saquigley@watmath.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (02/20/84)
Scott, You stole my line, I obviously didn't move quickly enough. Ok, since my following article is already half written, and since it is calmer than yours, and since I am making a few additional side remarks, I will still post it. So everybody, beware, read my next one at your own risk of being bored!!! Sophie Quigley watmath!saquigley
anderson@ittvax.UUCP (Scott Anderson) (02/26/84)
T, a non-null line. I planned to stay out of the abortion discussion, but I am enough incensed to reply to the following: > From decvax!harpo!ihnp4!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell! > uw-beaver!teltone!teldata!ted Fri Feb 17 15:13:18 1984 > > ******* > This answer is from a male so "n" it if you want. I am married with 3 > planned children. > > My answers: > > 1. No. Using abortion for birth control is irresponsible and is > one of the situations in which I would agree with the > anti-abortion people that abortion is murder. First, when responding to questions, could everyone please include the question with the answer? Thanks. By some judicious grepping, I found the original question: > For each category of women listed underneath, which of them should > be allowed to have an abortion if they so desire: > > 1 - Women who get pregnant as a result of not using birth control. About four years ago I took an introductory psychology course, and learned about the following inquiring into attitudes towards abortion. The subjects were, of course, as always, college undergraduates (both male and female, I think). Basically, the questions were much like Sophie Quigley's, except they asked many variations on the same question. Consider the following pair (I DON'T remember the exact questions, but the contrast is what is interesting, and I think I'm getting that correctly): a) A poor ghetto girl gets pregnant from not using birth control; she's not even sure who the father is. b) A pair of college students have gone steady for a while and use birth control regularly, but once--in the heat of passion--neglected it and the inevitable happened. Both sexes were FAR more disposed to grant an abortion to the latter than to the former. There are several things at work here: I) The latter couple was easier to sympathize with. After all, they only messed up ONCE. The first girl was clearly tempting fate. II) The latter situation struck closer to home. It's easier for college undergraduates to "walk a mile in the moccasins of" the college couple. It's the old "that could happen to me" syndrome. III) The first girl deserves to get pregnant for leading an irresponsible, wanton, promiscuous, immoral life. (Note, I'm not claiming these elements are orthogonal. If anything, they're co-incident. Certainly mixed up together.) Think for a minute what this means! Having a child is being used as a PUNISHMENT for being "bad" (consistently not using birth control), and an abortion is being used as a REWARD for being basically "good" (not to mention for being basically "like me"). Remember what the statement I'm incensed at was? "Using abortion for birth control is irresponsible." And what is the punishment for these irresponsible women: having to carry and give birth to a child! (Given the pain of childbirth, I think this could be attacked as cruel and unusual punishment.) And who will raise this desperately unwanted child? These same irresponsible people? That's right, let's force those who would be the worst parents to BE parents. [Personally, I'd rather there be thousands of abortions in order to avoid hundreds of (possibly) physically- and (certainly) psychically-damaged children. Damaged because they are unwanted and unloved.] And if not, WHO? YOU? If so, you should know how the adoption numbers work out: there are many un-adopted children, AND many people who want to adopt. This paradox is because the children available for adoption are not suitable for the potential adopters. The children aren't of the right race or just don't look enough like "potential mom and dad" to get picked. What do we do with the children who don't get adopted? Who will pay for college for them? Who will tell them they're loved? Who will love them? Or is love not necessary for these children? [Stop reading me, I've degenerated into useless inflammatory rhetoric. Sorry folks. Calm, calm. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Okay, I'm better now.] I'd like to leave you now with another excerpt from the article I'm flaming about. Please, everyone, think about who the "irresponsible people" are and who the "victims" are. > My answers are based on the concept that irresponsible people > should bear the consequences of their irresponsibility and victims > should not be further victimized. >From the usually calm, Scott D. Anderson decvax!ittvax!anderson