HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Abortion doctor builds small empire through his practice
Date: 14 Oct 92 23:04:20 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

dk>In article <1992Oct14.154745.22040@nas.nasa.gov> dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King) writes:
DOD>In article <1992Oct13.161830.11548@ncsu.edu> dsh@odin.uucp (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
sg>In article <Bw1nII.9EF.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

sg> Did he use a big rusty nail to do the abortions, DOD?

DOD>If he could have made more money doing abortions that way,
DOD>I suppose he could have.  

dk>He could have made more money using a rusty nail.  It should be
dk>obvious to most anyone except for DOD that rusty nails are cheaper
dk>than surgical equipment.  Big nails are even cheaper than a Hoover.
dk>So did he or didn't he use a rusty nail?

DODie doesn't seem to want to answer this, oh bouncy one.  

(Or maybe he believed M. Price's article about the Big Rusty
Nail Abortion Clinics in NY, and he thinks that the doctor
would have had to pay a franchise fee.)

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: wdo@TEFS1.acd.com (Bill Overpeck)
Subject: Re: Sarah Weddington
Organization: Applied Computing Devices, Inc., Terre Haute IN
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:03:53 GMT

In <1992Oct6.181735.12057@advtech.uswest.com> steven@jaynes 
   (Steve Novak) writes: >
(Bill Overpeck) writes: >>
Eric Marsh writes: >>>

[...]
>>> Yea, right. Judgement day. Yea, right.
> 
>>> I don't know why people even bother to post this superstitious crap.
>
>>One also wonders about the intentions of those who maliciously 
>>derogate the religious convictions of others. 
>
>Well, jeepers, Bill - I know this a real *stretch*, but...maybe it's not
>the religious convictions.  Maybe, ju-u-u-ust maybe, it's those
>religious fanatics who are trying to make everyone live their way by
>force of law!

I see.  Sort of like how Roe endorses the morality of choice.

>Whaddya think, hmm?  Aren't those kinds of people rather ASKING for it,
>Bill?  ...Or possibly you're too close to the same condition to
>recognize what seems obvious?

Oh, you bet.  They're asking for it.  So why not give it to them?
After all, it's a free country.  I can choose to ridicule and malign
people if I want to.  That's part of what choice is all about.  

>>If only we were all Wiccans...
>
>Then no one would thump that bible anymore!  I like your wish.

Right.  We can all thump Susan Faludi's "Backlash" instead.  I
can't wait.

>>> All it does is make them look like know-nothings.
>
>>Based on your comments, I suspect that there are those who've reached 
>>similar conclusions about the proponents of Wicca.  
>
>Bzzzt!  Pay attention, Bill.
>
>For example...when was the last time you saw a Wiccan waxing
>fanatical and trying to enact laws based on his Wiccan-ism?  

Listen closely.  One does not (as we've seen right here in 
t.a) to profess any particular religious philosophy in order
to recognize that human life is valuable and shouldn't be 
subject to arbitrary termination.

Bill
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Is is Logic or Set Theory?
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on... 
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:59:01 GMT

In <1992Oct10.175541.5081@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:

>In article <nyikos.718487093@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>In <zlsiida.149@fs1.mcc.ac.uk> zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd) writes:
>>
>>>>>>>they are ripped limb from limb via abortion.
>>
>>>I'm not very well informed on the actual physical process involved in 
>>>abortion: is 'ripped limb from limb' strictly accurate? 
>>
>>My understanding is that this is exactly what happens in the overwhelming
>[Delete.  Delete.  Delete.]

>Peter, if your understanding of this is anything like what you've shown us
>of your understanding of Logic and Set Theory, I would suggest you re-enroll
>in school.

>First grade would seem to be about your level...

I'm calling your bluff.  YOU tell me what happens during a D&E abortion.
(And not just me.  Suzanne could benefit from your "enlightenment".)

Peter Nyikos
From: jgalley@us.oracle.com (Jon Galley)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: RE: ACT-UP MUST be destroyed.
Date: 16 Oct 92 14:08:00 GMT

WITH RESPECT TO:
From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: ACT-UP MUST be destroyed.
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:25:16 GMT
--------
[article describing speech disrupted by heckling deleted]
--------
*Okay, pro-lifers. Quite obviously the pro-choice movement supports
*this kind of terrorist activity because it continues to go on and no
*one is doing a thing about it.

