NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/talk/abortion/36425

Text File | 1992-09-14 | 4.6 KB | 90 lines

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!gordons
From: [e-mail] (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade and abortion (was Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 21:44:35 GMT
Organization: Stay Awake Software
References: <[e-mail]> <0zwnlb#[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 79

<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steven Arnold) writes:
><0zwnlb#[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gordon Storga) writes:
>|> <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steven Arnold) writes:
>|> ><v=[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gordon Storga) writes:
>|> >|> <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steven Arnold) writes:
>|> >|> ><[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gordon Storga) writes:
...
>|> >|> Now Steve, I don't know why you think you know what I'm thinking.  In this
>|> >|> case you are dead wrong.  I absolutely believe that a fetus is a living
>|> >|> human being.  It's just not a person.  And (are you ready for this?) even
>|> >|> if it was a person I would support unrestricted abortion upto the time of
>|> >|> birth.  You see, the being that the fetus resides in is normally called a
>|> >|> 'woman'.  If you'll check your biology books you'll see that she is a
>|> >|> human being too.  If you'll check your legal books you'll see that she is
>|> >|> a person.  And if you'll check the constitution you'll find that no
>|> >|> *person* unconvicted of a crime my be forced into bodily servitude against
>|> >|> their will.
>|> >
>|> >    I do not suggest that the woman be forced into bodily servitude.  I do
>|> >assert, however, that she is responsible for the consequences of her behavior on
>|> >others, including the living human being in her womb for whose existence she is responsible.
>|>
>|> And you believe she should be forced into bodily servitude (read: slavery)
>|> because of an action she may or may not have taken voluntarily.  Do you
>|> also believe that this should be the case for other actions taken by
>|> people in other situations?  Car accidents and car insurance come to mind.
>
>    I believe that if one person puts another person into a dangerous
>situation, the former is responsible for the safety of the latter.  I do not
>propose that any particular deed must be done or measure taken; but if the victim
>dies or is injured, the one who caused it is responsible.

And there is no person involved in an abortion except a woman.

>|> >    Gordon, you're a person (I hope).  Suppose I push a button which causes
>|> >you to be in my body.  Can I abort you?  Yes or no?
>|>
>|> Sure.
>
>    Oh, this is a jewel.  This might be .sig material.  Let me get this
>straight: if I do something which causes you to appear in my body I can kill you
>at will and you would have no legal recourse?  All this despite the fact that you
>neither requested nor granted permission for your body to be put inside mine?

Sure.  I'll worry about it happening when you perfect the technology.

>    Do you believe, in general, that a person should be responsible for the
>effect of their behavior on others?

To a particular point, yes.

>                                     Or do you think that any consequences of one
>person's behavior on another are the responsibility of the one who was affected?

Not necessarily.

>And if you accept the latter position, then if I ran you over with a car, why,
>that'd be YOUR problem, wouldn't it?

Nope.  Well, technically it would be *my* problem because I was run over,
but I think that legally you'd better have a damn good reason.

>    No dodges, Gordon.  Your answer above was simple and beautifully clear,
>and I'd be in your debt if you would follow one superb answer with a few others.

I try.  However, working for a living kinds cuts down on the length of
time one can take to respond to every post fully.  Also, not all answers
are cut and dried.  Your exampes have been pretty outlandish so it's kinda
difficult to give you a reasonable answer.


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel,
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), and Diana (Sorceress),
and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it.
--
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.