HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dschenke@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dennis L Schenkel)
Subject: Re: Some Pro-life...conclusions?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: talk.abortion
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 22:26:03 GMT

In article <3159@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays) writes
:
>Sometimes abortions fail and children get born.  This shows that
>abortion is wrong.
>
>Sometimes contraceptives fail and children get born.  This shows that
>contraceptives are wrong.
>
>Sometimes people fail at abstinence and children get born.  This shows
>that abstinence is wrong.
>

A friend of mine once told me that he was born back in the old days when sex
was the cause of pregnancy.  Surprised, I asked him what causes pregnancy in
these modern times.

He replied, "Contraceptive failure, of course."
-- 
Dennis Schenkel, Graduate Student    *****************************************
Ohio State University, English Dept  * Pax Christi Vobiscum...  from one of  *
dschenke@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu   * those who "...wait in joyful hope..." *
    --My opinions are mine--         *****************************************
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: smithmc@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Lost Boy)
Subject: Re: To Lost Boy...Re  The thoughts of a fetus (Lost Boy Responds)
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 18:13:19 GMT

In article <Nov.19.12.27.06.1992.15494@andromeda.rutgers.edu> hauk@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Keira E. Hauk) writes:
>I think this is who I'm sending this to... It's in response to your "what 
>really pisses you off about prolifers", or whomever.
>
>Did you know that the human fetus can dream?  Recent studies have found that
>the human fetus can actually dream!  
>
>"Think" about it.

I have three things to ask:

1) Where is this study from?? I read _Scientific American_ religiously,
and I also look through _Science News_ for anything politically relevant
or related to Physics (my field of study). I have'nt seen anythning on this
in the five years I have done this reading. I am most interested in
seeing this report.

2) When do feti start dreaming? I have no objection to your assertion; however
I would argue that even if we were to use dreaming as an indication of 
humanity (I have no trouble with this assertion at all), this would not
make the fetus a human being until such a time as dreaming (and thus brain
activity and thus experiencing) began. I have lots of trouble with the idea
that a fetus is a human being before this point, however. Thus, even if
feti dream, a pre-dream-capable fetus is not human.

3) What makes you think that I haven't thought about this possibility?

Lost Boy

******************************************************************
* Go ahead and quote me, I really don't mind. I kinda like it... *
*                                       -Karen Uru               *
******************************************************************
From: frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: To the discussionaries!
Date: 23 Nov 1992 10:41:41 GMT
Organization: Siemens-Nixdorf AG
NNTP-Posting-Host: d012s658.ap.mchp.sni.de

In article <adams.722190444@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
#joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays) writes:
#>And being an American means reacting with respect if they reject your version
#>of the truth.  I can see that you are good Christian.  Are you a good
#>American?
#
#He cannot be a good Christian if he is not also a good American.  Romans 13.

I'm not any kind of American, and I'd like to keep it that way.  Where does 
that leave me? :-)

# -Steve
-- 
Frank.ODwyer@ap.mchp.sni.de   "You take slaves when you make us free,
                               when you make us free your way"
                             World Party - 'Ain't going to come til I'm ready'
From: smezias@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Jim, the chastity belt theory, and me, Part 2
Date: 17 Nov 92 13:51:19 GMT
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

In article <1992Nov17.060654.15779@panix.com> jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
writes: 

>K., S. & T. show that our plans for the future and who we feel should
>be responsible for what have no strong connection to what sorts of
>things we believe are likely to happen?  I am sceptical.

What I stated is that there is no connection between actual
probabilities of events and our perceptions about them; these
inaccurate perceptions in turn guide our planning.

>>Besides I agree we need to hold people responsible for pregnancy,
>>including the responsible choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.
>
>Whether that choice is responsible, of course, depends on the nature
>of the act, which in turn depends on the nature of the z/e/f.  That's
>what the whole dispute depends on.

It depends on the person making the choice according to current law,
which I hope to see strengthened with the signing of the FOCA.  The
whole dispute depends on whether you or the woman carrying a child is
better qualified to decide how to handle the pregnancy.

SJM
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Keeganoid and censorship
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 06:44:33 GMT

In article <By3BwE.AzH.2@cs.cmu.edu> 
garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
>ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>>keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes ...
>>>dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>>>> It wasn't "my" moderated talk.abortion newsgroup, Keeganoid.
>>>> I only proposed a moderated newsgroup 

>>> how many readers, other than ms. bartley of course,
>>> supported your proposal to censor talk.abortion, DODie?

>> I don't recall anyone (not even DOD) proposing that t.a. be censored.
>> Are you lying again?

> Moderated newsgroups are, by definition, censored.

That's not what the Keeganoid accused me of -- he claimed that
I wanted to censor this newsgroup, which is clearly a lie.
I merely proposed a moderated newsgroup which would co-exist
with talk.abortion. 

