Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!saquigley
From: saquigley@watmath.UUCP (Sophie Quigley)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: An abortion story
Message-ID: <10118@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 3-Dec-84 02:23:02 EST
Article-I.D.: watmath.10118
Posted: Mon Dec  3 02:23:02 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 4-Dec-84 06:47:18 EST
References: <44@tove.UUCP> <1092@ut-ngp.UUCP> <46@tove.UUCP> <1097@ut-ngp.UUCP> <52@tove.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 79

>  = Liz Allen
> 
> As has been said at least a few times before, there are two rights
> involved here: (1) the right of the fetus to live and (2) the right of
> the woman to control her own body.  The right the fetus has to live is
> related to the value we place on its life and that value has to with
> our view of the fetus.  If we view it as a human being with the
> accompanying rights, then its right to live is much greater than the
> right of the woman to control her body.
> 
Ah! here we come to the crux of it!!  WHY is someone's right to live greater
than someone's right to control their own body?  I for one disagree
completely with your assertion above.

If I was to be a judge in a court case involving one person who needs
a part of another person's body (maybe a patch of skin for grafts or
a kidney, you name it) and the second person refusing to provide that
part of their body, I would rule in favour of the person refusing to
provide the part, even though I would know very well that this would
mean the death of the first person. 

Of course I would never want to be in a position to make such a difficult
decision for other people because I really do not see how it would be
any of my business to do so.  I find the idea of using authority on
such issues EXTREMELY unethical and very scary, much more scary than
the fact that people will die because other people will not let them
use parts of their body.
>
> And who's taking over who's body?  The fetus didn't appear as if
> by magic...  Sometimes when I'm reading articles in this group, it
> sounds like people are saying that this fetus came from nowhere
> and is taking over this random woman's body.  Now, I'll assume that
> everyone really does know better than that, but let's try and keep
> in mind that any woman who is sexually active is taking the risk
> (or welcoming the risk!) of becoming pregnant.  There ought to be
> some consideration of this risk and some acceptance of the
> responsibility involved if a pregnancy does occur.  And, this
> responsibility ought to go beyond using some kind of birth control
> method to the knowledge that birth control methods do fail sometimes...
> 
OK, what about women who are raped then?

> Again, let me say that reasonable alternatives to abortion must be
> provided -- no woman should ever *have* to get an abortion.
> 
I would rather say: "no woman should ever *have* to get an unwanted
abortion", but no woman should ever have to have an unwanted pregnancy
either.  (If we're talking "should"s here, I might as well go all the way)

> >> ... From the women I've talked to, most would rather carry the baby to
> >>term (given that they are now pregnant) or would definitely carry to
> >>term if the pregnancy had occurred at some other more convenient time.
> >
> >This is the exact opposite of what the women I have talked to said.
> 
> Perhaps when they either never want to have children or already have
> enough, but I don't think I ever remember anyone at the center who
> told me that they never wanted to have children -- and most were too
> young to have too many already.  On the contrary, most were concerned
> about whether or not having an abortion would effect their ability to
> have children later on.
> 
And who claimed that women who had abortions never wanted to have children?
certainly not pro-choice people.  Let me remind you that it is the pro-life
movement who is trying to depict such women as heartless monsters, not
the pro-choice movement.  I think your second sentence above: "or would
definitely carry to term if the pregnancy had occured at some more convenient
time" says it all.  People have abortions because they do not want to have
a child at that particular time, not because they are horrible children-
haters.  Most of my friends who have had abortions want to have children
eventually.  Thank you Liz for telling people how women having abortions
really are.  I am glad someone from the pro-life side is dispelling those
awful images of women having abortio}ins as "rich bitches who get an abortion
because their stomach won't fit behind the sterring wheel of their Mercedez"
that some of the women-haters in the movement are trying to project.

Sophie Quigley
...!{clyde,ihnp4,decvax}!watmath!saquigley