Statement of Principles circa 1990, page two.
It should be noted that the major shake ups mentioned above would be far more in the area of our internal concepts/outlooks
than in the area of noticeable mechanical functions/interactions. As far as our pro- choice position statement goes...The
Sunrise Foundation supports and holds the concept of a persons natural right to sovereignty over their body as very dear
to the bedrock, core values, upon which all issues concerning individual/societal freedoms are based. We know that this issue
is replete with sound moral concerns from both sides, but we believe, overwhelmingly, that the approach to how this issue
is dealt with must stay within the operational boundaries of choice and free will, especially since it involves a persons
right to being sovereign over ones own body.
We find that the "process" of an abortion "in
the/or around the" period in which the fetus becomes viable to be as disturbing a proposition as do others who oppose
this process.. If the mothers life or health is not at risk I do not believe it would be appropriate to force another person/doctor
who was opposed to participation, to participate in such a process. Furthermore if any laws were to be passed that did in
some way restrict a womans right/access to abortion, it is in the areas of fetus viability, that these restrictions appear
most reasonable..,and again only in those instances where the health and well being of the mother are not a factor.
In cases such as rape or incest other processes could be available..but at some point personal responsibility, when severe
emotional or other problems cannot be noted, must/must become a part of the considered process.