home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31 / NN_1992_31.iso / spool / talk / abortion / 53825 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1993-01-01  |  1.0 KB  |  23 lines
  1. Newsgroups: talk.abortion
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!gatech!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!nigel.msen.com!heifetz!rotag!kevin
  3. From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
  4. Subject: Re: Pro-choicers must condone infanticide
  5. Message-ID: <1993Jan1.022332.536@rotag.mi.org>
  6. Organization: Who, me???
  7. References: <1992Dec29.111932.26271@hemlock.cray.com> <1992Dec30.005736.24210@rotag.mi.org> <1992Dec30.051334.12145@watson.ibm.com>
  8. Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 02:23:32 GMT
  9. Lines: 12
  10.  
  11. In article <1992Dec30.051334.12145@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
  12. >In <1992Dec30.005736.24210@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
  13. >>
  14. >>"Interference" refers to detrimental effects. It is not a violation
  15. >>of BA to have one's biological functions affected in beneficial ways.
  16. >
  17. >Someone whose religious beliefs forbid medical intervention might not agree...
  18.  
  19. True, but in the context of the article from which you quoted, "beneficial
  20. ways" mostly denoted natural gestational processes. 
  21.  
  22.                                 - Kevin
  23.