Re: Sobran's thoughts on baby killing
- From: Rumpelstiltskin <PleaseDoNotReplyByEmail@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 01:47:58 GMT
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 12:56:48 -0800, El Castor
>Gary James <gnajmes43@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:02:08 GMT, Rumpelstiltskin
>>>On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 08:06:26 -0500, Gary James <gnajmes43@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>The Reactionary Utopian
>>>> November 8, 2005
>>>>WORDS OF CHOICE
>>>>by Joe Sobran
>>>> A leading abortion advocate, Kate Michelman, says
>>>>that if it had been up to Judge Samuel Alito, she might
>>>>not have been allowed, many years ago, to have the baby
>>>>she was carrying killed. As you may know by now, Alito
>>>>once ruled in favor of a law requiring that a married
>>>>woman get her husband's consent before aborting.
>>> We had a Proposition #73 on the recent election. It
>>>lost, but was close. It said that an underage girl had to
>>>get her parents' consent before having an abortion.
>>>As noted, the count was close, and the proposition might
>>>well have passed except that a fetus was referred to it as
>>>an "unborn child", which would be the first time in
>>>California law that a fetus was called a child. That term
>>>really got people's attention, as a backdoor way for the
>>>fundies to impose their opinions on State law.
>>Wasn't that guy, Scott Peterson, who killed his wife and their fetus
>>charged with a double murder ? That was in CA. I cannot
>>understand how in the same state it is (a) OK to flush it down the
>>drain if you are a woman, but (b) it is murder, if you are a man.
>>They could at least be consistent.
>I have mixed feelings on abortion, but that one is easy to explain.
>A. A woman considers the alternatives and chooses to have an abortion.
>B. A woman is pregnant and intends to have the baby, and along comes
>some guy and punches her in the stomach. The baby is dead, and the
>woman still alive. It does seem like something more than simple
>assault just happened.
I feel pretty much the same way, though I can't justify my
feelings and still feel I'm being consistent. A fetus is a baby
or not a baby. Its status before it died doesn't depend on
how it died.
>>I personally believe that the fetus is the property of both man and
>That's not the way your fellow liberals look at it.
I agree with Gary, personally. I've gotten raked over the
coals in this newsgroup for suggesting that view. That's
assuming the fertilization was consensual, of course.
>interesting conundrum for you which was true several years ago and
>probably still is. If a married man went to Kaiser and asked for a
>vasectomy, they wouldn't do it without the written permission of his
>wife. If the wife wanted to have her tubes tied, no permission was
>>It's sort of like a tree growing on my property line. It
>>belongs to both me and my neighbor. I am legally free to cut my half
>>down. But if that results in the death of my neighbors half, then
>>I'm up s--- creek. That's the way it should be with a fetus. If a
>>woman kills her partners half, she should do prison time just like
>>Scott is doing.
>>Just a thought.
>Nah, be reasonable. She may not even know who the father is, and
>besides the father doesn't have to risk his life and health lugging
>around the baby for 9 months -- and if he walks out on the mother to
>be, there is a 99% chance she is going to spend the next 18 years
And the father is probably going to be paying for it. yet he
has no say in the matter but she does? It's inconvenient
to see things that way, granted, but convenience, while it
must be a consideration in action, never makes truth.
> I do think that before a woman gets an abortion it would
>be best to notify the father so the father could discuss it with her,
>but that's the extent of it. I recall being in high school when in
>walks this idiot and announces that he is a father. How would you like
>to be the 15 year old girl that he got pregnant and have him announce
>that he was going to require her to have the baby? In this case, she
>and her parents must have decided it was the best thing to do, and
>good for them, but I sure wouldn't want some 16 year old guy who
>couldn't keep his pants zipped making that decision.
Assuming he didn't rape her or deceive her, it takes two to
>"Arguing on UseNet is like competing in the Special
>Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded."
- Re: Sobran's thoughts on baby killing
- From: Rumpelstiltskin
- Re: Sobran's thoughts on baby killing
- Prev by Date: Re: Sobran's thoughts on baby killing
- Next by Date: Re: Too Much Equal Time, We Didn't Mean That At All!
- Previous by thread: Re: Sobran's thoughts on baby killing
- Next by thread: Re: Sobran's thoughts on baby killing