From: boutell@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Tom Boutell)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.zines
Subject: VOICE: Issue #1: Abortion (part 1 of 2)
Summary: First Issue of Voice: Roe vs. Wade
Keywords: voice roe part1
Date: 8 Sep 92 16:42:12 GMT
Reply-To: boutell@cshl.org
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: Voice Magazine


 
  
    
     
     V o i c e   M a g a z i n e : 

     An online magazine of world issues

     Volume #1, Issue #1

     Editor: Tom Boutell, boutell@cshl.org

Part 1 of 2


About Voice Magazine                                                 Page 1
--------------------

Voice magazine is an free, independent magazine of political and
moral issues. Each edition of the magazine concerns a different
topic; usually a particular question is posed for those submitting
material to consider.

The magazine is edited by Tom Boutell, and is expected to
appear on an approximately monthly - to - bimonthly basis. It is
distributed online by a variety of means. It may also be available
in print at various universities.

(NOTE: Voice Magazine is in no way affiliated with the Village Voice of
New York City, NY, USA, or any other publication.)

Contacting the Editor                                                Page 2
---------------------

I can be reached by email at boutell@cshl.org. I also frequent Usenet news,
but email is by far the most reliable means of contact.

Comments on material printed are always welcome. Plese realize, however,
that I will not ban an author on political grounds, regardless of the
number of people who complain. Material will be judged on quality alone.
Thus the first issue, which deals with abortion rights, contains both
pro - choice and pro - life standpoints. Generally speaking, the best
revenge is to write better articles than your opponents.

I will, however, print letters to the editor to provide a forum for 
responses to the last issue's topic. Better still, in the hypertext
edition, letters will be linked directly to the articles they comment upon, 
making it easy for readers to see responses in the context of the original 
article.

Writing for Voice Magazine                                           Page 3
--------------------------

Voice Magazine is open to submissions from anyone with any standpoint.
The magazine accepts nonfiction prose, fictional prose, and poetry.

The three criteria on which submissions will be judged are relevance
to the topic of the issue, quality of writing, and overall balance of views
in the issue. Articles must be relevant to the topic of the
upcoming issue to be considered. Quality of writing is second, in that
a well - written article will almost always be accepted before a poorly -
written one, regardless of the stance it takes. Balance of views is third.
If the majority of articles received for an issue hold one viewpoint,
I will make an extra effort to accept at least some material with an
opposing standpoint, but the higher - quality articles will dominate
even if I disagree with their authors on the topic being discussed.

Articles should be up to ten single - spaced pages in length, about
600 lines, and a minimum of 60 lines. (Exceptions to the latter rule
will be made for poetry.) Longer material is often excellent but I cannot
guarantee it will appear in all the forms in which the magazine is
distributed.

To submit material, first learn about the topic of the upcoming issue
(see page 34), then submit your article to the editor, who can be reached 
through email as boutell@cshl.org. Articles should be sent in plain ASCII 
(plain text) format.

Further Distribution of Voice                                       Page 4
-----------------------------

One of the goals of the magazine is to be read in as many venues as
possible. If you would be interested in further distributing the magazine by
printing and distributing print copies at your college campus or other
institution, please contact the editor. Even a small number of print copies, 
distributed in a location where they will definitely be read, will help 
immensely in making people more aware of the magazine. A typical example is
the small number of copies I intend to place in the Honors Center
of my alma mater, the University of Delaware.

If you would be interested in helping to distribute the magazine to
an electronic network on which it is not currently available - presently
it is available via Usenet News, email subscriptions and (shortly)
the World Wide Web hypertext system - I would also be
interested in hearing from you.

The magazine as a whole is Copyright 1992, Thomas Boutell. The individual
articles remain the property of their authors,  It is acceptable to quote
or excerpt from the magazine provided that the quotation or excerpt
is attributed to Voice Magazine, and to the author of the individual
article.


