HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Telling Tales Out of School
Date: 5 Nov 92 04:30:44 GMT
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<1992Nov4.185811.15530@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) :
>gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>] <1992Nov2.034128.7999@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) :
>] For those of you who have never met Drieux I've nesws for you:
>] He talks just the way he writes.  Incredible.
> 
>Ok Buddy, That's IT!

"It's it, and that's that"  (one of the the more ridiculous advertisements)
What's wrong with being thought of as "incredible"?

>Two Can Play At this Game.....

Only two?  Tsk, tsk.  Where's your imagination, boy?  Judging from Nadja's
playroom I'd say 6 to 8 at the least.

>Eric Rescola ACTS and TALKS like a HyperThyroidEastCoastOverStressedLoonie!

Your point?  <sorry, Eric.  I couldn't resist>

>Larry Margolis - Contrary to His Postings, Is NOT a Mature Responsible
>		Adult with a Well Reasoned Well Balanced Personality,
>		And a Clear Victim of his 
>		EastCoastWimpLiberalZionistComedyCabalBackGround
>		Not To Mention, does the Rapier Replies LIVE!

Ah, but he is a clean-cut respectable fellow with a rakish beard (my
wife's opinion) and a dynamite looking SO (my opinion).

>Gordon Storga	- Deserves to be Writing OS/2 apps, as penance for
>		  his good looks and smarmyways, and the fact that

Good looks?  Smarmy?  Moi?  I think it's time for that ProblemOlderWoman
of yours to relieve some of your stress. ;-) BTW, I'd write OS/2 apps for
the rest of my life if it means I "deserve" my *goddess*.

>		  He is Married to a CutesyTootsyArtsyFartsy Type.

OOooooh!  Carn sarn fleabit varmint!  Them's fightin' words!  <in your
best Yosemite Sam voice>

Would an A-F-Type have *this* as her signature:
----
"Babies, babies, babies. Why did God make so many babies?
 But no, God didn't make them. Stupid people made them."
      -- Margaret Mitchell, Gone With The Wind
----
Ya gotta love a woman with that signature.  BTW, she did think you were...
interesting.  ;-)

>Eric Marsh	- Missed His Calling to be a Fundamentalist Preacher.

Definately.  It would have been so appropriate too, since his wife's last
name is 'Christian'.

...
>So THERE BUD!

Not bad.  Not bad at all.  Alix is a bit hurt though, she hates
artsyfartsy types too.

>just because you may NOT have root on your machine
>does not mean I do NOT have root on my machine!!!!

On a DOS machine, everyone has ROOT.


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel, 
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), Diana (Sorceress), Beth 
"CJ", and Nadja, and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it.
[space reserved for alternate ex-girlfriends Eric R. and Drieux]
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: Nyikos flamefest 
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Distribution: world 
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:49:24 GMT

It seems that I must come back to t.a after all, since Dr. Nyikos
seems hell bent on putting labels on me with scant justification.
Perhaps it was during the period when he claimed his newsreader
was malfunctioning, and so he missed my response, or rather a
further clarification to my initial response.

For a gentleman who is so fond of accusing others of reading
comprehension, he seems to have some problem in that area
himself.

Claim #1: He seems to think I am the number 1 pro-abort here in
t.a. I believe that I have only ever stated here that I believe
in a woman's right to choice - the choice she makes may be to
secure an abortion or it may be to continue the pregnancy. Since
no one (least of all myself) has elected me God, I do not have
the right to impose my views on women, no more than I may make
their decisions for them. Is this your definition of pro-
abortion Dr. Nyikos?

Claim #2: Purple prose. No doubt in reference to my account of
a *real* pregnancy of a *real* woman. Dr. Nyikos is constantly
refering to how easy pregnancy is *in his experience*. To be
honest, I am delighted that the women in his life have such an
easy time of it, I only wish it were true of *all* women.

However, since he either missed the clarification (or chose to
ignore it), I will repeat the significant data. This pregnancy
that I described took place in 1956, in these United States, in
the state of Ohio. The delivery finally occured 36 hours after
her water broke just in time to save her from having her
pelvis broken to save the child. It was a catholic hospital,
with a catholic doctor in attendance. So that gets us 26 years
away from the 1930s and away from some third world country.

My own Mother had a difficult time bringing me into this world,
and paid with her health later in life. I am (now) delighted to
be here, but this was not always the case. To this day, I think
that a free choice should have been available for her.

So, Dr. Nyikos, if you intend to keep on slandering me in your
posts, the rest of the group now knows it for what it is - pure
slander or a bad case of reading comprehension on *your* part.

For those in t.a who did not agree with Dr. Nyikos' efforts and
notified me, many thanks. However, I still intend to remain non-
subscribed to this group. Whether I can add to/not add to the
discussion is irrelevant. It simply takes time that I can spend
better elsewhere. As to my views, I will express them where
they do the most good - at the ballot box.

To those who believe as I do, peace. To those who disagree, I
will always oppose you but do not wish you ill.

BTW, Peter you were close on one thing with your 1930 date. I 
was born that year, on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception,
ironic isn't it :-).

Peace;

Robert Earle Blackshaw, fortunate husband to the most delightful
woman I have ever known.


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: Keeganblather says it all (was Re: Logic vs. Rhetoric (was: J'ACCUSE JOAN CAMPBELL (and dozens of others)
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 15:49:16 GMT

kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
> chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:

>> I've already demonstrated that 5/8 of Keeganblather, as defined by Darcy,
>> is Darcyblather.  

> Already demonstrated, eh? I must have missed this "demonstration". Care to
> repeat it?

Sure, Kebbin.  You quoted 8 non-blank lines from my article about two weeks
ago and characterized it as "Keeganblather."  Of those lines you quoted,
one was written by me, two contained article reference numbers, and five
contained text authored by you.  Hence, the main ingredient in "Keeganblather"
turns out to be Darcyblather.

Hope this helps.

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  / standard disclaimers
 "Republicans run on a platform that government is bad.  And when we
           elect them, they prove it!" -- Phil Harbison
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The Mendacity of Gordon Storga
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:02:43 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon


In article <nyikos.721348814@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

[Petey Honey's whining about the AGI deleted]

#_Aborting America_ is a primary source for lots of things, such as the
#early history of NARAL, one of whose co-founders was Nathanson. [Of course
#Larry would prefer the account of Jerry Lader, another co-founder.]  Let's
#not forget that at the time he wrote the book, Nathanson was still doing
#abortions and was in neither the pro-life nor the pro-choice camp.
#
#About as close to an unbiased source as you can get, IMHO.

An we all no how valuable your opinion is, Petey Honey.

I've never heard of Jerry Lader.  Larry Lader was one of the many co-
founders of NARAL.  His _Abortion II_ provides a less biased account
of the beginnings of the organization.  Unlike Nathanson, Lader
does not color his description of the events with personal attacks
on the character of other founding members.  Unlike Nathanson,
Lader had no financial stake in the legalization of abortion.

Nathanson admits to doing a few abortions in the book, it is
true.  It seems odd that he would continue to do them, considering
that the thesis of the book is that abortion is morally wrong.
It doesn't seem so odd, though, when you read Nathanson's
criticisms of the dishonesty of the anti-abortion movement and
realize that he later adopted their tactics - then it becomes clear
that the man is utterly without scruples.

The book is worth reading, though.  Nathanson's claims of
superior knowledge about abortion procedures based on his
experience at CRASH are revealed to be nonsense, since he
rarely performed any abortions himself.  He merely served
as administrator.  His criticisms of his current buddies are
instructive, too.  

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: an anti-choice post
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:27:17 GMT

In article <92311.071218ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> Linda Birmingham <ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> writes:
>
>In article <1992Nov2.182216.11675@midway.uchicago.edu> e elizabeth bartley says
>>In article <92303.180905ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> Linda Birmingham writes:
>>>In article<1992Oct25.013118.24469@midway.uchicago.edu>
>>>e elizabeth bartley says
>>
>>>>Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                   - E. Elizabeth Bartley
>>
>>>Little wonder you are anti-Roe. It doesn't mandate jail
>>>terms for women.
>>
>>Trying to get my blood pressure to rise since Keegan can't manage it,
>>dear?
>
>Hardly "dear".  Are you suggesting people should censor their
>posts by keeping someone's blood pressure in mind?

"Censor" implies the involuntary taking OUT of material, Ms. Birmingham. I 
take Ms. Bartley's comment to address the voluntary putting IN of material 
that is counter-productive to a rational discussion of the abortion issue. 
Why include such material in your posts? Does it conform to the primary 
purpose of this newsgroup?

>>As I've said before, I rather like Roe's position; it forbids a lot of
>>stuff I disapprove of and doesn't forbid anything I want.
>
>Well it doesn't mandate jail terms for one ...

Neither does it forbid them.

>and it
>permits many of the women who would be disallowed
>abortions under your desired legislation.

Only with the consent of the state, Ms. Birmingham. RvW doesn't, _ipso
facto_, protect any third-trimester abortions, except when the life of 
the mother is at risk.

>btw does your fetal right protectionism include
>forcing women to abstain from activities that may
>cause harm to the fetus?

Personally, I would oppose any such protectionism, except maybe 
INTENTIONAL attempts by women to self-abort or harm their viable fetus 
via these activities. NOTA BENE: I didn't say I'd _support_ such 
restrictions; I only said I might not _oppose_ them.

