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!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Torek's SECOND ANNUAL CONCLUSIVE ARGUMENT :-> Message-ID: <542@mit-vax.UUCP> Date: Tue, 6-Aug-85 04:16:27 EDT Article-I.D.: mit-vax.542 Posted: Tue Aug 6 04:16:27 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 9-Aug-85 02:17:14 EDT References: <789@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1012@noscvax.UUCP> Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA Lines: 58 In article <5691@cbscc.UUCP> pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) writes: >Hmmm, sounds like you haven't answered my question. I'm asking, how >can you talk about a human having any other conceivable right if she >doesn't have the right to live? Ok, you can't. Now answer my question: who ever said that having the right to live was guaranteed to anybody? The Constitution? That's not working very well is it? Now why is this relevant? >Anyway, the draft is not quite the same thing as >classing individuals just for the sake of killing them. Did you sleep through the sixties or what? >Those people helped remove the draft, remember? Yes it's funny... sometimes people can fight for their rights and win... like the women who fought to gain the right of having abortions. >>The labels we put on people have a definitive >>effect on whether or not they are allowed to live. > >But they shouldn't. Can you justify the idea? How about "BRAIN DEAD". "Pull the plug Doctor McCoy, this one's BRAIN DEAD." Happens all the time. >Because people in some state think that a human who kill another >human forfeits that right. "Murderer" isn't just a label. The >one being so labeled has presumably committed the crime. What >sort of crime does the label "infant" describe? None. Righto, but it has been successfully argued that a "fetus" can be part of the woman's body (which she owns, therefore she owns the fetus) and can be considered "Tresspassing". I think it's stupid to have to find a lump of tissue guilty of something before it can be removed from it's parent, but there you have it: Tresspassing. >See the difference? Not yet, maybe Ken can clear it up for me. :-) >All this is similarly missing the point (and is a little "off the wall" >to boot). The bottom line is not that I'm missing the point. I believe in that sanctity of HUMAN life that you describe. I have a difficult time extending this to tissue outgrowths. -- Charles Forsythe CSDF@MIT-VAX "You are a stupid fool." -Wang Zeep "I'm not a fool!" -The Hated One