From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: ALL ARGUMENTS FOR PRO-CHOICE REFUTED HERE!!!!!
Date: 6 Oct 92 16:02:10 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Distribution: na
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

I've changed the distribution slightly, as this is an extremely long
post. There are 5 reproductions of earlier posts at the end from different
sources that fairly well refute any and all pro-life contentions that
life begins at conception, that abortion hurts the mother and birth
is better, and that child bearing is a wonderful thing.


ss1@kepler.unh.edu (The Rink) in
<1992Oct5.023010.6885@newshost.unh.edu> rants for 311 lines of
which most have been mercifully deleted. The originals are
available either in t.a or I have temporarily archived them. I'm
only reponding to specific points to invalidate arguments. There
are a number of posts reproduced at the end of this article, each
preceded by a "**" for easy location. They serve to show why
abortions are necessary or otherwise give pertinent information.

     The following is an article that refutes all arguments that
     justify abortion.

TbBA or lack of an argument or statement to refute cause 1-18 to be
summarily "unproven". Case 19 is for someone with legal knowledge,
as the specific instances of what is said are beyond my legal
knowledge. In any case, there appear to be no rights, only things
granted should a child occur for case 19. Further information on
these cases will be provided at the end of the post, to make it
somewhat bearable. I will only answer these cases one at a time
from now on, and only if you provide a reasonable argument that
requires a refutation.
------------------------------------------------------------------
     1.  A woman should have a choice.

     Between what options? 
What ever options she feels are correct for her. Why you ask such
a nitwit question is beyond me.

     Deuteronomy 30:19 reminds us:  "I have set before you life and
     death, the blessing and the curse.  Choose life then so that
     you and your descendents may live."

Your biblical quote actually supports a woman being able to choose
abortion if she wishes, although it indicates that it is not the
desired choice. Since you offer it as an argument, I ask you
whether you will directly contradict it and choose for others, in
effect not letting them choose?

See "**1"

...
     3.  To reduce illegal back-alley abortions.
     
     ... the evidence points to only 114 deaths in 1963, 

Please point out to me 114 deaths through abortions that occurred
since 1973, in any single year. You'll be surprised. Also, the
number of total people has increased since 1963, so you'll have to
do a number per population figure instead of plain outright
numbers. That's kind of like saying "in 1880, there was one murder
in Houston, in 1990 there were 745 when Houston had a population of
less than 1000 in 1880, and almost 3 million <3,000,000> in 1990"
(Numbers totally ficticious, they're only to prove a point) to show
how lawlessness has run rampant in modern society. See "**12"
     
     4.  To prevent child abuse.
     
     Following Roe vs. Wade in 1973, the cases of child abuse in
     America rose 500% by 1982.
     
Following man landing on the moon in 1969, there was a 500%
increase in murders nationwide. Asserting statistics, whether true
or not, does not indicate causality by themselves. If you're
asserting that the increase was due only to RvW, then I beg to
differ, as recent studies have shown that child abuse was as
rampant in the 50s as it is presently, and that only because we are
becoming aware societally, more are being reported as people
realize that being silent is no longer the correct course of
action. The same is true of homosexuality, it has stayed at about
the 10% of the population it always has been, it is just more
visible now.

     Pediatrics (1980), who found that abused children came from
     planned pregnancies in over 90% of the more than 600 cases he 

This little set of studies indicates several things that I've
suspected for a long time. In families where the husband is the
abuser, I expect you'll find the guy is extremely insecure, needing
the ego boost of naming the child after himself, and probably
marrying a quiet, insecure woman who is dependent on him. The fact
that they put on maternity clothes an average of 57 days before the
rest of the nation indicates to me that the husband wants to
announce to the world that "Hey! Look! I'm fertile! See?" where the
woman quietly subjects herself to his will. From what I remember of
the statistics, I think men are the most common abusers, and women
abusers often marry male abusers, as they remind them of their
abusive fathers.

All that's needed to refute the credibility of Dr. Ney is to
mention Dr. Koop's report on abortion that was sponsored by the
pro-life government of Ronald Reagan that failed to find *any*
significant problems, psychological or otherwise, that were greater
for abortion than child-bearing. Toss out this argument.
     
