Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site rabbit.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!ulysses!allegra!alice!rabbit!jj
From: jj@rabbit.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.flame,net.abortion
Subject: ENFORCED birth control?  NEVER!
Message-ID: <2671@rabbit.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Apr-84 14:49:23 EST
Article-I.D.: rabbit.2671
Posted: Wed Apr  4 14:49:23 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Apr-84 02:01:10 EST
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 33

(mucha muncha muncha)



I think that the idea, recently put forth in net.flame, that
all highschool students (for example) should be FORCED to
take a long-term contraceptive drug <assuming that one exists>
is both silly and immoral, as well as illegal, unwise, counterproductive,
and foolish.  <There!  Now I feel better.>

In fact, it's just the opposite position from the "pro-life" folks,
and the complete anthesis of the "pro-choice" concept as I understand
it.

On one hand, we have the pro-lifers, who would torture both parent
and child for the sake of the child.  On the other hand, we have the 
pro-contraception folks
who would deny everyone the right to reproduction.  
It's obvious to me where the balance is, and I hope that
some of the pro-choice folks out there agree with me.

I'm assuming that religious differences will be ignored by both sides, as
is the case with pro-lifers right now.  This is slightly
different than the proposal.  I regard it as only
slightly different, because I remember the religious differences
that one had to have to avoid Vietnam.

Enjoy,
-- 
TEDDY BEARS ARE NICER THAN PEOPLE--HUG YOURS TODAY!
(If you go out in the woods today ... )
 
(allegra,harpo,ulysses)!rabbit!jj