HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker)
Subject: Re: Susan, Muriel, Cathi, please read this...;-)
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 19:47:55 GMT

garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

>In article <1992Apr10.230121.25145@midway.uchicago.edu> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>#In article <1992Apr8.182426.10884@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes:

>##Gordon
>##Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boyfriend of Susan,
>##Muriel, Cathi, and Nora, and married to the sweetest woman in the world,
>##               ^^^^^^^^
>##and darn proud of it.
>#
>#We're proud of you, too, Gordon. In fact, we get together sometimes
>#to have slumber parties and talk about you; don't we, girls?

Nora, I've been meaning to speak to you about that.  I mean, the
strippers were nice and I enjoyed them quite a bit, but don't you
think getting the WWF to send those guys in the g-strings to do
that thing they did <nudgenudgewinkwinkSayNoMORE!> was...well...
a bit much?

Not that I didn't enjoy it, mind you.  It's certainly a story I'll
be telling my great-grandchildren.

>Of course we do.  Cathi and I have some other ex-boyfriends in
>common, too.  Allow me to recommend Dan King and Dean Kaflowitz 
>and Keith Cochran and Patrick Humphrey and Jim Keegan once again.

Dan King is A-#1, though Dean does have a tendency to sulk a bit.
Keith Cochran has trained his cats to do some truly amazing things
(that I'm far too ladylike to discuss here), and Patrick is much
nicer these days since Dale Ann has trained him so well. And as
for Jim, well.....it just can't be described in words.  Not in
English words, anyway.  I think Hindi might have something that
applies.

>It would give us that much more to talk about while we eat all 
>that junk food and try on each others clothes.  

Y'know, it's really kinda odd to see the near-obsession with 
leather that my kid has had since the LAST party we were all at...

>I'm inviting Kathi and Linda to my next sleepover, too.  They
>may or may not have dated Gordon.

You speak as if dating Gordon were an act.  Dating Gordon is a
whole other level of consciousness....

>I'm really hoping that I can get a new ex-boyfriend with gills,
>too.

I have a recommendation here, but I think that's best handled in
email.

>Susan

                              -rocker
From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Date: 14 Apr 92 17:42:58 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <18123@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:
>In talk.abortion, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:

>How kind of you to come out and admit what we all already knew, except
>you left out twit....
   Actually - there are a rare few of you who seem to moan about
what a loser I am. Apparently the others are just too lazy to come out
and say it huh? Jee, I should be offended, but some little part of me doen't
seem to give a shi*.

>I don't know what kind of friends you have, few if they knew what kind
>of value system you have, but mine do look out for my back, as I do
>their's.
   All of my friends know exactly how I feel, but strangely enough,
they are not few in number. But, I guess you know all about birds of
a feather...
   steve
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:10:30 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <1992Apr08.185851.8689@sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>In article <92099.011358JKH107@psuvm.psu.edu> JKH107@psuvm.psu.edu (Joy Haftel) writes:

>After all the end result of 80 years of long and happy life is ALSO
>death.  But I wouldn't therefore go so far as to justify abortion on
>the basis of "we all die eventually -- it's our potential".
   Thanks... that would have been utterly nonsensical...

>The end result of an egg that doesn't meet a sperm is also death.
   No, conception has not occurred.
>The end result of a fertiziled egg that doesn't implant is also death.
   But different - this was at the hand of nature, not man. Man has
   no right to deprive another of his life. Only God/mothernature/fate
   or whatever you call it has this right. This would be similar to
   the argument that pro-lifers consider miscarriage abortin. This is
   simply ridiculous. Pro-lifers will only incriminate the death
   of the zygote/unbornchild/fetus at the hands of MAN/woman/humanity.

>The end result of a born child riding in a car without a seatbelt that
>has a head on collision at 60 MPH is also death.
   Once again - the end result is not quite so important. It is the means.
   Abortion is delivered by humans, judged by humans, and affects other
   humans. All for the sake of convenience. NO one wants a car accident to
   occur, and it is averted by all means. Let us avert abortion by all
   means too my friend.

   with regards adrienne...
steve
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Sorry, did I miss anything?
Date: 6 Apr 92 13:58:29 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:

>Why is everyone looking for / volunteering to be *ex*girlfriends; I
>need a *current* girlfriend...  :-)

Second that :]

Ron
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: THE IMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION ON OUR SOCIETY
Date: 17 Apr 92 05:02:49 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Organization: The Village Waterbed
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

In  <1992Apr16.211726.3049@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>  mjln_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Mikeey Jean Lin) writes:
> In <JBATES.92Apr16105047@pinocchio.pinocchio.encore.com>
>  jbates@pinocchio.encore.com (John Bates) writes:
>
> >In article <1992Apr16.001852.10637@pony.Ingres.COM>
>  dan@Ingres.COM (1 Min. Mgr 1aB) writes:
>
> >>Scientists have developed strong enough equipment to know that brain wave
> >>activity begins around or before the time an abortion can be performed.
>
> >     So what? What is the significance of brain wave activity?
>
>      It means perhaps the fetus can think and feel pain.

