Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site unc.unc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!unc!goodrum
From: goodrum@unc.UUCP (Cloyd Goodrum)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: What if?
Message-ID: <177@unc.unc.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 20-Aug-85 12:33:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: unc.177
Posted: Tue Aug 20 12:33:30 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 02:54:24 EDT
References: <427@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA>
Reply-To: goodrum@unc.UUCP (Cloyd Goodrum)
Organization: CS Dept, U. of N. Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lines: 37
Summary: 

>
>Pregnancies resulting from rape & incest are a nasty case, since neither the
>woman or the fetus had any say in creating the situation, and no matter what
>is done, someone loses.
>
	Although I consider myself a pretty staunch right-to-lifer, I'm a little
more liberal on the matter of pregnancies resulting from rape for this reason.

>My personal feelings are that in these cases, the fetus should be allowed to
>live.  I realize that this imposes hardship on the rape victim, but going the
>other way imposes much worse hardship on the child.  But I also think that the
>government should try to reduce the hardship on the woman as much as possible
>by providing psychiatric counseling, arranging to place the baby for adoption,
>etc.  (the first of these should be supplied to all rape victims).  And every
>convicted rapist should be thrown into prison for a very, very long time (none
>of this out-in-2-years-to-seek-another-victim stuff).
>
	I think there's another measure (taken in addition to everything you
mentioned above) that can be taken. Why not confiscate any funds the 
convicted rapist has and use them to pay for the psychiatric counseling, 
the medical expenses, and the etcetera??? No matter how they're funded,
these services should be offered to rape victims, especially if we're going
to require that they not have an abortion.
>
>What I'm saying is that it's possible to argue against more than 99 percent of
>all abortions on BOTH right-to-life and choice/responsibility grounds.  And in
>fact, it seems to be precisely unwanted pregnancies resulting from *voluntary*
>sex that Todd Jones is concerned about.  His post raves on and on; given his
>outlook, I thought a choice/responsibility argument to be most appropriate.
>
	Absolutely!! Pro-lifers should not be discouraged by the "hard case"
arguments that are often presented, even when we disagree on them. 
>                                        -- Thomas Newton
>                                           Thomas.Newton@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA

					    Cloyd Goodrum III
  					    University Of North Carolina