home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!jsue
- From: jsue@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Jeffrey L. Sue)
- Subject: Re: Rerunning old arguments
- References: <1992Nov16.005829.17960@wetware.com>
- Message-ID: <1992Nov16.182152.16055@ncsa.uiuc.edu>
- Originator: jsue@troon.ncsa.uiuc.edu
- Sender: usenet@news.cso.uiuc.edu (Net Noise owner)
- Organization: The Dow Chemical Company
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:21:52 GMT
- Lines: 41
-
-
- In article <1992Nov16.005829.17960@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
- >
- >What seems MOST confusing about all the rantfest from
- >those who are arguing in favor of antiabortion laws
- >is why at NO TIME has the IRS ever considered an
- >unborn entity a tax deduction. And why, in particular,
- >when it was attempted by persons during the BUSH administration,
- >did the IRS consider said suit to be frivilous.
-
- Since when do we "consciously" consider the IRS to be the judge
- of what we value?
-
- >
- >Why is it that NO ONE has ever asked for place of
- >conception, or gestation, and merely asks for place
- >of birth.
-
- Perhaps because it's often difficult to establish, there being no
- scientific records and all.
-
- >
- >ciao
- >drieux
- >
- >ps: and folks slowly wake up and notice that the
- >AntiAbortionists want to rewrite history about
- >what is supposedly 'traditional family values.'
- >
-
- I don't want to rewrite history. And I don't claim to know anything
- about 'traditional family values'.
-
- However I do enjoy thought-provoking, insightful discussions about important
- subjects.
-
-
- --
- -----
- Jeff Sue
- - All opinions are mine - (and you can't have any, nya nya nya)
-