From: ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:43:09 GMT
Organization: Netcom San Jose

nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes ...
> bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
>>Martin writes:
>>>Ray writes:
>>>>Nobody (nobody) wants to
>>>>kill embryos or fetuses, and to imply otherwise betrays your
>>>>prejudices.
>>>
>>>If nobody wants abortion, then why do so many people have abortions?
>
>>You're missing a crucial point here, Martin.  There's a difference
>>between "wanting to cut off bodily support to the fetus" and "wanting
>>to kill the fetus".  If the law allowed a woman to cut off support to
>>a fetus and have it removed from her body and kept alive by hospital
>>staff, but not killed, I don't think many women would have a very big
>>problem with this.
>
>Except the ones that want the fetal tissue harvested.

Spare us the sleazy bullshit.  It is precisely because of this blatant
and unsupported innuendo that so many people have so much disgust for
the tripe you typically post.  Can you come up with any evidence that
a significant number (or any) women actually got pregnant just so they
could provide fetal tissue, or are you lying via implication again?

>>That being said, how do you propose to allow a woman to cut off
>>support to the fetus without killing it?  Can you think of any way for
>>a woman to end her pregnancy before birth and have no further legal
>>ties to the fetus, without killing the fetus?  If you think of a way,
>>we'll be more than happy to consider it.
>
>You mean it never occurred to you that she might have it removed 
>after viability???  And why don't women bother to wait until 
>after viability?

Well gee.  Lessee here.  Option 1) get an abortion before week 8 when
it is safest, cheapest, and has the least liklihood of harming another
person.  Or 2) wait until week 30 when the problems of pregnancy are
in full effect and getting an abortion will be much more hazardous and
much more expensive.

Don't ask such stupid questions.

>>Another consideration is: who will pay to keep the fetus alive?  It'll
>>be pretty expensive to incubate an eight-week fetus until it can
>>survive on its own and be given to an adoption agency.
>
>It depends on the circumstances.  If the woman does it for gender
>selection reasons, she should foot the bill.  If she does it because
>of serious health impairment, then the fetus should become a ward
>of the state unless she wants to keep it, and then an equitable 
>arrangement would have to be worked out on a case-by-case basis.

Ah.  So you want me to pay for it.  Generous of you.

>>So what it comes down to is that I feel a woman has as much right to
>>refuse to use her body to support a fetus as you have a right to
>>refuse to use your body to support a dying man.  It's unfortunate that
>>the fetus has to be killed in the process, but since the fetus goes
>>through half a year of development without having even a working
>>brain,
>
>The brain starts working at 7 weeks or before.

Given the startling lack of knowledge about things biological in the
past, I rather doubt you're any more correct about this factoid.

-- 
Ray Fischer                   "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth
ray@netcom.com                 than lies."  -- Freidrich Nietszsche