Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Date: Mon,  5 Oct 1992 12:29:45 -0400 
From: "Andrea B. Gansley-Ortiz" <ag1v+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Fwd: rights and responsibilities

I had sent -rocker- a private note before finishing her entire 
article. I think that I should respond openly.

|> Why is it that often people forget the 
|>'very real physical and emotional risks of' abortion?

r> Have you ever seen anyone state that "Women get abortions without
r> a second's thought about it, have no physical pain, and never think
r> about it again"?  If not, you are attacking a strawman of your own
r> making.

I don't think that asking a question is attacking a strawman. I asked a
question. One person that I've noticed so far has tried to answer it
for me. And he has helped me learn a bit more by the answering.

r> Are you suggesting that most women do not know that invasive surgery
r> carries some risk?  Are you suggesting that abortion has a higher risk
r> than surgery in general?  Are you suggesting that abortion has a higher
r> risk than childbirth?

No. I'm asking a question. Why, when I do read pamphlets, is it that
I never see addressed the questions you're asking. Maybe I just got bad
information. Or that was years ago and the information is better now. But
why are these things, in my experience, not addressed?

r> They're certainly welcome to an opinion, if they label it as such.  
r> They may have an opinion that's based on "I have seen men kill, and
r> I have seen women kill, therefore I think that women would be able to
r> kill in combat as well as men."  If they are saying "Well, I've never
r> been in combat but I don't think women can do it.", do you consider 
r> this to be a valid opinion?  

Does that mean that only with the label (IMO, IMHO, etc) that it is
able to tell that someone is stating their opinion? Is there such a
thing as a valid opinion? Opinions aren't facts. Opinions, by their
nature sometimes aren't even grounded in many facts.

No I don't consider the second opinion valid. But I wouldn't call the
second opinion a fact either. I don't consider most of what people
say here as facts. 

|>I don't think this is an accurate arguement. Firstly, I don't recall
|>any of Bruce's comments being specifically on the 'rigors' of pregnancy.

r> He said that abortion was done for "convenience".  This suggests that a
r> woman who has an abortion because she is vomiting constantly and unable
r> to get out of bed, much less hold down a job, is suffering only an 
r> "inconvenience".  I really don't think that Varney is in a position to
r> judge her level of discomfort, do you?

So, you're saying that Varney has never experienced any discomfort in his
life at all, without asking him. Why not ask him why he feels it's for
convenience, and then explain problem pregnancies to him. I think that
would be more productive. 

I don't know whether I agree with Varney or not. But because it is a
choice between agreement and disagreement means that it's an opinion.
I can *say* I disagree with facts, but that doesn't make a lot of sense.

r> If indeed this were the case, are you arguing that Varney would have a
r> right to comment on the childbirth experiences of all women because he
r> had watched a single birth?  I have seen a prostate exam, but I still 
r> don't think I'm in any position to judge how comfortable or uncomfortable
r> the exam may have been for the man involved.

Many people do use their experiences and those experiences told to them to
form their opinions. I think that many people would form an opinion on how
uncomfortable they see a single person receiving a prostrate exam. How do
you form opinions? Can you find out the experiences of everyone so that 
your opinion is 100% correct? Opinion is something based on feelings and
few facts. If someone has an opinion from a single experience, that's 
what an opinion is all about. If you have an opinion from working with
thousands of women who've gone through a certain experience, then maybe
some people would say your opinion is more valid. But it doesn't make it
anything more than an opinion.

Can't the same argument you use for Bruce be used on yourself? For example,
your sister experienced a very difficult pregnancy. In your mind, how could 
anyone possibly say abortion is a convenience considering how she suffered. 
This is using the same anecdotal experience that you think is irrelevant. 
You, -rocker- wouldn't do this. Especially since you've specifically stated 
that it's not valid. But that's how I've been interpreting some of what I've
heard.

|> We don't know that. [varney's experience]

r> Indeed, which makes your speculation rather pointless, don't you think?

No, I think it makes it apposite. You're condemning Varney without 
knowing any of his experiences or what led him to hold the position
he presently does. This is what you are accusing him of doing when
he states that 'abortions are convenient' without knowing some or
all of the situations that women get into. That he is condemning 
abortionists without knowing their experiences or what led them to
that choice. 

If I've mistated your argument, please clarify it for me. I don't 
see the difference in what the two of you are doing in your arguments.
Why then would he be wrong and you be right in how you argue?

r> That's why I specifically asked him if he had ever been pregnant.  Do
r> try to keep up on these threads.

There is no need to be condescending to me. Yes, I saw you ask him that.
If necessary I could even quote it.

|>You have no way of knowing.[his experiences]
r> And neither do you.

Exactly. Which is why your comments to him are unfair if you think his
are unfair against abortion.

|>There are many things that we all have opinions on without having 
|>experienced them, or having much knowledge on the topic.

r> Could you give me some examples of this?

Our recent political campaigning I think is a perfect example. The
candidates prance about eachother without talking much about the
issues, and many of us are going to try to make an informed choice
on the little information that we could find. That's not having
much knowledge on the topic. But people sometimes try to do their
best with the little information they have.

|> Using the
|>above argument would invalidate most of our opinions and let us 
|>simply be lambs led to a slaughter.

r> "Lambs led to a slaughter"?  My my, you must think it's important 
r> for people to be able to state unsubatantiated opinion as fact.  Do
r> tell me how we can be "lambs led to the slaughter" by questioning
r> Varney's basis for stating that pregnancy represents nothing more 
r> than "inconvenience" for a woman.  Note that I have taken no position
r> on Varney's right to _believe_ this, only his statement that this
r> was a fact.

I did not state that I think it's important for people to state 
unsubstantiated opinion as fact. And I think you know quite well 
that that was not my intent. I never said don't question Varney's beliefs. 

I did not read Varney's opinions as facts. I would always interpret a 
comment like 'abortions are for convenience' as a matter of personal
opinion.

To continue the political analogy, if I am not allowed to form an
opinion using the little information I have about the candidates, then
you're saying that I shouldn't vote. Therefore, I should have no say
in the fate of the country.

I do however, think you misinterpreted much of my argument. Maybe I
didn't state it well for you. I do think we're saying the same thing.
All I'm saying is what's good for the gander is good for the goose.

ag



Newsgroups: talk.abortion