Issue #1: Abortion Rights & Roe vs. Wade                           Page 5
----------------------------------------

In the early 1970's, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down
the famous Roe vs. Wade decision, which legalized abortion throughout the
U.S. and prevented individual states from restricting it. Though the topic
is of global significance, I chose the following question as that to which
articles should have some relevance:

"Should Roe vs. Wade be overturned?"

The articles below are all attempts either to answer or illuminate that
question. I have made no attempt to censor material based on point of view
or opinion of author; the views of these authors do not necessarily
reflect the views of the editor. For my views, read my editorial.
The order of articles does not reflect editorial preference for the views
expressed.

Contents                                           Page
--------                                           ----

Editorial, by Tom Boutell                          6

Creating Real Choices, by Terrance Heath           8

Overturn Roe vs. Wade, by Stephen A. Chaney        11

"My Child" (poem), by Barclay Blanchard            12

"Sleeping Pills" (poem), by strake                 14

Pro - Life Feminism, by Stephan A. Chaney          15

"Song" (poem), by Chris Johnson                    18

Clinic Defense Diaries, by Jay T. Stein            19

Ban Abortion After the "Fetal Stage," by Wess Orr  33

About the Upcoming Issue                           34


EDITORIAL: Preserve the Right to Choose, by Tom Boutell            Page 6

I chose to create this magazine to provide an open forum for discussion
of controversial topics, making editorial decisions primarily
on the quality and interest level of the material. For that reason, a great
deal of the material in this issue is strongly at odds with my own views.
I am willing to do this because I believe firmly that only those who
are afraid their side is in the wrong believe it necessary to silence
their opponents.

Having said that, I strongly support a woman's right to choose abortion. 
This does not mean that I support the trivial use of abortion. It means, 
rather, that I do not believe any fair means exists to codify abortion
restrictions into law without violating the right of women to control
their own bodies and make the decision responsibly for themselves.

Many have suggested that abortions be restricted to cases of rape or
incest. This sounds well and good, but consider the fact that a woman
who is raped by her own husband (and yes, sex against her will is rape,
whether performed by her legal husband or not) will have a great deal
of difficulty convincing a judge that she carries the child against
her will and without having consented to the act that created it. 
Consider the fact that this law would require women to bare the details 
of an act of violence in order to convince a court that they - the victim of 
a forced sexual act - are not guilty of seeking an abortion to escape the 
consequences of a voluntary sexual act. They would, in essence, be required
to prove their innocence before being allowed to seek an abortion. Issues
of backed - up court systems delaying such proof until the question is
forced by biology aside, it has always been understood in the United States 
that one is innocent until proven guilty. It should not be necessary to seek
a court hearing in order to terminate a pregnancy resulting from a
forced act. Yet if such a hearing were not necessary, rape would become
a bullet - proof legal excuse to circumvent the abortion restrictions.
In other words, such a law is either unethical or unworkable, depending
on its implementation.

And what of abortions permitted in cases of incest? Shall we force
13 - year - old girls to come to court and explain that they really ought
to be allowed to have an abortion since their father or brother or uncle
is responsible for the conception? Shall we add to the ignominy already
suffered by a victim of incest the further ignominy of begging permission
from a judge to remove a fetus that is the product of the act? Again,
I believe this places the burden of proving her innocence on someone
who is already the victim of a crime. Again, if no such proof were to
be required, incest would also become a bullet - proof excuse. Again the
law is either unethical or unworkable.

Yet banning abortion altogether is clearly unworkable, lest those
women and girls forced to carry fetuses whose conception they did not
willingly participate in be forced to carry those children to term.
It is well and good to suggest that such children be given up for adoption -
well and good, that is, if you are not the woman who will be forced to
carry the fetus for nine months. The shame unfairly forced upon a victim of
rape or incest should scarcely be compounded, unless she is willing,
by nine months of pregnancy.

                                                                   Page 7

Here, already, we have a strong argument against anti - abortion laws.
I would further add, however, that even in cases not involving rape or
incest, women should be allowed to terminate pregnancies for the simple
reason that though the decision is terrible, the woman involved is clearly
the only person qualified to make that decision. Only she is aware of
the details of her personal circumstances, and only she will be able,
in the end, to weigh those circumstances and decide. The circumstances
surrounding each pregnancy are too complex for the law to attempt to
generalize and determine in which cases the child's well - being should rule,
and in which the mother's. Those who would seek to prevent abortions would do
well to eliminate some of the things that make the need for abortion frequent:

Lack of adequate birth control.
Lack of child care assistance for poor mothers.
A common unwillingness to adopt children of disadvantaged backgrounds.
Lack of enforcement of child support laws.

Those concerned with "saving babies" should consider that taking steps
to repair these four problems alone would save far more children than making 
abortion illegal, which would only push the practice underground. Making 
other options more widely available to women will doubtless allow mothers 
who would otherwise opt for an abortion to consider keeping the child. 
If you want to prevent abortions, make things better for children - 
which is, I hope, your ultimate goal in seeking to prevent abortion.

But the decision is ultimately in the woman's hands, and it is my 
sincere hope it will always remain hers. 

Creating Real Choices, by Terrance Heath                            Page 8

Though I am unwaveringly pro-choice, of late I've become
rather frustrated with people on both sides of the abortion debate.
Following the recent Supreme Court ruling both sides have taken to
increased yelling about whether Roe v. Wade should be upheld or
overturned.  Meanwhile, each side has ignored some important questions
surrounding the issue.
	
First, both sides ignore this important question: why do so
many women believe abortion is the only viable option when facing a
crisis pregnancy? And what can be done to make other options more
attractive and more viable? No one likes the idea of abortion. There's
a difference between being pro-choice and pro-abortion, and almost no
one is pro-abortion. It seems both sides are arguing over a tightrope,
well - greased by the Supreme Court and state legislatures, which women
must cross. One side want the rope suspended, and the other side wants
the rope cut, but neither side seems concerned with the net that ought
to be stretched beneath the rope!

Why aren't more people focusing on ways to make it easier for
women to  have and keep their children?  There are very specific
things that states and local communities can do to make choosing life
a little easier.  First, every pregnant woman needs good prenatal care
to make sure she and the baby are healthy.  Prenatal care should be
availible to all pregnant women regardless of economic or insured
status.  If the state is concerned about infant life and welfare, it
should get interested before the child is born and provide prenatal
care to mothers who cannot otherwise afford it.

Once a child is born, it needs health care, and if the state is
interested in preserving the child's life, it ought to be interested in
the quality of life once the child is undeniably here. No child should
be without good pediatric care, and the state should provide it if the
parents are unable.  Health care is an important part of taking care
of a child, and some women may not opt for abortion if they know that
caring for the child will be made easier.

Caring for a child also takes time.  In an age of fluid
parental roles, single parent families, and double - income families, it
is time to mandate paid parental leave in the workplace, equally 
for both parents regardless of gender. I say both parents, regardless of
gender, because we live in a time when mothers and fathers in poor and
middle class families both have to work to keep the family afloat; equally
and regardless of gender, because the assumption that only a woman can
properly care for a child is outdated and arcane.  

As we live in economic times that require families to have two
incomes, forcing both parents into the job market, there is an
increased need for childcare.  Again, a state that is interested in
protecting life ought to be interested in the quality of child care as
it affects the quality of life.  Child care should be available to
those who can't afford it otherwise.

                                                                   Page 9

Like it or not, we live in an age when young women, teenagers,
are becoming mothers.  Many young women have to drop out of school to
care for their children, ending their education and thus affecting
their ability to provide for their children.  Single mothers,
including teenagers, should have access to child care so that they
can educate themselves and become able to provide better
lives for their children.  Remember, the age of long-distance travel
has brought an end to the days when a nearby, extended family could
meet this need, and many teenage mothers have parents who work and
cannot afford to stay at home and care for a child.

