home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:34779 alt.abortion.inequity:3462
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!destroyer!ncar!csn!cherokee!eatdust!stevens
- From: stevens@eatdust (John Stevens)
- Subject: Re: Observations
- Message-ID: <1992Sep3.173838.8528@advtech.uswest.com>
- Sender: stevens@uswest.com (John Stevens)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: eatdust.it.uswc.uswest.com
- Organization: Hence, stagnation.
- References: <1992Aug31.220151.12113@watson.ibm.com> <1992Sep1.172929.12103@advtech.uswest.com> <1992Sep2.024720.23681@midway.uchicago.edu>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:38:38 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- In article <1992Sep2.024720.23681@midway.uchicago.edu> eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
- >In article <1992Sep1.172929.12103@advtech.uswest.com>
- >stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
- >
- >>I would be much happier with a constitutional amendment that requires
- >>the consent of the father before abortion is allowed.
- >
- >You do realize, of course, that this gives my lover (possibly my
- >rapist) control over my body equal to mine?
-
- Wrong. It gives the father equal control over your reproductive system
- only in so far as to whether or not you are allowed to abort the child,
- and of course, that control can only be exercised if you are pregnant.
-
- And if you had read any of my other posts, you would realize that I
- support exceptions in regards to rape, incest and to save the mothers
- life.
-
- >Hopefully that phrasing makes clear my objection to this proposal.
-
- Hopefully, my explanation outlines where you misread.
-
- You took a single idea out of context, which of course stripped it of
- it's disclaimers and exceptions.
-
- John
- stevens@uswest.com
-