XPost: talk.politics, alt.law-enforcement, alt.true-crime   
   XPost: talk.philosophy.humanism   
   From: spam@hotmail.com   
      
   Don Swayser wrote:   
   >   
   > David V. wrote:   
   >   
   >> Don Swayser wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> under_the_bridge wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> golddodgearies@yahoo.com (golddodgearies) wrote   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> supertroll47@xmsg.com (under_the_bridge) wrote   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> My recomendation is to have abortions within   
   >>>>>> the first three months of pregnancy.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Doesn't prove it's not murder, dum-dum. (The   
   >>>>> parents prove it is.)   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It doesn't prove anything.  That was just my   
   >>>> recommendation.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Is it a greater sin to abort an unwanted fetus, or   
   >>>> to have an unwanted child which you may not   
   >>>> financially and personally be able to care for?   
   >>>   
   >>> Unwanted by whom. There's a long waiting lists for   
   >>> adoptions.   
   >>   
   >> Where? In California most adoptions are coming from   
   >> overseas.   
   >>   
   > Yes, because American girls are killing their unborn   
   > babies, so American's who want to adopt are forced into   
   > it.   
      
   That is not true. You really should study up on the topic   
   before you make inane remarks like that.   
      
   >>>> Since the question is partially concerned with the   
   >>>> will of the fetus, it is close to unanswerable.   
   >>>> What does the baby want?  A similar question is one   
   >>>> of euthanasia.  Should we kill poor people if their   
   >>>> lives are miserable?   
   >>>   
   >>> Seems two entirely different situations. If a   
   >>> chile[sic] is unwanted it should be surrendered for   
   >>> adoption....   
   >>   
   >> How are you going to adopt over a million babies a   
   >> year?   
   >>   
   > Do this....   
      
   You didn't answer the question. An internet search is not   
   going to get over a million babies adopted, nor will it   
   point to a solution.   
      
   >>>> We are free to make choices.  Should murder be   
   >>>> legal? The death penalty is.  The fetus, if it   
   >>>> feels itself to be murdered, simply has no   
   >>>> recourse.  But then, killing a killer is not much   
   >>>> recourse in my opinion. Two wrongs do not make a   
   >>>> right.  All you do when you "punish" someone is   
   >>>> destroy not one, but two people.   
   >>>   
   >>> Falacious[sic] premise and conclusion drawn from it.   
   >>> You (society) don't destroy two people. The killer   
   >>> has destroyed one. Destroying the destroyer prevent   
   >>> him or her from destroying another human life. That's   
   >>> the principal justification for the death penalty.   
   >>   
   >> No, it isn't. Revenge is the main goal of capital   
   >> punishment.   
   >>   
   > Then why isn't Susan Smith and Andrea Yates on death row?   
      
   Revenge. Duh!   
      
   >>> Another is deterence[sic]....   
   >>   
   >> It isn't a deterrent.   
   >   
   > Oh? How do you know.   
      
   By having studied the subject.   
      
   --   
   David V.   
   Yosemite Llama Ranch   
      
   UDP for WebTV   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)