From: psmith@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Paul Smith)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Keywords: abortion, slavery
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:13:06 GMT


Well Dan, I've responded to a lot of these points in other posts. I hope
you read them.  Please, in the future, try not to assume how I feel or
what my stance is on other issues is based on what a post.  Don't try to
infere what I've done about these issues.  It only makes you look bad.

In article <1992Nov17.162439.18162@nas.nasa.gov> dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King) writes:
>
>Care to elaborate on how abortion is a societal problem.  If anything 
>I would say the reverse.  The forced continuation of un-wanted pregnancy
>is a much larger societal problem.  Many of these forced pregnancies you
>wish to force women through will require a large amount of societal
>help in being raised.  Also by denying women reproductive freedom you
>are denying them any chance at equality.  This denies 50% of society
>a fair shot which is a societal problem.  

Well, lets start with your premise: there are more unwanted pregnancies
than abortions (which is the "larger problem"?).  Give that ~1.5M abortions
occur in the US alone each year (since RvW), and we don't know how many
"unwanted pregnancies" are carried to term (an oxymoron) I don't think 
we have a basis for discussion here.

Now, I don't wish to force anything on anyone, but we do have laws that
say simple things like you can't (theoreticly) kill someone and get away
with it.  These laws are in place because we have to have them to live
in an orderly/workable society.  So some forcing of rules on poeple is
inevitable.

But I ramble...

I am simply advocating that men and women should not have sex if they
don't want a baby at that time, but if they do have sex then they should be 
prepared to, at the least, give that child up for adoption.  That *WAS
THE ORIGINAL QUESTION* - "adoption is a viable alternative to raising the
child, so what is a viable alternative to pregnancy".  That viable 
alternative is abstinence.

And that is all I'm saying.  I was not saying that abstinence is an
alternative to abortion.  I'm simply saying that abstinence is a
resonable behavior to expect from two people to *prevent* a so-called
"unwanted pregnancy".

>Looks like we again end up with someone who has no clue about responsibility
>trying to force their warped vision of responsible behavior on someone
>else.  You are the one that desires protecting fetus. To do this, you'd
>rather use a method that requires no personal sacrifice of your own,
>but would rather use government force to enslave women to care for this
>fetus you treasure.  Sure there are other effective and less restrictive
>ways for you to protect the fetus, but that would require you to 
>actually give a little of yourself to accomplish.  I'm really not very
>impressed with your version of responsibility.

See, here's where you start assuming things and start attacking me.
I didn't call for government intervention, I didn't call for laws.  
I simply called (dared) society to call a spade a spade and acknowledge 
that killing an unborn child is wrong, and to do so to *protect* ourselves 
from government intervention.

You also shouldn't assume what personal sacrifice I've made.  I have plenty
of clues about responsibilty.  But, I'm not here to cry on the net and play 
guilt trips about how "I've done something why can't you."  That type of 
argument doesn't persuade anyone, so I won't bite.  I've given plenty.  
I will continue to do so.  What will you do?  Stand on the sidelines in 
self-righteousness?  You seem like you might know what you will do to 
protect rights and freedoms, which I applaud, but what will *you* do to 
protect a child?
-Paul
--
---