Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rlgvax!plunkett
From: plunkett@rlgvax.UUCP (S. Plunkett)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Dividing Lines
Message-ID: <398@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 28-Jan-85 13:27:43 EST
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.398
Posted: Mon Jan 28 13:27:43 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 31-Jan-85 00:37:17 EST
References: <150@spp1.UUCP> <252@scgvaxd.UUCP> <253@scgvaxd.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 23

> In article <252@scgvaxd.UUCP> dan@scgvaxd.UUCP (Dan Boskovich) writes:
> >I propose that we should consider the "fetus" a human
> >being until proven otherwise!
> >
> >					  Dan Boskovich
> >					  (New on the Net)
> 
> After posting this I realized that some may ask, "Why should we consider the
> "fetus" a human being until proven otherwise, rather than visa versa???
> Answer: The "fetus" at less than 10 weeks has fingers, toes, all of its
> "human" organs, and brain patterns. I think it is a safe assumption that
> there is a *good* chance that this "fetus" just might be a "human being".

A simpler reason: Who would want to continue abortions, then later learn
that you were killing people, or permitting innocents to be killed!
If, after "all the evidence is in," it is determined that in fact fetuses
can't possibly be human (silly!), then the ladies may begin aborting again
in moral safety, with little damage having been done.

Thus: Better safe than sorry.  Wait for the "facts."  Abortionists can
go on welfare, or explore plumbing as a profession.

Problem solved; disband net.abortion.