Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihu1m.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ihu1m!jho From: jho@ihu1m.UUCP (Yosi Hoshen) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: The Status of the Fetus and Its Rights Message-ID: <690@ihu1m.UUCP> Date: Tue, 24-Sep-85 13:31:04 EDT Article-I.D.: ihu1m.690 Posted: Tue Sep 24 13:31:04 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 26-Sep-85 06:23:56 EDT References: <429@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA> <1546@pyuxd.UUCP> <1571@brl-tgr.ARPA> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 24 > I told everyone that abortion is a question of values. MY values tell me so, > so I say so. YOUR values tell you that the woman's right to remove the > entity outweighs the entity's right to go on using her body for support. > It goes back to my very first posting: WHOSE right to control her own body? > Can you PROVE than every person has the right to control his own body? Or > is it just something you assume as a basic, fundamental right? [ROSENBLATT] I think you got it right. The abortion issue is a clash between two sets of moral values. However, I think the positions of the pro-lifers and pro-choicers are asymmetrical. Whereas the anti-abortionist are trying to impose their moral code on the pro-choice side, the pro-choice side does not attempt to coerce the other side to conform to its moral code. I think that in some (Red China?) countries the governments are trying to force women to have abortions against their will. They justify their act by the needs of population control. Such a coercive approach is symmetrical to the pro-lifer approach. In both cases, we have a moral standard that denies a woman control of her body. -- Yosi Hoshen, AT&T Bell Laboratories Naperville, Illinois, Mail: ihnp4!ihu1m!jho Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com