								- Kevin
From: mjb10@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael J. Bumbulis)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Pro-life ad
Date: 8 Nov 1992 23:15:34 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: mjb10@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael J. Bumbulis)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu




An advertisement for pro-lifers.             
>                                                                     
> I've just put together a pro-life poster/flyer.
> It has a picture of a 17 week human fetus taken from a medical  
> school textbook.  It reads: "FROM": and the title page of the medical
> text on human development is listed.  Next to it is the picture of the
> human fetus.  Below these you read "FROM" again, but this time the
> Cleveland Plain Dealer is listed.  And what is listed are some classified
> ads which proclaim that abortions "up to 24 weeks" are done for $$$.
>                                      
> And finally the bottom of the poster reads "No rhetoric.  No slogans.
> Just two undeniable facts".  It's left for the reader to put it
> together.                    
>                                        
> If you would like some master copies of this poster to Xerox and
> post around your city, just e-mail me and give me a mailing address,
> and I'll pay the postage to send it to you.                  

-- 
Michael              
                           Liberty is the right to tell people
                           what they do not want to hear.
                           [George Orwell]   
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: zenith89@bcarh1eb.bnr.ca ()
Subject: Stay in talk.abortion, assholes 
Followup-To: alt.fan.unproductive.members.of.society
Reply-To: zenith89@bcarh1eb.bnr.ca ()
Organization: BNR Ottawa, Canada
 
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 20:21:27 GMT

Article xxxxx of alt.flame:
Newsgroups: alt.flame
From: samant@tartarus.uchicago.edu (Tushar Samant)
Subject: Time to retire, assholes. (was "reason to exist" or some such fuck)
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 04:03:39 GMT

Listen all you senile buffers out there, Darcy and Keegan and rest
of the homeys. There is a slim chance that one of your incestuous
family will actually take time off to read this instead of brownnosing
each other as usual and I am banking on that to make a growing opinion 
heard.

It's time someone told you you aren't appreciated here anymore. It's
a shame that someone not a regular poster has to spell this out to you.
You are spent, you fail to hold anyone's interest, you are lamer than
kids-talk. Get the fuck out of here. It's a reasonable request.

alt.flame has gone to hell in the last few months. The dimwit darcies
are to blame. Having had a Pnews installed in your system a decade ago
doesn't imply that you know what the net is about. Observe it for a
decade more to see if any clue skullfucks its way into your heads and 
in the meantime stop boring discerning readers silly.

There is nothing more yawn-inducing than Darcy contesting Lefty's proof
that Garvin supported Keegan's assertion that Darcy denied Lefty's
approval of Garvin's justification of Keegan's statement. Start a new
group for old farts and move your asses there if you must. You can lick
each other's spittle-flecked lips with no attempt on your privacy. Just
don't flood alt.flame with your geriatric dandruff-caked drool-soaked 
love letters.

If you don't know how to create a new group, please take your crap to 
misc.jobs.offered.

The Society for Amputation of Kebbie's Cojones is oh so very cute and a
lot of unh, usc and wpi freshmen are even impressed by it but frankly 
speaking it's now full of alzheimered fuckwits. Dissolve it and the net 
will thank you brokenly for getting rid of its biggest embarrassment.

Claim veteran status and step down honorably while the going's good, in-
stead of trying everyone's patience. If you do it now, you will be pensioned
off satisfactorily. Maybe I should explain that that's better than eventually
running away whimpering with your tail between your legs. It's high time 
some fresh faces hanged out here.

It's time to retire, assholes.


For the purity of the flame I have for once posted,
Sincerely,


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: markts@mcl.ucsb.edu (mark t schmidt)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: public funds. financing abortions. why not.
Summary: yes. public funds should pay for abortions.
Keywords: abortions and public funds.
Date: 7 Nov 92 05:24:45 GMT


  why not publicly fund abortions? 
  here is an answer. here is _the_ answer.

  it is too fair and the right thing to do.

  our laws give most people the option for abortion.
  it should be federally funded as long as the other
  options are sponsored. 

  two choices: give birth, have an abortion.
  we will counsel you on the birth, prepare you for
  the birth, assist in the birth, provide care after
  the birth. choose abortion, you are on your own.
  entirely. 

  there is no choice. 

  this situation reminds me of a line from the cinematic
  epic "the legend of billy jean": 

  fair is fair.

  but do not think me a bleeding heart just yet.
  i do not want to pay for either birth or abortion.
  but you should do nothing or finance both.

  come on politicos. just think of it as a matching fund.

  mark.

  mst3k is in the loop.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: TOO YOUNG TO CHOOSE
From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:50:06 CST
 <1dcctgINN5kg@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> <1992Nov7.175749.20629@rotag.mi.org>
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

In article <1992Nov7.175749.20629@rotag.mi.org>, kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
> In article <1dcctgINN5kg@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov5.204934.29875@ncsu.edu> jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes:
>>
>>So, let's make these dishonest people have children!!!
>>So, let's make these underage females have children!!!!
>>So, let's make these ignorant people have children!!!!
>>So, since she committed the sin of *changing her mind*, let's force her to
>>have children!!!!
>>Because, if they *don't* meet your standards on knowing what they are doing,
>>it is *much*, *much* smarter to force them to have CHILDRE!!!!!
> 
> A one-word refutation of Adrienne's points: adoption.

