home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!ray
- From: ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer)
- Subject: Re: Blackmun calls the Roe v. Wade dividing line ""arbitrary""
- Message-ID: <1993Jan12.073021.5818@netcom.com>
- Organization: Netcom. San Jose, California
- References: <markp.726627258@spider.wri.com> <1993Jan11.021351.13617@netcom.com> <markp.726772397@joplin.wri.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 07:30:21 GMT
- Lines: 30
-
- markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) writes ...
- >ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
- >>(Mark Pundurs) writes ...
- >>>(Ray Fischer) writes:
- >>>>A. You certainly DO open yourself to the possibility of pregnancy by
- >>>> having sex (if you're a woman, of course); but
- >>>>B. This in no way weakens your right to your body, or your consequent
- >>>> right to an abortion.
- >>>
- >>>Try again, Ray. The parallel conclusion here is
- >>>
- >>>B. This in no way weakens your right to life, or your consequent right to
- >>> an abortion if your life is imminently imperiled.
- >
- >>So you're arguing that unless a woman's life is threatened, rape is
- >>acceptable?
- >
- >No.
- >
- >>After all, her life isn't necessarily being _imminently_
- >>threatened;
- >
- >But often, it is.
-
- As is the case with pregnancy. May a woman therefore act towards the
- fetus as she would a rapist?
-
- --
- Ray Fischer "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth
- ray@netcom.com than lies." -- Friedrich Nietszsche
-