home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news
- From: brinkley@cs.utexas.edu (Paul Brinkley)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: Christian Pro-Choicers
- Date: 25 Jan 1993 15:55:26 -0600
- Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
- Lines: 30
- Message-ID: <lm8oeeINNgrg@ar-rimal.cs.utexas.edu>
- References: <adams.727758048@spssig> <lm1g5pINNegu@ar-rimal.cs.utexas.edu> <1993Jan25.093753.3864@hemlock.cray.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ar-rimal.cs.utexas.edu
-
- In article <1993Jan25.093753.3864@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) writes:
- >How can the fetus' liberty be valuable? Of necessity, it is
- >on a very short leash. It is in the nature of a fetus to
- >have very little liberty. Whenever I see the argument that
- >fetuses should have the same rights/liberties as anyone else,
- >I always wonder, how are you going to go about allowing them
- >to peaceably assemble?
-
- You've got a good point. I could say, "Well, if they WANT to, LET them
- assemble!" :) Of course, that would be ludicrous.
-
- (And then that Simpsons episode, where Maggie restored all those pacifiers
- to the babies in the day-care center, comes to mind. All those babies just
- sucking...spooky.)
-
- Perhaps what I should have said is that they should have the same
- protection under the law as everyone else, rather than the same liberties/
- rights.
-
- If you see a problem in THAT statement, let me know. I'm struggling with
- this issue the same as the rest of you...
-
- Thanks for spotting that flaw in the wording.
-
- Paul Brinkley
- brinkley@cs.utexas.edu
- Pro-Thought Advocate
-
- (See? Nice, friendly exchange. No flamewars. No problemo. :) )
-
-