🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <l2jhouINNpft@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> jdr@starflight.Corp.Sun.COM writes:
>We need to make a major push on the media and politicians that there is a third
>position distinct from pro-life and pro-choice, which holds that:
>
>(1) The state has a natural right to regulate the reproductive behavior of its
>citizens, and may, under certain circumstances, need to either compel women to
>bear children or to refrain from doing so. Therefore, women must not be accorded
>a constitutional right to choose whether or not to bear children.
>
Where does the state get this 'natural right'?  This is like saying
that the state has the 'natural right' to kill anyone, to end any life.  
Or prolong it.  For any reason.  

The state has no more right to mandate my reproductive behavior than
it does to mandate my living or dying.

It is one thing for the state to persuade women to bear children or to
refrain from doing so.  But the state does not have the right to decide 
for me.

Sheila

-- 
Sheila Wallace		(shla@spf.trw.com)
TRW, One Space Park, R2/2162, Redondo Beach, CA 90278