From: datepper@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Aaron Tepper)
Subject: Re: Let me state my view
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:16:48 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.201750.18369@ncsu.edu>, jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu
(JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes:
>In article <1993Jan8.025210.9017@Princeton.EDU>,
>datepper@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Aaron Tepper) writes:
>|>In article <1993Jan7.233902.5458@ncsu.edu>, jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu
>|>(JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes:
>|>
>|>> 1. A fetus is a human being were as life begins at conception...you
>|>>    can't prove otherwise so it must be true.
>|>Have you been to alt.folklore.urban lately? Just wondering. Now prove
>|>to me that a fetus is a human being. Go ahead. I'll wait.
>My corollary is that you can't prove that a fetus isn't...Are you
>willing to kill 1.5 million lives each year just because there is
>no proof that they are alive....?
Yes--we don't know if z/e/f's are alive, but we _do_ know that women
are alive, sentient, and functional. Hence, women's rights should
take precedence over z/e/f's.

>|>> 2. A person has a right to do whatever they wish so long as they
>|>>    don't
>|>>    infringe upon another person...now the baby is using the body of
>|>>    the mother we can say it may be removed...BUT...this will result
>|>>    in the death of the fetus. So the lesser of the 2 evils must be
>|>>    followed and the life of the fetus is more imp. than the choice
>|>>    of the mother...in the event of life threating situation bla
>|>>    bla bla bla... [sorry, I couldn't take it anymore]
>|>
>|>First off, _why_ is the life of the fetus more important than that of
>|>the mother? That is something that no one has ever satisfactorily
>|>explained to me. Secondly, since when is a fetus a person?
>|>
>Of course you so convienently bla..bla...bla out the part in which I
>dealt
>with the valuse of the mothers life(we see only what we want?) I stated
>that when a mothers life is threatened it is a personal choice because
>both lives are equal and no one has a "right" to say who lives and who
>dies.
Nope, both lives are not equal. A woman has been alive for at least
twelve years. A fetus is not quite living and may not survive to   
term. Seems like you devalue women's lives when you compare the two.

>|>> 3. Conclusion...abortion by todays standards is murder and must seen
>|>>    as such with the penalty required by law imposed on both the
>|>>    doctor and mother expect in above said case of threatening.
>|>The penalty for murder is execution. By your standard, you would send
>|>two people to their deaths to save the life of one fetus. At the same
>|>time, I've gotten flak for suggesting that we should salvage what we
>|>could from an anencephalic baby who will never have a life to speak of
>|>and use organ transplants to save five or more already established
>|>lives.
>I am against the death penalty like a said but where did that go? More
>convienent editing? 20 years in prison would do the job.
At least you're consistent about your oppostion to death (although
I still have to give you the fruitarian test :-) ). But don't you
think prisons are crowded enough already? How will we fit millions
of doctors and women into those things? There's got to be a better
way.

>|>>    Somalia OK because we are trying to save
>|>>    lives even if we do end up killing a few...The same with abortion
>|>>    of course a few women will die perfoming illegal abortions but we
>|>>    will save many more.
>|>
>|>So we _can_ save lives if we do end up killing a few. That means we
>|>can
>|>use that anencephalic baby after all? Thanks! Many organ recipients
>|>will cry your name from the rooftops!
>|>
>Question? is this anencephalic baby on total life support...brain
>dead..and have no chance of living off life support you answer is yes.

You've already opened the door to sacrificing human lives with your
example of Somalia. As near as I can figure from an earlier thread, the
baby did indeed have no brain. But even if it didn't, so what? You
apparently have no qualms about giving up one life to save many.

Except, probably, when it's _your_ body. Then you probably think, "Hey
whoa! I need that liver and those corneas! Give 'em back!"

>|>And if we could use fetal tissue to perform medical experiments that
>|>could save thousands, nay millions, of lives... are you _sure_
>|>you're anti-abortion?
>You can use fetal tissue from still-borns or miscarriages provided the
>would have been parents agree...
>
>I said abortion should be illegal...

And you're suffering from terminal contradiction. Now go away and
learn how to proofread a post.

Tep
-- 
I don't need you to worry for me 'cause I'm all right | Dear Lord, give
I don't want you to tell me it's time to come home.   | me chastity... 
I don't care what you say anymore, this is my life.   |    but not yet.
Go ahead with your own life, leave me alone. --B. Joel| --St. Augustine
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:55373 alt.abortion.inequity:6405