From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Subject: Re: THE IMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION ON OUR SOCIETYdir
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 01:12:10 GMT

In <1992Apr7.185217.15334@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> rfischer@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Ray Fischer) writes:

>franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes ...

>So basically you're saying that it is so because you believe it to be
>so and because the church says so.
   No... I'm saying that you haven't given the unborn fetus a chance
to decide. Forget the church's say, forget my say, but listen to the fetus.
You know what? You can't... So, I say it is not our position to judge the
status of the fetus. The fact that the population is so divided on the
status of the fetus should be sufficient to show us we cannot end it's 
existence. Until a unanimous decision arises that the unborn fetus
is not a sentient being with rights, then we cannot afford to abort the
fetus. Otherwise, as long as the decision is split, there are many out
there that see it as murder.

Ahhh - here we go - Just what I was waiting for. A hack at the church's
credibility. Don't bother tackling arguments and concepts, but go for
character assasination. I'm starting to feel a bit like Clarence Thomas...
Character assassination is one thing, but lowering an entire group 
by it's beliefs from hundreds of years ago, and even by other individuals 
in the past decade is pathetic. I truly thought it was beneath you.

>1) Wholesale murder (the Crusades)
>2) Torture (the Inquisition)
>3) Belief in a Heliocentric universe (re: Galileo)
>4) Illiteracy (during the Middle Ages being caught with a Bible could
>   get you in serious trouble if you weren't affiliated with the Church)
>5) Bribery (buying permission to sin was once common)
   So, if I could show you all of the corruptible evidence within
the American government, would that prove to you that democracy is
not any good, and should be done away with in the American society 
as we know it? Let good ol' anarchy reign? My friend, judging a 
message by the people who carry it, (even 500 years ago for crying out
loud!) is pathetic. Just pathetic. I'm embarassed for you but will 
assume you don't make such flaws in logic often...

>I might point out that I can build a machine that moves and sucks its
>thumb.  These attributes would hardly make it human, however.  And if
>I put a petri dish with some living tissue inside it, it would also
>have some genetic material in it.  As for dreaming - how can you tell?
   What a poor analogy... Doesn't merit me responding. Unless your machine
has millions of responsive synapses which respond to it's environment.
The ability to reproduce, a beating heart, thermo-responsive cells,
responds to pain, etc etc etc... That's what makes the difference between
man and machine. Although I must say, my macintosh seems to be a little
more intelligent than some of your remarks...hmmmmm

   steve (who's beginning to feel outnumbered 8)    )
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA