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