mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com wrote:
> When such technology becomes available, most here will agree with
you.
> On a philsophical level, many could still quibble about women's
> abortion choices but men having access to convenient, reliable,
> comfortable birth control will make that issue largely moot.

They can quibble away. My viewpoint is that whether it's planned or
unplanned, once a woman is pregnant, it should remain her decision
whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term, considering that it's
her body that will be carrying the extra passenger for nine months. I'd
hope that any woman who was in a committed relationship and considering
abortion would take her partner's concerns and rights to heart when
making her decision. If she's not in a committed relationship, I don't
think the partner has rights in that situation anyway. And I'm sure
neither of those opinions will be popular here, but that's where some
of us will just have to disagree.

> That said, what do you think, as a self-proclaimed feminist,
> about the possibility of many women who had previously
> only had access to motherhood through "oopsing" remaining
> childless?  In a very short time, sperm banks will be hit
> by women who intend to go on state welfare support.
> What do you think the state will do then?

Deception is deception. Wrong if a woman does it, wrong if a man does
it. So any woman who intentionally "suprises" a man with paternity is
being deceitful, and wrong. Even a self-proclaimed feminist can see
that.

Still, if there is no sperm, there is no oops. Some men don't take
responsibility for their own deception. I'm not sure why - heat of the
moment? Seems a silly choice weighed against fatherhood.

As far as the sperm bank/welfare question, I'm not sure if it's
rhetorical or not. I'm thinking it is, so I'll leave it for the time
being.



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 2/14/05 10:09:20 PM ---