No it doesn't.  Scientists have developed strong enough equipment to
detect brain waves from three neurons in a petri dish - does that mean
that those 3 neurons can think and feel pain?

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis)
Subject: Re: So Many Men! So Little Time! (Was: March in D.C.)
Reply-To: mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 02:56:29 GMT


In a previous article, kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu (Keith A. Cochran) says:

>Then please don't claim that I am "abusing sex" when I define it differently.
>Thank you very much.
>
didn't imply it.....you said it....not me

>Ok, Asshole.  State one reason why some people come down with AIDS Dementia,
>but not everybody.  Define "virus soup".  Explain what the brain/blood barrier
>is, and why it's imperative for science to develop a drug that will cross it.
>State two side effects of AZT.  Explain the possible connection between
>Syphillis, Hepatitis, and HIV.  State one major difference between HIV and
>AIDS.  What is a "normal" t-cell count?  How low do your t-cells have to go
>before you are eligible for DDI?  Of what use are T4 cells to your immune
>system?  Is it possible for HIV to be transmitted by skin contact?  How long
>will HIV surivie when exposed to air?
>
>Good for you.  Now why don't you think about some of the stuff you know?
>What is riboviran?  What is Kaposi's Sarcoma?  Name three opportunistic
>infections HIV people need to watch out for.  Explain the possible connection
>between Pennicilin and HIV.  Why shouldn't HIV+ people take Aspirin?
>


I never claimed to have a freaking PhD, did I??? Maybe if I have some
free time, I'll do some undergrad. research to please you.


BTW, to answer some of your questions: (most of which do not refer to
how AIDS is transmitted, which is what I claimed to know ALL about )

side effects of AZT......weariness, effects reduced as time on drug
                         increases and therefor opens victim up for
                         other infections
sorry I didn't remeber the number of T cells because I don't care
about the technical part of it.....but they are spherical cells
used in identifying certain pathogens. In the end, the AIDS virus
blows them up. 
connection between AIDS and Hepatitis: both spread by blood,and especially
             by contaminated needles
Kaposi's Sarcoma:  deadly skin cancer that people with normal immune systems
are immune to
Asparin thins the blood......meaning reduces the number of cells and reduces
the little immuntity that exists.

I didn't claim to be the dude who discovered HIV, which BTW is a retrovirus
that cause AIDS, but I'm pretty aware. Get your diploma out of your
ass.
And HIV does not survive long in air. What is it? 5, 10 seconds?
HIV is found in tears and sweat but the concentration is not enough
to be considered a serious risk factor.

why should I worry about things that concern having AIDS? I should know
things about getting AIDS, which I do.
Man.....you sure have a superior attitude.

Take a chill pill.

-- 
MaThiEu a. LeWis   "Achtung ya'll........it's good to be down in America
Thieves Like Us     for a while....and get to Texas.....I'll have a drink
mal11@po.cwru.edu   on Texas."  - U2  Dallas, Texas  April 5th, 1992 
                   I LIKE TO WATCH THINGS ON ZOO TV
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: OH MY GOD!  HE'S GOT A GUN! (Was: All Caps Implications)
Date: 7 Apr 92 00:41:23 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Organization: The Village Waterbed
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

In  <1992Apr6.234039.19399@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>  kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu (Keith A. Cochran) writes:
>
> Sex may be a PART of your relationship, but a relationship based purely on sex
> is doomed (IMHO, of course).

Perhaps, but it's fun while it lasts...  :-)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: pro-choice == pro-(womens' only) choice?
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 18:02:05 GMT

In article <1992Apr16.175548.4018@sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>>Bye, Adrienne. Thanks for playing.
>
>I devoutly hope he's serious.

I'm not going anywhere, Adrienne. YOU were the one who declined to answer the
central question in the debate, so I was bidding adieu to YOU. Capische?

(And Birmingham accuses ME of poor reading comprehension. HA! She should
take a good look at Adrienne's sometime).

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis)
Subject: Re: Eric's Rasmussen Boycott
Organization: University of Virginia Health Sciences Center
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 17:18:30 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.121846.1@kscdl1.ksc.nasa.gov> lockhart@kscdl1.ksc.nasa.gov writes:
}Referring to Eric's David Rasmussen posting (in response to "who is David
}Rasmussen?):
}
}Being new on the net, I also didn't know who this was.  And I read your
}boycott response.  It's a joke, right?  This guy didn't really mean all
}this stuff, did he?

