regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (04/24/85)
>> But I would be content to let the women -- the people who really have to >> make the personal decision -- decide. What do you fear? >I'm not the poster you're responding to, but I'll tell you what I fear. I >fear an injustice similiar to what took place in 1973 when a handful of >people decided on this issue. Not only were these people not women but, I >assume by their ages, not likely to be involved in creating a pregnancy. >They were also not medical experts but decided upon an issue dealing with >life and subsequently a decision costly to millions. They were also people whose job it is to decide legal issues, if you and I are thinking of the same body of folk in 1973. And they were deciding a legal issue, not a moral, medical or personal issue. Their jurisdiction. >What you are suggesting is that those who have the ultimate choice decide >whether that choice is legal or not. What I am suggesting is that those who have to act on the basis of the laws decide the issue. Fer instance, I don't work at GM, so I don't vote on GM/labor contracts. Incidentally, I don't expect this suggestion to be taken up -- men being very fond of deciding things. I made the suggestion to perhaps, maybe, gently, bring to the front of the mind the fact that the "hard decisions" sometimes don't rest with the people who have been given the rights of free speech and use it to blast everybody who disagrees with them. My suggestion is essentially "judge not, lest ye be judged", and is therefore unpopular (people don't like me quoting scripture when it supports my opinions). >I'd like to draw an analogy and since sexism is the topic this ought to >fit in. Since men usually have the ultimate choice in whether to rape a >woman or not, should we let men decide the issue on the legality of rape? Didn't we? Hasn't every court that ruled on this subject up until perhaps 30 years ago been the sole domain of men? (doesn't really relate to the thrust of your argument, but true, none the less.) >I'm sure you feel that the potential victims of rape (in most cases, >women) should have a say. Perhaps you don't see a victim in the case of >abortion. Some pro-choicers don't. In my original posting, I suggest that the fetus isn't the only victim. I feel that the women are victims of this whole controversy as well. How much, to what extent, is the crux of the argument. Once again, in the case of rape, the rapist is not held by society to have a responsibility for the victim, does not "contain" the victim, the rapist's life is not controlled by the life of the victim. In some respects, not a bad analogy. In others, not so good. Adrienne Regard
goodrum@unc.UUCP (Cloyd Goodrum) (04/27/85)
Adrienne Regard writes: > >>> But I would be content to let the women -- the people who really have to >>> make the personal decision -- decide. What do you fear? Since the majority of voters are women, the issue could be decided by them if it were resolved democratically (i.e, by elected state and national legislators, not by unelected,virtually unaccountable Supreme Court justices.) > >What I am suggesting is that those who have to act on the basis of the laws >decide the issue. Fer instance, I don't work at GM, so I don't vote on >GM/labor contracts. > Are you willing to apply this standard to all laws?? For instance, should laws regulating various businesses be decided only by people who own a business?? Cloyd Goodrum III