Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf
From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Re: Aborted fetuses in Cosmetics
Message-ID: <309@mit-vax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Jul-85 15:43:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-vax.309
Posted: Wed Jul  3 15:43:48 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 5-Jul-85 15:10:52 EDT
References: <855@bunker.UUCP> <863@bunker.UUCP> <878@bunker.UUCP>
Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Distribution: net.abortion
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 137
Summary: 

In article <890@bunker.UUCP> garys@bunker.UUCP (Gary M. Samuelson) writes:

>You're welcome.  It didn't look like sensationalism until you
>replaced the evidence and reasoning with the phrase beginning
>with "bogacity."
>You have dismissed what I said with a little handwaving, calling
>it "bogacity" without explaining what is bogus.

Ok, here: The article is bogus. What?! You mean a reliable news source
is wrong? Not possibly but I am not the only one that has pointed out
that quoting *one* article no one else heard about is somewhat flimsy.
Perhaps when the story makes it to the cover of Time...

>> You were trying to make us
>> believe that abortion clinics were raking in the dough selling fetal
>> remains to cosmetic manufacturers.
>
>When did I say that?  Abortion clinics do rake in a lot of money,
>mostly by performing abortions.  Selling fetal remains (to anyone)
>is a way of making additional money.

You said that when you opened this whole can of worms. You were, if you
remember, trying to show us all of the financial opportunities that
abortion clinics have. 

>> What proof? Well, it is known that
>> they use fetal remains. How do we know they're human? Well, because ONCE
>> a shipment was intercepted at a custom stop. 
>
>How many should be intercepted before you think that there is proof?

How about two?

>> Customs officers stop lots and lots of trucks, Gary.
>
>Do they stop all of them?

Trucks have to declare what they're carrying across boders. If people
are not declaring at least "fetal remains", they are lying and breaking
the law.

>So we should wait until everybody is doing it before trying to stop it?
>How do you know what people will or will not do or consider doing?

No, we should stop those who are guilty. So far these discussions have
been about things in general. If you want to stop someone, go to France,
find the clinic, and have it closed, but leave honest American clinics
alone.

>> It's still horrible. It should be stopped...
>
>I'm glad you agree.  What are you going to do to help?

I live in America. If the FDA doesn't forbid human fetal remains being
used in consumer poroduct, I will happily cast my vote to change that.
That way, the guilty will be punished (when they are caught with their
truckloads going into France.)

>> but it DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ABORTION!
>
>I.e., you don't want to hear about it.  Go ahead, close your eyes.

Rather than insulting myt intelligence, why don't you apply yours and
explain to me the connection? First, abortion is a source of human
fetuses, but so is miscarriage. Second, such use of the fetuses is
illegal (or could be quickly). Third, you haven't demonsstrated that
this is particularly widespread. Please explain why stopping abortion
will solve this problem? Why not solve it by illegalizing this practice
internationally? Why not solve it by finding the sources and stopping
THEM?

I have very good evidence that people who are NOT aborted often end up
unhappy and kill themselves. Should I use this as a pro-abortion stance
(ie why bother putting them and their loved ones through all that
misery.)?

>maybe the problem will get so big that no one can do anything about
>it at all.  I would like the practice stopped altogether; in the
>meantime, I would like to help prevent it from spreading.  It seems
>like one way to do that is to let others know about it.

Okay, now we know. When "Oil of Baby" starts appearing in the
supermarket, we'll write our senetors.

>> Too many stupid stereotypes are generated by people
>> who make decisions on skimpy data!
>
>What stereotype?  What decision do you think I made on skimpy
>data?

How about this steroetype: Abortion Clinics are murder factories that
ENJOY selling fetal remains for profit. If you are going post horror
stories, you owe it to the innocent to leave them alone. Why is it so
difficult to say "this doesn't happen in America, in fact I've only
heard one report but..."? Perhaps it would undermine your scare tactics.

>Your point is not valid; I have not made the generalization
>that you think I have made.  You are attacking a position I
>do not hold.

Its implicit.

>> Show me some more articles and conclusive proof.
>
>How many would you like to see?  What would you do if I did show
>you the number you require?  Probably just re-iterate the claim
>that it has nothing to do with abortion.

Again, you insult my intellegence. Send me the media blitz. Show me the
abortion clinic jackpot and I'll write my senetor. Until then, I think
this is an isolated incident on the other side of the Atlantic. It is
you who has failed to make the connection to abortion clinics per se. If
you are trying to say that "any clinic could be a supplier" you are
making the unfair generalization that you claim not to.

>> Tell me about how doctors are getting rich and show me evidence.
>
>I suppose if I mentioned the fact that over 1.5 million abortions
>are performed in this country each year, you would want a list.

No, I believe you. I believe they get rich. I don't believe any fraction
of their income comes from selling fetuses to cosmetic companies.

>> Don't believe everything you read, Gary. I don't.
>
>What did you read in my articles you didn't believe?

"Abortion is murder for profit." (it's between the lines, if it isn't
make that clear!)


-- 
Charles Forsythe
CSDF@MIT-VAX
"The Church of Fred has yet to come under attack.
    No one knows about it."
        -Rev. Wang Zeep