liz@umcp-cs.UUCP (04/16/84)
Alan Silverstein says:
No one is trying to force any woman to have an abortion
she doesn't want. Some of us merely want to prevent fanatics
from forcing their morals on others.
In practice, that's not true. There are parents who tell their
daughter that if she doesn't get an abortion she will have to move
out of her house, etc. There are also boyfriends who exert undue
pressure on girl friends to have abortions promising love only
conditionally on that. (I know this happens because I've talked
to women in such situations... who need housing desperately in
order to keep their baby.) Fortunately, the majority of crisis
pregnancies do not fall into this category. However, a large number
of abortions occur because of a more subtle form of the same thing.
No woman really wants an abortion but would rather they had never
become pregnant in the first place -- pretty obvious... For a lot
of women, it's bad timing -- usually too soon ("We have talked
about marriage and could see it maybe in a few years, but right
now, we're not ready for it -- we need to finish school", etc.).
They want a child, but often (to my surprise) they view it as
selfish to have the child because of the burden the child will be
for those around them. They wind up feeling that the "right" thing
to do is to abort even though they don't want to. Upon reflection,
I now wonder if this reasoning is really rationalizing the decision
because they're not comfortable saying that the pregnancy was simply
inconvenient, but I still think that women in crisis pregnancy are
influenced too strongly towards getting an abortion from various
facets of our society.
[Note: In the last paragraph, I'm drawing here from two sources
of information: my experience in working at a crisis pregnancy
center and from reading a book by Carol Gilligan, "In a Different
Voice". That book was recommended on net.women a while back, and
I've been reading it -- a lot of what she says makes a lot of sense
to me and I recommend that book to anyone interested in women's
psychology. The part that I'm drawing on here is a study she did
in learning about how women make decisions and she chose the abortion
decision as a focus. She appears to be pro-choice and I disagree
with that, but I still recommend the book because she seems to have
a lot insights on the main subject of the book.]
There's something else I'd like to bring up here that has bothered
me off and on for quite a while. At the center, I talk to a lot
of women who think initially that abortion is the only answer for
them. After talking to them for a while (telling them about what
is involved in abortion, risks, the developing baby and help
available to them), most of the women in their 20's will reconsider
and (frequently) will decide against abortion once provided with
a viable alternative. On the other hand, the teenagers frequently
refuse to consider anything other than abortion. One gets the
impression from talking to them that they figure since someone made
it legal, then that someone must have already thought through
everything, and it must be ok. A woman who thinks through the
alternatives and decides on abortion knowing what she's doing is
one thing, but I feel like these teens are really not ready to make
this kind of decision when they refuse to really think about it
for themselves. I feel like they're being taken advantage of or
something...
There do seem to be more women taking a more conservative view
towards "free" sex. I hope that trend continues long enough to
change the pressure encouraging teens to experiment with sex into
one that emphasizes the results of irresponsible sex and enourages
them to wait until they are really ready to cope with the possibility
of children. Though not so long that sex is painted as evil! (As
the pendulum swings...)
Quoting again from Alan Silverstein:
The right answer, if there is one, is not all at clear.
Those of you who would deny others' rights, can't you see
that? This is not a clear cut issue, on which the vast
majority of sane adults can agree. The one simple, obvious
conclusion you CAN draw immediately, given that state of
affairs, is that you fanatics should back off. Stop
threatening the rest of us by trying to make us live by
your ethics.
But who is denying who their rights? There are *two* rights being
weighed against each other: the woman's right to choose and the
fetus's right to live. If you don't believe the fetus is human,
you conclude that the woman's right is more important. But what
if the fetus *is* human? Look at a picture of a fetus sometime.
Can you come back and tell me that it's not a baby??? At 8 weeks
from conception it has fingers and toes and has had detectable
brain waves for two weeks...
About the clear cutness. It's funny, but this used to be quite
clear cut. Even Planned Parenthood as recently as 1963 or so used
to warn women about getting abortions and how it could effect their
future reproductive health. (I know they were dealing with illegal
abortions, but even so it was a strong statement.) Medical textbooks
routinely stated that life began at conception -- I remember learning
that in both biology and sex ed when I was in school and it wasn't
really that long ago. A lot of sane adults *did* agree that abortion
was wrong then... (I could tell you some of the more interesting
and even dishonest politics that went into reversing the abortion
laws, but I don't have time now...)
Sorrowfully wondering what the result for our society will be
because of abortion...