David was a joke alright, unfortunately, he was all too real.  I don't
know if he meant all the stuff he said (I personally think he was pretty
wigged out) but he sure acted like he did.


--
       hang gliding mailing list: hang-gliding-request@virginia.edu 
     Galen Hekhuis  UVa Health Sci Ctr (804)982-1646 gjh@virginia.edu
    Don't put all your spilt milk in one basket, you might cry over it.
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Date: 14 Apr 92 14:08:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: oasys.18122
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
>In <18061@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:

->BTW, anyone read where they think AIDS originated? It appears the virus
->was introduced into the human blood pool in the 1920s or 30s by scientists
->injecting malaria-infected chimp blood into human subjects, to see if
->the malaria would take. Talk about stupid scientific endeavors (hindsight).

>   Hee hee... I have shares in the moon I will sell you Ron if you're
>interested... In any case, more likely is the references I have heard where
>humans have been bitten by the (green?) monkey of Africa. Doesn't really
>matter who started it. You should be more concerned with who spreads it,
>and how we can stop it... Now have I suggested my contraceptive? Oh yes,
>I believe I have... I won't dwell on it more.

Steve, that article came out of the Washington Post last week.

Then again, you wouldn't be interested in any factual history now, would
you? As far as who spreads it, yes that is a concern, and the fact that
people still engage in sex despite those risks should tell you something.
Even when they know their partner has AIDS. (HIV positive is BS, when
you are, you have AIDS since it is only a matter of time, IMO)

But then again, you live in utopia, where no one does anything you deem
irresponsible.

Ron
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Monday, 13 Apr 1992 11:56:16 EDT
From: Jennifer Brown <JLB155@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: You want to win.

Ok, I'll work on the "time problem".
I'll work on the "forced abortion thing".
I'll work on the "woman's health in danger".
ditto "If the woman will allow herself to be the host to the baby,
       and the man gets the baby afterwards."  (Any suggestions as
       to if the man wants it, but the woman DOESN'T??)
ditto the C-O-H-E-R-E-N-C-Y.  (I know it was bad when I posted it;
       I blurted out whatever came to mind.)

Congress to state this idea?  or  Congress to work there?  ;-)

Thanks for the comments.
-Jennifer
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: THE IMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION ON OUR SOCIETYdir
Date: 9 Apr 92 12:40:25 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:

>but I consider myself a spokesman for the unborn.

To be a spokesman, you need to know the wishes of the unborn. You've
had discussions? We should submit you to Guiness, or maybe the military.

>   Because I think GOd is smarter than you. ANd my way doesn't have
	   ^^^
I think your god lives in your mind, and only yours. I personally, for
that reason, think I'm light years more intelligent than your god. At
least I exist and can prove that I do (at least to myself, you I could
write off as a figment of my imagination, and a bad one at that)

>   Well, yes. because I don't agree with you. In any case, I dont' mind
>flames if they at least make me laugh. I don't think I have made one
>rude comment that wasn't embroidered with a bit of humor. you all
>just resort to tactics of anger and violence. Show a little creativity
>and then maybe I would laugh enough to overlook the insult. You guys

If they made you laugh, they would lose the intended insult. (man, this
guy really needs a lesson in reality :)

If you show a little logic and reason to back your argument instead
of all the hocus pocus crap, maybe you'd get a serious reply, but, being
as most pro-choicers keep running into that granite wall of 'my religion
states this, and be damned all the facts' they use whatever means possible
to break through the barrier (dynamite would be faster, but we're only
allowed minor blasting :)

Ron
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 00:55:34 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.222640.11768@odin.corp.sgi.com>, cj@eno.corp.sgi.com (C J Silverio) writes:
|> In article <1992Apr12.230932.3731@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, Matthew A. Lewis writes:
|> |But I respect everyone's decency here. 
|> 
|> Is this why you called Keith Cochran a "fils du pute"?
|> Clearly you are using a definition of "respect" unlike
|> any one I've ever seen.

It looks to me like in Matthew's little convoluted reality, anyone not as
violently "pro-life" as himself simply isn't considered a person...


-- 
Patrick L. Humphrey  (patrick@is.rice.edu)  Rice Networking & Computing Systems
  +1 713 528-3626 at Rice. 713 776-1541 at home. 713 527-4056 at Willy's Pub.

