Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccice2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccice5!ccice2!pwk
From: pwk@ccice2.UUCP (Paul W. Karber)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Re: The Status of the Fetus and Its Rights (Humanity Defined)
Message-ID: <667@ccice2.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Oct-85 22:51:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccice2.667
Posted: Tue Oct 15 22:51:56 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Oct-85 06:46:34 EDT
References: <429@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA> <1546@pyuxd.UUCP>
Reply-To: pwk@ccice2.UUCP (Paul W. Karber)
Organization: CCI Central Engineering, Rochester, NY
Lines: 39

In article <1335@ihlpg.UUCP> tan@ihlpg.UUCP (Bill Tanenbaum) writes:

>Nonsense.  First of all, the question is not whether the fetus is human.
>Of course a human fetus is human.  What is it, a chicken?  The question
>is whether the fetus is a HUMAN BEING, or only a POTENTIAL HUMAN BEING.

My dictionary (I like my dictionary :-) defines human (noun) as
a human being.  So I don't understand the distinction you are trying
to make.  Perhaps you are using human (adj)?  That would not fit
into the context of your sentence "What is it, a chicken?".

>Second, and more important, the question of whether the fetus is
>or is not a human being is not a scientific question, but a matter
>of semantics.

I think the question of the humanity of the fetus should be a matter
of science.  If we let it be a matter of semantics then we can call
anything we like human and anything we don't like non-human.
This has been done too often in the past (e.g. Blacks, Jews).

>There are no missing relevant facts which would allow
>it to "turn out" later that the fetus is or is not a human being.

I can think of no other scientific definition (my dictionary failed me :-(
then a member of the genus homo sapiens.

>You state your precise definition of the term HUMAN BEING, and I will
>tell you RIGHT NOW whether or not the fetus is a human being according
>to your definition.
>-- 
>Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL  ihnp4!ihlpg!tan

You needn't.  It is.

-- 

Of course I could be wrong.

siesmo!rochester!ccice5!ccice2!pwk