Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!vax135!ariel!houti!hogpc!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!duke!unc!tim
From: tim@unc.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.women,net.politics
Subject: Re: CHOICE and the Senate
Message-ID: <5494@unc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Jul-83 17:47:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: unc.5494
Posted: Sun Jul  3 17:47:06 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 7-Jul-83 02:41:27 EDT
References: umcp-cs.415
Lines: 33



                    How would YOU like to have been an
                unwanted birth??  Think about your
                outlook on the world...

            How would YOU like to have been aborted?  You
        wouldn't have an outlook on the world...

    This is a really dumb statement; sorry, Liz, but it is.  The best
comeback to it I ever heard was on Phil Donahue -- an anti-choice nun
asked a pro-choice woman in the audience the standard question, "Where
would you be if YOUR mother had had an abortion?" The woman answered,
"The same place I'd be if she'd become a nun."

    The same can be said if the mother had had a headache that night,
or if a sperm with a different half-nucleus had been a little faster.
There is absolutely no justification for this sort of silly argument.

    Again, my position is that since the fetus is not known to have a
human soul, spirit, will, or what have you, there can be no
justification for the infringement of the woman's right to choose,
since she IS known to have the soul or whatever.  If you don't believe
in the "soul", of course, this is irrelevant, but in that case it is
simply a matter of societal convenience, and there is no reason to
have the legislation restrict the woman.

______________________________________
The overworked keyboard of Tim Maroney

duke!unc!tim (USENET)
tim.unc@udel-relay (ARPA)
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill