On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:57:14 -0400, "D.Duck" wrote:


"Eisboch" wrote in message
m...

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...


John, that pill is pretty successful at doing its job, which is to kill
a fetus. And yet, you think it should be part of any post-rape
treatment. How do you resolve these apparently opposing concepts?

Do you believe there is a "fetus" the morning after?


To me, if there was conception, then indeed, there is a fetus.

Eisboch

I was going to carry on this discussion based on the medical definition that
a "fetus" emerges at about eight weeks after conception. Prior to being a
"fetus" it's technical name is embryo.

I believe that's a pretty fine line.

But why continue, this subject is a very personal matter and has to be
resolved by each person individually. Not a subject I like to get into a
****ing contest over like some of the entries in this group.

Here's my view - one time only. It's pretty simple.

If we can describe single cell micobes as "life" in the generic sense,
it only logical to extend that definition of "life" to conception -
the conceived "life" is human because the results are a human being.
From a logic standpoint, it can't be any other way.

Essentially, if you get caught, expect conseguences of your actions -
take some responsibility for your actions - don't foist your inability
to properly protect yourself on the unborn human.

I reluctantly support choice in the case of rape, inceest or extreme
physical/mental disability - that's a personal decision and I can't
foist my opinion on anybody else in that matter.

However, abortion as a function of birth control? No.

And that's the end of this discussion. :)