From: mulvihil@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Lawrence Mulvihill)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Date: 21 Aug 92 10:56:44 GMT
Reply-To: mulvihil@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Lawrence Mulvihill)
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>mulvihil@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Lawrence Mulvihill) writes:
>\eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>\>chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>
>\>Besides, if he did kill
>\>her, he'd be charged with TWO counts of murder.
>\Now that should be a really comforting thought to her!
>        About as comforting as getting an abortion, right?

She'd be dead, you simpleton!
>
>\>        I submit though that this stance is not taken by all fathers to
>\>their daughters.
>\Yes, but the "RIGHT TO LIFE" amendment would apply to all daughters,
>\wouldn't it?
>        I don't recall ever saying anything about the proposed
>Right-to-Life amendment to the network. I am not in favor of the
>strictness of the Republican platform since it does not account for
>rape, incest, or medical reasons related to the life of the mother.

I see, so your position is that it is murder, except if the
"baby" is "morally defective" (product of rape), "genetically
defective" (product of incest), or a "potential killer"
(medical reason).

>
>\>This story is very tough to swallow,
>\Now, faced with a world where Beaver and Wally are only TV
>\characters, he must reject reality and call the woman a liar.
>        Where did I say that? Please point out to me where I have made
>such an accusation.

Didn't you say you found it "tough to swallow"?  Or did I misread that
and you meant that it was somehow distasteful.  Where I come from
"tough to swallow" means you doubt the truth of the statement.

>
>        I don't doubt that the story is true. I have not said that, nor
>did I even (intend to) state any statement that casts doubt of the
>veracity of the story.

Ah, my apologies.  I misunderstood.
>
>        What do YOU mean by "although she is only a woman"? Women are
>human beings, 

That was what is known commonly as "biting sarcasm".

The point is that we are discussing a case, not an extremely
rare one, where the situation is not one where you can
have a loving discussion, followed by support.  In this
case, restrictions such as parental consent can force
a young person into a life threatening situation because
of a bad law.  Such a law will not strengthen families,
it may actually destroy the remaining threads at a time
of crisis when a rebuilding in future was possible.
Anyway, this has nothing to do with building or maintaining
families.  It has to do with the life and death of a
human being (the woman is one, beyond a reasonable doubt,
where there is reasonable doubt about the fetus).

>
>\
>\We are not discussing how to make families "closer and more trusting".
>        We sure are if this is truly the situation between a
>recalcitrant father and his daughter who wants his support.

She wants support, but she NEEDS an abortion!  Her father is
a problem she does not need or want another responsiblity
at the time (a child).

i>If a
>daughter cannot go to her father for his love and support for this
>shattering revelation that she's pregnant (premarital), then whatever
>she does will be met with scorn from her father.

Not if he does not know.  Even someone from a "Father Knows Best"
world will concede that fathers don't know all, I hope.

>This wall between
>Sylvia and her dad needs to be torn down.

That's your judgement bucko.  And at what cost?  She believes
her life to be in danger by that man.

>What would her dad do if he
>found out that Sylvia were pregnant (post-abortion)? What would you do
>if you were her dad?

What I would do is none of your business.

>        My question is -- without resorting to any personal attacks on
>me -- telling me what you expect with a relationship with your friends,
>your spouse, and/or your children. What constitutes a healthy
>relationship?

This is completely irrelevant.  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc