home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:55145 alt.abortion.inequity:6397
- Path: sparky!uunet!caen!sdd.hp.com!nobody
- From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
- Subject: Re: You want to talk about nature?
- Date: 11 Jan 1993 08:23:35 -0800
- Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
- Lines: 25
- Message-ID: <1is6u7INNsa2@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com>
- References: <1993Jan9.002950.11702@zooid.guild.org>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com
-
- In article <1993Jan9.002950.11702@zooid.guild.org> Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
- >peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes...
- >>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
-
- ...so if the woman, given a State of
- ...Nature, doesn't wish to support the child after birth, she just walks away
- ...from it. *POOF*! No child support.
- >>Followed shortly thereafter by the death of the child.
- >>I don't consider that progress.
- >Oh, but the death happened *BY CHOICE* of the parents. So I ask, what
- >difference does one hour *before* birth and one hour *after* birth really
- >matter in terms of whether the child should be respected?
-
- The difference is that one hour before birth, the fetus resided within the
- body of the woman, and one hour after birth it existed independently in the
- world.
-
- This is why people keep pointing out to you that the woman has a right of
- REMOVAL, but not a right simply to do away with it by 'choice'. As long as
- you continue to make the mistake of equating her right of REMOVAL with some
- non-existant right to kill feti, you will not get it.
-
-
-
-
-