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