Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf
From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Torek's SECOND ANNUAL CONCLUSIVE ARGUMENT :->
Message-ID: <427@mit-vax.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 20-Jul-85 06:43:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-vax.427
Posted: Sat Jul 20 06:43:53 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 21-Jul-85 05:57:18 EDT
References: <789@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1012@noscvax.UUCP> <915@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Distribution: na
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 17
Summary: 

In article <915@umcp-cs.UUCP> flink@maryland.UUCP (Paul V. Torek) writes:
>>As long as there are different words for these creatures, they are
>>distinct and subject to different treatment.
>
>I.e., as long as we have the separate words "teenager" and "adult" we
>can legitimately protect adults' lives and not teenagers', or vice
>versa?  I don't buy it.

That's not what the writer said. He said the could be "treated"
differently. That merely implies a different set of rights. Right to
life is a specific case.

-- 
Charles Forsythe
CSDF@MIT-VAX
"I always try to avoid cliche's like the plague!"
        -Rev. Wang Zeep