soc.women

On Aug 11, 4:24 pm, elcoy...@ (Paul Anderson) wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 09:00:55 -0700, "yarr...@ "
>
> wrote:
>
> .....
>
> >Actually, that depends on what you include/exclude from defintion of
> >abortion. If the pregnant woman is murdered and the unborn dies, how
> >is that death any different from an abortion in a clinic? As I recall,
> >there are laws on the book that make that a double murder. So, while
> >such a death is not called an abortion, I see no difference as in both
> >cases the same kind of organism dies and see no logical reason not to
> >call it one. It seems that you do, but will you tell me what it is?
>
> An induced abortion is the act of a woman terminating her pregnancy.
>
> The crimes you are talking about take place against the wishes of the
> woman, and generally include the death of the woman.

So, anything that is against the wishes of a woman is a crime?
Everything that is the wish of a woman is legal? Since when does
wishing determine what is a crime and what isn't? If I wish to rob a
bank, does that stop it from being a crime?

>
> The reason you cannot see a difference is that you cannot see a
> pregnant woman as being a human being with the basic human right of
> bodily autonomy.

As shown above, you are wrong. Wishing is not a basis on which to
create legality.
If you create that kind of legal precedent, then I have a few wishes
that I want to make legal too.

>
> The proposed law is of the same mindset as you: a pregnant woman is
> not a human being allowed to choose how her body will be used. She
> is, instead, a slave, owned by both the fetus and the 'father' of the
> fetus. She loses her basic human rights once she becomes pregnant.
>
> Since you cannot understand that a woman is a human being -- no, it is
> not possible to get you to understand the difference.

This is all utter nonsense. You have no basis for making your claims.
Do you realize how ridiculous yoru statements here sound?