Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!matt
From: matt@brl-tgr.ARPA (Matthew Rosenblatt )
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Equal Access to Pleasure
Message-ID: <1261@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 5-Sep-85 14:01:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.1261
Posted: Thu Sep  5 14:01:21 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Sep-85 04:46:50 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 26

Since "Equal Access to Pleasure" was MY article title, let me
state my position on the argument between R. Frank and unixcorn:

Consistent "Responsibility" positions:

	1)  No abortion on demand for the pregnant woman;
	2)  Enforcement of the father's obligation to support his child.

Consistent "No-responsibility" positions:

	1)  Abortion on demand for the woman if she
	    does not want the child.
	2)  The father can walk away scot-free from 
	    any support obligations if he did not want the child.

I support the consistent "Responsibility" positions, as does the Reagan
administration.  My original article included an expression of the
misgivings I feel, as a civil libertarian, about the Government's use
of Social Security numbers and computer data banks to track people down
for ANY PURPOSE, however laudable, when the data were collected for
another purpose.  I'm a pro-lifer, but I sure wouldn't want to live in
a society where the Government kept track of the name and location of
every pregnant woman (as in Bolshevik China), with a network of informants
ready to rat on her if they thought she was planning to abort herself.

					-- Matt Rosenblatt