NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1/NN_1993_1.iso/spool/talk/abortion/54314

Text File | 1993-01-06 | 3.6 KB | 81 lines

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!vengeanc
From: [e-mail] ()
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Net Noise owner)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 08:07:32 GMT
Lines: 69

[e-mail] (Muriel Nelson) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:

>[massive, merciful deletia]
>>Don't put words into my mouth.  Having sex and getting pregnant are not crimes.
>>They are, however, actions that an adult must deal with like an adult.
>>
>And what if the individual involved is _not_ an adult?

Doesn't make a difference.  Then her parents are responsible for her.  That
is the fact in almost every situation involving minors.

>>
>>You are wrong.  You are so completely wrong I know you have NO understanding
>>of this subject.  Women's lives are EQUAL to preborn babies.  Only when the
>>mother will definitely die from the birth should the baby be killed.  This
>>should be treated as a great tragedy, which it is.  The baby deserves a funeral,
>>not a garbage can.

>I think a woman's life is worth more than that of a
>conceptus.  2/3 of all zygotes will never make it to term
>because of natural factors.  What is it about the wishes
>of a woman that makes them inferior to the whims of nature?
>Do you think only women have equal worth with embryoes, or
>do you ascribe this valuation to men as well?  Would you
>demand 100% certainty of maternal death before the woman's
>life would be considered?  No other complications short of
>death would qualify?  No permanent physical damage would
>move you to compassion for the woman?

Let me make this plain and simple.  If you start with the premise that
the preborn baby is a person, then all other considerations are moot.
For example: if you had a choice between sacrificing your leg, or sacrificing
your mother, which would you choose?  I'd sacrifice my leg.  Murder is wrong.
It is my contention that the preborn baby is a person, and that it deserves
all rights implied by that label.

Compassion? Of course I have compassion.  But just when does compassion
warrant murder?  Since when does any mother have the right to have her
child MURDERED to protect herself from a medical problem?  Its easy
for you to talk about being compassionate.  Why not try a little compassion
for that poor baby you want hacked into little pieces.

>You seem to think that a woman incurs the responsibility
>to suffer _any_ amount of physical damage, up to, and possibly
>including _death_ (since we'd sacrifice all the women whose
>deaths could not be predicted with certainty) as a result
>of consensual sex.  What equivalent _physical_ responsibility
>do you propose for a man who has sex?  If you say he has to
>support the kid, how does that differ from the mother's duty
>to support the kid?

The woman incurs the responsibility to suffer virtually any amount of
physical damage, yes.  There would of course be exceptions depending on
the specifics of this "damage".  There is no way to make a man physically
at risk for his partners pregnancy.  The father has a financial and
moral responsibility towards his children.

>muriel
>standard disclaimer

Edward Simmonds- getting sick of repeating things to people who don't read
                 what he has already posted

- standard disclaimer -