OK, some pro-choice groups are militant.  Does that then imply that
the pro-choice movement supports terrorism?  If so then I counter
that the "pro-life" movement supports a much more dangerous (real)
form of terrorism.  In Toronto I saw a doctor attacked by a "pro-life"
man wielding a pair of scissors, and abortion clinics do get bombed.
This brand of violence makes chanting and name calling seem rather
trivial I think.  So now who do you say are the terrorists?

*I think that ACT-UP needs to be hit back and hit hard. Currently, the
*College Republicans here and many pro-life students are already
*planning to disrupt ACT-UP rallies wherever they show up in this city.

Your choice but I do not think you will have much success. I am
under the impression that Act Up likes to do the disrupting, and if
you are there your group will only improve the chaos that Act Up is
looking to achieve :-)

*If you allow an army of militant spike-clothed Nazi boot-wearing
*bald-headed Sinead O'Connor clones shout you down and harass you...

[frothing deleted]

Your recent fixation on Sinead O'Connor disturbs me.  I thought
the concept of discrimination on basis of appearance, gender, sexual
orientation, creed, religion...  was out of vogue, or is that only
when a pro-lifer is attacked?

If you do not think your remarks are discriminatory, rework them
substituting your ethnic/life-style/religious group.

****
*The fact is, if you want to be safe to speak out, you have to harass,
*shout down, and run those [YOUR SUBSTITUTION] out of town, wherever they
*show up.
****

I think that illustrates my point quite nicely.

jon
*****
Feminism:
"...a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to
leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism and become lesbians."                         --Pat Robertson
*****
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Mentioning those Economic Issues
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 21:31:07 GMT

inb@spock.creare.com (Ian Brown) writes:
] 
] WRT economic plans: if nothing else, Clinton offers a change from the past
] 12 years, during which the economy, following Reagan's and Bush's trickle
] down idea, has gone to hell in a hand basket (to borrow a cliche'.)  The
] gap between the richest people and the poorest has gotten bigger, big
] enough that the richest 1% of the population now has more money than the
] poorest 90%.

I think that you are taking a MOST NonPositive look at the record.

Remember in the Dark Evil Days of the Democratic Dominated
Efforts to turn the USA into some sort of Socialist Welfare State:

eg: circa 1967

A Decent Japanese HiFi set which cost $1000 american
cost some poor Japanese Guy 360000 Yen. Now, that
same $1000 product will cost the Poor Japanese Guy
only 120000 Yen.

Notice also that the War on Drugs has driven the price of
a Kilo of cocaine down from $50,000, Under the Evil Socialist
Dominated Democratic Days, to a Mere $10,000 Under the Reagan-Bush
Administration.

Not Only That but Inflation is Down, and Interest Rates are Down.

So let us look at the one thing that the Deomcrats want to
point at as a 'problem' - the "unemployment" figures. It
is clear that they wish to look at those numbers and get huffy.

But Notice that the numbers disallow those who are 'alledgedly
not looking for work' and thus have "fallen" off the chart.

To some this MIGHT be construed as alluding to the fact that 
there are NOW more REALLY UNEMPLOYED persons than the figures allow.

But the prudent person Knows Better! These Figures are the
signs of VICTORY in the restoration of Wholesome traditional
family Values. The Unemployment figures have been over_inflated
ever since the SocialistKommunistDomocraticParty has tried to
include women in the list of persons who should be counted as
unemployed!!!!

Every Woman Out there who has a child should be listed as
being Employed in her God Given Task. Thus it becomes clear
that we are REALLY Looking at the Lowest Unemployment Rates
in Years and Years!!!!!

As for the Matter of the accumulation of wealth amongst 
God's Divinely Selected Elite. This is merely the Natural
Order of Things with God's Wonderful Plan for the USA. There
are those who are Blessed Of God for Moral Purity, and then
there are the Dregs of Humanity who must suffer the wages
of their SINS.

If these 'poor' really wanted to be wealthy they could do
what the Good People Do, and Follow God's Wonderful Plan
for Wealth and Prosperity and start their Own Religious
TV show just as RUSH has done.

ciao
drieux

ps: some times these wimp liberals who only want to
complain about the economy should really learn the 
facts before they post to the NET....

-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Don't Just Rock the Vote
Kick OUT THE JAMS!
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
Subject: Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Organization: Starfleet Headquarters: San Francisco
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 06:24:49 GMT

Martin writes:
>Problem: Man is dying (cause could be anything)
>Proposed Solution: Force someone to donate parts.
>
>Problem: Mother doesn't want child.  No one is dying, however.
>Proposed Solution: Kill the human life within the mother.
>
>Check out the two problems and the proposed solutions.  I think you may
>agree with me (at least partially) that the relationship between the two
>cases is not very strong.

Okay, let me try to clarify this.

A man is dying for lack of a kidney, and although he desperately wants
somebody to donate the organ to save him, he's unable to get one from
another person by himself.  Therefore you say that he's not allowed to
have that done.

A woman is pregnant with a fetus, and although she desperately wants
somebody to cut off her support for the fetus, she's unable to do it
by herself.  Therefore you say that she's not allowed to have that done.

The situation isn't so much "the woman wants to kill the fetus" as
"the woman refuses to allow her body to support the fetus" and wants
it _out_ of her body.  When you look at it this way, I still assert
that the two situations are very similar: does a person have the right
to refuse to donate resources from his or her body to sustain the life
of another person?

I say yes, we all deserve this right.  You say yes and no.  Which is it?

-- 
_/_/_/  Brian Kendig                             Je ne suis fait comme aucun
 _/_/  bskendig@netcom.com                de ceux que j'ai vus; j'ose croire
  _/                            n'etre fait comme aucun de ceux qui existent.
                             Si je ne vaux pas mieux, au moins je suis autre.
                                                                 -- Rousseau
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:42002 talk.politics.guns:21997 alt.conspiracy:11166 alt.fan.dan-quayle:5247
From: ac10+@andrew.cmu.edu (Alison Rebecca Colman)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Feminists For Life...Huh?
Date: 12 Oct 92 23:18:02 GMT
	<Bvt6GL.M6H.2@cs.cmu.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Out of sheer curiosity, I called up the Feminists for Life and asked
them for some information. They send me an introductory pamphlet, some
articles, and a few xeroxed pages of their newsletter "Sisterlife". If
anyone is interested, please let me know through e-mail or post, and I
can post some of the contents, (although I don't think I can post the
contents verbatum -- is this illegal to do?) so people can see what the
FFL's goals are, etc.

The only opinion I will offer right now is that they seem MUCH more of
an anti-abortion group than a feminist organization.


Alison Colman (The Big A)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer)
Subject: Re: Abortion and Ethnic Purging
Organization: Netcom San Jose
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 00:42:09 GMT

c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes ...
> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>>c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes ...
>>>Exactly!  Guess who uses the self-defense arguments for getting rid
>>>of fellow humans?  Where have I heard something to the extent of being
>>>allowed to kill the parasite within the mother because the fetus
>>>is trespassing, causing pain, using someone else's body without their
>>>permission, etc.  And because of this, the mother should have the right
>>>to kill to defend herself.
>>
>>So then, what's _your_ excuse?
>
>I don't think you can really apply this to my views, thank you.

I apply it to anyone who never doubts their own fallability.  I
distrust idealists, especially when they are willing to put their
ideals over the lives of people.

-- 
Ray Fischer                   "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth
ray@netcom.com                 than lies."  -- Freidrich Nietszsche
From: bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Abortion doctor builds small empire through his practice
Date: 12 Oct 1992 12:21:58 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu



   What's your point?  

