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]