-Liz Allen
--
Univ of Maryland, College Park MD
Usenet: ...!seismo!umcp-cs!liz
Arpanet: liz%umcp-cs@CSNet-Relayowens@gatech.UUCP (Gerald R. Owens) (04/20/84)
Reply to moira: > So abortion should be illegal because *some* teenagers are not > mature enough to make an informed decision? There is obviously nothing > in their belief systems that tell them it is WRONG, so "it must be ok" > for them. I thought that that was the purpose for making laws. To restrain those who do not know better to not behave in a way that more mature people know is counterproductive. Southerners merrily violated the civil rights of the blacks merely because there were no "laws" against doing that. We know that is counterproductive, although at the time it was being done, it was quite profitable for southerners to do what they did. > In support of Alan Silverstein, I agree that the right answer (if there > is one) is not clear. But I disagree that it is not a clear cut issue. > The majority of American adults (~80%) believe that this is a matter > which should not be legislated by the government. It is a political > issue merely because the remaining minority seems determined, via the > political process, to force their system of values on the rest of us. So was slavery at one time. If the fetus is not human, then granted, it should be a personal decision, but if it is, then abortion is murder and the state has every right to step in and preserve the civil rights of the fetus. Remember, there have been times and places where the majority was quite wrong. Please address the status of the fetus explicity, rather than doing it implicitly by advocating positions that imply that the question of whether it is human or not has already been answered to the negative (i.e. don't beg the question). Gerald Owens Owens@gatech
kenn@sdccsu3.UUCP (04/23/84)
>From moira: > So abortion should be illegal because *some* teenagers are not > mature enough to make an informed decision? There is obviously nothing > in their belief systems that tell them it is WRONG, so "it must be ok" > for them. >From Owens: I thought that that was the purpose for making laws. To restrain those who do not know better to not behave in a way that more mature people know is counterproductive. Southerners merrily violated the civil rights of the blacks merely because there were no "laws" against doing that. We know that is counterproductive, although at the time it was being done, it was quite profitable for southerners to do what they did. >From Me: (!) Actually, you are a bit confused about what is being talked about here. What your example is about is restricting people because they are violating a moral taboo. What Moira is talking about is restricting people because of someone else violating a moral taboo. Your example, though creative, does not apply. Should we be responsible for the mistakes of our own kind? America forgave the Germans for what the Nazi's did. The Negro's forgave the southern whites for what their fore-fathers did. The forgiven in those examples weren't held responsible for what others of their kind. Why should I, a teenager, be made to pay for the mistakes or carelessness that other teenagers do? What does their responsiblity have to do with mine? >From Moira: > The majority of American adults (~80%) believe that this is a matter > which should not be legislated by the government. It is a political > issue merely because the remaining minority seems determined, via the > political process, to force their system of values on the rest of us. >From Owens: So was slavery at one time. If the fetus is not human, then granted, it should be a personal decision, but if it is, then abortion is murder and the state has every right to step in and preserve the civil rights of the fetus. Remember, there have been times and places where the majority was quite wrong. >From Me: And there have have been times and places where the majority was right! This country is a democracy, spelled D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y. Majority rules, with fair conditions attempted for the minority. When the two clash, minority looses. What the 80% of the population think about abortion does not matter with if they want to decide think about it themselves!!! I like the 80% figure -- I haven't heard it before, Moira is it accurate? If so then the anti-abortion'll loose anyway, or their laws will die out like the squeal law. Pro-choicers can breathe a sigh of relief. Also Owens, what does the human/nothuman fetus binge have to do with who decides on abortion? It is not related in the slightest, unless you concluded that pro- choicers would win if people could make their own decision, so that would only be right if you won in the first place (ie fetus not human). Lets not stoop to dirty fighting please! Anyway, back to abortion decision and all, I had an interesting thought a while back: who has the right to decide abortion? The people involved, ie parents? Perhaps their families? Perhaps the doctor? And how about the geatricities: Ronnie for instance. He'll *NEVER* as I can see it have a need for abortion for the rest of his life (which is a rather short bet anyway). Should he decide? How about all the married folks about fortish who've got a visectomy or <female visectomy> for one of the parents. They'll never have to, either. On a reverse note, the promiscious would probably be the people most needing the abortions. Should they have a larger vote? Feel free to flame and comment and put up ideas, but PLEASE don't say "this is right" because all that does is create another bland basenote. Put reasons 'n stuff to juice things up. Anyway, for my juice, I feel it's best to stick to the "everyone votes" concept. We're a democracy anyway, and while the decision won't affect everyone, no one has a right to say who and who won't be affected (idealism & 1984-shock). As for the "won't effect everyone", I would think there are lots of careful and "proper" people out there who won't even kiss before marriage. An extreme, but an "everyone" is easy to break -- all it takes in an example. Kenn the Kenf ...!sdcsvax!kenn ...!sdcsvax!sdccs6!ix192 ...!sdcsvax!sdccsu3!kenn
moiram@tektronix.UUCP (Moira Mallison ) (04/25/84)
<chomp! chomp!>
Quoting Liz Allen:
>> On the other hand, the teenagers frequently
>> refuse to consider anything other than abortion. One gets the
>> impression from talking to them that they figure since someone made
>> it legal, then that someone must have already thought through
>> everything, and it must be ok. A woman who thinks through the
>> alternatives and decides on abortion knowing what she's doing is
>> one thing, but I feel like these teens are really not ready to make
>> this kind of decision when they refuse to really think about it
>> for themselves. I feel like they're being taken advantage of or
>> something...
So abortion should be illegal because *some* teenagers are not
mature enough to make an informed decision? There is obviously nothing
in their belief systems that tell them it is WRONG, so "it must be ok"
for them.
In support of Alan Silverstein, I agree that the right answer (if there
is one) is not clear. But I disagree that it is not a clear cut issue.
The majority of American adults (~80%) believe that this is a matter
which should not be legislated by the government. It is a political
issue merely because the remaining minority seems determined, via the
political process, to force their system of values on the rest of us.
I'm fascinated by the political process and while some of the political
tactics seem not completely upfront, we've learned that if we want
to win on this issue, we have to be willing to get out hands dirty as
the opposition is.