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]