Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site graffiti.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!graffiti!peter
From: peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Reply in mail, please...
Message-ID: <134@graffiti.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Aug-85 16:51:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: graffiti.134
Posted: Fri Aug 30 16:51:56 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Sep-85 13:21:34 EDT
Organization: Information Brokerage Network, Houston, TX
Lines: 11

Would one of the pro-life (quote-unquote) people care to tell me what they
intend to do when it becomes possible to raise an egg to maturity outside
the womb, or when it is possible to take any undifferentiated tissue and by
suitable life-support measures (cloning) bringing it to term? No flip answers
from either side, please. My mailbox is full enough as it is and I shan't be
able to answer any flames...

Why hasn't anybody opposed abortion on the grounds that it is a dangerous
operation for the mother that can irreparably damage her cervix and uterus?
I haven't seen anybody using this argument, despite the fact that it has a
great deal more validity than the ones I've seen people using.