home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!keegan
- From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
- Subject: Re: restrictions
- Message-ID: <4a118qf@rpi.edu>
- Nntp-Posting-Host: hermes.acm.rpi.edu
- Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
- References: <1eb8irINNil4@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> <1992Nov19.165609.7444@rotag.mi.org> <1992Nov19.183336.13018@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1992Nov20.163735.10217@rotag.mi.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:40:43 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
- ->gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
- ->>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
- ->>}If it's not happening, then why does it hurt to legislate against it?
- ->>}Doesn't this sword cut _both_ ways?
- ->>
- ->>Sort of like, gee, if you're not hiding anything, why would you object
- ->>to a search?
-
- ->"Sort of like", but not really, since I'm giving an example of _legislation_
- ->and you're trying to analogize to the complex and delicate balance of rights
- ->involved in law _enforcement_. Apples and oranges.
-
- bullshit! when you talk about legislating against
- abortion rights, you're talking about the same
- thing as you are when you talk about illegal searches.
- both are an abuse of rights.
-
- i'm surprised you'd be arguing against those rights
- kebbin. as a newly declared supported of choice, i
- thought you just recently posted that you opposed
- legislation to restrict abortion. i hope you're not
- changing your mind again.
-
-
-