul23.021544.249982@cs.cmu.edu>
- > garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
- >
- > >dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
- >
- > >>garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
- >
- > >>>dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
- >
- > >>>> Please provide a rational justification for killing a late-term
- > >>>> fetus that would not also justify killing a newborn infant.
- >
- > >>> It is never necessary to kill a newborn infant in order to
- > >>> remove it from its mother. It is sometimes necessary to
- > >>> kill a late term fetus to remove it from the pregnant
- > >>> woman.
- >
- > >> ... Try again.
- >
- > > Why should I? I answered your question.
- >
- > OK, then define "necessary".
-
- Why not assume the same definition you used when you wrote (in article
- <1992Jul22.225042.15548@ncsu.edu>) the following:
- +> It is sometimes necessary to kill a late term fetus during a medically
- +> indicated abortion.
-
- [It is *so* terribly amusing to watch Doug assert "A", then assert "not A",
- and then squirm as he attempts to reconcile the two conflicting claims.]
-
- Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
-