XPost: talk.politics, alt.law-enforcement, alt.true-crime   
   XPost: talk.philosophy.humanism   
      
   >>   
   >   
   > "Ivan Gowch"  wrote in message   
   > news:0jpetvgdn5hdlgdp6kgvagjr428svve0kp@4ax.com...   
   > > On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 20:43:53 GMT,  wrote:   
   > >   
   > > ==>Thanks. So, if I understand you correctly, you believe that the   
   mother   
   > still   
   > > ==>could do anything she wants with the neonate   
   > > ==>but that, in your view, some things she might do would be wrong. Is   
   > that   
   > > ==>correct?   
   > >   
   > > That's a tough one.  I would have a lot of trouble   
   > > with a woman who gave birth to a live, healthy,   
   > > viable baby, but who then ordered the delivering   
   > > doctor to kill him/her before the umbilical cord   
   > > was severed.   
   > >   
   > > I suspect that there ae damn few women   
   > > who would even contemplate such a thing, and few   
   > > doctors who would comply.   
   > >   
   > > And since this scenario is virtually unheard of, I   
   > > don't think we need waste much debating time on it.   
   > >   
   > > --   
   > >  Laws are sometimes enacted to deal with situations that occur very   
   rarely.   
   > The international laws against holocausts come to mind.   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)