csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) (08/06/85)
The following article is a response to Ken Ardnt. If you have a weak stomach for the infantile name-calling "I'm right because I am" mentality, press "n" now while you can. In article <3431@decwrl.UUCP> Ken "the man" Arndt spews: >Good ole 'Stupid' (from his cute boring sign off) Charley Forsythe Guffaw. I bet you stayed up ALL night thinking of that. Don't tax yourself, Ken. >Er, Charley (I almost said "Sorry Charley!") Cleverness! You DID, in fact say,"Sorry Charley!" and cover it over with mock restraint. We're all really impressed out here, I can tell you. >if the fetus ain't human (but IS >livin' as you seem to assent) WHAT KIND OF LIVING THING IS IT???? Moma gonna >hatch a chicken??? It's the NOW IT IS, NOW IT ISN'T game that the abortion >rights people play that makes not common sense! Hmmm. I think I sense an actual POINT! No, couldn't be... not from Ken. Just in case though: IF IT'S HUMAN, REMOVE IT FROM THE MOTHER AND LET IT GET ON WITH IT'S LIFE WHILE SHE GET'S ON WITH HERS. >"Fully human" or "Incomplete" are terms with no content! Except for what they mean. >Because no one can >define what they mean. If something doesn't have eyes, nerves, a heart, liver, kidneys, private parts (Ken's fave!), or brain (sorry Ken, you lose!) then it's not human. Now I've seen "Silent Scream", and I know that "babies" are completely formed by day two and can play chess by day three... but there's always day one. >WHATEVER a 'human' is we all seem to agree that you and I are one of those. Nobody has made such a bold assertion on your behalf. >Biology is revealing nothing if not just the very point that there is no >QUALITATIVE difference between a fetus and you and I!!!! I don't eat through a placenta. Sorry, Ken, I tried, but I can't. I also can't live under water for more than a minute, although I'd like to help you try. >Masturbation produces no life. Except what's growing on your sheets. :-) (I really couldn't help it) >Look, it's really very simple even from a moral standpoint, so simple that >only the willfully stupid can't understand it. As opposed to the unwillfully stupid who assert their bogus morality. >If I place a box of bricks >in the path of your car and you get killed because of it, I am responsible >for the taking of your life. This is not true. >We're playing the ole "would you kill a chinaman with the push of this little >button here if it gave you a million dollars and you never had to see him?" I dunno. Tax free? >WHY do people have abortions?? Just feel like one today? No, it's a problem >to them to have a child right now. "Go ahead, just lay back and let the >doctor do it for you; it's only 2 1/2 inchs long and isn't really human >some people say." A LOT of people say. >"You'll never have to see 'it'." Obviously, you have never met anybody who has had an abortion. I know someone who has, and she was shown what came out. She has decided to avoid having an abortion again. However, she is glad she had the chance to get one. >"All be so much >simplier and over in a few seconds." You're ignorance is showing. >"IT'S LEGAL!" (It used to be legal >to scalp indians - women & children too - so I can see the scalp hunter's >defense. Haven't we heard the 'scalp hunter's defense from the abortion >rights crowd?) Thank God it is no longer legal to force women to give birth like so much cattle. >Pro abortion people, like Charley, are left trying to defend an absurd >position that has to define a point at which the living child BECAME a >living child at some 'magical mystical' point in it's development. It is ignorant shmucks like yous who see anything magical or mystical involved in this debate. >Science shows that it's the same child before 'birth' >during 'birth' and after 'birth'. I refuse to believe that you were this obnoxious as a fetus. >Only the motives of the woman attempt >to give difference. "I'm having a baby/abortion." It is no quirk of >thought that some have said we should defer giving 'human' status to >newborns until a few days after birth when we know that they are healthy. You're right, it IS a new development. And someday, it will be a new development that we can remove a developing fetus from a woman and bring it to term. Until then... >A WOMAN HAS A RIGHT TO AN ABORTION BECAUSE I WANT THE RIGHT TO GET RID >OF THIS PROBLEM!! All the rest is smoke. If this value system prevails >don't complain when they come for YOU. Oh fuck off. What does that mean? -- Charles Forsythe CSDF@MIT-VAX "You are a stupid fool." -Wang Zeep "I'm not a fool!" -The Hated One