>Susan


Doug Holtsinger

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: The Best of Enemies - John Dee
Organization: North Carolina State University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 23:42:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.195417.10578@pwcs.stpaul.gov> 
chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:

>  [.. biographical sketch of an abortion opponent ..]
> 
> Dee was recently sentenced to a six-month jail term for violating the 12-
> person limit at the Robbinsdale clinic.  He will start serving his term on
> the day after Thanksgiving.

What is the meaning of a "12-person limit", and why does a person
deserve six months in jail for violating this limit? 

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: cp7927@oktext.sbc.com (Caryn S. Prater)
Subject: Re: Quotes
Reply-To: cp7927@oktext.UUCP (Caryn S. Prater)
Organization: Southwestern Bell
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 23:19:33 GMT

In article <adams.721930917@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>cp7927@oktext.sbc.com (Caryn S. Prater) writes:
>
>>Suzanne - The Presidency was stolen from Carter but, you'll hear
>>more about that in the years ahead.  Funny, I didn't realize you
>>were a psychic and funnier yet that you seem to take great glee
>>imagining the destruction of this country, more Republican sour
>>grapes and unwillingness to accept defeat gracefully.
>God, I hate to step in and defend something Suzanne is saying, but I can't
>let this go.  What you are describing is the DEMOCRATIC reaction to the
>fact that Carter lost and Reagan won.  There is NO proof of any 'October
>Surprise' - the Democratic Congress even said so after their investigation.
>Carter lost.  And the left just can't acknowledge that.  Reagan *was*
>widely popular, and still is, even though there is a concerted effort to
>rewrite history.
>
>>Now, let me make a predicition, I see the complete destruction of
>>the Republican party as more and more of the truth of the dirty
>>deals made by them comes to light.  I predict that never again will
>>they have their dirty hands on the helm of state.
>
>Jack Kemp will be President in 1996.
>


Uhhh, Stevie could it be that you're a little repub?
> -Steve
>--
>  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
>                         -------------------
>   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
>   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558


--
Nolite te bastardes carborunodorum
       Author unknown :-)
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48686 talk.politics.misc:60985 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8870 alt.rush-limbaugh:10043
From: delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu (DERRELL EMERY LAROCQUE)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Rush Limbaugh makes my life a HELL!
Date: 20 Nov 92 00:53:09 GMT
Reply-To: delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu (DERRELL EMERY LAROCQUE)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Originator: delarocq@c00059-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu




   I have a gf with fundamentalist parents who treat Rush Limbaugh as though
 he has the answers to life's problems. Well, I am here to say that because
 of this, I will have to fight in order to marry her. Has it come to the point
 in this country where conservative ideas like the ones he presents are so
 much a part of the United States now, that two people in love can't even
 marry for fear of outright attack like this? I fear for our happiness.
 I don't want her to choose between keeping her family or keeping me.
 I hate liberals (I am moderate), but even moderates aren't safe from Rush
 Limbaugh!! Can someone PLEASE give me some ideas???
-- 
delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu


      
---------------------------------------------------------------------------   
1988,1989,1990,1991 AFC East Division Champions
1991,1992 AFC Conference Champions

Hungry for some fish.. Monday Night Football, November 16, 1992..

If you are a Buffalo Bills fan, email me at delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu
so we can talk all about the games, insight, etc.
If you are a Packers fan, let me know. I am interested in any news
out of Green Bay...
A PROUD MEMBER OF THE BILLS COALITION TAKING THE BET II.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE)
Subject: Re: J Price answers questions
Originator: jjprice@c00067-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:15:33 GMT


In article <1992Nov17.210607.21506@pwcs.stpaul.gov>, chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
|>jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes to Lynn Alford:
|>
|>> She knew there was a chance and she took and messed up PAY THE PRICE !!!
|>
|>You seem to express a willingness to PUNISH a married woman for having sex
|>with her husband.  Is that the case?  Yes?  No?
|>
I'm not going to punish her she punished herself by getting pregnant.

|>Either way, fie on you, you clueless wet-behind-the-ears newbie.
|>
So is being new a crime?

|>> I answered your question jbut I will answer a quetion about my reply I don't
|>> understand
|>
|>Huh?
|>
You edited out the reply to a reply to a wuestion about a rely I didn't 
understand now how the hell is someone suppsed to understand?

|>> lalford@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (LYNN ALFORD) writes in her .sig:
|>
|>>> I had an opinion just a moment ago.  Now where did I put it?
|>
|>> Who knows? but try looking in Space..oops I mean your head its the same
|>> thing.
|>
|>People who write things like "I answered your question jbut I will answer
|>a quetion about my reply I don't understand" probably should not be seen
|>writing 'space == head' flames.
|>
She accused me of not answering her questions so I answered all of them including 
the .sig quote.

