Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!sophie
From: sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Suffering
Message-ID: <1737@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 7-Aug-85 09:50:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: mnetor.1737
Posted: Wed Aug  7 09:50:27 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 7-Aug-85 11:46:12 EDT
References: <412@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA>
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 23

> I suppose comments could be made about many "pro-choicers" whose attitude
> is "copulate and make the baby suffer".  But if 'suffering' results from
> an activity, who should bear its costs:  the people who decided to engage
> in that activity, or another person who didn't exist before the start of
> the activity and therefore had no control over it?
> 
>                                         -- Thomas Newton

The problem with your line of reasonnning is that you assume that things are
binary: either the parents suffer or the child suffers.  I think it is
probably fair to say that no matter what, in this business of unwanted
children, children suffer.  If they are aborted, they suffer some physical
pain for a short while;  if they are brought up by parents who hate them,
they suffer for most of their childhood;  if they are given up for adoption,
there's a fair chance that they might suffer some trauma as a result 
(although this is not as clear cut as the other kinds of suffering). 
But the parents (mother actually) usually suffer too except in the case of
early abortions.  When you have unwanted pregnancies, there is a fair chance
that both the mother and the child will end up suffering.  So what's your
point?
-- 
Sophie Quigley
{allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie