Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sdccs6.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdccs6!ix192
From: ix192@sdccs6.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Re: killing human beings
Message-ID: <1285@sdccs6.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 24-Mar-84 20:48:59 EST
Article-I.D.: sdccs6.1285
Posted: Sat Mar 24 20:48:59 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 26-Mar-84 00:58:25 EST
References: <215@ihnp1.UUCP>, <366@denelcor.UUCP>
Organization: Hacker's Haven, U.C. San Diego
Lines: 51

[]

>From ...denelcor!neal

] >So the pertinent points seem to be:
] >	a. All human beings have the right to live.
] >	b. An unborn child is a human being from the moment of
] >	   conception with the right to her/his life.
] >	c. Human beings only forfeit their right to live when they
] >	   place the physical life of another human being in danger.
] 
] Granting a. and c., I maintain that b. is begging the question.  As you
] define "human being" b. is (I presume) true, as I define "human being" it
] isn't.
] 				Neal Weidenhofer

This comes down to the point - "what is a human being defined as?"  I won't
listen to some idiot quoting the Webster's dictionary!  I like to go by things
as they are, as they can be seen - not by what they would be, what they could
be, or what they will be.  A fetus is a fetus - be it a human fetus or a rat 
fetus or a athlete's fetus, it's still a fetus - not a human being, living,
breathing, moving, doing.  It has a CAPABILITY of becoming one, but so does
every single sperm and every egg.  Wouldn't these count if you took the "would-
be" into account?  Or do they get off on some technicality. 

The fetus is just lying in someone's womb with a potential of destroying the 
mother's life, possibly the fathers, possibly it's own.  Destroying by throwing
the family (of whoever joins into it) into a situation they may not be ready
for, mentaly, emotionally, or finantially, or into a situation they may not
be happy with.  (Most people getting abortions WOULD have already decided they
didn't want the baby!)  I happen to value the life of a already-living being 
(as in # of years > zero) over the life of a fetus (which hasen't lived at all),
so if one life is to be destroyed, I'd pick the fetus's.  

I see abortion as a chance to save the potential mother's life.  Saving her 
from having to care for an unwanted child, possibly marrying the wrong man, 
possibly giving up her future.  All because someone decided that two living a 
life of suffering was better than one to go living and the other not at all.

Suppose you had two children, one fourteen, one about a month old.  Suppose 
some big, dark, evil bureaucrat was coming to claim one, take one away, and 
you had to make a choice.  You have the baby under one arm, the fourteen-er 
under the other, the decision-awaiting bureaucrat in front of you.  The pro-
lifers would save the baby.  The pro-choicers would save the fourteen-year-old.
Which would you choose?

				   Kenn the Kenf
				...!sdcsvax!kenn
				...!sdcsvax!sdccs6!ix192
				...!sdcsvax!sdccsu3!kenn