                        The SubGenius MUST have Slack!
From: dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The Right to Exist
Date: 7 Apr 92 21:03:53 GMT
Reply-To: dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King)
Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation Facility NASA


In article <1992Apr7.155502.12298@ncsu.edu> dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>The right to exist is supreme above all other rights. Without the
>right to exist, no other rights are possible, including the right
>to freedom. Without existence, freedom is not possible. All humans
>should have an equal right to exist, and since the right to exist
>is supreme, no human can deny another human the right to exist,
>unless their own existence is threatened.

Who was it that said "Give Me Liberty or Give me Death"?
I think it was Ben Franklin that said something like
"Those willing to give up safety for freedom will lose both".

In the U.S. there have many times been the question of freedom versus
safety.  We must safe guard against giving up our rights in the name
of safety.  At times it may be warranted, but we should never give
them up with out very careful consideration.  If you are willing
to give up freedoms for safety, then I propose that there are many
more appropriate governments and societys for you to live in.  Society
can become very safe by turning over all your freedoms to some sort
of supreme ruler who will decide when or if you are capable of handling
freedoms.

>The right to exist includes the right not to be killed by others,
>and the right to receive support from others, but it does not
>necessarily include the right to expect support from others.

>The fetus either has rights, or it does not. If the fetus has any
>rights, then it must have the right to exist, and this right is
>equal to that of any other human being.

I have no problem in agreeing that the fetus has a right to life.
I disagree that the fetus can use a woman's body against her will
to retain this right to life.  If the woman wants the fetus out of
her body, the fetus must leave.  If killing the fetus is the only
way to remove it from the woman in a timely and safe manner, then
while it is unfortunate, it is not compelling for the government to
get involved.

>Abortion kills the fetus, and it prevents the fetus from receiving
>support from others. Therefore, abortion violates the right
>of the fetus to exist.

Abortion removes the fetus from where it is not wanted.  This generally
causes the fetus to die.  Abortions intent is not to kill the fetus
but to remove it.  Abortion does not violate the fetus's right to exist
but rather the fetus's right to use a woman's body against her will.

Dan King
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: olson@acf9.nyu.edu (David Olson)
Subject: NEWS:  Oklahoma fetus disposal
Organization: New York University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 13:58:43 GMT

Any in Oklahoma read this group?  

Info taken from the 17.April.92, NY Times, A13. 

An obstretician, Nareshkumar Patel, "said that he and and and employee
took the [remains of 60] fetuses to the [farmer's] field and tried to 
burn them with two cans of lighter fluid."  Patel didn't say whether 
the fetuses cam from abortions, but...  No charges have been filed yet, 
but judging from the sketchy comments in the article, Patel will (at least) 
be charge with illegally dumping biomedical waste.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Subject: Re: SO.....it's not a child.....
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 02:23:20 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.014207.7766@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis) writes:
> 
> In a previous article, decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) says:
> 
> >In article <1992Apr15.000857.3382@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis) writes:
> >> 
> >> so if I were to introduce a bill to Congress that allowed vigilante
> >> groups to beat the f**k out of drug dealers and kill them, and by
> >> some miracle it passed, would that make killing them not murder?
> >
> >You are a violent little fellow, aren't you?
> 
> nope....just making an example.
> I hate violence. BTW, i do not believe in the above actions.
> But who cares what I think
> 
> >I can't understand why these arguments aren't clear to you.
> >They aren't very complex statements.
> 
> 
> I can understand why my examples don't penetrate your thick skull.
> 
> BTW, you are the master of non-complex statement. Do you have
> a degree in that field???

Good writing is composed of clear, direct statements.  These
convey information effectively to the reader.

Your insults are gratuitous and unnecessary.  They do not have the
redeeming quality of making a point.

You deleted my response to your erroneous statements.  By this
can I take it that you agree that murder is a legal term
and that where the law permitys a form of killing humans,
whatever that form of killing or the circumstances may be,
it is not murder?

I was trying to deal with your arguments.  When I expressed
my bewilderment at your seeming inability to understand the
arguments, I was sincere.  Have the arguments become clearer
to you and do you understand the term "murder" yet?  If
not, let me know and I'll try to provide you with clear,
non-complex statements that will clarify it for you.

Dean Kaflowitz
From: tk@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Tommy Kelly)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Expiry tests
Date: 6 Apr 92 15:28:55 GMT
Reply-To: tk@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Tommy Kelly)
Organization: Laboratory for the Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh U

Drieux,  thanks for sending a response.  I tried to mail you, but my
mailer couldn't resolve your address.

The purpose was to see if my new site was holding posts received over a weekend.
(You may recall that I was complaining that in Glasgow it wasn't and so I was
 missing a lot of stuff).

The result is that my site (well one of the two) *does* retain the posts, so
I shouldn't miss em anymore.

tk
Newsgroups: talk.abortion