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