From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject: Re: Life at Conception? [prev: Legal Questions]
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 04:07:35 GMT

In article <sexe7jq@Unify.Com> sean@Unify.com (Sean P. Curley) writes:
>
>>That is exactly what I want.  I do consider it a person at conception and I
>>think murder charges should be filed against any women who gets an abortion
>>- and my wife has said the same thing...
>
>[all the slams deleted]
>
>Well... Did you slam me hard enough (redundantly)?
>
>In my mind the debate over abortion comes down to whether or not the ____ is
>a zybote/fetus or a child (read human) at conception (reference my article on
>abortion in historical comparision in alt.abortion.inequity).  If it is not
>human then you can do any bloody thing you want to it (please no slams from
>animal lovers), but if it _is_ human then abortion is pre-meditated murder.

Shoot, I hate to say it, but this is a semantic issue you need to be careful
of.  Do you have a problem removing a brain dead adult from life support?
Probably not, although it is definitely a human being, it cannot be a 
person.  Same with a zygote. It is human alright, it just isn't a person.
You would probably then have no problem disconnecting it from *its* 
life support.

>You can't take your argument half way just because it gets you to where you
>want to be.  People that say the ____ is human at conception and don't consider
>abortion murder are self-serving people comming up with incomplete arguments.

Sure, its murdering tissue that is of human genetic code, but is it a person?
You really think so?  It has no functioning brain.  I need to know what your
stance is on euthanasia of brain dead bodies is.


>I do think that smoking and drinking during pregnancy should be illegal and
>should be considered child abuse.

Hear hear.  The mother should at least be denied fedarl funding to pay all
those doctor bills for FAS.


>As for spontaneous miscarriges, etc.  There is no intent of wrong doing, there
>is no "assistance" as someone mentioned so there is no crime - most crime does
>come down to _intent_.

Not involuntary manslaughter. That is quite an accurate assesment if abortion
is murder.

>As for rape, incest, etc.,  Again - if you consider it life, then consider it
>life - don't go half way...  It is incredibly regretful and unfortunate that the
>life was created in such a way and I would feel for any person in such a position,
>BUT IT IS STILL LIFE (HUMAN).

So is every cell in your body. Do you masturbate? Seriously. If you consider 
human life (not a person's life) so precious, you'd better be very careful
with all your cells. A zygote is nothing more that a very specialized group
of cells.  It can't do anything but sit there and let the DNA do its stuff
until it has developed enough.  It is about as much of a person as sperm
or egg is.

Can you refute that by listing properties of the zygote that make it more
of a person than a sperm or an egg? Listing numbers of cells is not a valid
criteria unless you can make some connection between your personhood and
the number of your cells. 

-- 
David Knapp                                      University of Colorado, Boulder
Perpetual Student                                   knapp@spot.colorado.edu
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:34009 alt.discrimination:4042