Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihnp1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihnp1!dolan
From: dolan@ihnp1.UUCP (Mike Dolan)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Abortion
Message-ID: <212@ihnp1.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 21-Feb-84 12:09:29 EST
Article-I.D.: ihnp1.212
Posted: Tue Feb 21 12:09:29 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 22-Feb-84 02:11:52 EST
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 81


Sophie,

In response to your series of articles on abortion:

It is evident that you have spent a lot of time trying to understand
the various aspects of the issue.  But before you get too far into
the remainder of your series, please respond to this question.

Given that a child is a human being at birth, what reason is there
to consider it not to be a human being before birth?  

To say that a child is not a human being at one point, and is at
another requires that ability to show that somehow this "humanness"
was added.  What is there which adds this humanness?

	Is it the birth process itself?  If so, why do we consider
	caesarean born children to be human?

	Is it the environment of the womb?  The womb is a sophisticated
	life support system that has yet to be equaled by modern
	science.  The womb provides food, oxygen, protection, warmth,
	and waste removal.  If we were to declare that being yet
	attached to the life support system of the womb made a child
	not human, why should we not say that anyone in a hospital
	with tubes attached all over for life support is not human
	either?

	Is it human form?  Then what is human form?  Your form right
	now is not that which you had when you were newborn.  Moreover,
	to declare form to be the deciding factor would be to declare
	that anyone born without arms or legs to be non-human.

	Is it brain waves?  Recognizably human brain waves have been
	detected in utero ten weeks after conception.  And that was
	with the level of sophistication of equipment available five
	years ago.  With more sophisticated equipment it is probable
	that such brain waves could be detected earlier.  How much
	earlier?  I don't know.  But if brain waves are the determining
	factor, abortion after at most ten weeks would be the killing
	of a human being.

You see, Sophie, the arguments of those against abortion are not
emotional, though there are certainly strong emotions on both sides
of the issue.  Our argument is the fundamental one that the unborn
child is a human being.  A child is a human being at birth, and
there is nothing to suggest some sort of nonhumanness-to-humanness
change prior to birth.  Therefore, an unborn child is entitled to
the same human rights as any of the rest of us.  

I am not allowed to kill you for the sake of some convenience on 
my part.  If you threaten my physical life, our society's laws of
self-defense apply and allow me to kill you.  In the same way, I
cannot take the life of an unborn child for the sake of my
convenience unless it is threatening my physical life.

Does that lead to a lot of other problems?  You bet it does!  And
our society is learning to handle them.  There are special places
that an unwed pregnant teenager can go if she needs a loving, caring
place to live while she bears her baby.  These places can remove the
feeling of stigma that our society places on such women.  And there
are other counseling, adoption, and medical services being provided
to help a woman through the trauma of rape, incest, etc.  These
services are the ones that need to be encouraged and supported.

But killing a baby does not solve a problem, it only compounds it.

So please, Sophie, before you generalize the issue of abortion as an
emotional one, consider the very rational question that I have
posed.

	If an unborn child is non-human, what is it that makes
	it a human being at birth?


Have a Good Day,
Mike Dolan
AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, IL  60566
(312)979-6767
ihnp4!ihnp1!dolan