home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
- From: andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Some call me...Drew)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: Observations
- Message-ID: <78157@ut-emx.uucp>
- Date: 21 Aug 92 13:27:59 GMT
- References: <1992Aug19.192754.16560@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
- <1992Aug19.210947.26366@spdc.ti.com>
- Sender: root@ut-emx.uucp
- Organization: Leapers For a Better Yesterday
- Lines: 31
-
- serafin@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Mike Serafin) writes:
- >How can you call a pregnancy that occured as a direct result of the
- >animal desires of a man and a woman "forced pregnancy".
-
- As opposed, of course, to a pregnancy resulting from cool, rational
- discussion. Here's a penny--go buy a clue.
-
- >When will YOU
- >understand that YOU must take responsibility for YOUR actions. If you
- >are not willing or able to take a pregnancy to term then maybe you should
- >not be having sex.
-
- Reality check: I'm male. I'm not taking a pregnancy anywhere. My (alas)
- hypothetical partner, however, would under your scenario be forced into
- continuing a pregnancy she might or might not want to take to term. If
- I support a law telling her she has no choice in the matter, then I'm not
- allowing her to take responsibility for her own actions, I'm taking that
- burden on myself.
-
- I'm perfectly willing to take responsibility for my own actions, but I'm
- not willing to take responsibility for the actions of others, nor am I
- willing to force someone else to take responsibility for my actions. That,
- and that alone, is why I am pro-choice.
-
- --
- "Me and you, a two man crew,
- side by side we are united,
- we will never be divided...."
-
- Au revoir, mon cherie.
-
-