Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site mot.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!mot!qv
From: qv@mot.UUCP (Brad Castalia)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous Ironies
Message-ID: <209@mot.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 22-Aug-85 23:32:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: mot.209
Posted: Thu Aug 22 23:32:27 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 23-Aug-85 01:24:16 EDT
References: <930@bunker.UUCP>, <1833@mnetor.UUCP>, <208@mot.UUCP>
Organization: Motorola Microsystems, Phoenix AZ
Lines: 35

Saying that resolution (ie. moving to a new level of debate) of the
abortion issue (as a particularly instructive case) is possible
does not imply that it will happen under existing circumstances.
The point is to maintain a focus or direction as to how effort is
applied in the struggle of ideas.  A constructive perspective would
not only recognize that circumstances have changed since Roe vs. Wade,
but that they can be changed again.  Regresionists currently have the
initiative (backwards in the sense of the social evolution of values),
and progressives foolishly let the battles be fought on the opposition's
ground and by their rules.  The recent Right To Choose speak-out campaign,
for example, conciously used the opposition's tactics of blind emotionalism
as part of their defensive strategy.  This does not move us forward, nor
strengthen what has been achieved.  While it is essential to retain the
social awareness of the damage inflicted on people (mostly women) that was
lifted by the effects of Roe vs. Wade, RTC could be supporting court cases
that argue FOR personal rights of self determination.  The issue is not
the viability of the fetus (which is what the decision in Roe vs. Wade
hinged on).  Current scientific developments are quickly making this a
moot point, and, if taken to its absurd extreme, would result in male
masturbation/ejaculation becoming illegal except for the purpose of
conception on the basis that the viable sperm has not been given the
opportunity to fertilize an egg.

Perhaps I'm being too critical.  It may be that RTC members are currently
trying to define what "personal rights to self determination" are in
practice.  Active efforts may be underway to build functional links
between the social responsibilities for child wellfare and the humane
treatment of people of all ages and circumstances.  After a decade of
relative complacency progressives may be taking control of institutional
administration and wading into the arena of policy making.  Even the
traditional infatuation with a stance of opposition and indulgence in
finger pointing may be fading away!  Could it be that I just don't see
what's going on ...?

Brad Castalia