Another method of decreasing the demand for abortion is to
increase the information and access women have concerning birth
control.  A pregnancy that never happens can't become a crisis.
Making sure that anyone who can get pregnant, or who can get someone
else pregnant, has access to birth control ought to be a priority if
abortion demand is to decrease.

All of the above measures would make it easier for women
to have and keep their children, or to avoid pregnancy altogether. Yet
these options are ignored by both sides of the issue.  Some, usually
conservatives from the pro-life side, are vocally opposed to some
ideas that might help mothers, such as day-care centers and birth
control counseling in high schools. They oppose these measures for the
same reason they oppose legal abortion : they seek the enforcement of
Judeo-Christian moral code. More than this, they seek to be the
catalyst for a religious revival in this country, a revival of
christian faith and morality.

However, in opposing measures that would help mothers, and
seeking to make abortion illegal,they are conflicting with their own
goals. Moral behavior can indeed be legislated. However, for christians, 
morality stems out of faith. Where there is no christian
faith,there is no christian morality. Faith can not be legislated.
Therefore some pro-lifers are only succeding in half the battle.
Behavior can be changed through legislation, but faith cannot.

Some pro-lifers will point to the ministries and other
agencies they have built up to help women in crisis pregnancies, and
these efforts are to be lauded. However, it is too little. If abortion
were to become illegal tomorrow, there would not be enough such help
for women in crisis. Many women would be left with nowhere to turn and
no help from anyone. Remember, when a mother suffers, a child suffers.
Wouldn't it be better to work on creating a real system that will be
able to help women and children and offer real options besides
abortion and adoption (It is no easier - emotionally - to give up a
child than it is to terminate a pregnancy), BEFORE taking away another
option? Wouldn't it be better to open a window BEFORE slamming a door?

                                                                  Page 10

On the pro-choice side of the debate, there is a lot of energy
understandably focused on vigilantly protecting the right that has been
law for the last 17 years or so.  However, those on the pro-choice
side run the risk of appearing more pro-abortion than pro-choice. I
don't believe anyone really likes the idea of abortion, and I don't
believe any woman makes that choice lightheartedly. Those on the
pro-choice side would do well to focus some energy on those issues
that would make life easier on women, families, and children.
Admittedly, the pro-choice side is a little better about this than the
pro-life side.

So why don't people from both sides get together and discuss
these issues, and leave the discussion of abortion out so that we
might discuss other ways of helping women, families, and children?  We
might find that we agree more often than not, and we might actually be
able to make a difference that cannot help but affect the number of
women who seek abortions. We might be able to make life better for
those born, and those yet to be born.

Overturn Roe vs. Wade, by Stephen A. Chaney                       Page 11

Should Roe vs. Wade be overturned? My answer is yes. 

The Supreme Court has claimed that overturning RvW would jeopardize
the legitimacy of the Court, implying its dominance by
special political interests rather than purity of judgement. 

That mistake was made back in 1973, when the Supreme Court ruined its
credibility by finding the "right to privacy" in the 14th Amendment. 

There is no such thing in the 14th Amendment. I have read it over and
over again, and the only way I can find the right to privacy with
regards to abortion is as follows: 

1) Find the letters that spell "right to privacy" in the 14th
Amendment.
2) Copy them out of the 14th Amendment's text. 
3) Rearrange them into the words "right to privacy."
4) Voila! We have found the right to privacy in the 14th Amendment! 

That's about the only way I was able to find it. 

However, if you look at history, and the direction of the legal
system, you will find in it: 

1) Scientists discovered in the 19th century that human life begins at
fertilization. 
2) Abortion was banned as far as they knew when human life began, and
when fertilization was discovered as the beginning of human life, it
was banned to that extent.  
3) Punishment for abortions as well as the status of the fetus (a
person until 1973) were muddy and often inconsistent. 

But also, 
4) No attempt to curb the demand for abortions.

What do I think should be done? 
1) Go back to the scientific definition of the beginning of a human
individual, rather than the philosophical and metaphysical (brain
waves, etc.), to decide whether or not someone is a person. Brain
development is yet another arbitrary line of evaluation; it is still
debated and not even refined yet. We have many problems with
philosophical definitions of human life, when all we have to do is go
back to the un-arbitrary scientific definition: a growing individual
of the human species. That points directly to fertilization, because
sperm and eggs do not grow and become a new individual until they unite and
possess the full complement of DNA at fertilization.
Besides, someone's got to be home if the body is still
growing. Who else would be handing down those genetic
instructions?  
2) Begin tax exemptions and health care for children before birth. 
3) Treat abortion cases like any case of parental child
abuse. 
4) Nationally mirror Governor Robert Casey's (Democrat - Pennsylvania) 
Deadbeat Dads, health care and welfare-to-work programs, all of which have 
been hailed as models for the country, and other similar programs to cut
down the demand for abortions. Also, seek improvements in contraception.

"My Child," by Barclay Blanchard                                 Page 12

I felt it
the moment
I conceived you.
Richard and I
were making love
on a blanket
in his parents' backyard.
I felt a thrill
of love
in my womb.

I denied
my inner knowledge
for weeks.
I had big plans
to go out of state to college
in the fall.
I'd been high school Valedictorian,
and had a Big Future
in science.

But I felt a bond with you
from that first moment.
After a few weeks
I had a vision
of you at 5:
a beautiful little girl,
with long wavy black hair,
in a blue dress,
smiling tenderly at me.

I had such dreams for you:
I wanted you to have the love
I hadn't had
when I was a child.
I wanted you to be
my gift of love
to the world.
I wrote my hopes for you
and kept the paper
in my wallet
until just this year,
eleven years later,
when the paper was washed away
in some laundry.
Then,
for the first time,
I cried for the loss
of my dream daughter.

I wanted you so much.
I loved you
before I had proof
(which meant more to me
in those days
than intuition)
that you were growing
inside me.

                                                                   Page 13

But I was so scared.
I told my Dad about you,
and he convinced me
to have an abortion
as soon as possible.
He told me you were
just a wad
of tissue.
He wanted me to drive
the 60 miles
from Mobile to Pensacola
the next day.

But I had to talk with Richard
first,
and the "procedure"
had to be performed
on a Thursday,
so it was scheduled
for the next week,
on Dad's birthday.
My stepmom later blamed me
for the timing.
No one asked or cared
how I felt.

When I talked with Richard,
he was silent.
He left the decision up to me
without ever saying how he felt.
He left me alone
when I needed him
most.

Now I know
that it would have been difficult
for you and me;
we'd have been beaten up emotionally
by my parents
for more years
than I endured it
alone.

I felt that you understood
that the time wasn't right
for us to be a family.
I felt that you would come back
to me
when I'd worked things out
for us.
I still pray
that I was right.


         
"Sleeping Pills," by strake                                        Page 14

Now I lay me down to sleep.
I pray the Lord my soul to keep.
If I die or if I wake,
I pray the Lord this child to take.

Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned.
I loved a man, and now carry his child.
I do not want this "honor."

With this hand that stroked his loving flesh,
I place these pills upon the lips that sought his soul.

Forgive me, for I will not bring another life
to make the choice I was forced to make.
I risk my soul on my last hope.
-- 
                                 NERD NATION:
                   We're here. We're weird. Get used to it.
    Graduating in very very few days. Keeping email address however. Moving
up in world, depending. REPLY ADDRESS BROKEN, use: boutell@isis.cshl.udel.edu
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:35572 alt.abortion.inequity:3611