From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Subject: Re: Victory is at hand for Pro-Choicers
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:05:28 GMT

In article <1ddlrsINNhq4@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de> frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes:
#In article <Bx9o7F.139.2@cs.cmu.edu: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
#:In article <1dbr70INNch0@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de> frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes:
#:#In article <adams.720977803@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
#:##Any bill can be repealed...you won't have pro-choice leaders forever.  The
#:##price of liberty is eternal vigilance...
#:#
#:#Can someone explain to me the status of FOCA?  Is it just a bill?  I thought
#:#it was put to referendum - does this not give it a higher status?  How does
#:#Roe vs Wade fit into this picture?
#
#[explanation deleted]
#
#Thanks Susan, that explains a lot.

You're welcome.  Next week, we'll talk about executive orders.  :-)

#:#Please forgive my ignorance and all - but the only news in english that I get
#:#here is the Irish papers and the BBC world service, neither of which have said
#:#anything about FOCA that I know about.
#:
#:That's okay - I frequently assume that people in other countries
#:are just naturally avid scholars of U.S. current events.  :-)
#
#Well, all I know about American civics comes from P.J. O'Rourke's book,
#"Parliament of Whores", so my understanding is probably significantly out
#of whack :-)

Nah, it's probably better than most Americans'.

#[...]
#
#:It's difficult to amend the
#:U.S. Constitution, and fairly easy to pass a law.  
#:
#:We've been unable to add an amendment, for example, that simply
#:says that rights should not be denied people based on their
#:gender.  (Of course, a lot of the opposition to the ERA is
#:based on the notion that granting full equality to women under
#:the law implies the right to abortion.)  I think that the FOCA
#:will do as a temporary measure until the Constitution can be
#:amended.  The FOCA isn't perfect, but it's a decent first step.
#
#You would cry if you saw the Irish constitution, and what they want to
#do to it end of Novemember (I won't be home to vote against, after all).
#
#One of the articles there at present says something like "No woman should
#be forced out of financial necessity to work outside the home".  Apart
#from the sexism this is unexceptionable - if it said 'parent' then it
#would merely be stupid - but in a constitution?  
#
#The Catholic church helped write our constitution.  There is a constitutional
#ban on divorce too, and latterly (what purports to be) a ban on abortion
#(bereft of legislation - it's the recent attempt of the Supreme court to give
#it meaning that has caused the upcoming hassle).  Meanwhile the wellwoman
#centre and others try to get through the working day...

Sigh.  "I wept because I had no shoes until I met a man who had
no feet."  I can't imagine living under such rules, although I
was starting to try to after the Republican National Convention.

The only positive thing I can say about the situation in Ireland
is that the uproar over the young rape victim's attempt to have
an abortion created many converts to the fight for legal abortion.
Many people here in the U.S. did not fully understand the implications
of banning all abortions before that case.  

Can you give us some addresses in Ireland so that we can lend
some support?

Susan