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