 Thank you all for being here and you've probably heard a room to the effect of Ronin from not so many is coming here. I will be talking to him and I recognize the problem that we have and I'm sure I will receive. We're very candid views and I would like to have you speak with me because I'd like to have all the information that you could give me and with that I will turn it over to Ambassador Brock. Mr. President, we've had a great session before coming to talk to you and sort of laid out two or three fun known things we'd like to ask you for the discussion and just want to address. Primarily as I told them to give you something of a flavor of the complexity of the relationship and the depth of the problem because it is serious and it is very real and we've encouraged all of these individuals to be very frank and speak their mind as you would expect that in the last. Maybe we could start with a problem that seems to affect everybody whether they're extras or headquarters and that's the problem that Lee Morgan brought to Dershow's and others who are back. So we decided to cut it off. Yes, that's why you had cut it off. Thank you Mr. President. Why do you have to do that? Now that's Helen's fault. Sunday. Okay. That's your priorities. I think we do have to hear your views on what has happened now since the interim proposal has been made. The latest Soviet thing, I think we've got a job over here to be public relations the latest Soviet proposal but somehow it is fair for them to have over a thousand more hits aimed at the targets in Western Europe but it would be provocative and unfair for us to have even a single missile that could get to them in the same period of time and that that somehow is us seeking a first strike capability and it's so utterly ridiculous that I think it offers us an opportunity to finally mobile this interest in public opinion on our side but this of course has to do with the I and F thing and then with what you're going to achieve. How are you? How are you? I won't go all the way around. Well listen, I wanted to be meeting here with you on this particular anniversary day and I remember when many of us met here some time ago when I heard that we see if we couldn't unite behind one proposal and that we did to a certain extent fail and I would I want to bring up something that hasn't been brought up already is going to present a problem that we know is barely lost by about one bullet in the table on the proposal of the federal funding of abortion and this time we're faced with a difficulty they have changed the rules and the rules for the Democratic majority in the House according to that now there will no longer be a chance for high right to be put on an appropriation bill and we're going to have to work very hard and we want to get that and I think it's an important thing to get to scan the tide but if you don't mind I would like and then to hear from all of you I keep kicking around in my head I think it's another idea that's a little different than many of the things that have been proposed with the constitution at all but some time ago when the East Committee was having the hearings when life begins the was treated by the press as after the lengthy hearing and all the actors on both sides have spoken that they came to no conclusion but in my view that was a conclusion so this before I know if you came upon a body and you couldn't determine whether it was alive or dead you wouldn't bury it you would out for life until somebody could prove it was dead and then after all that testimony they cannot make that decision what would happen if we all centered our activities on either establishing that it is alive or but saying that they can't establish that it isn't alive then you have to opt for life I remember I don't know whether I told you this before but in California a strange thing when the whole matter of abortion came up and it isn't true that I supported abortion on demand it is true that I got a little deceived on the health issue by the area of psychiatry and did not realize how loosely they would interpret the law but at the time it was a very strange dichotomy there not too long before that a man had beaten his common law wife so severely that the child she was carrying was born dead and the California legislature unanimously devoted that any crime in the future of that kind a man who administered the beating or mistreated any woman to cause the death of her unborn child would be charged with murder now how can we recognize that it is murder to mistreat someone and cause the death of an unborn child or to be born dead and then turn around and say that it's alright for someone simply for their personal convenience to take the life of that unborn child surgically and that doesn't by the way to me the Constitution that guarantees his life, liberty and pursuit of happiness well unless they can prove that isn't a life then the Constitution already protects that unborn child and I just throw this out to see if there's any merit in us researching or studying this as a possible approach if you could dissolve the Supreme Court well I wonder since they haven't been able to arrive at the decision on this could even the Supreme Court rule and there is nice to see you so happy to see you but I just wondered if we might but of course I still believe that we're stronger if we unite on one thing and I should say this administration we already began to help to be supporting this but to look into this thing is the burden to prove on us or is it on them we have children born extremely prematurely who live I've seen myself in the hospital one that only weighed two and a half pounds because it was born so prematurely for those of you who haven't heard and then I would quit this discussion because I know time is limited the legislator who was introducing the abortion bill in California now a congressman and he escaped Senator then and he was in a debate with a doctor regarding when life begins or when is the unborn a human being and the doctor was showing him photos so Dr. Jefferson showed him I suppose X-ray photos and at various periods time of pregnancy and the doctor was asking him in the debate if this was a human being and he kept saying no and finally he got him up to pretty far along in pregnancy and showed him a picture and said is this a human being and the legislator now a congressman said no and the doctor said I have just shown you a picture of your son and then son was then eight years old going to school, not son but I just filled this out for our consideration Mr. President we may not be in perfect agreement on exactly what approaches to take on the constitutional amendment