Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cylixd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!akgub!cylixd!charli
From: charli@cylixd.UUCP (Charli Phillips)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Stand firm on your position.
Message-ID: <237@cylixd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 29-Aug-85 15:10:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: cylixd.237
Posted: Thu Aug 29 15:10:37 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 31-Aug-85 08:48:53 EDT
References: <29057@lanl.ARPA> <389@oliven.UUCP> <219@bcsaic.UUCP> <205@cylixd.UUCP> <240@bcsaic.UUCP>
Reply-To: charli@cylixd.UUCP (Charli Phillips)
Distribution: net
Organization: RCA Cylix Communications , Memphis, TN
Lines: 27
Summary: 

pam pincha:  [Pro-lifers are against birth control]
me:	     [some pro-lifers are against birth control,
	     most aren't]
pam pincha:  [acknowledges diversity among pro-lifers, and adds:]
>What I
>find irritating is that very vocal, AND INFLUENCING few that
>do hold this veiw point!  

>It is that few who are setting the policy that I am worried
>about. 

>The individuals with a more reasonable approach I would
>be willing to listen to -- but they are few and far
>appart -- AND NOT INFLUENCING THE LEGISLATURES!!!!

I have not seen any evidence that the anti-contraception folks have
had any influence on their legislatures at all.  I know of no
anti-contraception laws that have been introduced anywhere, let alone
passed.  (Not to say it hasn't happened.  I just don't know about it,
and consider it unlikely.)

And, while I am pro-life, I would certainly oppose any attempts to
ban contraceptives.  I think *most* pro-lifers would agree.

(P. S. - Thanks for the apology to the "reasonable few" - such gestures
help me believe that this is not really net.flame.abortion.)