home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:57695 alt.abortion.inequity:6702
- Path: sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!castor.cs.psu.edu!beaver
- From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
- Subject: Re: sexist assumptions
- Message-ID: <C1D6qo.8rv@cs.psu.edu>
- Date: 24 Jan 93 15:23:12 GMT
- References: <1ji7tmINNfnv@gap.caltech.edu> <C1Bosq.Bww@cs.psu.edu> <1jssksINNknc@gap.caltech.edu>
- Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
- Lines: 24
- Nntp-Posting-Host: castor.cs.psu.edu
-
- peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
- >beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
- >
- >>peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
- >>>beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
- >>>>Man A's condom breaks, woman has abortion, man A pays no child support.
- >>>>Man B's condom breaks, woman has child, man B pays $200,000.
- >
- >>Man A and man B have acted identically. But only man B can be "fined"
- >>(and indeed possibly imprisoned). Why the difference?
- >
- >Because man B has a child that he is obliged to support. Man A does not.
-
- You've restated the problem, not answered it.
-
- Why the difference?
-
-
- Hints: Who caused the difference?
- Who caused an obligation to exist, if one does in fact exist?
-
- Don
- --
- beaver@cs.psu.edu Opinions from the PC-challenged
-