home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!destroyer!ncar!neit.cgd.ucar.edu!kauff
- From: kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman)
- Subject: Re: When is a fetus not a person?
- Message-ID: <1993Jan27.232029.10335@ncar.ucar.edu>
- Sender: news@ncar.ucar.edu (USENET Maintenance)
- Organization: Boulder CO
- References: <1993Jan23.182348.7135@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> <C1JAnF.3FM@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 23:20:29 GMT
- Lines: 28
-
- > = cobb@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Mike Cobb) writes:
- >> = kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman) writes:
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
- >>[deleted material]
-
- >> This is not the whole truth: taken in context, it's seems rather obvious
- >> (to most people) that no woman would go through 9 months of pregnancy
- >> and then have an abortion for some trivial reason (on account the rather
- >> large natural disincentives to do so, ask a woman for details).
- >> o Is there any reason to restrict late-term abortions? Ie. can you
- >> document any "abuse" of late-term abortions?
- >> o Assuming such "abuse" existed, would outlawing abortion end this abuse
- >> while preserving unhindered access for those needing (not abusing)
- >> late-term abortions?
-
- >If it is obvious to most people that a woman should not (would not?) go through
- >nine months pregnancy and then get an abortion does that mean those people
- >would support legislation prohibiting that?
-
- Probably not, because while such a law would be useless wrt it's
- intended purpose, it would also have serious and unintended negative
- side effects. Abortion is legal now, and yet some women have had to
- fly from state to state in a desperate attempt to get a life saving
- late-term abortion. (Has anyone got that 60-minutes transcript?)
- Even now, "abortion on demand" is not a reality, and lives have already
- been seriously threated by this lack of "abortion on demand".
-
- -Brian
-