>>We are talking about a procedure much more akin to the removal of unwanted/unviable flesh from a woman's body, to assess it from a purely medical point of view.
I would love to hear this said to Gianna, the aborted fetus that lived to tell of her story. How can we call, something two people have partaked in creating "unwanted/unviable flesh"? The problem is, that piece of flesh has a soul, has nerve endings, can feel pain, can have eyes, ears, toes, finger, organs etc etc this is not just "flesh". How can we assess anything from a "purely medical view" for our bodies are not purely medical. We are body, mind and spirit, living as one being. I find the idea of viability an interesting one, because, if a baby and mother were all alone, no support, but the baby was alive and born, would it then be okay for the mother to kill her baby? It certainly wouldn't be "viable" if she left it alone never to return. I agree that this is not a list to argue on and I don't really fancy arguing by email as so many things are misinterpreted. I will admit that I am a hypocrite in the fact of eating meat (though, as soon as I could I made a decision not to eat meat and started only when I felt my body needed it for a time) though I do hold human life in much higher regard, way above an animals life. I don't ever believe that their is a "need" for abortion. Most, true unviable pregnancies are naturally aborted by the mothers body. Love Abby -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
