From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: COERCED ABORTION [Can you help me polish this up?]
Date: 27 Jul 92 23:15:20 GMT
Organization: California State University: Sacramento

In article <1992Jul24.170225.2619@ncar.ucar.edu> ilana@kiowa.scd.ucar.edu (Ilana Stern) writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.002839.20051@csus.edu>, chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
> > 
> > You missed a tiny facet, Ilana: the reason pro-lifers seek to ban
> > abortion is because abortion _always_ has a victim. Whether or not the
> > woman is sad or glad in the future about it, the fetus (human fetus,
> > member of the human species just like everyone else) is a victim and
> > always ends up dying as a result. 
>
>I said nothing about this because it was not part of the original article
>by Peter Nykos.  I was responding to his particular claim.  Your point
>is currently being debated in this group by far better debaters than I.
>In fact, I will agree that if you wish to ban abortion, your "facet"
>above is a more reasonable ground than the "coercion" argument.  I am
>simply arguing against banning abortion because some women are pushed
>into it;  I feel that the solution is better counseling and making it
>easier for women to carry to term if they really want to (which is truly 
>a pro-choice solution).  

I like that. Anything that helps cut down on the demand to abortion is
a "pro-choice" solution.  

Hey, we like to counsel and make it easier for hungry folks to forego
stealing and get a job instead, but we don't work to make it legal to
steal. Because when they steal, they victimize someone else. 

It would be most logically justified to ban abortion because it
victimizes someone else, but also work to make it less desirable. 

It seems we've failed to make robbery less desirable on a miserable
scale: There are over 1 million car thefts every year, and that's just
one type of robbery (well, not robbery but theft in general).  

Why don't you concentrate on that? More people are hungry than are
pregnant, and hunger can equal death a lot faster and easier than
pregnancy. And how can one control their own body if they're hungry
all the time?  

> > By the way, Ilana, what would you do if your 16 year old daughter were
> > sleeping with a 24 year old man? Would you oppose it? 
>
>As I don't have a 16 year old daughter, this is an irrelevant question.
>As this has nothing to do with abortion, this is an irrelevant question.
>I note, however, that the age difference between myself and my husband
>is greater than the 8 years in this example.  What would you do if your
>16 year old son were sleeping with a 24 year old woman?

I would most definitely split them apart and call the women's prison
for a reservation, and then send her on her way with the help of the
cops. 

But of course bra-burning feminists would try to stop me and I'd have
to turn them into political roadkill...  

> > Nowadays, especially in Florida, pro-choice means it's perfectly okay
> > to do that... 
>
>As I don't live in Florida, I am baffled as to why you bring this up.
>As pro-choice is generally considered to have a fairly narrow definition
>w.r.t. abortion, this seems to be mud-slinging.  

Oh, no you don't. You can't slither away that easily. 

In Florida, just last week, a circuit judge declared that the right
for adults to have sex with minors, comes from the same right to
privacy that gives minors the right to abortions without their
parents' consent. 

The judges and courts give you a broader definition of pro-choice than
you're willing to accept. Too bad; it just proves that your pro-choice
stand leads to intractibilities that no sensible American would stand
for.

BTW, never send your daughter to Florida. She might end up in bed with
someone like Patrick Humphrey when she's 12 or so, and you couldn't do
a thing about it if she says she asked him to be there. (And believe
me, with little kiddy-minded folks like Humphrey, he'll take her
invitation for its entire 5 minutes of worth...) 
 
> > How's THAT for an intractibility?  
>
>I think you're using a different dictionary than I am.

Gasp! Devastating hit... 

But so long as we're in the same country, you've got to deal with the
ramifications of telling 240 million Americans that pro-choice is
interpreted in courts as meaning the right to adult/child sex. Be glad
it's only Florida for now. 

But expect to see it soon - we pro-lifers will be hanging the
pro-choice movement with this for a long time. AND DON'T LET OTHER
COURTS UPHOLD AND SPREAD THIS RULING TO OTHER STATES. 

>-- 
>/\        Ilana Stern DoD#009 | Whoever first said, "Things are seldom as they 
>  \_][    ilana@ncar.ucar.edu | seem," was wrong.  Things are usually as they
>      \_______________________| seem.  Otherwise, they wouldn't seem that way.


===============================================================================
			I only battle the strongest. 
===============================================================================
===============================================================================
BBBBBB     OOOOOOOO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    Founder: Steve Chaney 
B    B     O      O   S         S          <chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu> 
BBBBBBBB   O     OO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    
BB     B   O     OO        SS        SS    Borg Operating 
BBBBBBBB O OOOOOOOO O SSSSSSS O SSSSSSS O  Space Systems, Revision 2.0 

	       The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS.