Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: TOO YOUNG TO CHOOSE
From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
Date: 4 Nov 92 18:40:00 CST
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

In article <1992Nov3.204620.2480@ncsu.edu>, jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes:
>  ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
> |>jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes ...
> |>>> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
> |>>Preventing illness- I am a firm beiliever in preventative medicine. You
> |>> should treat the problem before it arrises.Example- use birth control
> |>> so you don't get pregnant.
> |>
> |>Or use abortion so you don't give birth.
> |>
> Or use abortion to so you don't have to face the results of your actions

Hmmmm.  If a woman is impregnated, are there not at *least* two ways
to face the results of her actions?  1.  Follow through with pregnancy
2.  Obtain an abortion.  How is number 2 an example of not facing
the results of her actions?

> |>Avoid injury & hazards of birth- See above statement concerning
> |> preventative medicine (i.e., abortion)
> |>
> See above preventative medicine(i.e. birthcontrol) so as not to go
> thru the hazards of birth

You have yet to address the issue of birth control pills which prevent
implantation of fertilized eggs on the uterine lining.  What's the
primary difference between this and abortion to you?  Besides all that,
abortion *is* birth control, no matter what reason it is used for.
I suspect that you mean to refer to contraception.
 
[...]
> |>Ah, I see.  You value the life of the "baby" more than you do the
> |>mother then.  Just wanted to get clear.
> |>
> Where did I say that? I can see twisting my words but putting them in my
> mouth? that is wrong. 
> 
> I value both lives and as I've stated in an earlier post I havbe now come
> to the conclusion(although I don't like it) that if there is a choice
                    ************************
> between the mother's life and baby's life I will grant the mother an abortion
> to save her life

Why don't you like your decision to grant the mother her life rather than the
fetus'?  Would you prefer the mother died?  And why is it up to you to decide
who is "granted" an abortion, and who is not?  Do you plan to one day run
for office of some sort?

> |>Here's a clue: Everybody who was ever born started out as an
> |>unfertilized egg.
> |>
> You are missing my point! Yes that is true but you are not dening life
> if that egg is not fertilized 

If one denies an egg fertilization by abstaining from sex or using
contraception, one is obviously denying life.  Without fertilization,
there will be no life.  Denying fertilization denies life.

>you are denying life if you abort a baby.

No babies can be aborted.  This is not talk.infanticide.

> |>>I am by no means superior to a woman I feel everyone is equal. But this
> |>>also includes the life of the child.
> |>
> |>So for that reason you feel justified in stealing the woman's uterus
> |>and giving it to the fetus to use for nine months?
> |>
> I didn't steal it she gave the fetus permission when she had sex.

Why?  What makes you think that?  The woman *may* have given the man permission
to ejaculate inside of her vagina, but there is no fetus at that point 
in existance, therefore no permission could possibly be granted.
 
Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,uiuc.general,uiuc.politics