     
     5.  To save relationships.
     
A free clue. Could be that the relationship was going down the
tubes anyway, they thought the fact of an impending child would
bring them closer, the announcement of pregnancy made the
relationship even worse, and thus the woman correctly surmised that
it was going nowhere, and why should she have a child with this
loser? Any more questions?

     6.  A woman has a "right" to control her own body.
     
How about a body that contains two sets of genetic information?
This is the case of any transplant patient, yet there is only one
entity, with one body part growing inside a second person. In the
case of kidneys, which don't require the death of the donor, the
person is in effect outgrowing themselves. As for being two genders
simultaneously, ask Tula. S/he has both sets of chromosomes. This
argument is primary to the pro-choice movement. That you can't put
together a better argument against this primary argument should
show you that your position either needs much more diligent
research, or is not worthy of your continued support.

See "**1"

     7.  To prevent possible suicide.
     
See story about Stella at "**7"

     8.  To relieve stress.
     
See "**1" to see a real case of "stress".

     9.  To protect a woman's mental health.
     
Um, rink, the primary reason for medical grounds is generally the
health of the woman, not the mental health, although those probably
exist also. At least argue the correct portion, and don't side-
track the original argument.

But, to contradict your mental health case, at least as far as
epilepsy is a mental condition, see "**1"

     10. To relieve women of unwanted pregnancies:
     
Try again, and take a look at all the abonded children walking the
streets with the homeless. True, sub-urban America probably has
very few unwanted children, but the rest seems to have an
oversupply of them.

And please, great rink, explain the thousands of children that stay
in orphanages or foster homes for an average of 3 years.
(Washington Post, Saturday (I think) on story about foster care and
child protective services.) There is a great deal more demand than
availibility of white babies, however.
     
     11. The fetus is mere tissue or only uterine in content.
     
There is no such "plot" among pro-choicers. (Where do you get your
information?) It is human (adj) but not a human. (See the
difference?) Anyway, the tripe and misinformation about the
developmental stages has been deleted, and it is strongly
recommended that link, uh, rink, research a biology text written
for someone above the third grade reading level.

Oh, and see "**11"
     
     12.  Abortion is safer than childbirth.
     13.  At least for teenagers, abortion is safer than
     childbirth.
     
Un substantiated tripe removed. TbBa. Further info is included at
"**12" and "**13"
     
And please get references that are modern day, eh? Medical science
has moved great leaps and bounds since 1980, much less 1975. Your
quotes could also be refering to the fact that the younger the
patient, the more dangerous it is for her to be carrying a fetus,
as her body is not ready for it yet, and that the attendent
complications are due to this fact. Another TbBA, as you've
provided no supporting evidence other than an out of context quote.

     14.  Abortion is permitted only in early months of pregnancy.
     
He really doesn't have a clue, does he? (In answer to abortions
allowed throughout pregnancy on demand.

     Abortion can never outgrow its pagan heritage.

Nope, he sure doesn't. Showing your christian bigotry again, are we
link?As for why late-term abortions are a necessary thing, see
"**1"
     
     15.  A human fetus cannot feel pain.
     
I admit a fetus can sense pain, but my question to you is can it
"feel" it in the sense that you or I feel it, or is that sense more
akin to those of the animal world. This is more TbBA.
     
     16.  The child may be handicapped or deformed.
     
Questions, no arguments. You call this a refutation?
See "**1"
     
     17.  To control population and food supply.
     
Wonderful rink. You've shown us the true reason for your view. You
wish the earth to resemble an anthill. This again is not an
argument for pro-choice. In any case, you've not refuted it.
     
     18.  To save welfare (taxpayers') money.
     
This also is not a pro-choice argument. The proper statement is
"While you're on tax-payer's money, you will not concieve and bring
another child into the world that you cannot support." That is a
responsibility statement, and not really a pro-choice statement,
although some pro-choicers may feel that way. I do.

     19.  An unborn child has no rights.

     U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has
     said:  "Roe vs. Wade is on a collision course with itself.  It
     has no basis in law or logic." 

