From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: Pro-choicers must condone infanticide 
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:54:04 GMT

In article <C0LuxF.3Fv@news.cso.uiuc.edu> parker@ehsn21.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker) writes:
>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>
>>In article <C0BJBH.45q@news.cso.uiuc.edu> parker@ehsn5.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker) writes:
>
>>>A fetus is *not* independent; it requires the processed resources of 
>>>the mother.  
>
>>Wrong. A viable fetus does not need the processed resources "of the mother"
>>specifically -- it can survive off of processed resources from various 
>>sources. In this sense it is not dependent on a specific person. This is a 
>>form of independence.
>
>I did not say "viable fetus" I just said "fetus".  I will agree that a
>*viable* fetus could be removed (induced labor, usually) and sustained by
>other means (which tend to be rather expensive).  (just to clarify this for
>those who are following along)  I have heard many times (in t.a) that
>relatively few abortions are performed after viability, and I don't fight
>as hard to support them.

Same here. I'm just making a relevant distinction.

>>I would also suggest that perhaps you should procure a better dictionary.
>>I'm too lazy to type the whole thing in, but in my OED, the subsection of
>>the "autonomy" entry dealing specifically with biological meanings of the
>>word gives a couple of quotes -- one which refers to the branches of a
>>tree having "autonomy", and one which refers to the different types of
>>body tissue (muscles, nerves, etc.) as having "autonomy". If these things
>>have "autonomy", wouldn't a viable fetus have it too?
>
>First of all, as an American, I don't want to turn to an *English* dictionary
>to find definitions of words as I see them used around me.  ;)  

The OED is a dictionary of the English language. American usages are included,
and, where they deviate significantly from British usage, specially flagged.

>Second of all,
>I don't have room for a really large all-knowing, all-powerful dictionary,
>and I probably couldn't afford it anyway.  My dad got a free *unabridged*
>Random House dictionary (longer title than that, but I forget it exactly),
>but it is a few hudred miles away from my network access.  And besides, many
>of those definitions you cited are obviously out of the context of this
>discussion.  

Words tend to pick up the flavor of ALL of their various meanings, even the
ones that aren't strictly relevant to the topic at hand. Besides, I only
quoted the meanings from the "biology" section of the entry for "autonomy".
That I think was a sufficient narrowing in and of itself.

>Since you are the one making bodily autonomy arguemnts (aren't
>you?  I'm getting a bit confused), 

Let me briefly recap, then. The original question was "doesn't abortion 
violate a fetus'es bodily autonomy?". I responded yes, Muriel and Larry
disagreed. Their point was that the fetus has no "bodily autonomy", because
it is dependent on the mother. I responded that dependency did not preclude
autonomy. That's the point at which you joined the discussion.

I am, in fact, a believer in bodily autonomy. More so, in fact, because I
would recognize in a z/e/f a right to bodily autonomy that many pro-choicers
reject out-of-hand. However, at the same time, I hold that a non-viable
fetus'es bodily autonomy rights are inherently WEAKER than those of the
pregnant woman carrying it. So before the point of viability, my position
is pretty much indistinguishable from that of a "traditional" pro-choicer.
After viability, though, I am mostly neutral on the issue, preferring it to be 
decided by popular concensus for the most part.

>I would hope that you would understand
>the context meant by "bodily autonomy" (as opposed to "organ autonomy" or
>"tissue autonomy").

"Body" is a collective term for tissues, organs, etc., is it not? I guess
I'm missing the distinction you're trying to make here.

								- Kevin
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:57347 talk.politics.misc:69210 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13481 talk.religion.misc:27253