Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccice2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccice5!ccice2!cjk
From: cjk@ccice2.UUCP (Chris Kreilick)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Inconsistency strikes again
Message-ID: <597@ccice2.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 10-Feb-85 05:04:12 EST
Article-I.D.: ccice2.597
Posted: Sun Feb 10 05:04:12 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 13-Feb-85 02:22:24 EST
References: <3367@alice.UUCP> <342@ccice6.UUCP>
Organization: The Fall of Wog
Lines: 34

> > In Elliott City, Maryland today, Ronald Hicks was charged with vehicular
> > manslaughter because he was involved in a traffic accident that led
> > to the abortion of a 13-week fetus.
> > 
> > Hicks was driving a pickup that collided last August with a car
> > that contained a 22-year-old pregnant woman.
> > 
> > She suffered internal injuries of a nature that led her doctor
> > to terminate her pregnancy.
> > 
> > Here is the inconsistency:  there is no way to know what would have
> > happened had the doctor not done the abortion, and yet the driver of
> > the truck is being charged with manslaughter!
> > 
> > If abortion is murder, shouldn't the woman and her doctor be charged too?
> > If it isn't, how come Hicks is being prosecuted at all?
> > 
> > Can someone come up with a consistent way of explaining the facts?
> > I can't.
> 
> Stop and look again. The child was not wearing a seatbelt
> or involved in driving the car. Therefore the decision is fair.
> -- 
> The Watcher
> seismo!rochester!ccice5!ccice6!daf

WAIT MR. FADER!

I'm not sure about this one.  If the belt was around the
baby's waist, wouldn't it also shield the baby?


-- 
Bronto rider