Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/23/84; site ucbcad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!ucbvax!ucbesvax!ucbcad!faustus
From: faustus@ucbcad.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.abortion,net.politics,net.religion,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Re: Abortion and Capital Punishment
Message-ID: <2794@ucbcad.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 17-Nov-84 02:57:22 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbcad.2794
Posted: Sat Nov 17 02:57:22 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 19-Nov-84 02:42:02 EST
References: <1782@burdvax.UUCP> <779@ariel.UUCP> <359@klipper.UUCP> <315@qantel.UUCP>
Organization: UC Berkeley CAD Group, Berkeley, CA
Lines: 28

> >	Human fetuses are no humans, and may be aborted. Since birth does
> >	not miraculously brew "humans", the only logical limit is when
> >	it becomes clear that a child is reasonable. So I think parents
> >	should have the right to "kill" their children till something
> >	like the age of 12. In fact in Japan this is already an accepted
> >	point of view. Why would it suddenly be murder t " kill" a baby
> >	that two days ago still was a "fetus" and so possible subject to
> >	abortion? The natural limit would be this: At the moment a child
> >	would be able to live after being rejected by its parents, it
> >	could. Being removed from a womb is such a form of rejection.
> >	(In fact, this is also a [Ll]ibertarian idea: nobody has the duty
> >	to care for someone else, and children are held responsible for
> >	themselves)
>
> Is this supposed to be a sick joke or what?  Either this is an example of how
> ridiculous abortion is or this man wishes to be flamed to death.
>  
> I have never heard such a evil thing on this network before.  I can't believe
> people really think like this.  I hope no one else out there has this demented
> view of children, whether you are pro-abortion or not.  Does this man propose
> that we set ourselves up higher than any other authority and kill children 
> because they can't take care of themselves?  I just can't believe anyone could
> say such a thing!

Of course he's not serious. What I don't see is how somebody could possibly
miss the ironic intent of the article...

	Wayne