From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Subject: Re: Right to Kill (was Re: Cough Man's hypocrisy)
Organization: California State University Sacramento
Distribution: world 
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:00:56 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.001120.13056@advtech.uswest.com> steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak) writes:
>
>That's IT.  I'm getting a lobotomy and a bible so I can SAVE THE WORLD
>from the CRETINS that want women to be FREE TO CONTROL THEIR OWN
>BODIES!!!

Wow! <Clap> <Clap> <Clap> <Clap> Bravo! Bravo! Devastating speech!

Gee, I know some friends who want to be able to use marijuana as a
recreational item, in the privacy of their own homes, where no one
else can see them. They aren't hurting anyone as long as they smoke
pot at home. Besides, we get worse air in LA, right?  

Could you put your money where your mouth is, and get the message
across to America that these people ought to be, in your exact words,
FREE TO CONTROL THEIR OWN BODIES ? 

If "right to control one's own body" were so absolute and powerful a
defense, Steve Novak, you would be able to take up the war against the
AntiDrugUseFascists and help legalize marijuana, and America would
agree with you. 

REALITY CHECK: This argument is not half as solid as it looks, and
there are clearly MAJOR instances which contradict it, and if you
TRIED to push it as even RESEMBLING a general principle, you would
never again be acceptable in civilized society. No sensible politician
would support you. Well, few.  


Now, if the right to control one's own body is not guaranteed on
things that _aren't_ harmless to others, what in the hell makes YOU
think that where CLEAR HARM is present, "control of one's own body" is
going to hold? "Control of one's own body" is one argument that the
pro-aborts, can do better to forego and file in the trash heap. It's
no more workable for you, than it is for marijuana users. (And unlike
Clinton, I never go anywhere near marijuana.)  



=============================================================================
>##       "My logic is based on ... a religious perspective which says
>##  that personhood begins at birth (actually a month after birth if
>##  we want to be precise)..."
>##    -- Gloria Feldt,
>##       chief executive, Planned Parenthood of Central and Northern Arizona

>##   "I see nothing extreme or reprehensible about this statement."
>##     -- garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) <BtnDAw.Iwo.2@cs.cmu.edu>
=============================================================================
|Pro-Contraception   Pro-Freedom of Religion, Speech & Sexual Orientation   |
|Pro-Privacy    Pro-Humanism   Pro-Freedom of Choice 	Registered Democrat | 
|                                                                           |
|			Card-carrying member, NRLC                          |
|           Dedicated to achieving civil rights for the unborn              |
=============================================================================
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. 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion