Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site rabbit.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!ulysses!allegra!alice!rabbit!jj
From: jj@rabbit.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Faith vs. law vs. abortion
Message-ID: <2580@rabbit.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Mar-84 10:24:57 EST
Article-I.D.: rabbit.2580
Posted: Fri Mar  9 10:24:57 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 10-Mar-84 11:22:56 EST
References: <2579@rabbit.UUCP>, <1953@cbscc.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 60


I DID explain my position.  You even read it, Paul, because
you asked "Why don't incubators count?"

The reason I said "incubators don't count" is that I don't
regard an incubator as an extraordinary method of keeping
the fetus  alive.

I regard extraordinary measures as things like
in-vitro birth  (yeah, I know it's not available, and if
it was, that would indeed be a viable alternative to abortion
in some cases.), artificial wombs , heart/lung/kidney support, and the like.   

Basically, if the fetus can breathe, pump its own 
blood, digest its own food, and keep its own metabolism
functioning, it's no longer a fetus, it's a baby, and
it should be treated as a human.  (I don't regard
needing someone else to GET the food as a lack of
humanity, so don't bother using the usual emotionally
loaded sophistry to kill off all the 3 year old humans,
please.)

Clearly, if the mother WANTS extraordinary measures, she should
be allowed to request them.  Likewise for the father, or
for anyone who WANTS the fetus to grow into humanity.
.

The definition given here is no different that the one
that you claim I didn't give in the last article.  

I'm NOT going to argue about the definition, simply because
I will not argue matters of your faith.  

You are welcome to hold the members of your faith to the
tenets of that faith, but please do not expect me to
agree with, or act by, them.

On another note, referring to the individual who comments
that many pregnancies are the result of
"incautious behavior".    I find your argument  quite offensive.
You use pregnancy as a tool to punish people who are
not of your own belief regarding sexual behavior, 
a behavior which is EXACTLY equivelant to inflicting 
YOUR religious punishment on someone who does not believe
in your religion.    


-- 
TEDDY BEARS ARE NICER THAN PEOPLE--
HUG YOUR OWN TODAY !
(allegra,harpo,ulysses)!rabbit!jj