From: rfischer@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Ray Fischer)
Subject: Re: THE IMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION ON OUR SOCIETYdir
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 20:18:05 GMT

franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes ...
>   God has given us the gift to do anything. You give me enough
>tools and I CAN walk on water. God has also given us the will to choose
>our own destiny. But, I cannot stand by and watch our destiny go towards

And you would use that will to choose the destiny of others?  Isn't this
rather anti-christian and contary to God's commandments?

>corrupt and shallow means. You consider me a self-proclaimed vigilante,
>but I consider myself a spokesman for the unborn.

I may be mistaken, but a very much doubt that the unborn have chosen
you to be their spokesman.  Appointing yourself to the post seems a 
tad presumptious, does it not?  Would not the parents be better suited
to make major decisions about their children?  Or would you rather the
church take over the raising of children?

>   I TELL you that I feel abortion is wrong because the wisdom of God
>tells us this, and I AGREE with it. I TELL you that abortion is wrong, 
>because it gives us no chance to take back our actions. We are cowards.

You are making this up.  Nowhere does the Bible tell anyone that abortion
is wrong.  It is only people's interpretation that makes it so.  Given
that people are fallible, is it not reasonable for me to suspect your
interpretation as being erroneous?

As for taking back our actions, this is never possible.  The moment
once past, never returns to be undone.

>   Because I think GOd is smarter than you. ANd my way doesn't have
>any permanent damage. Okay - the woman has the child, and if she sees fit,
>puts it up for adoption. The child is given a chance, the mother heals 
>from the pregnancy, and the adopting couple is given a chance to raise
>a child. If abortion is the option, the mother is no better off,
>and the child is DEAD> Period. Which option makes sense to you? Well,
>I guess we already know that...

You presume that birth and adoption are the end of the story.  This
hardly surprises me since the so-called "Pro-Life" camp is seldom 
concerned with breathing, thinking people.  In fact, the mother may
very well be better off after an abortion.  As example consider all 
the uncountable girls thrown out of their homes because they got
pregnant.  How many of them were driven to suicide?  How many driven
to prostitution on the streets?  How many dead from drugs?  How many
doomed to poverty and loneliness because of an "illicit" child? (as if
a child could ever be illicit).  How many emotionally devastated by
choosing between being destitute or never seeing their child again?
Is it any wonder women risked death from back-alley abortions rather 
than face these consequences?

And you prattle on about the sanctity of the life of the unborn child?
Is it any wonder so many consider you hypocritical religious zealots 
and discount your views?

>   Incedentally, democracy doesn't work. If you had an infinitely
>varied society, the vote on any result would be absolutely split. 

Maybe so.  Got a good alternative?  Theocracy?

>>You've complained about the insults and jokes you've
>>received.  Ever wonder why you get insulted?
>   Well, yes. because I don't agree with you.

No.  Because you insult other people.  I ask legitimate (if uncomfortable)
questions and you respond with insults.

>                    The argument reciprocates, you all get rude, 
>the argument reciprocates again, and then we ask you to work with us,
>and you say no. Fun isn't it?

You have never asked anyone to work with you.  You have asked people
to accept your views.  Not at all the same thing.

Ray
rfischer@cs.stanford.edu