home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48259 alt.atheism:21433
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.atheism
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!agate!stanford.edu!hubcap!opusc!usceast!nyikos
- From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
- Subject: Re: What REALLY pisses me off about Fundies
- Message-ID: <nyikos.722022459@milo.math.scarolina.edu>
- Sender: usenet@usceast.cs.scarolina.edu (USENET News System)
- Organization: USC Department of Computer Science
- References: <1992Nov3.183610.1435@Cadence.COM> <16898CCA0.I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de> <nyikos.721695784@milo.math.scarolina.edu> <1992Nov14.212753.23349@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
- Date: 17 Nov 92 17:47:39 GMT
- Lines: 63
-
- In <1992Nov14.212753.23349@doug.cae.wisc.edu> mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
-
- >In article <nyikos.721695784@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
- >>In <16898CCA0.I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de> I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de (Benedikt Rosenau) writes:
-
- >>>And it is a well known fact that women who have given birth to a child go
- >>>often through long phases of depression. And lose interest in sex.
- >>> Benedikt
- >>
- >>I wonder how much of this post-partum depression is due to the artificial
- >>and forced separation of mothers from their newborn children immediately
- >>upon birth, or shortly thereafter.
- >>
- >Not all mothers go through that. Some woman have their children at home and
- >are not separated from their newborn children. Actually the loss of interest
- >in sex is probably a hormonal effect of childbirth. The body isn't ready
- >to reproduce again, so it tries to eliminate the chance.
-
- >Lets see a study. This study is a comparison of the emotional trauma of
- >woman who have an abortion, and woman who have an unwanted child and
- >possibly give it up for adoption. Lets have several categorys. 1. Woman
- >who have an abortion. 2. Woman who have unwanted children that they can
- >afford to care for. 3. Woman who have unwanted children that they can't
- >care for. 4. Women who have children and give them up for adoption because
- >they can't care for them. Note that I am leaving out the huge category
- >of women who have an abortion because the fetus is discovered to have
- >some major handicap, like chromosomal damage (frequently resulting in
- >mental retardation) vs. those who have those children.
-
- I wonder how "huge" this category is. I think it is much smaller than
- all except 4., unless one takes "can't" literally in 3. [Can't by whose
- standards, Mark?]
-
- > If you are
- >going to oppose abortion, then lets see an improved adoption system,
-
- It's already got a severe shortage of babies. It could use improving,
- sure, but unless more babies are saved from abortion, improving it
- is not going to have much effect.
-
- >and some way of letting the women care for the child. Or do you
- >believe that a woman should just shut up and bear the children?
-
- Of course not.
-
- >not phsiologically. Physiologically, I believe it is around 1 month after
- >birth that the infant finishes certain changes. I know, you will want
- >to flame me for this, but look at the internal physiology and there are
- >major and fundamental differences between a fetus and an infant. The
- >heart structure is one example. But we could argue this to the end of
- >time. (Now that would be interesting, NOT!)
-
- I take the issue of infanticide seriously. I wish more talk.abortion
- regulars would. For one thing, your "huge" category could be much more
- easily identified and mistakes either way (to kill or not to kill) would be
- minimized.
-
- Peter Ny.
-
-
-
-
-
-