From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject: Re: next
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 13:57:52 GMT

In article <74139@netnews.upenn.edu> kwelch@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Geisha Dawn) writes:
>David
>>>>>When you get pregnant, that's not an accident.  Something or somebody
>>>>>faulted in decision making.
>>>>But would'nt you say practically *all* "accidents", car or otherwise, are due to
>>>>a fault in decision making?
>>>I say that there is no such thing as an accident.
>
>>Ac.ci.dent, n. 1. an undesirable or unfortunate happening, unintentionally
>>caused and usually resulting in harm, injury, damage, or loss; casualty;
>>mishap *automobile accidents* (dictionary has this in italics). 
>>2. any event that happens unexpectedly, without a deliberate plan or cause.
>>Taken from the Random House Dictionary (big thick one; must be good ;-)
>
>>I have been using the above definition. That is what I condider to be an
>>'accident'.  I would say that ther *is* such a thing as an accident by
>>the above definition. You are clearly in the minority in thinking there is
>>no such thing as an accident, just judging by this morning's paper.
>
>Accident:  (My definition)
>1.	A happening that is not expected, forseen, intended.
>2.	An unpleasant and unintended happening, sometimes resulting from
>	negligence, that results in injury, loss, damage, etc.
>6.	LAW an unforseen event that occurs without anyone's fault or negligence
>
>This is from Webster's New World Dictionary (A big, thick one, too :-)
>
>Now, David.  My premiss was that there was no accident if there was fault.
>I did not say that it had to be intentional.  Your definition uses the
>word intentional:
>

It actually uses the word 'unintentional.' Your premise uses fault as a reason
to avoid the term accident.

In a car 'accident', there is usually blame allowed. Someone failed to 
check over their shoulder. They should have. They obviously did not expect
to get into the wreck. It was unforeseen, unintended, and unexpected unless
they are some kind of masochists. It was unpleasant, negligent and resulted
in injury (let's say) loss and damage.

Your def. #6 is not one I have heard of, frankly.  When I hear 'accident' 
(when those I have discussed this with hear it), we do not assume
there is not fault as there is usually someone who could have prevented it if
they were more careful.

You original assertion was there 'there is no such thing as an accident'.

b

>>unintentionally caused
>
>Whether it is unintentional is irrelevant.  I don't intend to hit anyone
>when I change lanes.  BUT, if I don't look in my mirrors, I made a fault
>in my judgment and caused a wreck that could have been avoided.
>

Your assertion was not regarding the definition per se but rather questioned
the existence of  an accident.

>My premise is that accidents occur without fault.  Such is my definition,
>reinforced by Websters.
>

According to your definiton(s), it *may*. 

>>I would also say that an unwanted pregnancy fits this description very well
>>also. It was unexpected.
>
>Sure it was.  But was someone or something to blame?
>

You may  use the word blame. Blame trojan, blame the human libido. Sure.
Pregnancy is the result of an action that someone took. 

>
>>The purpose for an abortion is to end a pregnancy. The purpose of an abortion
>>is to end a pregnancy.
>
>No, no, no.
>
>>Nobody I have spoken to about your differentiationj
>>can make sense of it.
>
>Larry suggested that I was talking about purpose OF while he was talking
>about purpose FOR.

Which still doesn't seem to matter to *anyone* but you.


>
>>Even the pro-lifers I discuss your posts with. They 
>>are in fact quite angry with you for, in their words, "making us look bad."
>
>Like who?
>

Would you like me to ask if I can publish their names?


>That's fine.  If they don't want to side with me, that's there prerogative.

You might want to ask those people who *get* abortions what their purpose
was in  getting one. Don't you think they would know more than  a bystander?



>And I don't like them any less for doing such.  I argue for myself.  I say
>things for myself.  If someone asks me to speak for him/her, I will.

You really *do* argue for yourself.


>
>Prolifers have different attitudes about method.  Be it as it may, I am more
>aggressive and not affraid to mow people in the process.
>

Aren't you areguing *against* mowing fetuses though?

>like me.  Besides, I've talked to a bunch and they seem to like me well
>enough.


I don't think the issue had anything to do with them 'liking' you.


>
>Perhaps you are lying, but I can't prove that.  If you are lying to put
>in a cheap shot and make me stop posting, well, guess again, buddy.  I
>would just assume yell obsenities at you if you are lying.
>

It is certainly not a cheap shot. It was to point out that you are not in a 
majority in your interpretation of the intent of a woman who seeks abortion.
That is all.

>(Note, if any lifer out there has something to say about me - ie "get lost,
>Kevin" type deal...let me know.  It's okay :)
>
>
That is not the issue either.


>>>Bottom line:  moral to get aid if in wreck.
>>>	       immoral (my view) and unethical to get abortion...not aid.
>
>>Both, by above definition, accidents.
>
>
>>You are correct, however. It does appear that, in your view, it is immoral
>>and unethical to get an abortion, even if it aids the ending of an unwanted
>>pregnancy.
>
>True.
>
>
>>> Of course we are all talking about human abortions here.  I
>>>have never seen a bunch of rhinos prop a female rhino up and rip out a
>>>rhino fetus in a clinic...gimmie a break.
>>>
>
>>I am not picking on semantics to be irritating, I am making sure we are talking
>>about the same things.
>
>I realize that words are important in such a debte.  But I think everyone
>knows we're talking about human abortion here, and the fate of human life.
>

Sorry, I wanted to maitain the level of articulateness.


>
-- 

**************************************************************************
Corrected .sig for those who did not see the absurdity of the original one.
**************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity