From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Mulvihill vs Chuck Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Date: 23 Aug 92 02:03:09 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

mulvihil@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Lawrence Mulvihill) writes:
.eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
.>(Lawrence Mulvihill) writes:
.>+EMIL CHUCK writes:
.>+Lawrence Mulvihill:
.>+>\EMIL CHUCK:
.>        Do you think her family won't stop him from killing her?
.
.They may not be able to stop him.  Faced with a fanatical
.fundamentalist, a bat or gun wielding psychotic, I really doubt it.
.More importantly, why should they be put in this position?
.No offense intended, but perhaps you have not seen many of
.these situations.  If not, let me suggest that you do some
.community service work in some of our larger cities where
.the women's shelters are packed to capacity.  They need the
.help, and I think it might change your mind.  You can't
.pass a law to make every relationship loving.  But you can
.keep legal obstructions out of the way of people who need to
.put their lives back together, or escape an abusive situations.

No offense taken with the suggestion.

I reread the post (as I try to each time in this discussion). The father
was not only a "fanatical fundamentalist," he was also a DRUNKEN bat- or
gun-wielding psychotic. Being a preacher, he's also pretty damn
hypocritical if he was responsible for the "unwanted" births of the
narrator and her sister. I guess he doesn't want the Scarlet Letter on
his facade. I guess his attitude, and that of his wife, results in the
mistake that they made, a mistake they didn't want to face.

The parents' blatent admission that the children are a "nuisance" is
very disturbing. Their attitude indicates that they care less about
their children as they do about themselves. And that is not right. The
fact that they didn't _try_ to tell their children about how they
(children) should not repeat the mistakes they (parents) made has
affected her decision to have sex and her decision to have an abortion.
I don't know if she told her boyfriend and what his opinions were on the
situation; I don't recall him being mentioned other than "we had sex
three times." This problem is caused by a lack of communication between
all members concerned. Even though she had an abortion, the rudimentary
source of this dilemma is still there.

I don't call for legislating that all family relationships be loving. I
am not calling for abortion to be legal to avoid the "nuisance" attitude
that these parents have for their unplanned children or the potentially
abusive situation the narrator found herself in; nor am I saying that
abortion should be illegal for these reasons. All I'm pointing out is
that abortion won't make her family relationship any better or help put
her life back together. Honest communication -- especially when her dad
is not in a drunken stupor -- is the best way to solve the main problem
in this family. [Recall again the original article from which this
thread is created: Bush's response to the "Dateline" question concerning
abortion. The pro-choicers called his answer being "hypocritical" of his
pro-life views. I'm trying to show he did not answer the way you
expected him to answer -- treating his granddaughter/daughter as this
father did to his.]

.>That there are choices with regards to sex,
.>i.e., whether or not one should have sex. I assume that when two people
.>consent to have sex, they are mature, consenting, responsible adults who
.>understand the implications of the decisions they are making and the
.>risks of getting pregnant, venereal diseases, or HIV-exposure. This
.>includes knowledge of birth control that they elect to use.
.
.The assumption is an absolute, it is a bad assumption.
.We both know that this is not the case.  Further, if these
.two people were not "mature" and "responsible"  should
.they be having a child?  Do we have enough love in this
.country to "support" all of those resulting unwanted pregnancies?
.We don't even have enough love to help those who have not
.been aborted.  If you don't believe that, watch the reruns
.of the Republican Convention, or watch our fist pounding
.leader.  Sure he's a loving father, but not of someone else's
.kids.

Sylvia and her partner were physically mature and sexually responsible
to have sex. But that's not enough: she admits she wasn't ready to take
care of children as she unfortunately couldn't take care of a kitten.
She surely knew that if this happened her parents wouldn't be able to
help her support this child. She couldn't be able to financially support
a child. I admit these are the main reasons why she wanted to have an
abortion. Why didn't she think about these questions when she and her
boyfriend were having sex? (Don't get me wrong; the boyfriend should
also have considered these issues for himself as well as "could I take
care of her and a child?" and other questions. Men have a responsibility
in their decisions too.) More below. 

How is "love" measured in your opinion? There probably is enough love,
but not enough resources for an entire society to support unwanted
pregnancies, and I'm not sure if the same society would support aborting
unwanted pregnancies. The "lack of love" by society is not a good reason
to support abortion; otherwise, we could be justified in a proposal to
committing genocide (which would really boost those pro-lifers who say
abortion is murder). It's not that everyone wouldn't give a damn about
Sylvia; I think we do care. I think we should care more to see that this
situation doesn't happen again.

Sylvia's father is a loving father, but he seems to love himself more
than he loves his daughters. Even though Sylvia is an adult (20.5 y), he
still treats her and threatens her like she's an eight-year-old. He
still drinks in one mouth and preaches with the other. I hope I don't
become a father like him; I hope Sylvia's boyfriend and sexual partner
doesn't become like him either.

.I don't think, perhaps I'm out of touch,
.most people discuss what they will do if the method of
.birth control should fail.  I am not aware of
.a legal form which both partners sign stating their intentions.
.Perhaps there should be.  It is not very romantic, but
.neither is driving a friend to a clinic.

I surely am not in touch with the sexually active people in America. :)
But people who are considering having sex should start talking about it.
And not about unplanned pregnancy either; HIV infection is the primary
impetus for my urging sexually active people [the initials spell SAP,
but that's not very constructive] to discuss this. Again if a condom
breaks during intercourse between someone with HIV and someone without,
the latter person is in deep trouble and nothing can be done about it.
Hepatitus B can be transmitted through condoms (although there is a
vaccine). I'm asking that those who are sexually active consider if they
think they are ready to take care of the person with whom you are having
sex as well as a child.

I don't know if we should have a "legal form" but surely they must be
able to understand what could happen. (I semijokingly tell my friends
that I don't have a girlfriend because "no one's been willing to sign
the paperwork.") Perhaps some couples will make up their own
arrangements. If that helps lower the teenage/unmarried pregnancy rate
in this country, then it's worth a try. 

.>If the pregnancy endangers the mother's
.>health, abortion then is a medical procedure. This is my position;
.>abortion is treated as an issue related to sex and not pregnancy.
.Birth control is a sex related issue.  Abortion is not birth control.
.Abortion is only an issue if a pregnancy results, it is not a
.sex issue.
	And unplanned pregnancy does not occur except through sex.
>
.>Personal choices are made at the intimate level of the bedroom. The
.>government in this forum cannot dictate your options here (albeit they
.>may influence them). 
.I wouldn't bet on it.  Ever heard of sodomy laws?  If they can do
.it to homosexuals, they can do it to the rest of us.
	So we have a precedence for "imposing morality." If we
aren't going to impose our morality on others, don't be selective on
which moralities to impose and which not. Is this what you are
proposing, or are we going to -- as another poster mentioned -- sell our
morals for votes? 
>
.>But the choice is yours, and the decisions you make
.>are whether or not to engage in sex.
.It is not so simple.  Not all of life is so predictable.
.Can you picture yourself calculating whether or not your
.savings, the insurance company, and the federal/state
.governments can afford to take care of you when your condom
.fails and someone gives you AIDS?  It is almost laughable.
	It seems laughable, but it isn't once you get AIDS or get
pregnant.

.>When I originally wrote that statement, I meant it's difficult to face
.>it as reality for many people, not an indictment of the story being
.>fantasy.
.
.Yes. That's why I'm spending some time writing this.  It is difficult
.to face.  If a couple minutes on the Net someday helps to save someone
.from facing choices made harder by fundamentalist laws, then I consider
.it time well spent.
	If someone doesn't have to face the decision to have or not an
abortion, it is worth it, regardless of how
"right-extreme-fundamentalist" our laws are or are not.

.>+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 agree her father's opinions give an unnecessary burden to the
.>already difficult dilemma she faces. But I think more that she NEEDS
.>support and WANTS an abortion. 
.She is not likely to get support from that guy!
.She does not necessarily need the support to live, and in this situation
.it is not likely to materialize.  She will probably be murdered,
.if she stays and starts showing.  So she needs to either run away,
.get rid of her father, abort the prenancy, or come up with something
.more creative.  Practically speaking, these are not good options
.and she has decided she can live with an abortion.  Without it, she
.will die => she NEEDS the abortion.
When people need things, there is usually no decision to need it. When
people want things, there is usually a decision to desire it. People
naturally need the emotional feedback from their parents; love is
subsumed in a typical healthy father-daughter relationship. Example: we
all need food to maintain our health, but we want ice cream to fulfill
those needs.

.>It is more necessary that she reaffirm
.>her confidence that her family will support and love her even though she
.>erred; 
.
.Why?  Thousands survive and prosper without "families".  Does this
.grouping she lives with sound like what JDQ or GHWB would call a family?
.Perhaps she would do better in one of those gay or lesbian groupings
.which may not be "families", but which supply support and nurturing
.love to their children.  I object to defining "family" as a biological
.unit, and nothing more than that.  An abusive father, drunken mother,
.theiving brothers, and prostituting sisters would fit the JDQ/GHWB
.definition, but I'll take a stable lesbian couple for parents any day.
I don't think that your description of the family is accurate for the
views of Bush or Quayle. Read the speeches Barbara made for Wellesley
College and the RNC. (There are probably a few "family" speeches by both
George and Dan, but I can't remember where they spoke.)
	A family is more than biological, but the biology is the
foundation of its creation. You need a man and a woman to create
progeny. You can't just slap two people together. When the child is
born, it not only has a genetic link to the parents, he/she imprints to
his/her family and a psychological and emotional connection is
established. This connection doesn't just disappear upon age 18 or 21.
You will continue to be concerned and think about your parents until
you die as they will until they die. If she could stay with a homosexual
couple and get more emotional love and support from them, that's fine,
but that will not replace the real family she left behind. She will not
forget how her dad scared her away from his roof, and the family will be
perhaps irreversibly damaged.

.>        Would you prefer not knowing if your daughter were pregnant (and
.>not married)? 
.The point I was making was that with legal, funded abortions, without
.parental consent, she would have the opportunity to have the abortion
.in a safe, clean environment from a qualified doctor and her father
.would never have to know.  Thus she could avoid being murdered,
.have the opportunity to put her life back together, and avoid the
.mistake in future.
But by the consequences of this position, it is also possible that your
daughter can get an abortion without you knowing about it. I ask how you
would feel if your daughter had an abortion and not tell you. What would
this imply about the relationship between you and your daughter? Would
you be comfortable not knowing what she is doing with her body?

.>What would you do if a sibling of yours did something
.>wrong and not told you about it (like get suspended from school)?
.What I would do is not relavant!  I don't want the government
.to impose rules which can kill, maim, and destroy the lives of
.people like that young woman who could, given a chance, become
.someone we would all be proud off.
The extremist pro-lifers will argue about the potential life that the
young woman carries, but I won't insert them here. We've all heard this
thread before.
.>        There was a movie that came out last year, a foreign film from
.>Italy called "Everybody's Fine" (from the same guys who produced the
.>Oscar-winning foreign film "Cinema Paradiso," which is also an awesome
.>film). 
.Saw it.  The nature of life should be obvious to someone who watches
.Italian cinema.  Nothing is perfect, there is evil, there is good,
.and we all try to muddle through without hurting each other.
.We can't all be the same, or have the same parents, or never
.succomb to temptation.  Responsiblity is fine, but let's not
.pass laws that cause young women to die for a mistake such as uninteded
.pregnancy.  Such severity is a characteristic of fundamentalist
.countries, not this one, yet.
Unfortunately young women will die for similar errors whether it is
HIV/AIDS or drug overdosing. It's not something to be proud of.

I don't advocate passing laws that will cause women to die due to errors
in judgement, but I do want to be sure that the situation described
doesn't happen again. A law cannot substitute for the loving
relationship among members of a family. What I implore is for all of us
not only to "just get along" but to communicate with each other and love
each other and trust each other. Talk to your children and let them know
that they can confide anything to you. Let them know that you will love
them no matter what mistakes they make or their consequences. Most
importantly, listen to them and have them listen to you. Trust each
other and try not to break that trust. That can be done without
resorting to laws by the federal or state governments. Don't let your
children wear a mask of happiness over a face of despair, as the
children did in the aforesaid Tornatore film.

.>+>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.
.>        That's not only my judgement, it's pretty clear.
.Why?  As I said, it is not clear to me, and it could be fatal to her.
One of the major reasons why she chose to have an abortion comes from
the family relationship between her and her father. If she cannot
confide in him about her pregnancy without threats, she sure won't
confide in him about anything else. The abortion eliminates her
pregnancy, but it won't remove the sword of Damocles her father has
hanging over her.

.>Will she ever
.>tell her dad that she had an abortion and almost risked her life because
.>of him? Or will she stay silent until either word comes to her dad
.>through hearsay or he dies?
.Hopefully we will not be nosey enough to try and find out!
I don't intend to be a tabloid reporter and try.

.>+>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.
.>        Come on. Don't do a Clinton or Gore and duck the question.
.It is none of your business.

.>+>What constitutes a healthy relationship?
.The ability to talk, without fear of being assaulted.  Mutual respect.
I am talking to you respectfully, without fear of you striking out and
killing me (and I hope that feeling is mutual). That may be one element,
but we don't know each other that well, much less our "relationship" be
considered "healthy." What else constitutes a healthy relationship?

.I do not think that her father respects her.  He has threatened to
.assault her.  It is not a healthy relationship, by my standards, and
.nothing but her death will result if she either tells her father,
.or stays pregnant.  This woman lived in a difficult situation and
.made a hard choice.  She can live with it, why can't you?
I can live with her decision since she has already made it and it
doesn't involve me. And I sure don't consider her relationship with her
father as healthy either. But if this situation is indicative of some
backgrounds behind some women getting abortions, we have to determine
the real root cause of the problem. What I cannot live with is that this
situation can happen again, and that she still was not free of her
father's threats. And I assume you cannot either. An abortion will not
"patch things up" with this family or any other family whose
recalcitrance destroys the trust between family members.

-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck		DUKE BLUE DEVILS: 1992 ACC CHAMPIONS!
Biomedical Engineer 1993	1992 EAST REGIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Duke University, Durham, NC	AND 1992 NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!
August 31, 1992 - May 16, 1993	Duke football? What's that?
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:39490 talk.abortion:31585 alt.politics.bush:1464