-- 
   "One can be a racist.  Or one can be a human being.  But one
may not be both."
                                 - Rabbi Abraham Joshua heschel

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Face it: Chaney has stupidity molecules frolicking all over his brain.
Summary: Well, something had to take the place of those neurons...
Organization: Patrick, his wife, her daughter, and forget about the cats.
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:07:38 GMT

In article <5795@catnip.berkeley.ca.us> tanj@catnip.berkeley.ca.us (Ren and Stimpy's Love Child) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.174509.11188@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (Steve Chaney : Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.0) writes:
>>Lessee... So far, the pro-choicers have:
>>1) Insulted nationalities and religions ([...] and "Ren & Stimpy's Love Child"
>>  insulting Catholics).
>
>Excuse me?  Isn't this the one where you looked like a complete moron
>because a) Tom Lehrer (who wrote the _Vatican Rag_ that you got all snooty
>about) IS Catholic and b) Lots of Catholic retreats happily sing the song
>as the loving (and funny) spoof it was written to be?
>
>Uh huh.  Nice try but no cigar, cupcake.  (Smooch)
>
>--Teddi
>----------------Another Catholic School Survivor (12 years!)-----------------
>And I suppose "New Math" is a slanderous insult to mathemeticians (snort)

It is if you're a salesdroid at Egghead Software...it takes some serious
math to work in that place.  Just ask Steve.  :-)

--PLH ("but wait!  There's MORE!!!!!")

-- 
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:42636 alt.politics.elections:16736
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: I'm back, the VP debate.
Date: 14 Oct 92 17:20:49 GMT
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com
Organization: SGI TechPubs
NNTP-Posting-Host: eno.wpd.sgi.com


[Watch your followups.  If they leave politics & move to
 abortion specifically, trim the newsgroups line.]

In article <30976@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU>, smezias@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU writes:
|Can you believe Dan Quayle going after Gore on the 24 hour waiting
|period?  Why didn't Gore point out that if the Republican platform is
|enacted, there won't be any waiting periods?  In fact there won't be
|any legal abortions that would require waiting periods of any length.
|There would only be back alley abortions that women would anticipate
|with terror, not wait 24 hours to have.  Geesh.

What I want to know is why Dan Quayle didn't just say that he
supported his party's platform, and reply to Gore that he
*didn't* support the right of a woman to choose.  Does Quayle
support the Republican platform or not?  Are the Republicans
trying to have it both ways?  Cuddle up to
Robertson/Buchanan/Schlafly, but whisper to moderate
conservatives that "we don't really mean it"?

One of Stockdale's best moments in an otherwise dismal
performance was his reply to the abortion question.  "A woman
owns her body", and has the right to do with it what she wants.
"Period."

If you count the Libertarians, 3 out of 4 major candidates
support the right of a woman to choose.  

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"Just saying no prevents teenage pregnancy the way 'Have a nice day' 
cures chronic depression."  -- Faye Wattleton
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: purdon@cons1.mit.edu (James Purdon)
Subject: Re: Hi, long long time no see
Organization: .
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 19:06:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.105033.6164@galois.mit.edu> maboyiny@ccvax.as.edu.tw writes:
>David J. Rasmussen are no longer with us.  Also conspicuously missing from
>the list above, people who I have not seen in my little trek through the
>backlog, are Jim Purdon, Galen Heckuis and Tim Clinkenpeel.  I see also

Ah, someone remembers!  I am normally much too busy these days to post here.
However, from time to time I drop by and look in to see who most resembles
Rasmussen in their arguments and posting style (the latest candidate is
Doug H., who has ignored my queries as to his true identity).

-- 
Jim

Once I was single.  Now I am married.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc
From: cecchini@acsu.buffalo.edu (Julie A Cecchini)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-
Subject: Re: A Technical Request
Date: 12 Oct 92 19:42:33 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: UB

In article <FJLHsB3w165w@unkaphaed.UUCP> popec@unkaphaed.UUCP (William C. Barwell) writes:
>ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>
>> crosmun@crosmun.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes ...
>> >In article <BD.92Oct7104850@fluent.UUCP> bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU writes:
>> >>Reagan Bush have lied to you for twelve years!  Lied, lied, and
>> >>lied again!  They have come damn close to bankrupting the country,
>> >>and *you* talk about big spender liberals?


