From: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (Patrick Taylor)
Newsgroups: houston.general,tx.politics,rice.politics
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston Defending Choice Coalition needs you)
Date: 20 Aug 92 23:22:47 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug20.141652.1999@menudo.uh.edu> moore@uhibpd.phys.uh.edu (Lorra L. Moore) writes:

>oh, I know... and accidents never happen.  Birth control works 100% of
>the time.  Isn't that a nice fantasy to live under.  Ever been inside an
>abortion clinic when you weren't preaching or carrying a bomb?  

Ever look past your prejudice when you weren't insulting?

To reply to your point, of course accidents happen.  Now tell me for real 
that most abortions occur because of _real_ accidents where birth control 
was being used with a good degree of diligence.

>Ever
>listened to the 16 and year old women that are tearing themselves apart
>because, even though they were on birth control, they still are finding
>themselves faced with this decision?  

No, but I hope to, one day.

>I have been inside one, and
             ^^^^^^^^^^

You mean an abortion clinic, I take it.  I have, too.  Not to disrupt, but 
to listen.  Most were mid twenties, had a regular boyfriend, took the pill 
most of the time...

>listened to their stories.  Out of 8 women sitting in a waiting room 7
>of them had been on birthcontrol when the conceived.  

That's pretty high, but I guess it could happen.

>And besides (I actually love it when pro-lifers use this argument cause
>it is so silly when you actually step back and look at it), this young
>lady was obviously to irresponsible to use birth control, so, what do
>the pro-lifers want to do? 
>Punish her for her actions by saddling her
>with a baby for the next 18 years.  

Oh is _that_ what WE are trying to do?

You have children?

>Oh, I am sure, over night, she will
>find enough responsibility in her soul to care for this child and
>herself.... NOT.  

Believe it or not, it has actually happened.  Do you know that some girls
that get pregnant at 16 actually later end up marrying some nice guy that 
was not the father of their child?  Some others get help from relatives, or 
the government, or (my God!) the churches (admittedly you have to get 
selective here).


>Do pro-lifers simply not care for the quality of life
>these children are going to have to endure?  

Damn right we care, and we're going to do something about it.

>Do they simply not think
>about it at all and live in this fantasy that they are doing some
>greater good?  

Your prejudice is showing again :-)

>>Your implication is probably correct.  Some of these instances would
>>probably have been abortions.  My contention is that neither solution is
>>a good one.  So rather than give someone a choice of abortion, let's give
>>them plenty of palatable, living solutions.  And don't tell me it will
>>never work.  That kind of negativism is part of the problem.

>I have an idea.  Before you try to make abortions illegal, why don't you
>put these palatable, living solutions into place?  

Never said I was going to try and make them illegal, although I might.  But 
this is not what pro-life is about.  It is about working the situation for 
the best of all, including the unborn.  Clearly any solution that left him/
her dead or uncared for is not good.  We simply have to stop settling for 
whatever we consider the lesser of two evils, because the two sides cannot 
agree on that.  The only thing we can ever seem to agree on is what is the 
very best.  SO let's get on with it.

>Then, as an after the
>fact, you can say 'But see, there are these other solutions that really
>work really well and have for years, so now we can do away with
>abortions because it really is for the greater good.'... But no,
>pro-lifers aren't interested in solutions... they are interested in
>domination and forcing their opinions, values, and religious beliefs on
>others.  

Just prejudice <blort>.

>>>Aren't they
>>>proud of themselves?  Just think, they brought it into this world so it
>>>could suffer.. .what a noble cause [This is sarcasm for those that
>>>missed it].
>>
>>Just think...the mother conceived it so that it could suffer in the hands of 
>>a physician or in a dumpster, alone...what wonderful choices.

>well, considering you have no evidence that an unborn baby is sentient
>at all during the first two stages of pregnancy and I have more than
>overwhelming evidence that a child is sentient after birth, I personally
>would choose that we not let it suffer a slow miserable death when we
>are sure that it can feel every minute of it.  

Considering you don't KNOW either you are guessing around with what may be 
someone's life instead of advocating a real solution yourself.

>Man, you are really sadistic.

Oh really?  It's sadistic of me to suggest that neither death is ok, while 
you justify abortion based on unknowns?

You're so caught up in the fight you don't know what you're fighting.

>Lorra
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "This must be Thursday.  I never could get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                       - D Adams
  - Patrick Taylor
    Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                       "Don't let the .se fool you"
    alternately, exuptr@ZGNews.Lonestar.Org