From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: Clarifying "Restrictions"
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on... 
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 23:20:07 GMT

In article <1992Dec25.195604.13432@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>In article <1992Dec19.081855.14741@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec18.165413.8758@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>>>
>>>Kebbin is just mad because we live in the Real World (tm) and not in
>>>some Darcian fantasy in which it is more dangerous to terminate a
>>>pregnancy then to carry the fetus to term. 
>>
>>Learn the difference between a hypothetical question and a fantasy, ignoramus.
>
>"Kevin Darcy is a genius".  Hypothetical question or fantasy?  You be the
>judge.

It's not even a question, so how can it be a hypothetical question?

Whatever the "judgment" is whether I'm a genius, I think it's pretty obvious 
whether or NOT! you're one...

>>>Considering his tendancy to
>>>argue both sides of any given question, I'd say he is the one who
>>>needs to be concerned with moral inconsistancy.
>>
>>Arguing a position and believing it aren't necessarily the same thing, schmuck.
>
>You know, Kevin, I'm beginning to believe that you're a Cochran-phobe.  

You know, Keith, this is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on the
Net. Your blood relationship with the other moron has nothing to do with my 
penchant for refuting the arguments of weak-minded sophists everywhere.

I'll also note that, not once, in all the long battles my brother and I
waged in alt.flame, and all of the times we had a common enemy, did either of
us ever accuse anyone of being a "Darcy-phobe".

But then, we never got as close to desperate as you apparently have, either...

>Granted, the only "proof" I have of this is your
>posts, and posting style, but I think that speaks plainly enough for everybody
>to see.

Yeah, it speaks plainly, all right -- it means you just made this horseshit 
up out of thin air.

>>>I'm still waiting for your real life example to validate your question
>>>Kebbin...
>>
>>Can you guarantee me that there is no possible or foreseeable combination of 
>>medical factors which could make termination of pregnancy more dangerous
>>than carrying to term? Are you willing to put whatever medical credentials
>>you possess on the line over this question? I _do_ have some contacts at
>>the UofM Medical Center (largest medical complex in the world, perhaps 
>>you've heard of it?), which is a couple of miles down the road from me.
>>I _can_ check this out, if necessary, and if you've been propagating bogus
>>medical information on the Net... well... 
>
>Kebbin brags, evades the question, and then makes yet another veiled threat
>against a person named Cochran.

Brags? Threatens? What an active imagination you have there, Keith 
Whatsyername. I was just letting Mark Whatshisname know that he couldn't just
blabber medical half-facts and non-facts, and expect them to go unchecked.

>This is turning into your "it's not legal in every state to use lethal force
>to stop a rape" thing, isn't it?  Why don't you stop waffling, and just 
>give us a situation (hypothetical or not) where ending a pregnancy is more
>dangerous to the woman than continuing it?

A 28-week pregnant woman, without any discernible medical complications,
announces her wish to end her pregnancy by having her fetus sucked out through 
her spine, heart and cerebellum. Should she be allowed to abort in this 
manner? 

Hey, you said "hypothetical or not"...

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion