From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Subject: Re: FOCA: And I quote.....
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:44:12 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <17ef7iINNhte@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@sdd.hp.com writes:

> In article <1992Aug25.191644.5381@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes:
> >
> >  Which world do YOU live in?  You cannot have it both ways; either most of our
> >young people know whats going on or they don't.  Quit hopping around.
> 
> Oh, come on, Jimmy.  How many young men say, age 16 do you know who know as
> much about pregnancy as young women, say age 16?
> 
> Do you *really* think there ISN'T an information differential by sex, on the
> subject of pregnancy?

  But that's not what we were talking about, was it?  It was how women were
"inculturated" with accurate information on pregnancy.  ARE they?  One second
you said they were, the next you seem to feel they weren't.  Which is it?
You're disappointing me.

> >  So selective reading of information is indeed okay.  Not the whole story,
> >not even an accurate story, just whatever they feel like.  Defending this
> >sort of intellectual dishonesty in unbecoming of you.
> 
> Let me also ask this, while I'm asking questions.  How many pro-lifers are
> pushing for 'full disclosure' about carrying to term?

  Haven't the foggiest.  And you are not answering my implied question.

>  They want their inter-
> pretation of abortion clarified, whether at the wishes of the private 
> citizen involved, or not, but do they insist on a reasonably balanced 
> disclosure of pregnancy also?  No.  

  Ahem.  As a basically pro-lifer (though there are those who would disagree
with that label) I have ALWAYS insisted on FULL and COMPLETE information, good,
bad, and indifferent.  I make no excuses for those who would hide anything,
no matter whose side they are on.  They are being dishonest, and are a 
discredit to the cause they claim to support.

> Why is that?

  I assume they do it for the same reason you did not have an answer for my
accusation that you supported intellectual dishonesty in your post -- the
truth is painful to look at.  Come on Adreinne, is it okay for people to
selectively look at the data when making a major choice?

> >> I don't think it is important that THEY make a decision based upon YOUR 
> >> criteria, damned straight.  Or the original poster's, either, whose name
> >> I've lost in deletions.
> >  MY criteria are not the issue here, this time.  Full and complete information
> >is.
> 
> What's "full"?  What's "complete"?  And is it balanced with 'full and complete
> information' about the risks of pregnancy, too?  
> Adrienne Regard

  Full and complete is just what it says.  The good, the bad, and the ugly.  
Risks and all.  For pregnancy, abortion, and the traffic next Tuesday.  So
tell me, do you support providing full and complete information, or just what
the person involved wants to see/hear?

semper fi,

Jammer Jim Miller 
Texas A&M University '89 and '91
********************************************************************************
* Aggie in Cougarland -- I just work here.				       *
* Speak for my employers?  They don't even know I exist!		       *
*"Become one with the Student Billing System. *BE* the Student Billing System."*
*             *********************************************		       *
* "Power finds its way to those who take a stand.  Stand up, Ordinary Man."    *
*      ---Rik Emmet, Gil Moore, Mark Levine: Triumph 		               *
********************************************************************************