Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mgwess.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!mgnetp!mgwess!plw
From: plw@mgwess.UUCP (Pete Wilson)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: "rights" to life, and a question
Message-ID: <14942@mgwess.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 18-Aug-85 00:45:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: mgwess.14942
Posted: Sun Aug 18 00:45:43 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 20-Aug-85 20:30:43 EDT
References: <661@ttidcc.UUCP> <14939@mgwess.UUCP> <396@mhuxr.UUCP>
Reply-To: plw@mgwess.UUCP (Wilson,Pete,PL)
Organization: AT&T Information Systems - Montgomery Illinois
Lines: 62
Summary: 

In article <396@mhuxr.UUCP> mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (SIMON) writes:
>
>Ah yes, the "responsibility" argument.

Exactly.

>					But why should not women have the
>right to reproductive freedom *and* guilt-free pleasurable sex.

They do.

>								 Men have
>the option to walk away after sex, never to be heard from again (some do.)
>The woman,of course, has no such alternative.

Really? Ever hear of condoms, diaphragms, IUD's, vasectomies, rhythm
method, etc.?

>					       So your argument, in effect,
>reduces to: the slut knew what she was getting into (or vice versa :-)
>so let her live with the results.

Your words, not mine. I don't remember doing any name-calling.

>				   How dehumanizing. Would you also establish
>the father's legal responsibility to this child?

Don't have to, it's already been done.

>						  Would you spend the
>dollars necessary to enforce such a responsibility.

I'd much rather spend the dollars on that than on UNNECESSARY abortions.

>
>The essence of the abortion debate is tied to a feminist issue: are women
>going to have the control of their bodies and equal to sexual pleasure
>or is a male dominated society going to retain that control?

Seems to me there are NO laws which restrict a woman's right to use
conception prevention methods or to say no (except in some backward places
where 'conjugal rights' supercede the woman's rights).

>							      Much of
>the argument against abortion is of the "greater good" variety, in
>which the woman becomes a mere instrument for the fetus. Again, subordination.

Men did not create women - blame either evolution or God. I'm sorry that
you feel it is 'dehumanizing' or 'subordinate' that women are the ones
who get pregnant. I think it is unfair also - both sexes should be able
to bear the young and EQUALLY share the responsibility. However, that
isn't the way it is or the way it's going to be in the near future.

>I see that as nonsense.
>
>Marcel Simon


	Pete Wilson
	AT&T IS CGBS
	Montgomery Works
	..!ihnp4!mgnetp!mgwess!plw