Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA Path: utzoo!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!ucla-cs!cc From: cc@ucla-cs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: a task for those opposed to abortion Message-ID: <8328@ucla-cs.ARPA> Date: Sun, 12-Jan-86 19:14:50 EST Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.8328 Posted: Sun Jan 12 19:14:50 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 14-Jan-86 03:37:42 EST References: <1100@oddjob.UUCP> <380@cisden.UUCP> <387@cisden.UUCP> Reply-To: cc@ucla-cs.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev) Distribution: na Organization: The Intellectual Wasteland, The Land Of Mental Midgets Lines: 76 Summary: Fr. Woolley strikes out -- AGAIN! In article <387@cisden.UUCP> john@cisden.UUCP (John Woolley) writes: >In article <380@cisden.UUCP> salazar@cisden.UUCP (Kathy Salazar) writes: >>In reversing the abortion issue... >>you would have abortion forced on people! >>This obviously is silly and unreasonable since it would be forcing an operation >>(like removing a kidney) on people who don't want it. > >I don't think I understand your point. I am not surprized... Logical experiment is beyond you. Sarcasm is foreign to you. I wonder about you, Fr..... >>If abortion is illegal... > >I don't think *anyone*, *ever*, suggested this. >I'd prefer penalties against abortionists, who rack up substantial >incomes from their killing. OK. What if the abortions are "free"? There is a new non-hormonal medication currently in research that stirred up a lot of controversy : it is used to regulate menstruation in women -- even if they happen to be pregnant. An induced abortion of sorts happens. Woman might not even KNOW if she is or is not pregnant. The medication has no known side effects. It's effects are painles and quick. And it needs to be taken once a month around the time of the period. So, Fr. Woolley, the incomes the manufacturers of this drug will rack up will derive from REGULATION of the menstrual periods, NOT abortions wich will be a side effect. Is THAT type of abortion OK with you, my good Fr.? >But a law can certainly >discourage and reduce the incidence of evil, as can be plainly seen >from the *huge* increase in the number of abortions done each year >in the U. S. since 1972. You have statistics on the number of ILLEGAL abortions in US BEFORE 1972 and the fatality rate of those abortions? Compare the number of fatalities to the those of the LEGAL abortions! >>Fact 2; >>It is a moral issue and only individuals make that decision. You can't >>force morality on people who don't want it. The good Fr. responce was again based on equating abortion to murder and to Nazi attitude toward Jews. Why, Fr. Woolley? Why do you insist on clouding the issue with evoking an emotional responce to an unrelated subject? Is it because you can't think of any REAL argument? >>Fact 4; >>Knowledge is needed to make your own decision, for or against abortion. > >No disagreement here at all between us. > >>FINAL WORDS: >>The morality of a society might best be defined by the way the poor >>are treated. Let's give more choices to people, encourage everyone to think >>for themselves and do the 'right' thing. > >And these foetuses, these children, who are being killed by abortions -- >who are they, the rich? If they don't qualify as poor in the sense of >disenfranchised, ignored, voiceless, powerless, just who does? > >"Let's give more choices to people". Okay. Let the kids get old enough >to decide, and then let them decide for themselves whether they want to >be killed. That way we wouldn't be *imposing* our choices on them. Now >*there's* a pro-Choice position I could endorse. Mean while let them starve, pull their parents into poverty, grow up in the streets and join the gangs. That way they will choose the option to be killed by themselves ( and take a few of their friend along!). Is that what you are saying, Fr.? Fr., if I find out that any of my friends is pregnant I'll try to stop them from having an abortion - IF YOU, Fr. Woolley, promise to SUPPORT FINANCIALLY and MORALLY that friend of mine for the period of the pregnancy and for the NEXT 18 years. NO???? Well, I gues it's abortions for the lot of them..... ================================================================================ From the steam tunnels of UCLA - Oleg Kiselev (....!ucla-cs!oac6.oleg)