home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!decwrl!access.usask.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!ciit85.ciit.nrc.ca!brandonu.ca!mcbeanb
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: Life at conception...
- Message-ID: <1992Aug21.124544.2143@brandonu.ca>
- From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
- Date: 21 Aug 92 12:45:44 CST
- References: <1992Aug20.185320.21941@watson.ibm.com>
- Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada
- Lines: 34
-
- In article <1992Aug20.185320.21941@watson.ibm.com>, Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com> writes:
- > In <1992Aug19.174332.2123@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
- >> In article <1992Aug13.165127.39789@watson.ibm.com>, Larry Margolis <margoli@wats
-
- [...]
-
- >> > Actually, I pointed out that it's "Truth by Blatant Assertion" *because*
- >> > I believe it to not be true. You're welcome to try to prove otherwise.
- >>
- >> I can't prove otherwise,
- >
- > OK, TbBA it is.
-
- Excuse my ignorance, but what does TbBA stand for? A stuttered version
- of To Be Anounced (just a wild guess of course)?
-
- >> You say it's ok to pick the arbitrary point of birth to abort.
- >
- > Yes.
- >
- >> ie abortions before birth are ok, but infanticide is wrong.
- >
- > No. See, I didn't say that abortions immediately before birth (or any time,
- > for that matter) are *OK*, just that drawing the line at birth was OK.
-
- I'm only using "ok" in an informal sense, so don't think that I'd think that
- you think (whew!) any abortions are "ok" in the strict sense of the term.
- BUT, let me try this again...
-
- You picked birth as the point, even drew a line there, but the line is
- really meaningless since you wouldn't want an abortion to occur just before
- birth? Why did you draw the line? I'm confused.
-
- Brian McBean - McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
-