From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: When is a fetus not a person?
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 02:49:37 GMT

In article <C1FtDt.J1z@news.cso.uiuc.edu> parker@ehsn17.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker) writes:
>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>
>>In article <1993Jan24.212831.10859@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>>>In article <1993Jan24.164230.23254@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>>>In article <1993Jan24.052258.14213@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>>>>>In article <1993Jan24.012006.20871@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>>>>>In article <1993Jan23.182348.7135@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>>>>>>>In article <C19H86.886@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cobb@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Mike Cobb) writes:
>>>>>>>>All they want to do is say that if a woman goes 
>>>>>>>>into labor at 9 months and then decides while the baby is still inside 
>>>>>>>>her that she doesn't want it she can kill it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>as for your last statement, kindly show where any pro-choicer have
>>>>>>>made such a statement. Or retract it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Many Extremist pro-choicers have proudly announced that they support
>>>>>>abortion "at any time, for any reason", Mark. That certainly seems to
>>>>>>cover the hypothetical which Mr. Cobb presented.
>>>>>>
>>>>>No Kebbin. Work on your reading skills. He quite specifically is
>>>>>talking about an abortion performed during a full term labor.
>>>>
>>>>That falls under "at any time", does it not?
>>>>
>>>Back to living ini your fantasy world again, aren't you Kebbin? or is
>>>this just another attempt by you to argue in favor of abortion
>>>restrictions? Certainly, at any time means exactly that. 
>
>>Okay, so by logical deduction,
>>If
>>	Pro-choicer X supports the right of a woman to abort "at any time"
>>And
>>	"During labor" qualifies under "at any time"
>
>Not even *you* can be THAT rediculous.  Technically, and out of context,
>"at any time" also includes years after birth.  Most people don't consider
>it to be "abortion" at that point.

I interpret "at any time" in the context in which it has been posted, as 
"at any time during pregnancy". 

You and I can speculate till the cows come home what exactly is meant by
"at any time". The ultimate clarification must come from those who profess 
this viewpoint. Cathi? Linda? Susie? Care to speak up?

>It is not really for you to say what someone *else* means by a simplified
>statement of their position.

Given my current provisional understanding of "at any time", and a little 
deduction, I think there are some pro-choicers here who would allow abortion 
during labor without there being any demonstrable threat to the mother's life. 
At the same time, of course, I'm willing to _change_ that view on the basis of 
further clarification of the term "at any time". Live and learn.

>You would also do well to notice:
>#############################################################################
>In article <C19H86.886@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cobb@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Mike Cobb) w
>rites:
>That would make the arguments significantly tougher.  BUt, I am at least open
>to the idea, strange as it may seem to some, that abortion is ok up to 14 days,
>or implantation.  I know, though, that no one would want to take the debate
>down to those fourteen days.  All they want to do is say that if a woman goes
>into labor at 9 months and then decides while the baby is still inside her that
>she doesn't want it she can kill it.
>#############################################################################
>
>You can see from the complete context (ok, *more* complete) that Mike is
>trying to imply that *all* pro-choicers (non-pro-lifers actually) would
>support "abortion" durring labor.  Although there may be a few people who
>would support that, it is hardly true of *most* pro-choice people.  Claiming
>a few extreem examples is far from showing it the case for *everyone* as was
>claimed.

Do you interpret "they" in that last sentence as "all pro-choicers; every
last one of them"?

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.religion.misc