This quote is out of context, and, I believe, innaccurate. It
actually, in its entirety, supports RvW. (Susan Garvin would be a
good source for more info on this one.)

**1

From: mills@uga.edu (Kathi Mills) Message-ID:
<1992Sep1.073037.7766@rigel.econ.uga.edu>

Let's take my abortion, which was typical in many ways, as an
example. If I had not aborted, the following would probably have
happened:

1. I would have died. Pregnancy is strongly contraindicated for
women who have had epilieptic seizures; the more severe the
seizures, the more strongly pregnancy is contraindicated. I had two
grand mal seizures (the worst possible kind) within 7 monnths of
becoming pregnant.

2. If I didn't die, there would have been a high risk of permt
health damage.

3. I had no health insurance and no money. Therefore the fetus,
which was already at grave risk of health problems due to the
seizure-connntrol medication I had beenn on, the fact that I had
consumed alcohol and over-the counnter drugs before I knnew I was
pregnant, would not have received ANY prenatal care. That factor
alone increases the risk of premature birth, and therefore health
problems, significantly.

4. I would have been unable to complete my (barely started) college
education, therefore dooming me to a life of low-paying service
sector occupations in which most women now work. Thus, I would not
have achieved my full creative and intellectual potential, snd
would nnot have served society as well as I do now.

5. I would have had to go onn welfare to survive, since I had only
a high school education, little job history, and non particular job
skills.

6. I would have given birth to a child I didn't want, and with my
temper, lack of education (at that point), and history of abuse, I
would probably have abused it.

7. My SO and the father of the child, being a responsible personn,
offerred to drop out of school and support us. Thus he would have
ruined his own life as well, since he also had few job skills and
little experience. Even now, 2 years out of college, he has yet to
find a good job, annd it is nnnot due to lack of trying.

Thus, by choosinng to abort, I benefited society by living to
become an educated, taxpaying, civic minded citizen annd
developinng real job skills; I benefited taxpayers by nnot going on
welfare; I benefited my SO by makinng it possible for him to
complete his education; and I benefited myself by preservinng my
life and health and making my life worth living. Still wonder how
abortion can be a "responsible decision"?

 [...]

"A woman voting for a Republican is like a chicken voting for
Colonel Sanders."

Ferrari (mills@rolf.stat.uga.edu) 

**7
From: regard@sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) 
This is a copy of a previous post:

This story is set about five years before Roe v. Wade, and it could
be set a few months in the future.
________________________clipped here_______________________________

I was 20.5, attending a local teacher's college, and living with my
fundamentalist family (my dad time-shared being a drunk, a
conductor on the railroad, and a sutherndunker preacher, my mom was
a housewife).

My sexual partner and I used birth control every time -- all three
of them.  Maybe it was a hole in the rubbers we used, maybe it was
badly mixed foam, but whatever it was, I was late, and I was
tossing breakfast.  I called a pal, arranged to use her phone
number and address, and went in for a pregnancy test.

When the results finally came, it was true -- I was pregnant.

A year or so before, in the course of a rather vitriolic fight
(growing up in that family may be why I'm not worried about the
flames that sometimes come my way on the net...), my mother had
assured me that both my sister and I were unwanted.  (I never could
have guessed...)

I braced myself, worked up every bit of acting skill I had, and
told my mother about a friend I had, who lived at home, and had
somehow gotten pregnant.  After forbidding me to see her again, my
mother told me that "Of course, she should have the baby, continue
living at home, and let her parents help raise the child."

Well, that was an answer in terms of her values, and not one I
could accept.  I knew that it would have been better to have been
born dead than to be defenseless and trapped in a house with people
who considered you, at best, a nuisance.  (The worst was more than
I'm willing to get into right now, thanks.... This post is a bitch
to write _without_ all the background.)  I was a sophomore in
college, with no more marketable skill than three sexual
experiences, and no desire to enter that branch of retailing. 
Minimum wage was either $.95 or $1.25 and that was bad news.

The good news was that when my father came home, and my mother told
him about the hypothetical friend, he said "I'd kill her".  Since
he'd already pointed a rifle at me once, and once threatened to cut
up my sister if my mother didn't cook for him when he came home
drunk (the knife against my sister's leg suggested this was not a
mere rhetorical flourish), it occurred to me that perhaps that was
the solution.  Tell 'em, get killed, and there'd be no unwanted
baby.  Not even a 20.5 year old (gutless?) one.

I didn't _really_ consider this "good news" to be the living
gospel, though, and after spending a day or two in constant fear
and prayer (yeah, prayer -- back then I spelled ghod without the
"h"), I realized that the best solution for me, and for the
innocent life I was in danger of committing, was an abortion.  But
this was 1967, and Planned Parenthood was a little goosy about
providing _birth control_ to unmarried women living at home, much
less able to provide abortions.

Thanks to the generosity of Enoch Pratt (philanthropist who funded
our public library), I was able to find books on conception,
pregnancy, and (peripherally) abortion.  None of the chapters on
abortion were _that_ helpful, full as they were of moral
condemnation of the very idea, but eventually, from the horrific
descriptions of "fallen women" who had illegal abortions, I
understood that if the lining of my uterus were made inhospitable
to the efforts of the fetus to implant, or the placenta were
disrupted if it had, I would have a good chance of losing the
pregnancy, and some chance of losing my life.

I read as much as I could find about sterile technique, and set to
work.  I bought a crochet hook, a file, and some emery cloth,
flattened the crochet hook and sharpened it the best I could along
one side (I think it was about a size A), then polished it with the
emery cloth till my thumbnail could not detect any roughness. (My
reading had suggested that I really _did not_ want to perforate my
uterus if I could possibly avoid it....)  I wanted a scraping tool,
not a cutting tool.

I selected a coathanger, and folded it until it would hold my
vagina open, so that I would not pick up any bacteria while
inserting my homemade curette.

Since I could not find sterile prepacked gloves, and
pressure-cooking others was not a success, I bit, clipped, and
filed my fingernails, and purchased a few LARGE bottles of
Listerine (thinking a few kind thoughts about Dr.  Lister as I
did).

I placed my curette and the coathanger-speculum into a brown bag,
and waited till my parents were out of the house.  Explaining to my
sister that I was working on a biology project, I took down the
pressure cooker, put my implements into it, and ran it at fifteen
pounds for about forty-five minutes.  When it was cool, I placed
the unopened bag in another, and put that package into my
schoolbag.  The Listerine was already in my locker at the college,
and before I went to bed, I trimmed my pubic hair to stubble, and
prayed that if what I was going to do was a sin, that god would let
me know, and that otherwise, he would guide my hand so I didn't
injure myself.  When I woke, I was comforted by a feeling that
everything was going to be just fine.

Nervous, but not guilty, I told the folks about a meeting that
would make me a couple hours late "working on the literary
magazine", and left as normal.  After my classes, I got the
Listerine, the bag, and a box of sanitary napkins, and went into a
restroom.  I had spent some time over the last few days considering
where to perform the operation, and decided that the small restroom
near the side door of the student center would be best -- lots of
foot traffic just outside, so if I _did_ get into trouble, and
could yell for help, I might be heard, consistent but low-level use
(because the other john had a lounge and was more popular) so
no-one would wonder why someone was in the other stall for half an
hour but if I collapsed on the floor I might be found in time, and
close to the magazine's office, so I could go somewhere and sit
privately afterwards if I was too shakey to start my long bus trip
home.  I used most of a bottle of Listerine on the seat and
porcelain, put the bag down on the purse-shelf, washed my hands and
forearms with soap, then rinsed with Listerine, and tore open the
bag so my tools were ready to pick up as soon as I'd finished with
my hands.  I sacrificed my toothbrush and more Listerine to scrub
my hands till they almost hurt, taking special care around the
fingernails and creases, and used most of the last bottle to clean
my pubic area as much as possible.

One more pause to ask god, who might well have been worn out with
listening to me over the last week, whether what I was about to do
was my will alone or his, working through me, and it was time to
start.

Reclining across the toilet, I spread my legs, and carefully slid
the coathanger into place.  I think I poured a little more
Listerine into my vagina, but I'm not certain after this long.  A
few deep breaths to stop the shaking (well, reduce it some....) and
I picked up the crochet hook.  I hadn't been able to come up with
a way of pre-dilating my cervix, so getting the hook in was a
little unpleasant, but adrenalin, of which I had PLENTY, kept the
cramps from being as noticeable as they might have been.

After that, it was almost easy.  I held the hook _very_ lightly
between two fingers, and gently felt around till I knew about how
deep my uterus was, moved the hook from side to side, and generally
poked around till I had a feel for how much pressure it took to
cause pain. Once I had the feel for it, I scraped back and forth,
side to side, diagonally, several times, then did it some more.  I
took my time, about fifteen minutes, then removed the hook and the
hanger, packed up my supplies (I _still_ wonder what the janitor
thought about finding three BIG empty Listerine bottles in the
trash!), put on a fresh napkin from the middle of the box, and
walked, shakey but not too rocky, out to the snack bar for a _tray_
of cups of coffee and a pack (my first) of cigarettes.  By the time
I had finished drinking the coffee, I had stopped shaking, and had
decided nicotine was one fine tranquillizer.  I hopped the buses
for home and entertained my mother with a description of the work
we'd done on the magazine.

The next day, I made an appointment with a gynecologist the friend
who loaned me her phonenumber suggested, and told him what I'd
done.  He was _not pleased_.  He listened as non-judgementally as
he could, then, in a rather flat, strained voice said that I was
lucky I hadn't killed myself (I agreed) and gave me the most
thorough gyne exam I've ever had in my life.  When he was done, he
gave me a prescription for antibiotics, another for birth control,
and took me from the exam room into his office.

"Stella, if you quote me, I'll deny it, but PLEASE, if you ever are
tempted to do that again, come talk to me.  We can find some
reason, suspicious cells maybe, to do a hospital procedure, but
PLEASE, don't risk your life again."

I'd rather not.  It worked -- I didn't wrong that potential human
by allowing it to grow up battered, torn between an unwilling
mother who was not even a fit parent for a kitten (I still feel
badly about some of the mistakes I made with my first kittens
eighteen months later), and self-hating, other-hating
religious-fanatic grandparents.

I am pro-choice, but I do NOT believe that women should be forced
to choose between committing a pregnancy against her will, her
interests, and any likelihood of happiness for the potential child,
and aborting herself in a public toilet.  Some choices just ought
not to be required, but if I ever face the same situation again, I
will take this posting to a gynecologist, and ask for improvements
on my techniques.  If SHe doesn't discover some reason for a
non-abortion, I will change gynecologists.

I do NOT recommend that women use this procedure, even after
today's Supreme Court decision, without discussing it with your
gynecologist (and if SHe's not helpful, get another one FAST),
that's not why I'm posting it.  But I want to encourage people to
think, just a little, about what illegal abortion can mean even in
the best cases (and on the whole, mine was far from worst-case --
I lived!), and though I'm sure some of you will see it differently,
I want to make a case that sometimes it takes guts to follow your
perception of the right against that of others.

Love is the law, love under will!

STella@xanadu.com   1016 E. El Camino Real, #302, Sunnyvale, CA
94087
#################################################################

**11


From: bmc@mayo.edu (Bruce Cameron)
Subject: Re: About those UnBornThings

orr@turing.mcs.gvsu.edu (Wes Orr {Academic Computing}) writes:
|> In answer to your question any time one human sperm cell and one
|>human egg cell merge they are a living human being, biologically
|>speaking.  They have no genetic ability to become anything else.

Well perhaps, then again perhaps not.

There is no doubt that the cell(s) are living, and biologically
human, but as for becoming something else ...

Cancer Cells vs. Embryonic cells

	Observation:
	     cancer cells spread in a manner resembling embryonic
cell
	     migrations.
		     Barbera et al.-- demonstrated specific
adhesive
		     recognition may control homing of optic nerves
		     from retina to optic tectum
		     Nicolson et al.-- demonstrated that cells from
primary
		     tumors for secondary tumors at sites where
those cells
		     have greatest adhesion.

		     have greatest adhesion.

