Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbscc.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!bellcore!petrus!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!ulysses!burl!clyde!cbosgd!cbsck!cbscc!pmd From: pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul M. Dubuc) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: "The child of a fiend" Message-ID: <6049@cbscc.UUCP> Date: Tue, 8-Oct-85 18:36:42 EDT Article-I.D.: cbscc.6049 Posted: Tue Oct 8 18:36:42 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 11-Oct-85 07:16:05 EDT References: <5986@cbscc.UUCP> <5@uscvax.UUCP> <6032@cbscc.UUCP> <450@mhuxr.UUCP> <1332@cbsck.UUCP> <455@mhuxr.UUCP> Reply-To: pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul M. Dubuc) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories , Columbus Lines: 99 Another response to Marcel: >> Paul Dubuc >> > Me >> >..... I can also see the horrible scenario when the violation a woman has >> >had to endure is visited upon her daily over some twenty years of raising >> >this so very unwanted child. Should *she* not be the one to decide? >> > >> I know a woman from a small town who married a black man. The people >> in that town attach certain stigmas to blacks and to their daughter. >> What would you tell this couple when they want to go and visit her parents? >> There are plenty of people who have to deal with the uncomfortable presence >> of bigotry. We usually recognize it for what it is and don't advocate >> giving it any respectability by accommodating it. Does the child of a >> rapist merit the social stigma any more that any other child? > >Your example is particularly vivid for me. I am black and married a white >woman. Yes, there are tough times: quizzical looks, odd questions, >hostile comments... It's not easy, even in supposedly liberal New Jersey. >We knew this beforehand. It still hurts, but we felt and feel our >relationship is strong enough to endure. The woman who was raped did >not have that choice to make. I don't see how the amount of choice involved justifies any stigmas. The couple I know had less of a choice than you. Their daughter was conceived out of wedlock and the woman was visibly pregnant at their wedding. The point is that the stigmas are equally unjust, it doesn't depend on who had what choice. In fact the lack of choice involved should make them seem more unjust because it should make it harder to argue from the irrelevant idea that "they brought it upon themselves". (You seem to be using a form of this argument in your own case: It's different because we took it all upon ourselves by making the choice.) >I do not disagree with your point that her child should not be held >responsible for the crime of the father. I argue, however, that to demand >that the mother not resent this child goes beyond the bounds of what can >reasonably expected of human beings. I'm not *demanding*, Marcel. I'm trying to reason it out. It isn't beyond human *capability*, necessarily, especially if there is more support than a woman typically gets in this situation. Don't our "expectations" have a way of determining what support we will give? Is the idea that this behavior cannot be "reasonably expected" related to the lack of support? What is the real reason for this lack? Who is determining the bounds you talk about? Is overcoming racial hatred beyond reasonable bounds for some? Is that supposed to lower our expectations on the issue of racial bigotry itself? It seems that you are arguing along these lines in the case of abortion and rape. >> >Yes, abortion might be the psychologically worse option. The point is *you >> >don't know that*, the *woman* does. The pro-choice stand is that *she* >> >should decide what to do with this product of her humiliation. >> >> I'm wondering if anyone knows. The pro-choice stand puts all the burden >> on her, that's for sure. I'm mainly driving at what I think is an unfair >> stigma that is attached to a child conceived under such horrid circumstance. > >You accuse pro-choicers of putting the entire burden on the mother, yet you >immediately claim that your primary concern is for the child. You are placing a >huge burden on the mother by withdrawing the option to terminate this >pregnancy, product of her humiliation. No, I'm not withdrawing the option, I'm asking that support for another one be provided. This other option will take support. I realize that pro-life folks are going to have to help. What about the pro-choice side? They seem to be pushing the path of least support. The point of my *article* may have been concerned with the stigma attached to the fetus, but *I* am primarily concerned for *both* woman and child. If I am a little unbalanced in my argument it is because I am arguing against a position that is *only* concerned for the woman. >> >But most people cannot be *legally* expected to be this good. >> >> Obviously. If you read my whole article, you would know that I wasn't >> making a legal argument. I'm making a moral argument against what seems >> to be a perceived virtue in attaching the "child of a fiend" stigma to >> someone. >> >Forgive my assumption. All my postings on the subject of abortion start by >assuming that we are attempting to define a public policy acceptable to all of >us. I am not interested in arguing morality, for that is a dry exercise in >futility. The multiple megabytes that have already been expended on the >morality or lack thereof of abortion should convince anyone that there is >no single morality that all can agree on (see some messages I wrote in >net.women that elaborate on this.) Given that impasse, if we are not trying >to reach a compromise on public policy, why are we all wasting our time? >Marcel-Franck Simon ihnp4!{mhuxr, hl3b5b}!mfs Does public policy have *nothing* to do with morality (a lot of people are sure that *foreign* policy does)? It seems that whether or not moral arguments seem a dry exercise in futility, depends on whose morality is being challenged more than just the fact that we are debating morality. You are using moral arguments (at least, arguing from moral premises, as I am), Marcel. It's a wonder you don't realize it. Where public policy reflects the moral treatment of human beings, I would think that discussion would not be a waste of time. -- Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd