From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Loren and Heather should bicker in person, not on net
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 21 Dec 92 20:50:44 GMT

In <17DEC92.14415107@vax.clarku.edu> hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes:

>In a previous article, lfinkelstein@vax.clarku.edu proves yet again what a 
>hypocrite he is:

>>Unfortunately, some people think that a public forum is a perfectly good place 
>>to flame people.  This is probably because they are so insecure in their own 
>>beliefs that they think the best way to present their case is to publically 
>>smear their adversary.

>Cute Loren.  Criticize me for flaming, after you've called me all kinds of 
>things.  You're the one who thinks the best way to present his case is to try 
>to publicly smear me by posting your bizzare teenage boy sexual fantasies 
>about me, which have absolutely nothing to do with anything.

Wow, I sure missed out on a lot.  Could someone send me the relevant posts?
They could make for good reading.  

>So, Loren, now that you've learned that some methods of birth control work 
>after conception, do you still think using birth control is okay?  Or would 
>you like to see IUDs and birth control pills banned because they can cause the 
>deaths of innocent little fetilized eggs?

I don't know about Loren, but my answer would be no.  On the other hand, 
I am glad DES and the Dalkon Shield have been banned, and I hope RU-486,
which endangers the health and even lives of women, like the French smoker 
whose death was linked to the chemical, will not gain wide entry into the
USA. 

>Now that you've seen statistics and references showing the frequency of 
>miscarraiges and health problems resulting from pregnancies, do you still 
>think most pregnancies are not a threat to the woman's health?

I missed those too.  All I've seen is undocumented claims about the
miscarriage rate, and lists of health problems that I could easily 
match with health problems resulting from abortion.

>Do you still think rape victims should be forced to give birth to their 
>rapist's child just because you want them to?
		^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The marked words are either redundant or unwarranted, depending on how
Heather uses words like "just because."

Clue: the rapist's child is wanted by lots of people who would be glad
to adopt it.  Heather is not only leaving the child out of her "just
because," she is also leaving out the men and women who are desperate
for children to adopt.

Whether that overrides the desire of the woman to abort, is a difficult
question, but has nothing to do with the words "just because".

For one thing, the woman might be under intense pressure to abort to 
prove that she was not "asking for it" or "enjoying it."  So long as
our society does not divest itself of these abominable attitudes, women
raped do not have a completely free choice as to whether to abort or not.

	I deplore the horrible crime of child murder...No matter what
	the motive, love of ease, or desire to save from suffering the
	unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the
	deed...but oh! thrice guilty is he who drove her to the 
	desperation which impelled her to the crime.
			--Susan B. Anthony, writing in her newspaper,
			  _The Revolution_, 8 July 1869, 4(1):4

	When a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is a
	sign that, by education or circumstances, she has been greatly
	wronged.		--Mattie Brinkerhoff, _The Revolution_,
				  9 April 1868, 1 (14): 215-216

>Are you still insisting that women's bodies be used against their will while 
>you yourself are unwilling to let your body be used to save the life of a 
>fetus?

Uh-oh.  Did Keith make his usual offer while I was "flying blind"?  Before
long, I'll post "What did Keith tell you about me, Mark?"

Clue: I have not seen Keith withdraw his slander that I threatened him
with net censors, when all I said was that if he really wanted to gross
me out, he'd have to be so explicit that the net censors would get on
his case.  By which I meant, the net censors themselves would take it 
upon themselves to reprimand him, despite my NOT wanting them to do so.

BTW Susan Garvin said there are no net censors, but the talk.rape character
who hosed some posters for talking about abortion sure seemed like one.

Peter Nyikos