|>Come to think of it, real space is not empty; it is infinite and contains
|>all kinds of interesting objects and energies.  Congratulations, you just
|>paid Lynn one hell of a compliment!
|>
I am talking about the amount of "stuff" contained in the same volume as her 
head which would amount to very little.

|>-- 
|>Chris Lyman 
-- 
-Jeffrey Price
_____________________________________________________________________
| "When he went, had you gone and had she, if she wanted to and were |
|  able, for the time being excluding all the restraints on her not  |
|  to go also, would he have brought you, meaning you and she, with  |
|  him to the station?"                                              |
| "OBJECTION: That question ought to be taken out and shot!!"        |
|____________________________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: crowder@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Mark Crowder)
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh makes my life a HELL!
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 20:17:28 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.005309.9356@ncsu.edu> delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu (DERRELL EMERY LAROCQUE) writes:
>
>
>
>   I have a gf with fundamentalist parents who treat Rush Limbaugh as though
> he has the answers to life's problems. Well, I am here to say that because
> of this, I will have to fight in order to marry her. Has it come to the point
> in this country where conservative ideas like the ones he presents are so
> much a part of the United States now, that two people in love can't even
> marry for fear of outright attack like this? I fear for our happiness.
> I don't want her to choose between keeping her family or keeping me.
> I hate liberals (I am moderate), but even moderates aren't safe from Rush
> Limbaugh!! Can someone PLEASE give me some ideas???
>-- 
>delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu

   In any relationship, the family eventually becomes involved.  Most
adults will politely ignore oposing views of prospective inlaws.  This
is called "being civilized".  Your girlfriend's parents are not this 
sort so the burden is on you.  Don't let them goad you into arguing.
Change the subject.  If they refuse to change the subject, leave.  Don't
argue, just leave.  Eventually, they will learn what subjects cannot
be discussed, and for the sake of their daughter's happiness, they will
"be civilized".  This may take a while, so hang in there.  Remember,
holding your temper is the mark of an adult.

Mark Crowder  "I'm sorry my karma ran over your dogma"  crowder@spdc.ti.com 
Dallas, Tx                                          Texas Instruments, Inc.
"Some degree of honesty must be present in conversation, or it lapses into
a lower form of art such as literature" 
                         -- P.J. O'Rourke "Republican Party Reptile"
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: eeb1@quads.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: Constitutional abortion rights
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 08:20:02 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.230850.26925@wdl.loral.com>
bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com writes:

>Well, Doug, seeing as how the only thing you *will* own up to is that
>you don't think abortion should be a Constitutional right, why don't
>you give us your reasoning for why you think the abortion right isn't
>covered in the Ninth Amendment?

I'm not Doug, but....

I don't think the Ninth Amendment guarantees a right to abortion
because I think that the Ninth Amendment safeguards right legally
granted to the people by sources other than the U.S. Constitution,
primarily state constitutions and English Common Law.  It *would*
prioritize a right in a state constitution over a federal law against
abortion, however.

If I wanted to find a right to abortion in the Constitution, I'd look
at the Fourteenth Amendment ... no involuntary servitude....

But Clinton getting elected has changed my opinion of Roe from
"Overturn it *now*; having precedents that far removed from the
Constitution still in force is DANGEROUS!" to "Let's pass the Freedom
of Choice Act, *first*, and *then* overturn Roe v. Wade...."

-- 
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.

Cthulhu for President -- when you're tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
From: bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash)
Subject: Re: Reconciling OT with NT
Reply-To: bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 02:16:41 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.013748.8796@iscsvax.uni.edu>,
clifton9220@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
|>In article <1992Nov14.214406.23543@doug.cae.wisc.edu>,
mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
|>> How to reconcile the Old Testament God with the New Testament God, (they
|>> do appear to be quite different):
|>> 
|>> He mellowed.
|>
|>Jesus came!
|>> 
|>> :)M^2
|>> 
          
Good point!  Alot of men "mellow out" after having
their first child.  (Of course God is a man!  How
do you think He got Mary preggers?)
New question: does the Rapture take place during
His mid-life crisis? (You know, re-live those action-packed
OT years!)

Brian /-|-\
From: joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Nyikos and SAT
Date: 20 Nov 92 17:14:45 GMT
Organization: Dept. of CS Ball State University Muncie IN

In article <nyikos.722204053@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>It is due to a shared in-joke, that anyone who posts SAT scores is like
>some pompous braggart [I forget his name, it was revealed to me shortly
>after I posted my SAT scores in response to a direct question] who posted
>them once upon a time, and is a suitable target for ridicule, and worse:
>As Kathi Mills said in reference to my posting the scores, "Let the
>flames begin."

I didn't see you post your SAT scores.  Had I done so I would have
called you a fool.  I certainly have never heard of anyone else doing
it on the net.  Had anyone else done so I would have called them a
fool.  To claim that I would be calling you a fool as part of some
"in-joke" is ridiculous.

You say that you posted your SAT scores in response to a direct 
question.  Was the question "What are your SAT scores?"  What
was the question?

Joe


Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48852 talk.religion.misc:21663 alt.atheism:21751
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
Subject: Returning the Church of Rome to the Fold
Date: 20 Nov 92 20:28:51 GMT
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper


the following is being posted for a friend:


In article <1992Nov20.011952.4766@noao.edu> by forgach@noao.edu:
>From article <adams.722195596@spssig>, by adams@spss.com (Steve Adams):
>> scruggs@zeus.franklin.edu (Kevin Scruggs) writes:
>> 
>> I am ELCA.  We are catholic....(ie universal).  The intent of Luther was to
>> reform catholicism.  ELCA considers itself a reform movement within
>> catholicism.
>> Protestant and catholic are *not* mutually exclusive...

>Hence the Ecumenical Movement.
>Are you ready to come home yet, Steve?  ;-)

I don't know about Steve, but as soon as the Church of Rome repents its 
errors, I'll be happy to have them rejoin the Church.

nadja

-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com



-- 
Modern Day Problems:
Little Miss Muffett, sat on a ToughtIt,
Eating her Kurds and Weighs, Along came a Spider,
and she drove off with the Neat Guy with a HOT CAR!
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:49093 alt.abortion.inequity:5254 soc.women:20129 soc.men:19765 alt.feminism:4846
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.women,soc.men,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: compromise
Keywords: nyikos fails to apologize for false accusation of forgery
Date: 22 Nov 92 01:08:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.By3F5K.Ep6.2
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1ek0efINNoro@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
#You know how it happens that things are always in the last place that
#you look for 'em?  There's a reason for that.  And now I gleefully
#note to the net that I'm a gonna be gone for about a week, and will
#probably "c"atchup all of talk.abortion when I get back, so in all
#probablility will miss mr. phoney sweety peetie when he FINALLY
#"gets around" to me.  Now ain't that a cryin' shame.....  Jim, save it
#for me, will ya?

I'll save it for you, too, even if it's a Darcyesque "You may be 
right" sort of admission such as PHoney made to me.

#In article <va11wlf@rpi.edu> keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
##nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes to
##-#Well, I don't know what qualifies as an apology in your eyes, but I just
##-#posted one in response to Susan's initial short post about my "selective
##-#editing".  
##-#Adrienne is a trickier case but I'll get around to her too when
##-#I have a little more time.
##
##adrienne is not a "trickier" case. you accused her of
##forgery. your accusation was false. in fact, anyone
##familiar with the net knew your accusation was false
##when they read it, which is why i suggested you speak
##with your sysadmins immediately and then post an
##apology for your false accusation. so much time has
##passed since then, three weeks or more isn't it, that i
##am forced to conclude that your accusation was an
##intentional smear rather than just a stupid mistake.
##unfortunately for you, this incident has gone a long
##way to solidify your growing net.reputation.
#
#WHAT net.reputation!?  (-:

This one's been answered quite nicely.

#PS, oh yea, all you talk.abortion posters that I've had entralled
#(against your will of course) in my web of deceit for the last few
#months, who have been posting that Peter is lacking integrity -- I 
#release you for the week.  You are now free to post your OWN thoughts,
#until I get back, and seize your minds again and force you to type
#nasty things about mr. clue-less-big-time.

I guess DODie didn't read this - he's been trying to speak for
me.  Maybe he thought that he could take control in your 
absence.  He should have known that you'd grant us autonomy
in your absence, though.  Radical extremists have this thing
about freedom.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: What REALLY pisses me off about Fundies
Date: 20 Nov 1992 16:03:05 GMT
Organization: Siemens-Nixdorf AG
NNTP-Posting-Host: d012s658.ap.mchp.sni.de

In article <1992Nov19.071543.25221@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes ...
>>So?  It has yet to be demonstrated that your whole life has not been
>>a dream and that we are not all just figments of your imagination.
>
>Utterly pointless.  It has yet to demonstrated that you are a human
>being.  So what?  Given that not much of anything can be proved
>absolutely, you've got to get the data that's available and take your
>best guess.  From all the evidence I have available, the pregnant
>woman is almost always clearly a person while a 12-week fetus isn't.  
>I might well be wrong, but I'm less likely to be wrong than one who 
>claims sentience for a 5 week embryo.

On what basis do you assign these 'likelihoods'?  Up there you said
you were guessing.

>Ray Fischer                   "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth


-- 
Frank.ODwyer@ap.mchp.sni.de   "You take slaves when you make us free,
                               when you make us free your way"
                             World Party - 'Ain't going to come til I'm ready'
                   
Newsgroups: talk.abortion