From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Subject: Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Date: 12 Oct 92 11:00:50 CDT

In article <1992Oct10.054059.10736@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.170338.25387@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct9.085353.24603@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>>
>>>Also, I mentioned several times that I do recognize the plight of the women.
>>>People may not trust me in saying that, but that is understandable.  
>>
>>Very.  I don't think anything else you have said evidences
>>any compassion or concern for women.
>>
>Why?  There is nothing wrong with wanting BOTH the mother and the unborn
>child to live.
>
Some of these women will die, Martin.  Your response to 
this sad fact seems to indicate that you think it's OK
for them to die, since they want to take an action of 
which Martin disapproves.

>>>The woman is very special, but I don't think the woman has the right to kill
>>>in most circumstances.
>>>
>>You don't even think she has a right to say how her body
>>will be used.  If you think life is more important than
>>that freedom, would you submit to a rapist rather than
>>kill him?  Pretend those are your only choices.
>
>I remember you mentioning that I compared women to a location.  
>
>Now look at how you invite a comparison between an unborn child and a 
>rapist.
>
The invasiveness of an orgnism growing inside when 
a woman doesn't want it there, and of the incredible
violence of birth, is not unlike rape.  But it is not
the fetus I am comparing to a rapist, Martin.  It is
those who wish to remove a woman's choice to obtain
a legal abortion whose disregard for the physical 
autonomy of women reminds me of the mentality of the 
rapist.

>>
>>>Legalized abortion cannot stand.  Some words have trouble sinking in because
>>>abortion would still be available to most people.  Abortion, sanctioned
>>>by law, is a sickening thought, as even you would agree. (I hope.)
>>
>>You cluless twit.  If you think illegal abortion is better,
>>you are not showing much concern for women.  Some of us are
>>old enough to remember what women went through before RvW.
>>The essence of your statement is that you think it would
>>be better if more women died as a consequence of taking an
>>action that you disapprove of.  Forgive me if I have trouble 
>>believing that you care about women.
>
>Is the only way I can "prove" my compassion for women is to become pro-choice
>and allow abortions to take place?  I don't think so.  

This depends on what you mean by 'prove'.  It would
probably take more than a conversion to the pro-choice
perspective to convince me that you have real compassion
for women right now, son.
>                                                         Pro-lifers are
>not misogynist.  I don't see how Feminist pro-lifers and women pro-lifers
>can hate themselves and show no compassion for themselves and their sisters.
>Mother Teresa is pro-life.  I suppose she is a misogynist too.

How much time does Mother Teresa spend on pushing
for anti-abortion legislation, compared to the time
she spends trying to alleviate the suffering of born
persons, Martin?  "Go, and do thou likewise."
>
>If I were a woman, would you claim the same things about me?
>
It is a known fact that our resident female pro-choicer
has expressed disdain for other women on several occaisions.
>
>-----
>Also: 
>   Abortion definitely kills our fellow humans.  Abortion may also
>cause some death for the mother.  But legal, or illegal, abortion still
>kills.  Women still die as a result of abortion even after it has been
>legal for quite some time.  And not that much of a difference too.

At least an order of magnitude more women die carrying to
term.  I have seen firsthand the results of a desperate
woman self-aborting.  Have you?

muriel
standard disclaimer