From: hsims@vax.clarku.edu
Subject: RE: Loren and Heather should bicker in person, not on net
Organization: Clark University
Date: 22 DEC 92 16:59:28 GMT

In a previous article, nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) wrote:
>In <17DEC92.14415107@vax.clarku.edu> hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes:
> 
>I don't know about Loren, but my answer would be no.  On the other hand, 
>I am glad DES and the Dalkon Shield have been banned, and I hope RU-486,
>which endangers the health and even lives of women, like the French smoker 
>whose death was linked to the chemical, will not gain wide entry into the
>USA. 

Do you think that non-smokers who understand the risks involved should not 
be allowed to make their own decision and choose to use RU-486?

>>Do you still think rape victims should be forced to give birth to their 
>>rapist's child just because you want them to?
>		^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>The marked words are either redundant or unwarranted, depending on how
>Heather uses words like "just because."

Loren never gave any good reasons why rape victims should be forced to suffer 
further, other than saying that was what he wanted them to do.  That's why I 
used those words.

>Clue: the rapist's child is wanted by lots of people who would be glad
>to adopt it.  Heather is not only leaving the child out of her "just
>because," she is also leaving out the men and women who are desperate
>for children to adopt.

First of all, if a woman aborts there is no "child".  Second, 
I see no reason why rape victims should be forced to produce healthy white 
babies for these "desperate" people.  Are these people who are so anxious to 
adopt aware of the number of older and handicapped children in foster care 
that would love to be adopted?  Have they looked into adopting any of the 
150,000-200,000 orphaned and abandons BORN children from Romania?

>Whether that overrides the desire of the woman to abort, is a difficult
>question, but has nothing to do with the words "just because".
> 
>For one thing, the woman might be under intense pressure to abort to 
>prove that she was not "asking for it" or "enjoying it."  So long as
>our society does not divest itself of these abominable attitudes, women
>raped do not have a completely free choice as to whether to abort or not.

The rape survivors I worked with that had abortions made their own decision 
to do so, because they couldn't stand the idea of having the rapist's child.  
It had nothing to do with proving they weren't asking for it.

[quotes from the 19th century deleted]

>>Are you still insisting that women's bodies be used against their will while 
>>you yourself are unwilling to let your body be used to save the life of a 
>>fetus?
> 
>Uh-oh.  Did Keith make his usual offer while I was "flying blind"?  Before
>long, I'll post "What did Keith tell you about me, Mark?"

Keith didn't make the offer.  I offer to carry to term if Loren would agree to 
be fisted for nine months.  If Keith wasn't interested I was going to ask my 
brother, but of course it never got that far, Loren was not interested in 
having HIS body used to keep a fetus alive.  He only wanted to force women to 
do things like that.

[ramblings about Susan and Keith deleted]

>Peter Nyikos

				.... Heather.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.animals