Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 12/4/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!rlgvax!jack
From: jack@rlgvax.UUCP (Jack Waugh)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Whether the Fetus is Human
Message-ID: <1788@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 8-Mar-84 18:40:35 EST
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1788
Posted: Thu Mar  8 18:40:35 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 10-Mar-84 08:26:03 EST
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 27

I'm pretty sure it's S. I. Hiakawa's book (I'm not sure if  I
have  his  name  spelled  right  --  the Senator from Hawaii)
*Language in Thought and Action* that gives  the  example  of
the  squirrel.  The question is: if a man walks around a tree
and a squirrel climbs around the trunk of the  tree,  keeping
always  on  the  side  opposite  the  man, has the man walked
around the squirrel?

Some people will argue vehemently that  the  answer  is  yes,
others that it is no.  Both camps will think they are arguing
about a squirrel, a tree, and a man.

In fact, all they are arguing about is what  "around"  means,
which  has  no  importance  at all.  In fact, I would say not
only no importance, but no meaning.

This is how I see the question, posed in this forum by  anti-
abortion  arguers,  of  whether  the fetus is human.  You can
call it (or her, if you please) human or not, but so what?  I
believe in taking its life if that's what the mother chooses.
You seem to hold human life sacred.  I beleive, rather,  that
the  correct  action  is  that that leads to the greater Good
(which is to say, less Evil).  In most of the  possible  sets
of  circumstances,  different  people  will disagree on which
route is correct on even that basis, because different people
will  place  different valuations on the evils and advantages
of the alternatives.