Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!yale!husc6!panda!genrad!decvax!tektronix!reed!omssw2!ogcvax!pase
From: pase@ogcvax.UUCP (Douglas M. Pase)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: It's still mine
Message-ID: <1091@ogcvax.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 13-Sep-86 13:51:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: ogcvax.1091
Posted: Sat Sep 13 13:51:34 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 19-Sep-86 00:33:26 EDT
References: <5152@decwrl.DEC.COM> 
Reply-To: pase@ogcvax.UUCP (Douglas M. Pase)
Organization: Oregon Graduate Center, Beaverton, OR
Lines: 38

In article  susan@madvax.UUCP (Susan Finkelman) writes:
>
>Once a woman is pregnant there is *NO* easy way out.  Planned or unplanned, 
>wanted or unwanted, if I am pregnant it's my body and my choice.  
>

That's like saying "If I have a child it's my child and my choice..."
Seriously though, folks, the fact is, we don't always have total choice
over what we do to/with our own bodies.  For example, we are not allowed
to pump our veins full of controlled substances.  (I'm not arguing what we
have the ABILITY to do, only our LEGAL/MORAL responsibilities.)  We're not
allowed to use our bodies for prostitution, or to hurt other people.

We are all responsible for our own actions.  Everyone has the freedom to
choose whether or not to have a child.  That freedom is exercised when a couple
chooses to have or not have sexual intercourse (birth control aside).  Certainly
it is your body and your choice, but your choice should be exercised before the
child is conceived, not after.  We are all able to choose our actions, but not
the consequences of our actions.

Suppose we say abortions are moral.  Suppose we allow abortions for convenience.
"It's too inconvenient for me to be pregnant right now, I think I'll have an
abortion."  I see no vast difference between that and "It's too inconvenient
for me to have children right now, I think I'll terminate my 2 year old."  You
may argue that the 2 year old is a person and the fetus is not (which in my
opinion is mere semantic drivel), but certainly they are both alive.

The major issue here is "at what stage does a human life aquire the right to
remain alive?"  Under what conditions does one's right to life supercede the
convenience of another?  I don't recall the Bill of Rights mentioning anywhere
a "right to a convenient life".  I do recall a right to "life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness".

Immediately following conception, a child is not capable of sustaining its own
life independently, but then neither are infants or young children.  The
difference is only one of degree.
-- 
Doug Pase   --   ...ucbvax!tektronix!ogcvax!pase   or   pase@Oregon-Grad