From: jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 17:04:05 GMT

I haven't been following this tread, in fact, I've been routinely junking
the entire subject, but I came upon this excerpt and felt compelled to
reply...

In article <ld0okmINN8b6@spim.mti.sgi.com> mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen) writes:
>Simon E. Booth) writes:
>|> 
>|> Why is it that when someone says that they are pro-choice they staunchly
>|> support abortion and refuse to discuss alternatives??
>

When someone comes up with an alternative to abortion I'll support it.
Right now, abortion is the ONLY way to stop a pregnancy before birth. 
There is no other option for women who don't want to be pregnant.
Come up with one that is safe, cheap, and readily available and I'll
I'll support is as staunchly and vehemently as I support the choice
for abortion.

For those who might be quick to supply "Adoption!" might I remind yo
that aboption is not an alternative way to stop a pregnancy.  Adoption
is an option ONLY after birth has occurred and is ab solutely no help
in stopping a pregnancy at all.

In fact, when a woman is faced with an unexpected pregnancy, there are
only two courses of action she can take now: end the pregnancy through
abortion, or continue and give birth.  There is no third alternative yet.
Come up with one and we'll discuss it.

>|> 
>|> I have one solution, and I'll get nuclear flamed for it, but what is
>|> wrong with abstinence as a means to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
>|> BTW--anyone notice that I've kept my postings on the level, without the
>|> sarcasm of the replies I get???
>
>There is nothing wrong with abstinence.  In fact, my daughter is practicing
>just that.  But there is also nothing wrong with engaging in pre-marital
>intercourse, if done with protection and with a person she has an onging,
>positive, emotional relationship with. 

I agree that abstinence is good--for some people.  Abstinence would not
work, for instance, in my relationship.  For one, I enjoy sex and so does
my husband.  To simply shut off that part of our relationship until
menapause is unreasonable and probably would wreck our marriage.  I choose
to save my marriage, and enjoy my body (and his!) and take the risk (albiet
small) of unwanted pregnancy.  If in the event that a pregnancy would
occur, I'd make another decision at that time.


>There is a reason we don't allow 14-year old children to vote, drive,
>drink, etc.  They are not capable of making good decisions all the time
>(who is, actually).
>

Here I disagree with the poster.  I think that many 14-year-olds are
capable of making good decisions, particulaly when it concerns their
own lives.  And I think that if a teenager wants an abortion she should
be able to get one--without _having_ to get permission, or even inform,
her parents.  I don't believe in legislating family relationships.
I also think that if a teenager wants to continue the pregnancy and
have the baby, then she should be able to do so--without pressure to
give it up for adoption. I think the support system should be in place
(if not by the parents, then by the state) to ensure good day care,
continued education for the mother, and any help she needs to get back
on her feet to support herself and her child.

When people (and Bush is one of them) state that "a teenage girl can't
get her ears pierced without her parent's permission, but can get an
abortion", they aren't understanding the complexities involved.
They need to think "Why is that?" instead of belaboring on the fact of
it.  The answer to "Why?" is simple...once the person asking starts
to think.

Jennifer
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:6411 alt.fan.dan-quayle:4856