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!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf
From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Right to Procreate
Message-ID: <497@mit-vax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 30-Jul-85 02:50:26 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-vax.497
Posted: Tue Jul 30 02:50:26 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 1-Aug-85 20:08:34 EDT
References: <393@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA> <1283@pyuxd.UUCP> <164@brl-tgr.ARPA> <471@mit-vax.UUCP> <254@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 39

In article <254@brl-tgr.ARPA> matt@brl-tgr.ARPA (Matthew Rosenblatt ) writes:
>> The whole idea that a male's right to produce offspring is higher than
>> the female's NOT to it so fascist I cannot find a less flame-oriented
>> way to respond!  (CHARLES FORSYTHE)
>
>O, let's turn it around.  Suppose the woman wants the baby, and the man
>doesn't.  Is the female's right to produce offspring higher than the male's
>right NOT to?

It's her body, he should leave her alone. That's the whole point.

>(In other words, does he have the right to force her to
>abort?)

He doesn't have the right to force her to do ANYTHING. Let's be serious,
she's got rights too. (She's NOT a fetus, after all).

>...and to hell with the fetus's or the man's rights to
>anything!

"Possession is nine tenths of the law." If he really wanted to have a
baby, he ought to give his sperm to a woman who will treat it better.
What if he wants THAT particular woman? He'd better ask her permission.
(can you say RAPE, Matt, or doesn't that word exist for you and your
women-are-cattle contigent). To make an analogy, my right to plant a
tree ends where your lawn starts.




-- 
Charles Forsythe
CSDF@MIT-VAX
"You are a stupid fool."
-Wang Zeep

"I'm not a fool!"
-The Hated One