Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: uunet!apctrc!crx34!zrra07@ncar.ucar.EDU ("Randall R. Appleton")
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Smoking and Abortion
Message-ID: <1895@apctrc.UUCP>
Date: 4 Aug 90 02:47:01 GMT
Reply-To: "Randall R. Appleton" <uunet!apctrc!crx34!zrra07@ncar.ucar.EDU>
Organization: Amoco Production Company, Tulsa Research Center
Lines: 14
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: zola.ics.uci.edu

Here is a thought.

It is well known (outside of Jessie Helm's little mind) that smoking
is bad for unborn babies.  Therefore, I ask the folloing question: If
one is pro-life, and wants legislation to keep these unborn babies
from being murdered, should one also want legislation to keep these
same babies from the life-long harm that pre-natal smoking can cause?

Please note what I'm NOT asking.  I am not asking about abortion;
everyone seems to have made up their mind, and I am not trying to
change them.  I am pro-choice myself, if that matters.

Randy
randy@ms.uky.edu