From: eeb1@quads.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: Holtsinger on Harassment & Health
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 06:47:22 GMT

In article <92311.065313ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca>
Linda Birmingham <ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> writes:
>In article <1992Nov3.191744.22467@midway.uchicago.edu>
>e elizabeth bartley says

>>Linda dear, my blood pressure has yet to change due to people
>>questioning the merits of my position.  I simply become upset when
>>people describe a position that a hundred abortion a year should be
>>heavily restricted and all others should be unrestricted as
>>"anti-choice", when people quote my suggesting prison terms for women
>>getting illegal abortions and carefully leave out the context which
>>makes it clear that these are only non-medically necessary third
>>trimester abortions, and such similar things.

>Elizabeth dear in or out of context supporting jail
>terms for women who obtain banned abortions is the
>antithesis of the pro-choice movement.

Supporting the jail terms, rather than criminalizing abortion in the
first place?

>imo, your demand

Demand?  Attempt, perhaps.

>to criminalize a medical procedure places an undue
>psychological burden on those women who must obtain
>the procedure by forcing them to justify why their
>abortion should not be viewed as murder and ultimately
>requiring women to literally plead for their lives.

I've recently made it clear that I support requiring medical approval,
not judicial approval....

I know you can't have seen my exact proposal, because I've recently
finished working it out and haven't posted it yet.

>Legislating fetal rights will cause further restrictions
>to women in the work place and reduce the opportunity
>for equality.

Wow!  All this from legislation concerning a hundred cases yearly
nationwide.

>Pregnant women have already been victimized
>by court ordered invasive treatments to "protect" the
>fetus.  You my dear are trying to use a sledge
>hammer to swat at flies

Remember, Linda, I consider third-term fetuses possible people.
Allowing them to be killed at will is hardly a "fly" even if it *were*
the lesser evil.

>and in the process this will
>create additional disadvantages for women.

See above comment wrt "Wow".

>>Furthermore, as I made very clear in the post where I announced the
>>killfiling, I feel a need to defend myself against such charges when I
>>see them being made, and defending myself against your hero's repeated
>>attacks was getting tiresome, taking up too much of my time, and
>>forcing me to engage in more flaming than I cared to at the moment.

>Perhaps instead of flaming you should have tried to
>discuss the issue.

I did.

>Oh btw Elizabeth dear, the only heros I have are women.

Interesting.  You would know, of course, but that seems the most
appropriate word to describe your behavior wrt him....  I shall have
to find a better term, then.

>wrt Mr. Keegan I just happen to agree with his position
>on abortion and feel that the repeated accusations of
>harassment are rather lame attempts at avoiding the
>issue of why there is no need for legislation.

Oh, Linda, dear....  I don't recall making accusations of harassment.
I suppose I've probably agreed with the charge somewhere, but I
haven't bothered to raise them; by now knowing that people are flaming
me doesn't bother me.  In fact, by now seeing the flaming doesn't
bother me; I'm too amused at the flamethrowers set on "automatic".

-- 
   - E. Elizabeth Bartley, a distant Shadow of

Llarana of Amber, possessor of ten points of Good Stuff