Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site t12tst.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!hplabs!intelca!t12tst!seshadri
From: seshadri@t12tst.UUCP (Raghavan Seshadri)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Whose (not who's!) Life Anyway?
Message-ID: <445@t12tst.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Jul-85 12:46:39 EDT
Article-I.D.: t12tst.445
Posted: Wed Jul 17 12:46:39 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jul-85 10:05:48 EDT
References: <504@gitpyr.UUCP> <3931@alice.UUCP> <1219@mnetor.UUCP>
Organization: Intel Microprocessor Mfg, Santa Clara
Lines: 19

> From: sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley)
> 
> > > It seems to me that since the fetus of 1 minute and the child of one
> > > month differ only in the amount of time since conception.  They
> > > share the same genetic information, and are thus the same person.
> 
> Oh, then why bother going through this silly process known as pregnancy?
> If they are the same person, then let's pop them out of the oven right
> after conception.  It would save some of us women a lot of trouble.
> --
> Sophie Quigley

The flaw in Sophie's argument is easy to spot.The phrase 'same person' was
meant in the sense of 'share the same genetic info',not 'identical in every
way'.When a child grows up to be an adult,we sort of assume it is the same
person but surely we do not treat them both the same way.Will you let your
5 year old cross a busy street,drive a car .....?
-- 
Raghu Seshadri