Cobol - Re: More on avortion, children, human, life, etc (was: OT

Author

Re: More on avortion, children, human, life, etc (was: OT - "lie" vs "

William M. Klein

2005-04-22, 8:55 am

"LX-i" <lxi0007@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:9cf77$4268586a$45491db9$1545@KNOLOG
Y.NET...
> docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
<snip>[color=darkred]
>
> From Merriam-Websters Medical Dictionary 2002...
>
> : an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic
> structural plan of its kind; specifically : a developing human from usually
> three months after conception to birth
>
> "A developing human"
>
> I realize that you're not going to be convinced of that - God Himself could
> appear to you in a blazing smoke, and you'd say "But it's not a child until
> it's born!" But, realize that you are also never going to convince me that
> it's not - so, these asides are not the best use of time on behalf of either
> of us.
>

So, do you agree with that definition and agree that abortion of "thingies" (aka
foetus) before 3 months of gestation is OK?

...

Assuming you don't (or do) agree with the above, do you agree that the CURRENT
status - as stated by the Supreme Court in the US is that abortion during
"early" (whatever that means) stages of gestation is NOT "murder" and that,
therefore, as far as the current understanding of the "government" these are not
"humans" (children)?

***

Again, I don't think any of us will "convince" others of basic terminology
changes. However, it is MY understanding that you believe that the "unborn"
(at least at some stage) are "human children" and that I do NOT believe this to
be true - but am AWFULLY happy that I will never be gestating a
"pre-birth-thing-that will/might-become human" - and I won't even be the sperm
donor toward such a thing/person. Therefore, the "ultimate" decision (whether
legal or not) is VERY unlikely ever to be mine.

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com

Sponsored Links