Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!dual!lll-crg!seismo!brl-tgr!matt
From: matt@brl-tgr.ARPA (Matthew Rosenblatt )
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: The Status of the Fetus and Its Rights
Message-ID: <2019@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 9-Oct-85 15:03:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.2019
Posted: Wed Oct  9 15:03:14 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 19:31:36 EDT
References: <429@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA> <1546@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 45

> 	  My premise was only that the willful destruction of the life
> of an innocent full legal human being is legally murder.  That, indeed, is
> equivalent to the legal DEFINITION of murder.  Therefore, if fetus killing
> is a lesser crime than murder, then the fetus is not legally a full human
> being.  [BILL TANENBAUM]

The common-law definition of murder that I remember does not use the words
"innocent full legal."  Murder is the willful killing of another with
malice aforethought and without justification or excuse.  The common law
did not need to spell out that "another" refers to a human being, because
judges and juries were men of common sense who would not waste time trying
the killer of a horse for murder.  If fetus-killing is a lesser crime than
murder, that just means the fetus's right to life is guarded by a lesser
sanction than the already-born human being's right to life.  

Example:  In many States, the killing of a uniformed policeman on duty
can bring the death penalty under circumstances where the killing of a
civilian can bring at most imprisonment.  Does that mean that the legis-
lators who enacted these penalties, almost all of them civilians, believe
that they are less fully, legally human than a uniformed police officer?

What society does when it really feels a practice is evil is increase
the sanctions against that practice, in order further to discourage it.
Abortionists before 1973 were never considered mere lawbreakers in the 
same category as a traffic speeder or a tax evader.  There was a
real stigma attached to doctors who did abortions, as well as a possible
jail term.  There still is a stigma -- why do you think abortion-clinic
personnel don't like right-to-lifers telling the world what they do for
a living?  

Now, suppose abortion is re-criminalized.  What is to be done with the
"back-alley" practitioners who will attempt to perform abortions, 
killing fetuses and risking women's lives?  If society is serious,
we can't just wink at them as we wink at bookies and pot pushers
and prostitutes who -- we say -- aren't REALLY doing anyone any harm.
We'll have to go after them the way we go after murderers, rapists
and arsonists:  Make a serious police effort to track them down, and
enact penalties strong enough to deter most of them (NOT THE DEATH
PENALTY -- REMEMBER, MATT ROSENBLATT  DOES  NOT  BELIEVE  IN  THE
DEATH PENALTY.)  If enforcement and penalties used against abortion
equal in severity those used against murder, it should make no 
difference whether or not we construe the term "murder" to include
abortion.

				-- Matt Rosenblatt