From: rayres@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Russell W Ayres)
Subject: A (Tentative) Position for Debate
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 14:12:49 GMT

The following is a tentative position on abortion, and the conditions that
might be required to alter it.  Flames acceptible, but realize that neither the
position advanced nor the conditions for its alteration are set in stone.

Present Position:
- Abortion should be remain legal in all cases where the life or health of the
mother is at stake, or where the fetus/unborn child's viability is in serious 
question.  (No, I don't have medical specifics on this, though I'm willing to 
take suggestions).  Abortion should also remain legal for cases of rape 
(including incestuous rape); this could be construed as insuring the mental 
and psychological health of the mother.  I know of no conditions at this time 
that would cause me to reverse this position.  Keep in mind that this is a 
pro-choice, no pro-abortion, stance; I am arguing for the availability of 
abortion under these conditions.

- Abortion should remain legal in all other situations where the procedure does
not seriously threaten or jeapordize the health of the woman involved.  This
position could be altered if the following conditions are met:

* All children born are assured of adequate housing, food, medical attention,
clothing, and a proper environment for development.

* Completely dependable (no specific definition here either; I'm open to 
suggestions.  The Pill more or less fits my definition, as does Norplant) birth
control is available to all women who desire it.  This includes freedom for 
excessive social as well as economic costs and barriers.

* All women are educated on the availability and details of methods of birth 
control; the problems and risks of pregnancy; and the resources available to
them should they become pregnant.

* Men and women are made jointly responsible, in all respects, for children 
which they are the parents of.  This does not rule out adoption (far from it!),
but does mean a complete end to child-support deadbeats, and includes
responsibility for the child's emotional and developmental, as well as 
economic, well-being for the father (something child-support laws don't cover).


For the record, I state again that this is a TENTATIVE position, and can be 
changed or altered if I am convinced otherwise.  My baseline position is that 
abortion is probably not such a wonderful thing, that it's utilization as a 
means of birth control is stupid and should be unnecessary, but that under the 
present conditions of our society, where the practical effects of a ban on
abortion could be potentially devestating, particularly to the poor, pro-choice
is the necessary position.  If the conditions of society can be changed such
that abortions are no longer needed (except in extreme cases listed above), 
than abortion will no longer be necessary.


I should also state as an observation that most of the "pro-life" activities 
that I observe are not directed towards serving the needs of the children they 
are intended to "save"; most are directed towards stopping women from having 
abortions, but offer those women no help in caring for the babies they would be
forced to have.  This is NOT universal; I do know of a church-related group in 
Athens, OH which provides services, referrals, clothing, baby equipment, etc. 
for mothers who are otherwise hard-pressed to care for children.  But this is 
an exception, not a rule.

--Bill
Committed to faith in God
Searching for answers to difficult questions