From: hatcher@MSUPA.PA.MSU.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: re:male chouce 1
Date: 11 Dec 92 22:18:49 GMT
Reply-To: hatcher@MSUPA.PA.MSU.EDU
Organization: MSU Dept. of Physics & Astronomy

In article <ByynuH.LuA@news.iastate.edu>, txdv1@isuvax.iastate.edu (Angela KAY Rolling) writes:
|>A dictionary dosnt help if you cant spell the word and I dont have time
                   ^'               ^'                        ^'
|>to cheak every word when posting, being disgrafic that is the only way to 
     check                                ????????? (I have no clue what
this word is supposed to be).

|>eliminate the miss spellings.
                misspellings (I didn't know what the right spelling was, but
looked this one up).

It is a complete fallacy to say a dictionary is useless for spelling; I 
had that pounded into my head in 4th grade.  It just happens to be a
little more work.  I really wouldn't have harped on it except your
spelling is SO egregious (I had to use both to Thesaurus and Dictionary
to get that one right).  It is so bad that your point gets lost like
the word above.  I'm dyslexic to some extent and know that I must take
care.  That I generally get it right (or flag a possible misspelling)
indicates that I care enough about the subject to put *real* thought
into expressing my ideas.

 |>I'm not illiterite in fact I got into the *clasics* in 6 th grade and
         illiterate                         classics
|>understude them (Sir Walter Scott would wright heavy metal songs if he were
  understood(?)                           write
|>alive today)

|>|>Did you EVER figure out the concept of analogies?
|>I'm not amoung thouse who couldn't get analogies, I got them all I just
|>didn't agree with them (I think I have made the statment-A beter analigy 
|>would be...befor) and I only post on thouse I disagree with.

This isn't the way I remember it.  I had to *explicitly* point out the
connections.  Only later did you understand enough to disagree with the
thrust of my arguments.

|>|>And you are an apologist for the male sexist pigs everywhere
|>No, I just see that Adrienne's coments of late have mostly gust been
|>female versions of male sexist coments and if they were targeted toward
|>wimen I would still atack them. I atack pregedism when every I find it and
|>have the time (the statment I hated the most growing up was "you cant dou
|>that you might have an asthma atack and die-not what most think of but still
|>pregidichile).

Ah, yes, I can see how people might think Adrienne's comments to be a
little on the shrill side, but your post contributed nothing to
the discussion except as a personal attack on one participant.  Hardly
a useful attitude.  There have been others, equally as shrill, that
sit on the opposite side of the abortion fence that you have NOT attacked.
So I hardly think that you are a objective warrior in the war on
prejudice (dictionary time).

|>|>If the mother wishes to put the child up for adoption,
|>This is *NOT* what I sead. I sead ***when she *WANTS* the child*** this
|>meens that she *KEEPS* the child. We all agree that if nither wants the 
|>child there is no problem so I felt that it was mute point.

If she wants the child then I'm confused why you brought up the word
"adoption".

|>|>why don't YOU address the issue with a logical, coherent plan
|>I thought I had, I have posted it several times, oh well one more wont hurt.

Not in your post.  Not coherently in your earlier posts (|>6 months ago).

|>Apon findinmg out about birth both parties conven and decide what to do.
|>The posable conditions are
|>	1 nithere want the child
|>	2 both want the child
|>	3 she wants the child but he doesnt
|>	4 he want the child but she doesnt.
|>solutions 
|>in case one she ether aborts or the child is put up for adoption (her chouce)
|>in case two they eather get married or each pays a % of **the cost** of
|>raising the child based on the % of time spent with the child
|>	note: this meen that if one parent denies visatation (other then I 
|>think they are abusive) the parent who is denied is not required to pay
|>any thing. also if one parent pays 100% of the cost then they are not
|>required to allow the other visatation.
|>in case three she has and raises the child and he pays nothing nor sees the 
|>child.  note this makes him nothing more then a sperm doner with all rights
|>and respocabilitys.
|>in case four he compnsates her **if she agrees** to have the child an amount
|>of money that she agrees with and pays *all* bills involved (including lost
|>pay cheach if she demands it) not: she becomes a serogate mother with 
|>apropreat rights and responsabilitys.

Okay, good.  Actually there's not much here that I disagree with as long
as you make it clear in (4) that the woman must NOT be coerced into being
forced to carry to term.  Then this becomes a paternity/maternity (sp?)
issue and leaves the realm of abortion.

|>The agreement can change at any time *befor* birth to something else if the
|>one of the parties involved changes there mind.

Now this could cause problems in certain circumstances which I won't 
spell out in this post as I need to leave soon.

|>|>Are you really kin of an elf? I thought they had all died out. :)
|>I'm a changling. No were all over the place even have our own digest.
|>There are several elves on, some half-elves, a cuple of dragons, at lest
|>one troll and orc and a stong likely hood that a few vampires may be 
|>goining up as the adress was recently posted on alt.vampires, oh and there
|>are some humans as well. see ma not smilly. ***this is for real,not fiction,
|>not role playing but real for real!***

Ah.... I won't touch this one.  I see the real reason behind your atrocious
spelling -- Middle World languages are entirely different than those of us
that speak/write English in the Real(tm) world.

|>Elf-Kin	were everywere
Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:5820 soc.men:21023 alt.feminism:5912