From: mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: Abortions should be rare
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: None worth mentioning.
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 08:07:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.030431.20479@wuecl.wustl.edu> dgp@atlas.wustl.edu (Don Porter) writes:
><1993Jan25.115252.2129@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu> hasselbring@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes:
>>> How can Clinton say that he 
>>> thinks aboritons should be rare when his actions will make abortions 
>>> more common?
>
><1993Jan25.195007.11399@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>> Perhaps because (being a rational man) he realizes tha tthe way to
>> reduce the number of abortions is to address the causes of abortion.
>> By education, ensuring the availability of effective, affordable
>> contraceptives, and by education.
>
[Deletions]

>> If no girl ever got pregnant because of birth control failure, or
>> because no effective birth control was available, or because she
>> didn't know that 'you can't get pregnant if we do it standing up, with
>> our left arms tied behind this tree while singing _Amazing Grace_' is
>> a lie, how many abortions would be unecessary?
>
>Not as many as you think, I expect.
>
>First of all, you talk about a "girl", so I assume you are focusing 
>on teenage pregnancy.  Keep in mind that teen pregnancies account 
>for only about 27% of the abortions each year.  Even if you
>got them all, there would still be a lot left for pro-lifers
>to protest.
>
Pregnancy as a result of ignorance is certainly not limited to teens.
Witness the number of individuals who actually believe that NFP is as
effective as the pill.

>Second, can you name even one person over the age of nine with 
>an IQ greater than 70 who is so ludicrously ignorant of the nature 
>of sex, pregnancy, and childbirth to believe your "Amazing Grace" 
>story?  This is typical of the sort of sex myths we are told are 
>widespread among teenagers, but the only reaction I've ever seen 
>from a teenager hearing these myths is rolled eyes and laughter.
>
Names? No, because names are a confidentiality issue. Can I cite case
histories? Sure. How about the 14 yo girl who gave birth (with no
prenatal care at all, she has no insurance) to a 26 week microcephalic
boy last week at our hospital. Baby is dead. The girl (who is a B
student, according to her mother) claims she didn't even know she was
pregnant. Not too suprising, since her mother has admited to us that
she does not discuss sex with her daughter, and has consistenly
opposed efforts by the local schools to provide sex education and
contraceptive advice. The girl in question consented to sex with her
15 yo boyfriend based on a line which was every bit as silly as the
one I gave above.
Perhaps you should spend a bit more time with underpriveledged teens.
Ignorance is incredibly pervasive, and more powerful then you may
imagine.

>Third, birth control is available.  Granted, there are barriers to
>teens getting the most effective kinds (prescriptions and expense),
>but birth control is certainly more available now than it ever
>has been.  Furthermore, concern about "access" is misdirected.
>I don't know of anyone too destitute to afford condoms, nor
>too stupid to know where to find them.  On the other hand, I know
>of several people foolish enough to go ahead and have sex without
>birth control anyway.
>
Condoms have a pretty poor record. How about making NORPLANT available
free of charge to any female who wants it? No barriers, no parental
consent, no cost. It would sure be cheaper then paying for welfare.

>And that is the key.  Knowledge doesn't solve a damn thing by itself.
>Putting knowedge to use; changing behavior.  That is the key.
>And doing that requires more than knowledge.  It requires wisdom.
>If you have any proposals on how to impart wisdom to the mass of
>American teenagers, I'm all ears.  Foolishness is a formidable
>enemy.  And I should not close this paragraph without noting
>that a propensity to foolishness does not leave a human being
>on his/her 20th birthday.
>
You cannot combat foolishness until after you combat ignorance. A wise
idiot will still manage to get into trouble.

>Please don't get me wrong.  I think education is great.  But I get
>tired of hearing again and again how it will single-handedly solve
>all of our most troubling social ills.  Perhaps if humanity were
>composed of perfectly rational creatures this might be true.  But
>then it wouldn't be humanity, would it?
>
I deleted lots of stuff, but left in the paragraph where I think I
made it quite plain that I do not think education will
'single-handedly' solve anything. I listed several things which would
make a start towards removing the need for abortion. Why did you
ignore that and latch onto only one aspect of my suggestion?

--
                  Mark Cochran          merlin@eddie.ee.vt.edu
These are the views of my employer, your employer, your government, the
Church of your choice, and the Ghost of Elvis. So there.
Member, T.S.A.K.C.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:57133 talk.politics.misc:68953 talk.religion.misc:27140 misc.legal:23021