From: rgoers@gumdrop.Xerox.COM (Ron Goers)
Subject: Re: Don't just whine about media bias. Do something!
Organization: Imaging Science Engineering & Technology, Xerox Corporation
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 12:11:58 GMT

In article <adams.717858738@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>
>
>Ron, please word-wrap your stuff at 75 or so characters....makes life a LOT
>easier...thanx.
>
>rgoers@gumdrop.Xerox.COM (Ron Goers) writes:
>
>>In article <adams.717777688@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>>rgoers@gumdrop.Xerox.COM (Ron Goers) writes:
>>>
>>>>In article <adams.717438740@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>>>>chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <syl.717230669@bcserv> syl@bcserv.wustl.edu (Syl the Wallydraigle) writes:
>>>>>>>chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (Official Astro Boy Virus expert)  writes:
>>>>
>>>
>>>>True! I'm pro-choice. Yes, I agree that a woman should have a choice, and 
>>>>she DOES!  She can choose to get pregnant, or not to.  Her so-called right 
>>>>to choice, should however, disappear as soon as it involves another human 
>>>>being.
>>>"Sex" == "consent to prgnancy" eh?  Sorry, but that doesn't work.  What
>>>about cases of rape and/or incest?  That woman has NO choice as to whether
>>>or not she becomes preganant.
>>
>>Would you support a ban on abortion for ALL cases which do NOT involve rape or
>>incest?
>No.  There are other reasons...saving the life of the mother is one...

That exception has ALWAYS been there, long before 1973 Roe v. Wade came about!
It will (and should) always be there.  The problem that arises is when 'mental health of the mother' is included as life-threatening.  That opens the door to anyone who wants an abortion, and has a doctor willing to say she is at risk.

>
>>(Don't cry rape/incest to me, that is a favorite of pro-aborts, when in fact 
>>less than 1% of abortions performed are done for these reasons.)
>1. I'm not pro-abortion
>2. I don't care if it's 1 in a million, it's still necessary as an option
>   for that one victim.  Just as saving a woman's life.

... shouldn't be.  It takes better than 8 hours for the sperm to travel to the egg.  In the case of rape/incest, the woman can get to her doctor who will clean her out, and she won't become pregnant from that incident.


>way out" for the irresponsible ones?
>In at least some instances, abortion *IS* a responsible decision.  And
>having seen the effects of abortion (mental/emotional) on someone who was very 
>close to me, I'd hardly say that she took the 'easy way out.'
>

Yes, there are terrible effects associated with abortion.  Did your friend know that when she entered the clinic?  Probobly not.  Did she know that her chances of having a 'wanted' baby have been reduced because of that abortion?  Probobly not.  Women are being exploited by a multi-billion (yes BILLION) dollar a year industry.  They go into a clinic armed with half-truths.  They are pressured to make on-the-spot decisions which will have lasting effects on their lives.  
All for the sake of the almighty dollar.  Abortionists aren't helping women, they are feeding off them!  I feel bad for the babies lost, but I also feel bad for your friend.  She more than likely DID NOT have all the information required to make such a decision when she entered the clinic.  

rlg





-- 
Ron Goers @ Xerox Corporation     Email: rgoers@iset.scan.mc.xerox.com

"Time flies like an arrow ...
 fruit flies like a banana"                                           
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame,alt.fan.kevin-darcy