From: usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman)
Subject: Re: Chaney's argument FOR choice! (Was Re: One sure way to prevent a teen abortion?)
Keywords: abortion house punishment get out forced removal sex
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 07:05:45 GMT

tjoa@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Richard Tjoa) writes:

>It's long, but he ends up on the side of parental choice...

>In article <1992Jul29.003446.28628@csus.edu> (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul28.145831.657@pwcs.stpaul.gov> (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>>>Somewhere else (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>>>>That (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>>>>>That (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>>>>>> Some parents have VERY strong feelings about their daughters not
>>>>>> having abortions. 
>>>>>> Some parents resort to illegal means by issuing threats.
>>>>>
>>>>> Like, "If I ever find out that you're pregnant, I'll kill you?"
>>>>> A kinder, gentler enforcement of wholesome traditional family
>>>>> values, wouldn't you say? 
>>>> The part that's aimed at preventing killing by a little more force,
>>>> is, "..but if you decide to kill that unborn child, your ass is out of
>>>> the house. Permanently."
>>>> A huge number of daughters would shrink way back from killing their
>>>> unborn child, then.
>>>
>>>Obviously, you approve of intimidation as a tool for keeping the
>>>youngsters in line.  Somehow, I'm not surprised.
>>If your parents ever punished you for talking back, that's just as
>>easily an act of intimidation. 

>It never got to the point where it was a threat of being removed from the
>household.  It would seem to me that if someone got to be trouble to
>your parents, your parents have the choice to remove them from their
>abode.

>>>>> Some parents threaten their teenage children with foster homes for all
>>>>> kinds of transgressions, some of them extremely trivial.  Actually,
>>>>> don't you think those kinds of threats are self-defeating?
>>>
>>>> Nope. It worked on my brother.
>>>
>>>Obviously it didn't.  Read on.
>>
>>It worked while he was in their house. 

>Uh-huh.

>>>>>> That's no slight inconvenience for anyone; the daughter would be
>>>>>> devastated, and she would have no legal action against her parents.
>>>>>> She'd just be out of a home.

>(Is that all?)

>Do your damnedest not to get caught?  Sounds like an anti-parental
>notification stand.
>Do your parents look like idiots for kicking your brother out?  I have no
>basis on which to make a decision.  However, it looks like understanding is
>just brimming from all corners of your household.
>Also, if parents have the right to "kick people out", then why shouldn't
>that right apply to, say, your mother and any unborn siblings?


>>>> Abortion goes way beyond a debate when it divides families and friends. 
>>>> That has all the qualities of a war in the brewing.
>>>
>>>If it's a battle over control, every parent loses eventually.  That's the
>>>way it is.  At a certain age, trust becomes a bigger component in the
>>>parent/child relationship equation.  If a parent chooses to make it a war,
>>>he/she is only hastening defeat.  Imo, of course.
>>
>By the way, Mr. Chaney, "war", as you so love to put it, has its
>casualties.

OK, what about a parent who decides that s/he doesn't want to deal
with a grandkid.  Do you think that the parent should say to his/her
pregnant teenage daughter "get an abortion or get out of the house!"?

If you think it's ok for a parent to kick a kid out of the house for
being pro-choice, I suppose you agree that a parent can throw a kid 
out for being pro-life and defying a parent who wants his/her kid to 
have an abortion.  That would teach the next daughter to either not
get pregnant or have an abortion, right?


Lori Kent Rothman
usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu


standard disclaimers

Newsgroups: talk.abortion