Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site ccvaxa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece
From: preece@ccvaxa.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: The pregnant criminals
Message-ID: <47800003@ccvaxa.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 30-Jan-85 17:05:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ccvaxa.47800003
Posted: Wed Jan 30 17:05:00 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 31-Jan-85 07:27:49 EST
References: <329@bonnie.UUCP>
Lines: 18
Nf-ID: #R:bonnie:-32900:ccvaxa:47800003:000:935
Nf-From: ccvaxa!preece    Jan 30 16:05:00 1985

>	If the a fetus is not a human being, at what point does it become one?
----------
The completion of the CNS is a tempting point.  The inception of normal
brain activity might be another (I don't know enough to say).  Actually,
I don't much care.  The only restriction I'd be willing to impose is
that after a certain gestational age pregnancies would have to be
by a means not directly harmful to the fetus (that is, you can remove
life support but you can't hack up a human being).  Induced labor
would be ok at any age.  Surgical removal would be ok at any age.
Simple principle: once it's qualitatively a human being you can't
damage it, but it has no right to the use of its host's blood stream.
There's room to argue about, for instance, tying off the cord (is the
placenta part of the fetus or part of the host?) or use of chemicals
that would enter the fetus's blood from the host's.

scott preece
ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece