From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Subject: Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:40:14 GMT

In article <nyikos.718566335@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
#In <1992Oct1.180147.14031@netcom.com> bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
#
##c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) wrote (in article <1992Oct1.070033.29228@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>):
###The right to life is the most basic and fundamental right we have.  Without
###a right to life, we cannot claim any other rights (possibly because we'd
###be dead?)
#
##There are two weaknesses to your argument.
#
##One is that your 'right' to life can be waived by other people.
#
#No weakness there.  I think even Martin would make a threat-to-the-life-
#of-the-mother exception, and I would make a lot more exceptions.

You missed his point, Nyikos.

##The other is that you're completely neglecting to consider the woman
##involved. 		  ^^^^^^^^^^
#
#Come off it, Brian!  are you blind, or are you such a toady of Adrienne
#that you cannot bear to disagree with her?

Come off it yourself, PH.  Why are you averse to considering
the woman involved?

## I've posted a list of some situations in which I feel a
##woman would have a very good reason not to have a child she doesn't
##want (she was raped, or she needs to take medication that could
##severely damage the fetus, or she would be required to quit her job
##and go onto welfare, and so on).
#
#I can't speak for Martin, but it is precisely for such reasons that
#I would keep abortion legal for the first 5 weeks.  

Have you ever answered this question, Nyikos?  Where is a woman
supposed to have an abortion performed at less than 5 weeks?
Do you approve of the use of RU-486, or are you suggesting
some method of early abortion known only to yourself.

#Can you give an instance where a woman NEEDS, in the sense of severe
#physical impairment resulting from ANY other remedy, to take a medi-
#cation that would SEVERELY damage the fetus, and I don't mean even
#the kind of damage that "thalidomide babies" endured, since some of
#them have grown up to be quite happy and productive citizens of their
#respective countries, and I have never heard of one saying he/she
#wished he/she had never been born.

Yes, Nyikos, I can.  One of the participants here in t.a. was
taking Tegretol for grand mal seizures when she became pregnant.

Standard cancer chemotherapy comes immediately to mind, as well.

I can see why Adrienne upsets you so.  When you're forced to
mention the pregnant woman involved, you display far more
ignorance and callousness than you do in your standard rants.

##  If you solve the abortion problem by
##flatly outlawing it, then women will use sympathetic doctors or
##coat-hangars, worsening the problem.
#
#No.  Sympathetic doctors are a big improvement on unsympathetic legal
#abortionists, like several right here in Columbia.  As for 
#coathangers, see the chapter "Specious Arguments in Favor of Abortion,"
#in _Aborting America_.

You have yet to prove any of your allegations about the doctors
in Columbia.  

     "The worst thing was not knowing what I was doing, really.
You could go to the library and find out all kinds of information
about how women took care of themselves.  I read these stories
by a health worker on the Lower East Side.  She'd find these
girls who'd been to these butchers, then have to doctor them up
afterwards.  She described the various methods women used and
how awful it was.  A hanger was the convenient thing."
 -Whoopi Goldberg, describing self-aborting with a coathanger
in _The Choices We Made_

##  If you pass legislation that
##will only allow abortions in some cases but not others, then women
##will struggle to slip through the loophole in that law, and women with
##a legitimate reason for needing an abortion will be hindered by it.
#
#The hindering will not be a major problem if the reason really is
#legitimate.  As to loopholes, sure, some will slip through, but there
#would still be a major reduction in the number of abortions if the
#loopholes are at all intelligently designed.  Or don't you give a 
#damn about reducing the number of abortions, Brian?


Your arrogance is astounding.  You have no idea what it
is like to be a woman who is unexpectedly, tragically
pregnant.  You're a sick man, Nyikos.

##How do you propose to solve this problem?  More to the point, why is
##it up to _you_ to 'solve' it?
#
#We're all in on this together.  Martin is just pitching in and doing
#his share, and so far what he has written makes a lot more sense than
#what you have written.

I'm sure that Guerrero is pleased to have the praise of a
fellow fool.

Susan
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:41193 talk.politics.misc:50125 alt.sex:32242 alt.rush-limbaugh:6794 alt.politics.elections:15517 alt.politics.clinton:8945 alt.politics.bush:8070