From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject: Re: Shameless attack on pro-choicers in general!
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:13:28 GMT

In article <tgreen.712383496@pv1788.vincent.iastate.edu> tgreen@iastate.edu (Todd Greenfield) writes:
>In <1992Jul29.032349.15036@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp) writes:
>
>>In article <adams.712339545@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>>chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (Steve Chaney | Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.0 ) writes:
>
>>[much rational response to irrational questions deleted]
>
>>>>11) Would rather have human fetal testing?  
>>>This is a tougher question, to which I don't have an answer.
>
>>Steve Adams, I don't understand why fetal testing is different that corpse
>>testing. If the fetus is dead, what is the problem? Do you find testing on
>>dead adults reprehensable? There is much to be gained by studying and using
>>the tissue of a dead fetus that would otherwise rot.
>                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>                             or maybe be born & be allowed to live.

Notice I didn't specify aborted fetuses. There are lots of fetus out there
available for testing that weren't aborted. Even so, testing on an aborted 
fetus isn't going to prevent it from being aborted. For that matter, 
passing laws restricting abortion won't either.  That is reality and
nothing we say here is going to change that.

Abortion and fetal testing are two issues which are quite easily separated.
Can you come up with a reason why dead fetuses that weren't aborted 
shouldn't be used in testing and for viable tissues to help living fetuses
and adults? I'm not saying there *aren't* any good reasons, I just haven't
come up with any.

>since I'm speaking up, I'd do it just once, and say what I've
>got to say:  I believe the choice is whether to conceive a
>child or not, *not* what to do with the child ("fetus") after
>it is conceived.  You've made your choice before you're 
>pregnant. 


The choice being to have sex and get pregnant or to just have sex?  People
*often* (if not mostly) have sex for any other reason than to procreate.
If you believe this is a 'wrong' thing to do, that is your business, but
you cannot expect everyone to follow your personal moral decisions.
In light of that, there are *going* to be unwanted pregnancies and that
is reality.  Now to deal with the reality.


>If you can't live with that, don't have sex. period.
>end of discussion :-)

This is unreasonable.

Unfortunately, it is only the end of your *input* on the subject; the 
discussion goes on whether you decide to add your opinions which is
unfortunate, becuase you might be that person that is able to enlighten
the rest of us to something we hadn't thought of.  If you stop speaking,
the Steve Chaneys of the world will have your point crushed under a mile
of garbage.


-- 
David Knapp                                      University of Colorado, Boulder
Highly Opinionated, Aging  and                      knapp@spot.colorado.edu
Perpetual Student of Chemistry and Physics.
            Write me for an argument on your favorite subject.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:29520 alt.politics.homosexuality:5238