Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site ccvaxa
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece
From: preece@ccvaxa.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: So, where DOES it start?
Message-ID: <24000001@ccvaxa>
Date: Tue, 3-Sep-85 11:25:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccvaxa.24000001
Posted: Tue Sep  3 11:25:00 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 6-Sep-85 03:29:58 EDT
Lines: 25
Nf-ID: #N:ccvaxa:24000001:000:1003
Nf-From: ccvaxa.UUCP!preece    Sep  3 10:25:00 1985


Just out of curiosity, where do some of you pro-life people draw the
line on life?  Consider two hypothetical possible birth control
strategies, one not unlike some current methods, one representing a
relatively modest medical advance:

	(1) a pill taken by a female which makes the womb unreceptive
	and keeps the fertilized egg from taking up residence

	(2) a monthly pill or process (perhaps the "flush" mentioned
	in a Pohl short story) that causes anything that has taken
	up residence to be ejected (the flush in the story also
	made periods less obtrusive, but that's not the point)

How do you feel about these?  In neither case is the question of pain
relevant, we're talking about clumps of cells here with no nervous
system at all, even if the process involved pain, which we hypothesize
it does not.  Clearly there is no argument that there has been
experience or awareness.

Do you distinguish between the cases?  Do you object to one or both?

--
scott preece
ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece