From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: repost
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 18 Aug 92 19:11:40 GMT

In <1992Aug18.124155.987@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:

>Much as it may look like I am following up my own post, I am actually
>following up a post I made for Peter.

And, who knows, I may have to do some following up to my own post.  Finally
I get to see the Distribution line, and it said "uscar" (local), and I 
erased it and typed in "world".  Hope it finally works.

>In article <1992Aug18.122206.650@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
>}I got this note in my mailbox, and am reposting it intact, so the
>}attribution lines remain somewhat intact.  You should regard this as
>}coming from Peter.  I have not edited it or anything.

>While I did write the above, the following words (demarked with lines 
>beginning with the "}" character) are those of Peter Ny.

>}I tried to post this follow-up, but something is wrong with my network
>}server, so I'm mailing it to you personally via e-mail.  Your comments
>}appreciated.
>}
>}In <1992Aug10.011014.5711@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:

>}>What we face, when the rhetoric and fluff is removed, is a set of
>}>laws or regulations which would affect (by biological necessity)
>}>females alone. 

>}A textbook case of begging the question.  Approximately one-half
>}of all fetuses are male.

>I suppose you could see it this way.  My textbooks all conclude that
>females (alone) get pregnant and it is only females who request
>abortion.  I can agree with the "textbook case" part of your statement,
>but I hardly was "begging the question."  (I have enough of my own without
>having to resort to begging, thank you.)

"Begging the question" is a rather specialized term.  It means that you
assume a certain point has been established when in fact it has not.
In this case, the "certain point" is that "female" is a term not applicable
to Homo Sapiens in utero.  Although I've heard many arguments (most of them
in bad faith) that fetuses are not human, this is the first time I've 
run across the idea that fetuses are neither male nor female.

>}>"Ah Love, could thou and I with Fate conspire,
>}> to grasp this sorry Scheme of things entire
>}> Would not we shatter it to bits--and then
>}> Re-mould it nearer to the Heart's Desire?"
>}>                       - Fitzgerald, rather loosely translating from
>}>                         Omar

>}I too am a fan of Fitzgerald.  

>Perhaps you assume too much when you say "too."  I am not a fan of 
>Fitzgerald.

Point well taken.  I stand corrected.  

>  There are
>many who contend that Fitzgerald's translation had little to do
>with Omar, except serve as inspiration.

This is my understanding too.

>In <1992Aug8.145011.7837@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU 
>(Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:

>}>In article <Aug08.050616.50240@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> 
>}>sa114984@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU (Steven Arnold) writes:

>}>Uh, Steve, a lot of pro-choice folks would consider legal as included
>}>in safe. 

>}Not before 1967, they did not.  

>I was there.  I was pro-choice then.  I considered then, as I do now, that
>legal would be included in safe.  I had the same feelings in '66, '65, '64,
>'63, etc.  Of course, if you go back far enough, I can't claim to be
>a counter example.  Then I'll get a note from my mother...

You left out the rationale for the statement.  I'll admit "they" is 
an exaggeration and accept your claim that you are an exception.  I still
say that a strong selling point was that 
the overwhelming majority of illegal abortions were very safe.  
In fact they were safer than all too many abortions today, since
abortionists have much less to fear from a botched abortion today.

Peter Nyikos