Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!barry
From: barry@mit-eddie.UUCP (Mikki Barry)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: To Barry Shein
Message-ID: <3716@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 28-Feb-85 09:55:25 EST
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.3716
Posted: Thu Feb 28 09:55:25 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Mar-85 04:20:46 EST
References: <791@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 66

Welcome again, Barry.  Nice to see that BU (the old alma mater) is finally
on the net.  Did the put ye'ol 370 on, or did they finally get a computer?

One thing you will have to contend with on this newsgroup are assumptions
made by pro-life:
		1.  The woman must be "responsible" for her naughty action
		    of having sex.  The "punishment", have the baby.  Note,
		    that even though the "famous" rape/incest victim is 
		    allowed to have the abortion because it isn't her fault
                    she is pregnant.
		2.  The want for the fetus to be carried to term overides any
		    wants of the mother.

Many statistics will be brought up (some bogus), many moral arguments will
be brought up, some religious arguments will be brought up, and the whole
thing will be repeated over and over again.

Then will come the assumption by pro-choice:

		1.  Abortion on demand is a right (usually modified to
	 	    "in the first trimester") Even if it is only for     		           convenience.

More statistics, arguments against using morality or religion to make laws,
and the whole thing will repeat.

And this, in a nutshell, is net.abortion.

By the way, I agree with you that abortion is not a very nice thing.  Believe
it or not, I have seen many women who don't sing all the way to the clinic
when they needed an abortion.  And you know, of those I knew (6), ALL had used
contraceptives.  And of those 6, only 5's boyfriend came to be with them 
through the ordeal, even though all 6's boyfriends thought abortion was the
right thing to do at the time.  I also agree with you that pregnant women are
sometimes abandoned by society, their families, and the man that helped them to
get pregnant.  AND, in some cases, by state funding to have the same rights
as those more well off (abortions, proper medical care if the decision is to
carry the fetus to term).  And some are ignorant of the care provided by some
pro-life groups.

In case you haven't realized by now, I am pro abortion on demand (so are 76%
of Boston's catholics by the way).  However, I also believe that there are
many women who wouldn't have abortions if there was adequate birth control
information available, AND if pro-lifers and pro-choicers could work together
WITHOUT trying to convince the pregnant woman whether or not to have an 
abortion, and just lay out ALL the options.  I know that many clinics do not
have access to information concerning group homes and financial aid, and
adoption assistance available to pregnant women.  And I know that many pro-
life groups do not have the medical information necessary to make an informed
decision as to whether or not to have an abortion.

It sounds naive, but if the two warring factions could get together, drop
the hysteria and name calling, and work together for the common goals of:
	1.  Eliminating unwanted pregnancies in the first place
	2.  If an accidental pregnancy occurs, making ALL information
	    available to the pregnant woman so that an intellegent,
	    informed decision can be made about what is best for
	    everyone involved.
I think there would be much fewer abortions, and the ones that would occur
would be safe, and the woman would be sure that that's what she wanted.

Abortions have been done for thousands of years.  There will always be those 
women who will have them.  Wouldn't it be better to lose only one life
than two?  And better still to provide the education to prevent the
pregnancy in the first place?

Mikki Barry