Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ut-ngp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!kjm
From: kjm@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ken Montgomery)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re*2: Good Fallout
Message-ID: <1108@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 4-Dec-84 09:58:52 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-ngp.1108
Posted: Tue Dec  4 09:58:52 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Dec-84 03:23:32 EST
References: <374@gitpyr.UUCP> <1094@ut-ngp.UUCP> <389@gitpyr.UUCP>
Organization: U.Texas Computation Center, Austin, Texas
Lines: 40

[]
> ... My intention was to mean that, once It was
>determined that a woman was pregnant, that there was another life involved
>than just the woman's convenience, and in this case, there IS a duty
>involved!  Just as much a duty as that a father SHOULD support his children!

Why does anyone have the duty to support anyone else?

>Of course, a woman does not have to become pregnant,

Ever hear of accidental contraceptive failures?  Women *do* have
to put up with ovulation!

> but once another
>human life is involved, her rights are naturally restricted,

You are not just talking about restricting her rights --
you are talking about forcing her to aid someone who has
no claim on her!

> ...
>        Do not, by the way, in the great rush to free women from the "slavery"
>of pregnancy, give them the extraordinary power of summary execution,

You don't think people should be able to use lethal force to protect
themselves from intruders, if necessary?

>without trial or cause, of an innnocent human life.

Abortions are done "without cause"?  Isn't an unwanted pregnancy
a "cause"?  What does the alleged "innocence" of a tresspasser
have to do with protecting one's property, anyway?

> Gerald Owens

--
"Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs"
Ken Montgomery
...!{ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!ut-ngp!kjm  [Usenet, when working]
kjm@ut-ngp.ARPA  [for Arpanauts only]