Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: BULLPUKEY
Message-ID: <1152@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 4-Jul-85 01:20:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1152
Posted: Thu Jul  4 01:20:07 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 5-Jul-85 07:23:01 EDT
References: <149@pyuxii.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 22

> Abortion for convenience sake is murder.  [WHEELER]

You've already said more than once your views on "convenience": anything
done out of "convenience" is WRONG.  Taking a car to work instead of walking
like your grampa did is WRONG.  Using a refrigerator instead of eating fresh
fruit and vegetables each day grown in your backyard is WRONG.  Using a
word processor or text editor instead writing and erasing by hand is WRONG.

Oh, I see, I've misunderstood your position.  It's only those things you don't
happen to like done out of "convenience" that are WRONG.  Is that it?  If
I'm wrong I can't for the life of me figure out what you do mean.  It's only
"wrong" (i.e., murder) if the object of the abortion is a living independent
human being, and we know that the objects of abortion, the fetuses, cannot
sustain themselves outside of the environment of the womb, thus they cannot
be "murdered".  Since that is really the central core of the argument, not
"Oh my god, look what they do with the fetuses!" or "They do this out of
convenience, and not out of the hard working Puerile ethic I grew up with,
so it MUST be wrong!", I think we can skip the bold assertions that basically
amount to "It's wrong because I don't like it".
-- 
Like aversion (HEY!), shocked for the very first time...
			Rich Rosen   ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr