Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site iddic.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!iddic!galenr
From: galenr@iddic.UUCP (Galen Redfield)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Re: Live fetuses
Message-ID: <2121@iddic.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Aug-85 16:22:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: iddic.2121
Posted: Wed Aug 14 16:22:55 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 03:59:49 EDT
References: <399@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA> <1654@mnetor.UUCP> <1407@pyuxd.UUCP>
Reply-To: galenr@iddic.UUCP (Galen Redfield)
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 40
Summary: 

In article <1407@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes:
>> Come on Rich, admit that you made a mistake.  Fetuses are alive.
>> There are enough good pro-choice arguments around without having
>> to resort to lies to prove a point.  I'm sure that most people
>> would respect you more if you admitted your mistake than if you
>> (not just you) continued to weave silly webs around it to try
>> to cover it up.
>> -- 
>> Sophie Quigley
>
>Show me these "silly webs", Sophie.  When someone takes a 6-week fetus
>out of a woman's body and it "lives", then it would be worthy of calling
>it alive.  Until then, refrain from accusing other people of "resorting
>to lies" when they have shown evidence to support their position, OK?
>The fact the the fetus requires the environment of a human being's body
>to provide it with support tells me quite clearly that it is not alive.
>If you disagree with that notion, fine.  That goes against definitions of
>life as we know it, but that's OK, the net is full of people who make
>up their own definitions at whim.  [FLAME OFF]
>-- 
> [extraneous signature drivel omitted]
>	Rich Rosen	ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr

But of course, you would never do that, right??

Geez, doesn't everybody remember that living  things  are  seldom  found
within  the  human  body,  and the few that are will survive if removed?
How quickly they seem to have forgotten this basic "fact."

Yes, really, Sophie.  You should stop accusing Rich of resorting to lies
when  that  is not what he does.  He uses them exclusively.  He knows no
other method than to use his own manufactured evidence  to  support  his
claims.  This is known as being consistent and logical.

What a load!

Warm regards,
Galen.

P.S. I expect to be flamed.  Don't disappoint me, please!