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