home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!hubcap!opusc!usceast!nyikos
- From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
- Subject: Re: Chaney chokes again.
- Message-ID: <nyikos.716584462@milo.math.scarolina.edu>
- Sender: usenet@usceast.cs.scarolina.edu (USENET News System)
- Organization: USC Department of Computer Science
- References: <1992Sep10.041120.15868@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: 15 Sep 92 19:14:22 GMT
- Lines: 68
-
- In <1992Sep10.041120.15868@watson.ibm.com> Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com> writes:
-
- >In <1992Sep10.011244.18565@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
- >> In article <sam.715448934@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
- >> >chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
- >> >
- >> >>So they basically said that it's okay to kill a human life as long as
- >> >>it's done in private and they're too young.
- >> >
- >> >That is NOT what I said at all. Privacy rulings do not allow you to harm a
- >> >person. Please show me the law that defines a fetus as a person. Can't
- >> >find one? Oops. You lose.
- >>
- >> The fetus was a person before Roe vs. Wade. And of course, it is Roe
- >> vs. Wade that we're challenging.
-
- >The fetus was *never* legally a person; RvW had nothing to do with it.
- >Hence Steve Adams' challenge to "show me the law that defines a fetus
- >as a person". Which, of course, you can't do.
-
- >Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
-
- I can show you something pretty close to it. _Regina v. Turnour_
- Assize 35/23/29 (Essex 1581). "Regina" means the charge was brought
- before the Queen's bench.
-
- I have added capitalization for emphasis. Everything between the two
- rows of asterisks is from the court records, and I take no responsibility
- for it, except for the authenticity of the records.
-
- Translated from the original Latin by Dr. J. H. Baker of Cambridge
- University.
-
- ***********
-
- Essex: The jurors for [our] lady the queen present that
- Jane Turnour of Stisted in the aforesaid county, spinster, being
- a common witch and enchantress, not having God before her eyes, but
- being seduced by the instigation of the devil, on the eight day of
- January in the twenty-second year of the reign of the Lady Elizabeth
- [1580], Queen of England, France and Ireland, defender of the faith,
- devilishly and maliciously at Stisted aforesaid, on various days and
- occasions both before and since, maliciously and devilishly bewitched
- and enchanted a certain Helen Sparrowe, wife of John Sparrowe, in the body
- of the same Helen, being then great with a certain LIVING CHILD [Latin:
- *infantum vivo*], by reason whereof not only was the same Helen then
- and there on various occasions gravely vexed in her body horribly troubled,
- to the greatest danger of her life, but also the aforesaid CHILD (of which
- the same Helen was then and there great) then and there came to death.
-
- And thus the aforesaid jurors say upon their oath that the aforesaid
- Jane Turnour, in manner and form aforesaid, on the day and in the year
- aforesaid, at Stisted aforesaid, maliciously and devilishly bewitched
- and enchanted the aforementioned Helen Sparrowe, and deprived the
- LIVING CHILD...of HIS LIFE by reason of these enchantments and bewitchings,
- contrary to the form of the statute made and provided for such cases...
-
- [Note by the clerk:] Puts herself on the country [i.e. accepts trial
- by jury]; guilty as charged.
-
- ********************
-
- This record, and many others like it, are part of an *amicus curiae*
- brief which Joseph Dellapenna has generously provided me with a copy of.
-
- Peter Nyikos
-
-
-