Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gitpyr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!gitpyr!owens
From: owens@gitpyr.UUCP (Gerald Owens)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: An abortion story
Message-ID: <393@gitpyr.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Nov-84 15:30:20 EST
Article-I.D.: gitpyr.393
Posted: Fri Nov 30 15:30:20 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Dec-84 05:24:34 EST
References: <44@tove.UUCP> <1092@ut-ngp.UUCP> <46@tove.UUCP> <1097@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Lines: 63

> [ken montgomery] 
> >[Liz Allen]
> >Its right to remain in the mother's body against the mother's will is
> >dependant on whether or not its life is valued more than mother's
> >inconvenience to carry the baby to term.
> 
> Valued by whom?  Anyway, why does the alleged "value" of a fetus
> override the woman's right to control her property (her body)?
> 
	We normally restrict the criminal's right to control his
body to prevent him from harming others, for a fixed period of time, and
nobody objects.  It's nine months of the woman's inconvenience vs. the
LIFE of another human being.  Life is more valuable than property.
(ken used the term 'property', not I!)


> >I would also like to point out that here you do think the development
> >of the child's brain is relevant and the actions of the child throughout
> >the narrative would indicate a fairly high amount of brain activity
> >(relative to the typical picture of next to none which is argued by
> >the pro-choice side).
> 
> Why does the alleged brain activity of the fetus give it the right
> to use the woman's body?
> 

	it apparently disproves abortionist propaganda that what is
being aborted (killed, murdered, whatever) is not anything really
human.  Besides, it didn't get where it is by itself!  Again, actions
by individuals in our society can lead to restrictions of their "rights"
in order to protect others.  No, the woman is not a criminal, but
TWO lives are involved now.  Again, it is a matter of nine months of
inconvenience VS a human life.  If one is permitted to kill another, in
order to make the next nine months a little nicer for themselves....

> >If it causes you to grant a high degree of humanity to the unborn
> >and if you value humanity, then abortion does become unthinkable.
> 
> "Value humanity"?  What does this phrase mean?  Are you saying
> that there is some way in which random people are valuable to
> me?  Can I trade this value for a microcomputer? :-)

	Lets see:  Vietnam, the boat people, Palestinians, Hungarians,
Czechs, Afghans, Jews, Blacks, Women.  Just a few victims of people
who questioned the value of valuing humanity.  By attempts to deny the
humanity of the not-as-yet-born, one can keep it off the above list.
If it's humanity is evident to all but the self-blind, then denying
the value of humanity, as ken has done, is the next logical step in order
to keep the "right" of oppression.

> > -Liz Allen
> 
> --
> "Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs"
> Ken Montgomery

	I wonder what else you are now ready to shred, ken.


-- 
Gerald Owens
Georgia Insitute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!owens