Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site spp1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwspp!spp2!spp1!johnston
From: johnston@spp1.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Beyond "Prolife" Smugness: The Consequences They Never Thought of
Message-ID: <131@spp1.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Dec-84 19:40:10 EST
Article-I.D.: spp1.131
Posted: Wed Dec  5 19:40:10 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Dec-84 05:15:25 EST
References: <1545@pur-phy.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: TRW, Redondo Beach  CA
Lines: 52

In response to a posting by Alex Tselis wife:
Forgive me for not addressing every point and I'm not just selecting only
those I can favorably refute. The article makes some good points and I
would just like to offer a few comments.

1. Parenting is indeed a commitment and because a woman is biologically
able to conceive does not qualify her for this. Yet she need not accept
the responsibility of parenting if she is not committed. The choice to
keep a baby after delivery is hers. Unfortunately, as you stated,
adoptions for non-white or retarded children are low, but they do exist.
Of course you also talked about the alternatives for children who aren't
adoptable. Ugly situations can arise which brings up my next point.

2. If we are to have unwanted children (a situation I see with us
irregardless of abortion), let's attack that problem directly. Solving
the abuse of unwanted children can never be realized by attempting to slow
down the production thereof.


3. I'm about to violate a basic rule of mine which is to offer a statistic
without references. But I've read this from several sources and no source
(including planned parenthood) has refuted it. The statistic (actually a
statement, no numbers) is that the majority of abused children were not
unwanted and abortion was not a consideration. To be sure, committment
itself cannot produce always a good parent. Therefore abortion would not
really effect a solution to child abuse.

4. I hope you're not seriously attempting to make a statement concerning
the reluctance of anti-abortionist as a class to be concerned about
children that are alive today based on some that you have talked to. I
didn't think I needed to adopt a black child to be concerned or to be
active in his plight. You might ask those questions to professional
footbal players (or any group) and come up with the amazing statement that
athletes are not concerned with the plight of children.

5. I wish also that the time, energy, and money directed against abortion were
spent on living children. Unfortunately, I don't see the issue going away,
since that would free up these resources. I might add how beneficial the
time, energy, and money spent for abortions could be used not only for
living children but to prevent conceptions.

In summary, the problem of how children are handled in this world needs to
be addressed independent of abortions. Since I don't follow your logic of
disregard for living children being a result of concern for the unborn, it
seems possible to be concerned about both. In other words concern and
compassion for children irregardless of their state. You ask people to be
compassionate for a child placed in an institution against his will. I ask
for the same compassion for another child who also is in an institution of
sorts against his will. This institution, at times, upholds a death
penalty.

				Mike Johnston