XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.religion, alt.religion.christian, alt.support.abortion   
   XPost: talk.abortion, talk.atheism   
   From: tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk   
      
   On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 20:29:20 +0200, "Warnock"    
   wrote:   
      
   >   
   >"Thomas P."  wrote in message   
   >news:fi4d30tggd9uttev0f8v5p8ck4qe2u3kt6@4ax.com...   
   >   
   >   
   >> >****** Let's be fair, if there are two people and you have a split vote -   
   >> >how do you resolve it? There's no intrinsic reason why the woman should   
   >have   
   >> >the casting vote,   
   >>   
      
   >> Of course there is.  She is the one who is directly affected.   
   >   
      
   >****** The husband is also very affected!   
      
   Please try to be a little honest.  It is quite clear that the pregnant   
   woman is the one who is directly affected.  She has quite a bit more   
   at stake than the man does.  It is her body not his.  It is her   
   decision not his.   
      
      
   >   
   >> >nor the man. So we have to allow 'right action' to have   
   >> >the casting vote.   
   >>   
   >> There is no such person as "right action".   If the woman does not   
   >> agree with the man, she is the one who has the most at stake and   
   >> should be the one who decides.   
   >   
      
   >****** That's a selfish attitude!   
      
   Nonsense.   
      
      
      
      
      
   Thomas P.   
      
   None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.   
   "But he has got nothing on," said a little child.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)