Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site bunker.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!ittvax!bunker!garys
From: garys@bunker.UUCP (Gary M. Samuelson)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Response to Gary's response to ...
Message-ID: <673@bunker.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 18-Jan-85 16:01:23 EST
Article-I.D.: bunker.673
Posted: Fri Jan 18 16:01:23 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 21-Jan-85 03:05:23 EST
References: <3300@alice.UUCP>
Organization: Bunker Ramo, Trumbull Ct
Lines: 29

> Gary, you are trying to suck me into an argument that I have neither
> the time nor the inclination to enter.  I am just trying to get you
> to answer one simple question:  why should the legal status of abortion
> be any different from the legal status of killing animals for food?

I am not trying to "suck you into" anything.  I gave your simple
question a simple answer: That the human fetus is not an animal.
You implied that there wasn't any "real" difference; when I tried to
show that there was, you said I wasn't answering your original
question.

I tried to get you to answer the converse question, "Why should they
be treated alike?" and you said that the important thing was the
ability to think; I asked for criteria to determine that ability,
and tried to show why it was not a practical definition for the
term human.  Now, you say that that is not answering your original
question.

You want me to answer your question only after I accept your concepts
of what a fetus is, what a human is, what an animal is, and what the
basis of rights is.  *Of course* I would agree with you if I first
accepted all of your concepts first.  But I don't; but if I try to
point out that fact, I am not answering your question.

Sorry, I no longer believe that you really want an answer.  Therefore
I will stop trying.

Gary Samuelson
ittvax!bunker!garys