Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Living in Peace
From: yoders@wittenberg.edu
Date: 8 Apr 92 20:34:16 -0400
Organization: Wittenberg University

In article <1992Apr7.214014.10886@cs.dal.ca>, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
> YOu guys are realy immature you know that? When the tough gets going,
> the pro-choice get offensive. How many Christian jokes have been brought
> into an otherwise serious forum for discussing abortion?

I don't know, how many?  Speaking of jokes, I heard a good one the other day.

These two <<religion of your choice>>s are fucking a dead alligator...

Don't even think about flaming me on this.  I can joke about anything I damn
well please.  If I offend somebody, then that is probably their problem
(assuming it was intended in jest, not as a put-down).  On second thought, fuck
you if you can't take a joke.  (by the way, I stole the above joke from Buddy
Hacket)

> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DON"T MAKE A WAR OF THIS. We should be working
> TOGETHER to help the victims. YOu see the women as a victim, we see
> the fetus as a victim. CAN WE NOT WORK TOGETHER so that everyone is happy?

Love to, Steve.  Got any suggestions?  It would be nice to see something
constructive in this group again.  Can't remember when I last saw anything
that might lead to some compromise/understanding.

> I don't think you guys give a shit... All I see are the pro-lifers here
> begging to work TOGETHER, and you guys are so busy trying to hack away
> at our faith and pride, that you don't spend any time thinking about
> a solution.

No, this is not constructive, either.  But let me ask you, should your faith
and pride be used as a basis for legislature that affects me or anybody else
with a different faith and pride?  It's been a while since I read it, but I
thought there was something in the Constitution to prevent the "church" from
legislating?  I don't think religion should ever be used in debating a legal
issue.  Not anybody's religion.  The Bible should never come into play.  Not
anybody's Bible, old or new testament, or any other variation of religious
propoganda.  NEVER!

It would be valid, however, if you took the ethical issue that a religion has
given its "final word" on and discussed it on its own merits.  You would have
to strip away any religious arguments, though (GOD said so doesn't cut it).

> of abortion, and I am calling for peace. WE are calling for peace...
> It is up to the pro-choice now to decide. You will not pound us into
> submission. There are too many strong individuals in this movement 
> for us to be silenced. The ball's in your court now...

Caught it!  Nice toss.  Got any other problems you'd like to pass off on
somebody else?  Ok, sorry.  I give in, you win and we'll all live in peace
exactly the way you tell us to.  You haven't come right out and said it, but
this is certainly the way I read the above, i.e. it's up to me to give in and
accept that you are right.

And yes, I am picking on your post more than I should be.  This was not because
I disagree with you on many things, but because I agree with you on 1 thing:
People ARE divided on this issue and we need to find some way that both sides
can live together happily.

I will propose one here, which will probably be unacceptable to the pro-life
side, but nonetheless, here it is:

	Let the people directly involved make the decision.  If you are
anti-abortion, you will have a right to not have an abortion.  If you think
abortion is the best solution, then you have the right to have one.

You see, this position would allow both sides to co-exist happily.  Except that
many pro-lifers want to be able make decisions about somebody else's life.

Kevin Yoders  - pleased to finally be able to post to Usenet.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion