Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!hoxna!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Dividing Lines
Message-ID: <296@psivax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Feb-85 17:50:59 EST
Article-I.D.: psivax.296
Posted: Fri Feb  1 17:50:59 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Feb-85 04:45:16 EST
References: <150@spp1.UUCP> <252@scgvaxd.UUCP> <382@cadovax.UUCP>
Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley friesen)
Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA
Lines: 24
Summary: 

In article <382@cadovax.UUCP> keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes:
>[......]
>>Everybody is trying to answer the "important" question; At what point
>>does the fetus become a human being.
>
>No, I don't think this is the important question at all.  The question
>I'm trying to find the answer to, is at what point does the mother
>have to give up her rights in favor of the foetus.
>
>Keith Doyle
>{ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd

	But this amounts to the same thing. The mother need not give
up her rights in favor of what is not human, but that which is human
does have rights which should not be abridged.  Look at the arguments
presented by both sides.  The pro-lifers argue repeatedly that a fetus
is human, pro-choicers continue to deny it.
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

{trwrb|allegra|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|aero!uscvax!akgua}!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
 or
quad1!psivax!friesen