apologies made to all but the right person
cruyff at ix.netcom.com
Mon Feb 12 18:49:42 EST 1996
In <4fnmp7$cds at ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca> sophiewi at uoguelph.ca (Sophie
>ED MCNALLY (cruyff at ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>: 2. My words were discounted simply because I am a man. Reverse
>: discrimination against men by some will not help resolve any
>: oppression leveled against women.
>Ed's words were "discounted" (I like this image: like "70% off!")
>he was a man, offering another way to deal with pregnancy. If the
>of you don't mind -- I'd like to persue this.
>Do we have to value all opinions/insight at the same ("100%") level?
>are some sources more value-able than others? I would have thought
>pro-choice movement would argue exactly that: a woman's opinion of
>own abilities to cope with a baby, and her own insight into the whole
>abortion/life question, are more valid than anyone else's. More valid
>than a doctor's, and more valid than a politician's, and more valid
>any other man or woman who is not in her shoes. That's why
>she should get to choose, and politicians and doctors and other people
>(even though she's
>outnumbered by them on a straight everyone-is-equal basis) don't get
>choose for her. Anyone whose own experience resembles hers may
>have some insight (i.e. women - since their experience resembles hers
>more closely than men's?) -- but hers is the ultimate viewpoint.
>No, I'm not keen on starting an abortion flame war, either. But I
>this a very difficult and worthwhile issue to consider. Whose
>count? Whose can be discounted? Is discounting ever valid?
My point, once again, was that I only provided information on
an option, without a command to do anything.
If we were talking of only one life (that of the woman), then
you would be correct - a woman's opinion should count for more.
However, the whole point of the Pro-Life stance is that the woman is
not the only life to be considered. As much as you may disagree with
them, Pro-Lifers are people who are of the opinion that someone should
speak for the unborn who are unable to speak.
Again, I am responding (minimally) to what was written. I do
not wish to use this as a forum for the abortion debate. I would
certainly be willing to do soin another, more appropriate newsgroup.
However, I think that enough distracts from the purpose of this group,
to provide a human resource to help women-in-bio. As a teacher, I
initially accessed this group in the hopes of finding information which
might be of assistance to my female students.
More information about the Womenbio