home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!darwin.sura.net!dtix!oasys!bense
- From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: Who are you guys?
- Message-ID: <29563@oasys.dt.navy.mil>
- Date: 11 Jan 93 20:14:36 GMT
- References: <1992Dec29.235055.18645@mksol.dseg.ti.com> <markp.726777200@joplin.wri.com>
- Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
- Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD
- Lines: 31
-
- In talk.abortion, markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) writes:
- >In <29528@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense) writes:
-
- >No; it doesn't; but the mother's implicit consent to the possibility
- >of lost bodily autonomy (to which she has a presumptive, but not an
- >absolute, right) DOES depend on the circumstances of conception. Also,
- >she may ethically choose her own right to life over the fetus'.
-
- WHere is the implicit consent to the possibility of lost bodily autonomy?
- Furthermore, can you give a case where a person doesn't have an absolute
- right to bodily autonomy? (Other than the death penalty, where this
- right is forfieted through due process)
-
- Another free clue: consent to sex != consent to pregnancy
-
- And please don't just state "yes she did" but "prove" it.
-
- >The fetus' right to life is a VERY important consideration -- but NOT
- >the only one.
-
- The fetus has no right to life. As a matter of fact, no one does.
-
- >(Help me out, here; where's the irony?)
-
- Ron Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
- The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
- Make a U-turn to God.
- The irony is priceless.
-
- If you need this explained, it brings to light much about your consternation
- with those in this group who have opinions other than yours.
-