Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccice2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccice5!ccice2!cjk
From: cjk@ccice2.UUCP (Kreilick)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Re: Abortion and Capital Punishment
Message-ID: <511@ccice2.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Nov-84 17:43:27 EST
Article-I.D.: ccice2.511
Posted: Fri Nov 23 17:43:27 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Nov-84 21:05:32 EST
References: <1782@burdvax.UUCP> <779@ariel.UUCP> <359@klipper.UUCP> <315@qantel.UUCP> <2794@ucbcad.UUCP> <249@ccice6.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Central Engineering, Rochester, NY
Lines: 31


			

Carlos:

"     Or else he thought before he began typing, you should try it.
  
  No one said to kill children because they can't take care of themselves.
  The statement was that it should be acceptable for a person to kill a child
  if that child depends on that person in order not to die. If you can not
  see the difference then should not try to respond.
  
  I'm not convinced the article was intended to be irony. I think the
  article is an attempt to start a discussion on definitions.
  
  There seems to be no agreement on when a fetus becomes a human. Since
  this point can not be determined then it is not sensible to use it
  in a definition.
  
  Perhaps it is easier to define the point at which a human is able to
  reason and survive on its own. If this point can be determined then
  it could be used for a clear definition of where a child becomes a
  person with his own rights.
  
  These points do not address right or wrong. They are intended to
  be thought provoking. Unfortunately, thought is not a requiremnt
  when discussing abortion.
  
  				THINKING "

Juan:	Tsk, tsk, tsk.  Don Juan made a smacking sound with his lips.