>This is all very nice, I'm sure (this improving of society --
>how could anybody be against progress, after all?), but what the
>hell do you mean by "improving society"? Please define your
>terms. It really does sound like you think you know which kinds
Use your archives. Try searching on "Facing "facts" with fantasy" and "mart555 at inow.com" in the sender. The time frame was during the discussions of developing a socialist position for social action (platform?).
Briefly, my argument was -
a. abortion has been positioned as a focus point of many sectors of society. Every sector seems to have a position on the "social issue of abortion".
b. The issue has been a divisive issue. No group has managed to use it as a galvanizing issue.
c. The group that uses it as a galvanizing issue will have a broad audience.
d. Defining the issue in a way to make it galvanizing requires assuming a viewpoint that uses the act of abortion as a indicator of what I referred to as "fear of mothering", or "unwillingness to mother" or "unwillingness to make the sacrifices associated with mothering", or whatever term most clearly establishes the point. That the sacrifices associated with mothering are substantially the reason for the termination of unintended pregnancies.
e. Extending that definition to the broader issue of "social health", and defining women's "willingness to mother" as an index or borometer of "social health" is the point. If the reason for improving the index aren't clear then the matter has to be further developed, but I would think that the reason would be "self-evident".
f. Developing social changes with the intent of altering (improving) the index forms the position for social action. Many of the changes that I can imagine would affect woman's "willingness to mother" seem to be naturals for a socialist agenda. Ubiquitous professionally trained daycare associated with learning centers and workplace for a start.
g. Maintaining the focus on the barometer requires that access to abortion be unhindered. Any obstacle to access would skew the validity of your statistical index.
Martin