	Question:
	      do we have embryo-like tumors or tumor-like Embryos?
		   Mintz et al.--isolated teratoma cells, injected
the
		   cells into early blastocysts (mice). The
blasocysts
		   were allowed to implant into the uteri of other
		   female mice (different genotype from cancer
donor).
		   embryos developed into tumor free adults, but
with
		   cells of both genotypes.

		    also observed:
			(mouse)teratomas develop in clusters that
			 resemble (mouse) embryos & will
differentiate
			 into the embryonic tissue types if in a
			 suitable environment.

			 normal (mouse) embryos will form teratomas
if
			 implanted in the testes.

Now, if cancer cells can develop as an embryo does if placed in a
receptive uterus (suitable environment) and an embryo can develop
as a cancer if placed in an unsuitable environment, then are you
sure that an embryo can't change form?

sources:

Barbera et al., Adhesive Recognition and Retinotectal Specificity.,
Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S., 70:2482-2486

Faber J.J., and Thornburg K. L., Placental Physiology, Raven Press,
New York, 1983

Mintz, B., Clonal Basis of Mammalian Differentiation., Symp. Soc.
Exp. Bio., 25:345-369

Nicolson, G. L. et al, Transmembrane Control of the Receptors
on Normal and Tumor Cells. II. Surface Changes Associated with
Transformation and Malignancy. Biochem. Biophys. Acta 458:1-72

Nicolson, G. L., Cell and Tissue Interactions Leading to Malignant
Tumor Spread., Amer. Zool. 18:71-80

--
--Bruce

"Truth is ultimately a philosophical concept,...,
 and standards of truth are adequate for practical
 purposes if they are substantially more reliable
 then the system undergoing evaluation"
				C. E. Metz
---------------------------------------------------
bmc@mayo.edu    (507) 284-3288  fax: (507) 284-9623
Mayo Foundation, 200 1st St SW, Rochester MN 55905
---------------------------------------------------
#include <std/disclaimer>             ARS -- WD9CKW


**12 From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) Subject: Deaths from
abortion 1973-1982 Message-ID: <1992Aug07.235648.262212@cs.cmu.edu>

This is for the U.S.A., as reported to the CDC.  Ten deaths later
attributed to ectopic pregnancy are omitted.  The  numbers in
parentheses were classified as unknown.  The source is "Induced
Abortion: A World Review, 1986", Christopher Tietze and Stanley K.
Henshaw, AGI.

Year Legally induced          Illegally induced   Spontaneous

1973      25                       22(3)               10 
1974      26                       7(1)                21 
1975      29                       5(1)                14 
1976      11                       3(1)                13 
1977      17                       4                   16 
1978       9                       7                   9 
1979      18                       0                   8 
1980       9                       2(1)                6 
1981       7                       1                   3 
1982      11                       1                   6 
     -----------              ------------        ----------- 
	 152                    52(7)                116

_________________________________________________________________ 

**
Ron's input, for the present post---

Even these numbers don't tell everything, as they don't give
relative numbers per normalized population for each, but the
numbers do refute rink's statement about abortion being oh so
dangerous as compared to his 114 figure number for 1963. Also, see
that there were 10 deaths in this time period due to ectopic
pregnancies, and that numbers for deaths due to pregnancies carried
to term are not included. 

**13
Risks of abortion: 1990
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Abortion related mortality

--   The risk of death associated with childbirth is about 11
     times as high as that associated with abortion.

--   The risk of complications with abortion is minimal --
     less than 1% of all abortion patients experience a major
     comlication associated with the procedure, such as a
     serious pelvic infection, hemorrhage requiring a blood
     transfusion or unintended major surgery.

--   The risk of death associated with abortion decreased
     more than fivefold from 1973 to 1985, with 3.4 deaths per
     100,000 legal abortions in 1973 to 0.4 in 1985.

--   There is no evidence of problems with later childbearing
     among women who have an early abortion performed by
     the most common method - vacuum aspiration.

Source:  "Facts in Brief:  Abortion in the United States."
published by the Alan Guttmacher Institute.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com
(Internet)
Ron                          Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
			     The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
			     Make a U-turn to God.
The irony is priceless.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.women