martin wrote:
>
> a msg onWed, 5 Feb 2003 08:47:19 -0800fromIan Murraycontained-
>
> >Women want abortions due to the unintended consequences of consensual or
> >coerced sex. That's a far cry from animals eating their young. The law is
> >always already interfering with society; shifting the directions-
> >dimensions of it's interference to afford greater scope for women's life
> >choices will leave the overwhelming majority of citizens far better off
> >than they are now.
>
> I think that the discussion was how to present a clear and compelling
> argument for the decriminalization of abortion.
>
The discussion is veering away from politics again.
There is and was a clear and compelling argument: either decriminalize or there will be hell to pay in the streets. What we need now is (a) to build up the comfort level of women using the procedure (thus eliminating psychological ill effects of abortion and giving more women the courage to use it) and (b) build up enough hell in the streets that abortion will have to be made financially as well as legally easy to maintain.
The argument martin wants to start all over just is not worth pursuing.
Abortion _has_ to be universally and easily and cheaply available as back-up birth control for casual sex.
Carrol