kdwarren@iwlc6.UUCP (Kerry D. Warren) (03/31/84)
I am not sure I got the title write but this is a response to three questions
posed by one writer. The first question was:
1) Would you accept a child the caused the death of your spouse (paraphrased)
the second question is:
2) Would you be in favor of abortion if you found out that your child would
be severely handicapped
I would lik to responed to both of these questions together since they are
often used by many pro-abortionist as reasons for allow free choice for having
an abortion. First of all both of these arguments are "red herring" arguments
The over whelming numbers of abortions performed today are not becouse the
mothers life was in danger or because the child was severely handicapped or
even because the women was a victim of rape or incest. Conservatively all
of these reasons grouped together are less the 10 percent of the total
abortions performed in this country. Most were performed merely for the
convenince of the womem who was pregnant. In fact, going beck to victims
of rape, only a very few rape victims ever get pregnant (~1%) and of those
studied that had an abortion were more traumatized by the abortion than by
the rape itself. In fact one women remarked that you could talk to her about
the rape but don't ever ask her about the abortion. Of those who chose
to put the child up for adoption they recovered from the rape much more
quickly because of the feeling that some parents had benefited from this
terrible mishap. In fact there are more applications for adoption in this
country than there are abortions in this country and that runs into the
millions. Most of those applications NEVER get filled.
As for your third question;
3) Would you drop your material status in order to have a child?
I am really afraid of what that question says about our society. But to
answer your question directly, yes I would and I have. But I would liked you
to think about the question you just asked. Do you really want every one
to make value judgements on whether it affects their material status or well
being. What if doctors only operated on people who could pay large sums
of money. What if the government quit giving any money to the poor because
it would completely eliminate the national deficit and would kill off all poor
people therefore eliminating poor people and helping society as a whole.
What if the government eliminated all laws prohibiting polution becuse it
keeps industries from making huge sums of money. What if your neighbor burned
down your house because it was pulling down the value of his house. All
of these sound silly but are using the same reasoning, that material well
being is much more important than any kind of life. You know there hve
been a few past civilizations that have grown powerful and strong and then
fell. These societies had an increased infantisied, increased pre-occupation
with sex, more and more people wanted to live off of the government, the
gap between the very rich and the very poor became bigger and bigger, and
there was an increased desired for material well being. Does any of this
sound familiar. You will also notice that these societies had opposite values
when they were coming to power. There is a saying
Dwell on the past and you lose one eye. Forget the past and you lose both eyes.
Think about it!!!