From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Subject: Re: Shameless attack on pro-choicers in general!
Organization: California State University: Sacramento
Distribution: world 
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 18:27:09 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.151050.21057@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp) writes:
>In article <1992Jul31.000659.28271@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>>In article <adams.712421943@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>>knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp) writes:
>>>
>>>>In article <adams.712339545@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>>>>chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (Steve Chaney | Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.0 ) writes:
>>>
>>>>[much rational response to irrational questions deleted]
>>>
>>>>>>11) Would rather have human fetal testing?  
>>>>>This is a tougher question, to which I don't have an answer.
>>>
>>>>Steve Adams, I don't understand why fetal testing is different that corpse
>>>>testing. If the fetus is dead, what is the problem? Do you find testing on
>>>>dead adults reprehensable? There is much to be gained by studying and using
>>>>the tissue of a dead fetus that would otherwise rot.
>>>
>>>My problem with deciding how I feel on this is the possible ramifications.
>>>Assume for a moment that fetal tissue is found to cure some horrendous
>>>disease.  Do you then support conception soley for provision of fetal
>>>tissue?  This creates lots of issues that I don't have any answers for...
>>
>>Well, here's a few questions: 
>>
>>1) Why is it that we don't take tissues from the bodies of executed
>>murderers, for experimentation? 
>
>If they've signed the back of their drivers liscence like I have, then we do
>take their tissues for experimentation.
>
>
>>2) Dead bodies in general? 
>
>We do.  Are you familiar with medical training on cadavors? On donated tissues?
>*I* certainly have no use for my tissues if I'm dead. If someone can live 
>because of direct use of my organs or from research done on my tissues, I
>am very much for that.
>
>>3) Those who die from diseases? 
>
>Happens all the time. Pull out your California drivers liscence, or go right
>to the state DOT in Sacramento, probably right next door to you, and sign
>up yourself.
>
>
>>After all, they, too, could hold answers to major diseases. 
>
>
>Which is why I, and many others here on the net who are pro-choice, have 
>chosen to donate our bodies after we die.


BUT... you missed one point. In all these instances, they have given
their permission for this to happen. 

In none of those 1-3 points, can we do that to someone who has not
given permission previously. When you don't have permission, you can't
do it. 

Now, try and dodge that.  


===============================================================================
Question: If you don't have truck bombs and thousands of fanatics to
	  sacrifice their lives and drive them, how do you scare a 
	  nation into giving in to your demands?

Answer:   Buy coat hangers and encourage women to kill themselves
	  with them and call yourself "pro-choice".
===============================================================================
===============================================================================
BBBBBB     OOOOOOOO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    Founder: Steve Chaney 
B    B     O      O   S         S          <chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu> 
BBBBBBBB   O     OO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    
BB     B   O     OO        SS        SS    Borg Operating 
BBBBBBBB O OOOOOOOO O SSSSSSS O SSSSSSS O  Space Systems, Revision 2.0 

	       The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS. 
 
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:29687 alt.birthright:187 alt.abortion.inequity:2786