rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson) (07/16/85)
-------------- FIRST OF ALL, I POSTED THIS TO THE THREE NEWSGROUPS TO GET THE ATTENTION OF INTERESTED PARTIES. IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THIS, POST/FOLLOWUP TO net.abortion ONLY SINCE I KNOW THAT ALL THE net.legal AND net.women READERS DON'T WANT TO SEE IT; THAT'S WHY WE HAVE net.abortion. Thank you very much in advance for your consideration in this matter. -------------- Seems the Supreme Court, due to a 'Friend of the Court' brief submitted to it yesterday, is going to review its 1973 abortion decision. Some thoughts on the matter which I would welcome comment on: a) I was unaware that abortions in the third trimester were legal at all -- is this only in emergency or life-threatening (for the mother) situations? b) I think it is VERY stupid that the legality of abortion, which is a woman's issue PRIMARILY (she carries the child, takes the risk, has to take care of the child if the father is not around or leaves her during pregnancy, etc. etc.), is being decided by one woman and eight men. I think that men should be represented for moral reasons, but how about one man and eight women, or some number with 10-20% men? c) If left up to the states, this will mean that women will either travel to a state where abortion is legal, as is the case when a dry county for alcohol and a wet county are adjacent; or they will be unable to afford the expense and extra time away from work and will resort to backroom coathanger jockeys. d) Please remember before replying that this is NOT a review of federal funds for abortions; this is a review of the decision to legalize abortion and the guidelines for how difficult it is to get one legally during the three trimesters. Thanks, and ?happy? discussing, -- The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj ...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcj