From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Subject: Re: Don't just whine about media bias. Do something!
Organization: SPSS Inc.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:06:11 GMT

rgoers@gumdrop.Xerox.COM (Ron Goers) writes:

>In article <adams.718032997@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>rgoers@gumdrop.Xerox.COM (Ron Goers) writes:
>>
>>>In article <adams.717858738@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>>1. I'm not pro-abortion
>
>>>Did she know that her chances of having a 'wanted' baby have been reduced 
>>>because of that abortion?  Probobly not.  
>>Yes, she did.  But again, the ramifications of carrying the child to term
>>(this was in '81) were FAR worse than the risks associated with the
>>abortion.
>>
>That's simply not true.  Abortion is the un-natural termination of a natural
>body process.  To say that abortion is safer than birth is repeating something
>that someone taught us somewhere along the way which is unsubstantiated and
>un-true.  Abortion is not, nor has it ever been, safer than giving birth.

Until her father killed her.  Or she had to drop out of school (for even a
semester).  The school she attended did NOT allow visibly pregnant girls in
the school.  We're not talking simply physical health here, but just for a
data point, the mortality rate is HIGHER for birth than abortion.

>>>Women are being exploited by a multi-billion (yes BILLION) dollar a year 
>>>industry.  
>>No one exploited her.  The decision was made LONG before she even went near
>>a clinic.  She didn't need counselling to know what options were available,
>>and she was fairly well informed on the procedure and the ramifications.
>>
>I have to ask where she got her information.  If it was from PP, then I can
>assure you that she got one side of the story ONLY.  If she visited a Crisis
>Pregnancy Center, then you are probobly correct in saying she was well 
>informed.

She was extremely intelligent (honors student) and well aware of all of the
options.  She never went NEAR a Planned Parenthood clinic, so you can quit
beating that horse.  Her decision was made based on her own views and those
of her boyfriend.  Period.  They knew the options.  In fact, a few years
later when they thought that the birth control had failed again, they
resolved to keep the baby.  False alarm, though.

>>>They go into a clinic armed with half-truths.  They are pressured to make 
>>>on-the-spot decisions which will have lasting effects on their lives.  
>>Huh?  This 16 year old who CALLED AND MADE AN APOINTMENT OF HER OWN
>>VOLITION and followed HER OWN CHOICE was pressured?  By whom?  Certainly
>>not any abortion provider.
>>
>You can't tell me that ANY 16 year-old who finds out she is pregnant is 
>thinking clearly.  Again, who counseled her?  
A couple of people, myself included.

>Therein lies the answer as to whether or not she was pressured into doing 
>what *she* wanted to do.  I suggest that it is more likely that she really 
>did what 1) her parents wanted, 
Her parents didn't know.  And never will.

>or 2) her boyfriend wanted.    
Her boyfried revealed no position on the matter.  He simply told her he'd
support her decision.  And he did.  He paid for the abortion.

>>>All for the sake of the almighty dollar.  
>>Oh yeah...she was dragged into the clinic, forced to pay and forced to
>>undergo an abortion.  She'd be quite surprised by your characterization.
>>
>>>Abortionists aren't helping women, they are feeding off them!  
>>Oh please...this generalization is unsupportable.  I am showing you a
>>datapoint that disputes what you are saying completely.
>>
>No, what you showed is a data point which supports the above, that is assuming
>that they DID take her money ... which I am sure they were more than happy to 
>do.  
Not hers, her boyfriends, but she went to the clinic with a decision
already made.  Period.  They didn't coerse her, trick her, etc.  She went
there with the determination to have an abortion.

>Besides, if you are so sure about this 'data point' being represenative of 
>the majority, 
I don't know either, but given this, and the lady who posted about her
abortion, you now have 2 first-hand histories.  What are you going to do
with this info?  Ignore it?

>I ask you; Why is PP willing to give up hundreds of thousands 
>of dollars because they don't want to follow the recent 'gag order' put into 
>effect?  Could it be that they stand to lose less money by ignoring it, than 
>by following it?
Could it be that they believe in a CHOICE among ALL options.  That abortion
is a VALID CHOICE just as adoption or keeping the baby?

>>>She more than likely DID NOT have all the information required to make such 
>>>a decision when she entered the clinic.  
>>Bad assumption.  She had already MADE the decision before she got with 20
>>miles of the clinic...
>>
>... Didn't answer the above!  Because she already made a decision, does not 
>mean it was an informed one, or the best one.  
I'm here to tell you that it was informed, and given her situation, it WAS
the best one.  She'll tell you that today.  As will her former boyfriend.

>Now, I am not saying that
>your friend WAS NOT informed at all, however, MANY counseling centers which
>openly admit to being pro-abortion oriented, DO NOT tell the full story to 
>these scared girls when they come in.  The reason?  $$$  So, your friend may
>have known what she was getting into, but chances are that she didn't.  
Once again, she didn't GO to a counselling center!  Can't you understand
that?  She made an informed decision in advance, knowing the options.

>ie:  The doctors tell their patients 'it won't hurt' but I've seen tapes of 
>actual abortions taking place where the woman (who is put under) is screaming,
>and her body is writhing as she is getting scraped and vacuumed out.  I'm 
>sorry, but I *can't* believe it didn't hurt!   
That's beside the point!  I've had out-patient surgery.  It hurt.  I've had
teeth drilled.  It hurt.  But in both cases, it was the absolute right
thing to do, and the pain comes with it.  I can't speak for how much pain a
woman might go through during an abortion, but she claimed that it was
merely uncomfortable, not painful.

>Beyond being pro-life, I feel strongly that Informed Concent laws would in 
>themselves eliminate the demand for abortion.  (Informed Consent is where 
>doctors would be required to inform their patients on all aspects of abortion.
>This would include explicit information on procedures, alternatives, etc.)  
I disagree.  Women are still going to get pregnant.  There will be some set
of women who decide to abort irrespective of any information given them.
And I suspect that the number of abortions won't go down very much.

And I bet when this happens, you scream that the information isn't explicit
or graphic enough, and want to impose more demands.  And more and more
until you get the results you want.  Scaring women into carrying to term.

>The fact that this DOES NOT happen today should be enough to make one 
>suspicious of their current motivations and practices.  Therefor, if you were 
>to ask me if I would prefer No Abortion over Informed Consent, I would rather 
>women be informed, and feel that in itself would be enough to eliminate the 
>demand for abortion.
I think you are out of touch with reality.  Ask any of the women on this
net about this.

(By the way, thanx for word-wrapping this stuff...much easier to deal with!)

 -Steve
--
  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                         -------------------
   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Newsgroups: talk.abortion