Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpfcla!ajs
From: ajs@hpfcla.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Re: Re:	[No subject.  Sad, huh?]
Message-ID: <47700010@hpfcla.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 15-Apr-84 18:23:00 EST
Article-I.D.: hpfcla.47700010
Posted: Sun Apr 15 18:23:00 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Apr-84 05:28:49 EST
References: <1294@sdccs6.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Systems Division - Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 21
Nf-ID: #R:sdccs6:-129400:hpfcla:47700010:000:1019
Nf-From: hpfcla!ajs    Apr  8 15:23:00 1984

Laura, you believe that it's better to be unhappy than dead.  Perhaps so.

Thus, you believe it's better for a woman to not have an abortion, even if
the resulting child is put up for adoption.  Perhaps that is the right
answer for you.

Then, do you believe that you have the right to prevent someone else, who
very well might wholly disagree with you, from having an abortion?

That's what really galls me about this whole subject.  No one is trying
to force any woman to have an abortion she doesn't want.  Some of us merely
want to prevent fanatics from forcing their morals on others.

The right answer, if there is one, is not all at clear.  Those of you who
would deny others' rights, can't you see that?  This is not a clear cut
issue, on which the vast majority of sane adults can agree.  The one simple,
obvious conclusion you CAN draw immediately, given that state of affairs,
is that you fanatics should back off.  Stop threatening the rest of us
by trying to make us live by your ethics.

Alan Silverstein