Please expand.  I can't see how adoption is the cure-all for forced
pregnancies.

Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Protecting newborn infants as non-persons
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:54:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.232724.25475@cs.yale.edu> 
rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:

>dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>> If we consider newborn infants as non-persons, then we
>> are not considering their interests, but we are considering
>> society's interests in protecting them.  Therefore, when
>> when society's interests are not served by protecting a
>> a particular newborn infant, then that infant may be killed. 

> So what's your point? 

If newborn infants are defined as non-persons, then a particular
infant may be killed when society's interests aren't served by 
protecting that infant. 

> This is, in practice, true for persons
> too. Consider the draft. 

The draft is not an example of society killing its own members.

> If one places on infants a value just
> short of persons, I fail to see the practical difference.

Please define the phrase "a value just short of persons".

>-Ekr


Doug Holtsimger
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: ATUI: References
From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
Date: 8 Nov 92 00:03:50 CST
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

References

Devereux, G. (1955).  _A Study of Abortion in Primitive Societies_.
     New York : The Julian Press, Inc.
Dunsmuir, M. (1990).  "Abortion:  Constitutional and Legal Developments".
     Ottawa : Government of Canada.
Dunsmuir, M. (1989).  "Bill C43:  An Act Respecting Abortion".  Ottawa:
     Government of Canada.
Feinberg, J. (1984).  _The Problem of Abortion_.  Belmont : 
     Wadsworth, Inc.
Haas, A. & Haas, K. (1990).  _Understanding Sexuality_.  Toronto :
     Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishing.
Luker, K. (1978).  _Taking Chances:  Abortion and the Decision Not to
     Contracept_.  Berkely : University of California Press.
McDonnell, K. (1984).  _Not An Easy Choice:  A Feminist Reexamines
     Abortion_.  Toronto : The Women's Press.
Mitchell, L., Mutchmoor, J., & Dolphin, W. (1988).  _Zoology_. 
     Don Mills : The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company.
Nelson, J.B., & Roricht, J.A.S. (1984).  _Human Medicine:  Ethical
     Perspectives on Today's Medical Issues_.  Minneapolis :
     Augsburg Publishing House.
Noonan, J.T.Jr. (1972).  _The Sanctity of Life and Criminal Law_.
     Cambridge : Harvard University Press.
Rachels, J. (1986).  _The End of Life:  Euthanasia and Morality_.
     Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Shakespeare, W. (1965),  "The Merchant of Venice".  Toronto :
     The Ryerson Press.
Wortman, C. & Loftus, E. (1985).  _Psychology_.  Toronto :
     Random House of Canada, Ltd.


NEXT POST:  In Retrospect

Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,alt.child-support,alt.da
From: roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby)
Subject: Re: Nadja's Reprehensible Attitude Towards Men
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:40:21 GMT

In article <yqwuTB2w165w@dogear.spk.wa.us> bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick) writes:
>cj@eno.esd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio) writes:

>The unsaid element here is whether or not the magazines (mugs) 
>were placed with the knowledge that they offended. If a complaint
>was made --and none was mentioned-- and the magazines weren't
>removed, it could be construed as harassment; but it strikes me
>as a weaker case than a posted pin-up. This due to access. A
>pin-up doesn't need to be read to offend, a glance will do it.
>However, on the whole, a magazine with negative content must be
>read to offend, which makes the offended a party to the problem.

I don't think of pin-up calenders in the workplace as sexual harassment 
but rather as a sign of cultural gender gap.  The best solution I heard of 
was the following.

A new woman at a construction site was mildly annoyed by the pin-up calenders. 
So, she bought a few Chippendale (male stripper) calendars and put them 
also.  When some of the men asked her to take these down, she said, I 
will if you take yours down.  That workplace is now free of pin-up 
calendars.  

King Solomon would be proud.


-- 
Scott W. Roby           *This sentence no verb.*      "No Matter where you go..
Phys.& Astr.Dept.    ///// / /  /  *|*  \  \ \ \\\\\      there you are!"
Univ.of Delaware    ((((( ( (  (  * + *  )  ) ) )))))   -> Buckaroo Banzai
roby@brahms.udel.edu \\\\\ \ \  \  *|*  /  / / /////   *Standard Disclaimer*
Newsgroups: talk.abortion