From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject: Re: Flogging an Undecided (formerly: The Disease is Cropping...)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 01:26:13 GMT

In article <73855@netnews.upenn.edu> kwelch@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Mr. President) writes:
>Ron
>>Kevin B.
>>>Judi
>>>I have explained my usage of "pro-death" before.  It is not intended as an
>>>unprovoked "stab" but as an eye-opener to those who refer to Pro-Life
>>>people as Anti-Abortion.  The fetus' are unquestionably "slaughtered".  So
>>>I guess you're referring to my saying "babies" as "emotional".
>
>>IYHO
>
>>BTW, unprovoked or not, it is still a deliberate emotional stab. How
>>is Anti-Abortion an emotioanl stab?
>
>Hey, call me Anti-Abortion if you want.  Call me Pro-Life if you want.
>I'm both.  You're Pro-Abortion.  You are for the existence of abortion;
>you're pro-abortion.


You are *really* missing the point. If that person was pro-abortion, don't
you think they'd *tell* you?

After you go around telling women what they are "really" thinking when they get 
an abortion, I guess I should expect nothing less.

Personally, I am pro-choice. If nobody wants an abortion, heck, they shouldn't
have one. If they want one, let them have it. I don't care either way.

I AM NOT FOR THE EXISTENCE OF ABORTION. And no matter how often, or how
adamently you tell people what they are "really" for, you will not change 
them. They know, better than you, what they are 'for'.

>>>If it walks, talks, acts like a duck ...
>
>>Gee, you've seen a fetus walk, talk, act????????
>
>I've seen one act.  I've seen one move about. 


Sperm move. Big deal.


> Seen a new baby walk?
>Seen a new baby talk?  I haven't.  But hey, they're not persons either;

Walk and talk are today's criteria for personhood?


>let's legalize infanticide now....there NOT persons...

*You* are the one claiming they're not persons, not the pro-choice people.
I think they make *fine* persons. They can think. Their brains *work*.
An 8 week fetal brain does not work.

I am *still* waiting for a response to the questions about that issue and the
issue of potentiality implying inalienable human rights.


>>At 8 weeks, it's not much more than a blob.
>
>No, at about 10 days it's pretty much a blob.  At 8 weeks, it looks pretty
>human...maybe that's...because it IS human.  I dunno, Judi.  What do you
>think?  Is the fetus human?
>


If you think an 8 week fetus looks like a human, you are out of the discussion
as far as I am concerned. An 8 week fetus looks just the same as any other 
mammal at that age.  If you were available, we could put up a dozen pictures
of different mammals at 8 weeks, and you would not be able to tell me which 
was which.

>>>>When a man loves a woman, he supports her right to choose.
>>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ drivel alert
>
>>Actually a true statement.
>
>Actually, sentimental bullshit. 


You make quite a few sentimental appeals yourself. Who are you to judge?


> (Come on, Michael Bolton, sing it with
>me while we sit on the dock at the bay.)
>
>"When a man loves a woman, he supports her right to choose."
>
>Scraaaaaaaaaatch  <static>  <bleeeep>
>

Logic?


>Michael:	Kevin, that tune just doesn't work right.
>Kevin:		Well, is it the music, Michael.
>Michael:	Somethin' about the lyrics.
>Kevin:		How about the following change:  "When a man loves a woman,
>		spend his very last dime."
>
>I wrote that line actually.  
>

What does it have to do with this subject?


>When a man loves a woman, he loves everything that comes with her and that
>they do together; they are, afterall, together as one flesh, one body
>(Hamlet).  Everything they make is both of theirs.  If a man loves a woman,
>he loves her and her child.
>

They make feces together. Wonderful. Should they adore each others sputum?

>If a man loves a woman, he loves life.
>

Sure. Then live. Live and let live. Let animals live. Let plants live.
Let us live (quit polluting our air).


Big deal? A man loving a woman implies 'loving life'? Isn't that rather a 
generalization?

Which life?  Plants? Animals? Fetal tissue?

You are not even using *rhetoric* well. Nobody is convinced. 


There is no logic. When we discuss these things, and we get to the end of
the issue, when *you have* to agree logically with something, you literally
say "let's end this" and you walk away. 

You are trying to change the status quo and you will have to do better than
this.



-- 

**************************************************************************
Corrected .sig for those who did not see the absurdity of the original one.
**************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity