home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:33007 alt.abortion.inequity:3223
- Path: sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!mips!sdd.hp.com!nigel.msen.com!heifetz!rotag!kevin
- From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
- Subject: Re: Observations
- Message-ID: <1992Aug23.024539.5785@rotag.mi.org>
- Date: 23 Aug 92 02:45:39 GMT
- References: <1992Aug20.151934.6784@eco.twg.com> <1992Aug20.191212.8054@spdc.ti.com> <lefty-210892155346@lefty.apple.com>
- Organization: Who, me???
- Lines: 20
-
- In article <lefty-210892155346@lefty.apple.com> lefty@apple.com (Lefty) writes:
- >
- >> Just because I would allow abortions in cases of incest and rape does
- >> not mean that I do not believe a fetus has a right-to-life. I do believe
- >> that a woman should not be forced go through a pregnancy caused my
- >> unwanted, illegal or immoral actions from a man.
- >
- >How about unwanted, illegal or immoral actions from a fetus?
-
- Specious argument alert! Abortion is not legally premised as "punishment"
- of fetuses. For one thing, in order to make that schema work, one of the
- first things we'd have to do is declare them to be persons. I think most
- pro-choicers would have an eensy-weensy little problem with that legal
- technicality, don't you think, Lefty?
-
- Then there's the messy business of the right to face one's accusers, the
- right of appeal, the right of habeas corpus, etc. etc. All in all, putting
- fetuses on trial tends to be rather impractical...
-
- - Kevin
-