[net.abortion] sundry items

regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (08/06/85)

>Rich Rosen cannot possibly believe that women's right to control their own
>bodies is one of those "unalienable rights" that the Declaration of Indepen-
>dence claims "they are endowed by their Creator with," because he cannot
>prove the existence of any such "Creator."

He doesn't have to prove the creator.  Point is, the laws of this land are
based on a document drawn up by the founders of the country which supposedly
sets forth the ideological basis of all government for this country.

That they founders may have believed in a creator doesn't require us to.
They didn't write that in as an amendment.

However, they did write in that the charter of our government is based on
the idea that persons had certain inalienable rights, and then they listed
those rights.  The philosophical basis for the origin of those rights is
rather immaterial.  The "creator" didn't give us rights to due process of
law -- we made that one up for ourselves.  And it is a basic right under
the constitution, and one that the country's laws are based upon.

>The statement "A woman has the right to control her own body" is a fact
>only so long as the men with the power allow it to be.  When they cease
>to allow it, then the statement reverts to what it was before 1973,
>merely an opinion.
> Matt

Yes, and no.  The 1973 ruling reinforced a woman's right to act on her
control of her body without government interference.  Prior to 1973,
opinions and laws notwithstanding, many women were controlling their own
bodies without concern for men's or government's opinions.  Willy nilly.
We could pass a law that said that the sky is usually blue, and find days
when this law was and wasn't in effect, but I doubt we could do much about
the "violations".  Incidentally, prior to the civil war, abortion was a
perfectly legitimate way for a woman to deal with a pregnancy -- often
without the knowledge/consent of the man involved.  It wasn't particularly
safe, or sanitary, or even effective, but it was legal.  So much for
"opinion" prior to 1973.

Adrienne Regard