From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject: Re: Observations
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 21:10:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.190944.21948@advtech.uswest.com> stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
>In article <gzlnb8_.ray@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>>stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes ...
>>>In article <1992Sep1.202750.18927@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp) writes:
>>>The pro abortion camp IS trying to make laws to force people to do the things
>>>they think we should be doing.


BAD ATTRIBITE ALERT. I think it was John who said that in response to my
assertion that Pro-choice isn't out to make laws to force people to do what
we think is correct but the pro-life 'camp' is.


>>First, I am NOT "pro abortion".  I would object to anyone forcing an abortion
>>just as strongly as I would object to anyone forcing pregnancy.
>
>Then, I would think that you would support me.  After all, having a woman
>abort your baby is forcing you to get an abortion, whether you want one or
>not.

John, you still have a most unique definition of abortion. I have not been
able to find a single person who sees it possible for a man to have an abortion.


>>The term
>>of preference is pro-choice (as in given women the _choice_ whether to 
>>continue with the pregnancy).
>
>The least ambigous term might be pro-female-choice-NONE-for-the-father.

On the other hand, if the *father* was the one carrying the fetus and the
woman couldn't, the *women* would be out of luck.

Maybe your beef is with God for making you a man?

>>Second, I'm not trying to force you to do anything except respect the
>>privacy of other people.
>
>You are trying to tie my hands.  Which is forcing me NOT to do anything.

You are forgetting that you have all the freedom in the world to find a 
woman that *wants* to have your child. For some reason you're chosing to focus
on a situation wich is not common (your experience was the first time I'd 
ever even *heard* of it.)  While you now cannot force a woman to have your
child, and hopefully never will, you will *always* have the option of just
finding another woman. Have you considered that?

Sperm are *much* less than a dime a dozen.


>>You insistance on being able to force a woman to give birth to your child
>>strikes me as being rather like the chicken deciding for the pig whether
>>you should be allowed to eat ham & eggs for breakfast.
>
>If this is the best analogy you can come up with, you must be re-examing
>your belief systems about now.
>
>1)	A pig and a chicken are not even of the same species.  Are you claiming
>	that men and women are of different species?
>
>2)	Eating, and what you eat is a personal decision.  Abortion is not.

I got his analogy fine.

>>While the legal system is rather biased towards mothers in this area, the
>>solution might be to modify child support & custody laws and rulings, 
>>rather than to attempt to spread the misery.  Whether I, my fiancee,
>>or my friends have, are having, or will have and abortion is none of
>>your business, and I intend to keep it that way.
>
>You can try to enforce your belief system.  And so can I.
>
>>Ray Fischer
>>ray@netcom.com
>
>John
>stevens@uswest.com


-- 
David Knapp                                      University of Colorado, Boulder
Perpetual Student                                   knapp@spot.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: talk.abortion