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!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!kjm From: kjm@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ken Montgomery) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: The pregnant criminals Message-ID: <1185@ut-ngp.UUCP> Date: Sun, 13-Jan-85 18:18:35 EST Article-I.D.: ut-ngp.1185 Posted: Sun Jan 13 18:18:35 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jan-85 04:34:59 EST References: <28000020@uiucdcsb.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: U.Texas Computation Center, Austin, Texas Lines: 38 [] >I am appaled that kjm has such a low view of human life. Typical tactics. Anyone who doesn't agree with you gets his/her character assasinated. >Thats like saying, >I know there was a guy out back of my house, due to something I and someone >else did, such as leaving food out, To take your analogy at face value, why would you construe me leaving food out as an invitation to enter my property? Or, why do you construe the invitation for a man to enter a woman as an invitation for their child to live in her for 9 months? In each situation, I see no reason why the first action implies the second. Anyway, your analogy appears to equate the father and the fetus, which is silly. >but I shot him because I did not want him on >my property any more. He shouldn't have been there uninvited. >It is not just a mass of tissues we are talking about, >it is a human life. This is why abortion is wrong. Why is abortion wrong simply because it takes a human life? Why do humans have the right to live at the expense of others? > Brad Andrews -- The above viewpoints are mine. They are unrelated to those of anyone else, including my cats and my employer. Ken Montgomery "Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs" ...!{ihnp4,allegra,seismo!ut-sally}!ut-ngp!kjm [Usenet, when working] kjm@ut-ngp.ARPA [for Arpanauts only]