Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site opus.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!hao!cires!nbires!opus!rcd
From: rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: definitions
Message-ID: <418@opus.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 27-Apr-84 21:41:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: opus.418
Posted: Fri Apr 27 21:41:16 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 30-Apr-84 05:59:18 EDT
References: <177@hercules.UUCP>
Organization: NBI, Boulder
Lines: 25

<>
>Also, if the "moment of humanness" is at birth, what does one make of
>birth by Caesarean section?

If you can't solve a tricky question, does that mean you can't solve a
simple one?  Come on, we're discussing abortion here.  At the point of a
Caesarean section, it's clear that abortion isn't an issue any more.

Backing off a bit, why is it so hard to get rid of the stupid idea of
"moment of humanness" or whatever you need to call it?  It isn't a
black/white (perhaps you like 0/1?) question.  It never has been.  It never
will be.  It cannot be.  Science cannot answer questions of semantics.  You
decide whether a fetus is included in the definition of "human" when you
define the word "human".  Science does not define words.  (How many ways do
I have to explain it?)

Moment of humanness, or starting point, or whatever you want to call it,
can be chosen at any of a number of arbitrary points.  It serves a function
in legal terms of establishing age, and for that purpose alone it doesn't
matter much where you choose it as long as it's consistent.  Parturition is
convenient because it's generally easy to pinpoint.  How do you know when
conception occurs?
-- 
...Cerebus for dictator!				Dick Dunn
{hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd				(303) 444-5710 x3086