Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site kestrel.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!Glacier!kestrel!king
From: king@kestrel.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: ancients predict usenet
Message-ID: <1288@kestrel.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 22-Sep-85 13:12:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: kestrel.1288
Posted: Sun Sep 22 13:12:16 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 25-Sep-85 09:18:22 EDT
References: <811@gitpyr.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Kestrel Institute, Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 22
Summary: Why Planned Parenthood didn't address the fetuses in the dumpster

In article <811@gitpyr.UUCP>, myke@gitpyr.UUCP (Myke Reynolds) writes:
> I watched some of the PBS special on abortion. Even through all the
> distortions of _Silent_Scream_, there was something about it, and
> the pro-choice film that followed it, that deeply disturbed me.. All
> those gruesome pictures of aborted children.. They didn't look like
> fetuses, they looked like half developed babies?! The followup film
> did a good job of countering every point the anti-abortion film made
> *except* that. A rather large except in my mind.

The PP film came out shortly after _Silent_Scream_, and had nothing to
do with _Conceived_In_Liberty_, which came out even later.

I noticed that this film said something like "The ages of the fetuses
averaged X" and managed to show a few shots of fetuses FAR older than
that.  (Of course, you need a special lens on your camera to show a
twelve week fetus - that must be why they didn't do it :-) )

As yet nobody knows where the fetuses in the dumpster came from.  One
strongly suspects they were doing something that is illegal under
current law...


-dick


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com