>> >What is Clinton going to do differently?
[chop]

>  What would Clinton do different?
>  What would Clinton Do DIFFERENT?!
>
>He would NOT try to saddle us with a $399 billion dollar deficit
>
>This, the Bush $399 billion dollar deficit, would have been the largest 
>yearly deficit for any country in the history of civilization!
>The biggest deficit of alllllll time!
>
>If any neo-conservatives want tio continue to sneer at Clinton, fine,
>but think about the Bush $399 billion dollar deficit when you vote.
>That's a lot of taxes you'd have eventually paid!
>
>Clinton, cause Bush doesn't have a Clue!

Vote Marrou because Clinton would do almost *exactly*
the same thing.
Organization: Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 16:03:06 -0400 
From: "Andrea B. Gansley-Ortiz" <ag1v+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
	<1992Oct9.074018.1791@umbc3.umbc.edu>

[NOTE: many newsgroups have been dropped]

>  I believe abortion ought to be and 
>  unrestricted up until viability.  Nothing hypocritical about that.

Question. Who decides when viability happens? Doctors seem to be in
disagreement, yes?

How is it decided? By the government? Why? Why are they in a better 
position to understand the issue or make a stand on the issue?

ag

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Simon Booth comes out pro-choice
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 03:10:44 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Oct12.200431.14455@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>  sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
> In article <1992Oct12.034034.23325@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (
> >In article <1992Oct12.023459.7473@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu
> >>In article <1992Oct10.232122.13523@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu
> >>>In article <1992Oct8.073626.1003@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu
> >>>>
> >>>>Let me rephrase that--I should have said "Perhaps there are extreme
> >>>>circumstances where abortion might be an option, but I am still against it..
> >
> >******************************************************************************
> >* SIMON!!!! READ THIS!!!! SIMON!!!! READ THIS!!!! SIMON!!!! READ THIS!!!!    *
> >******************************************************************************
> >>>Ok, Simon, let's get to the "extreme" circumstances.  If my Aunt Ann gets
> >>>pregnant and tries to carry to term, she *WILL* have her spinal column snap,
> >>>and wind up being paralyzed and in a wheelchair for the rest of her life.
> >>>
> >>>She's on the pill.  Ed (her husband) uses a condom every time they have
> >>>sex.  They don't want to go in for steralization on the hopes that they
> >>>will come up with some sort of precedure that will fix Ann's back, in which
> >>>case they'd love to have another child.
> >>>
> >>>She gets pregnant.
> >>>
> >>>Would you let her have an abortion?
> >>>
> >>>Why should she have to ask you?
> >>>
> >*****************************************************************************
> >* DID YOU READ THAT, SIMON? DID YOU READ THAT, SIMON? DID YOU READ THAT???? *
> >*****************************************************************************
> >
> >Simon's response so far:
> >>
> >>About my River Styx comment: Anyone familiar with Greek mythology will know
> >>where that River is supposed to be, and will understand that remark.
> >
> >I'd say he's six years old.  Or maybe a really bright five year old.
>
> Well, actually you're way off--I'm 22.  A five or six year old would only
> spout the liberal junk taught in schools today.

Does this mean that you're not going to answer Keith's questions?
(The ones bracketed by SIMON!!!! READ THIS!!!! and SIMON? DID YOU READ THAT????)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: In defense of Peter against "Lady" Adrienne
Date: 16 Oct 1992 08:07:48 -0700
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <nyikos.719168720@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>Lots of other pro-choicers have this dual personality. 


Uh, Bill.  Bill Overpeck.

Are you now going to be reasonably consistant?  

Come on, Bill.  Show us what you are made of.

Adrienne Regard

PS - yes, I am baiting you, Bill.  You now face what is known as a
dilemna.



Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
From: ksjwr@acad3.alaska.edu (REDELSS JOHN W)
Subject: Re: Language Devaluation Question...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41.UAC
Organization: University of Alaska - Fairbanks
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 22:36:00 GMT

>Modern Day Problems:
> 
>Don't Just Rock the Vote
>Kick OUT THE JAMS!

Who or what are the JAMS?  And while I'm asking, who or what are Discordians? 
Finally, what do Discordians have to do with JAMS.  This is all pretty
mysterious language to me.  Maybe it is none of my business? 
Ssssssssshhhhhhhh!
Newsgroups: talk.abortion