sofo@ihuxm.UUCP (Terry Bermes) (10/12/84)
Regarding the statement "...the fetus is a part of the mother.."
A fetus is WITHIN the mother. A newborn child is no more viable than
the fetus. It must be fed and cared for whether by the mother or a surrogate.
The child is totally dependant and yet his/her humanity is never questioned.
Maybe those who were too late for an abortion should be allowed to kill the
child after birth?
We are talking about stages in the development of a human being. A newborn is not as fully developed as an adult, yet his/her humanity is not denied. The
unborn child is another stage in this development but certainly no less of a
human being.
There is an apparent hangup with the presence in the womb.
Out of sight, out of mankind?
Terry Bermesdaver@hp-pcd.UUCP (daver) (10/20/84)
> A fetus is WITHIN the mother. A newborn child is no more viable than >the fetus. It must be fed and cared for whether by the mother or a surrogate. The key word above is surrogate. An unwanted child can be given up for adoption, assuming the child is adoptable (there are a lot of children waiting for adoption - that's what orphanages are about). When medical technology advances to the stage where a fetus can be safely transplanted we may see a large number of pre-birth adoptions where the fetus is carried to term by the surrogate mother. Until that time it is not valid to equate a fetus with a newborn child. Dave Rabinowitz hplabs!hp-pcd!daver