🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <35D7E5CA.4E56@echidna.stu.cowan.edu.au>,
username@echidna.stu.cowan.edu.au wrote:

> REP wrote:
> > 
> > In article <6r7qce$7ad$1@ionews.ionet.net>, "Samantha"
<halls@ionet.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > Abortion  =   an inconvienient child
> > 
> > No. Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. No child involved, unless
> > it is a child who is pregnant and terminating her pregnancy.
> > 
> > --
> > "I think of myself as a person who will eat your lunch one day."
> > - Ralph "Goldilocks" Taite to REP in <4ultck$m2o@panix2.panix.com>
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Rep,
> 
> You say that an abortion doesn't involve a 'child', yet science, not
> religion, not anyone else's beliefs but the fact of science itself has
> concluded that life begins at conception.(Research it) So whather you
> want to call it a foetus, a blastocyst, a child or a person it is life,
> not some magical concept which can be killed off. 


And yet, 75-80% of those 'lives' will not reach the stage of implantation.
Your 'fact' that 'life begins at conception' is NOT proven, and many
people, even some antiabortionists, feel that until implantation there is
no pregnancy.

>Just because you hear
> that a person died on the news without seeing the actual event itself
> doesn't mean that they did not die. Could you watch an abortion?

Seen thousands. There's nothing to see, except a little blood going up a
clear tube and some undiscernible mush in a cotton suction filter bag. 

Since you've obviouly never been present at an abortion, it's clearly the
lies and myths spun by antiabortionists that feed your squeamishness.

-- 
Remove 'funky' to mail me.

'Caution: cape does not enable wearer to fly.' 
                           -actual Batman costume tag