HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis)
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Reply-To: mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 23:50:12 GMT


In a previous article, lockhart@kscdl1.ksc.nasa.gov () says:

>Hold it right there Bub.  You can educate all you want, but without cheap
>(read: free) contraception, you're not going to halt jack shit.  Besides,
>I, (a reasonably well-educated woman), who knows *where babies come from*,
>now have two beautiful children due exclusively to the failure of contra-
>ceptives...once the Pill, and once a condom.  What kind of education is
>going to prevent *that*?  (And, as an aside, I recently had my tubes tied, 
>to prevent future contraceptive failures.  It cost over $4000.  Now *theres*
>a good option for most people.) Fortunately for me, I could afford them 
>(barely).  But I would've been severely pissed had I decided, for reasons 
>relevant only to myself and my god, to abort them, and been prevented from 
>doing so by some sniveling pro-lifer.  And while we're at it, this whole 
>issue doesn't concern MEN anyway.  I don't tell you when to get a 
>vasectomy...although, come to thinkof it, it *would* help resolve 
>this issue. :-)


in the not so recent past, married people have had so-called "accidents"
and lived happy, productive lives afterwards. Is there anyone left
to make small sacrifices???

BTW, just how many abortions are done to married women???
I'm sure the number of abortions by unmarried, perhaps promiscuous
women is alot higher. Statistics anyone???


-- 
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: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Date: 15 Apr 92 12:05:09 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <1992Apr14.200352.18522@ncsu.edu> dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>In article <1992Apr14.184741.72292@cs.cmu.edu> 
>         garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

>> I've seen a lot that indicates
>> that he is anti-women, and pro-violence, and pro-idiocy.

>I can vouch for that.

I don't think I agree here. Everyone of his anti-women and pro-violence
stances were brought up in analogies to prove a point. The wonder of 
metaphorical and analogous thinking is that it isn't necessarily what
you believe. I don't think Matt wanted to kick his girlfriend
in the groin or any of the other analogies that were presented. However,
I do think he wanted to make a point.
   But I guess whoever brought up some stupid analogy about chicken-Gods
must really worship the old hen? No, of course not. Analogies allow
flexibility and hypothetical argument.
   Stop taking Matt's scenarios so literally and try and dig under to 
the message he is trying to express.
   And no, I don't think he's an idiot either, but I suppose you think 
that means little coming from myself.
   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: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.?
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 15:06:14 GMT

decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:

> Frankly, there'd be a lot less trouble in the world if
> Jesus had said "Live and let live" rather than "Love thy
> neighbor." " Love thy neighbor" doesn't seem to work out
> with enough people, and it's awfully pushy when you come
> down to it, but I think a lot more people could get
> behind "Live and let live.

Actually, I think that the commandment to "share the good news"
has created more trouble than "Love thy neighbor."  Sometimes
a Bible-thumper beats prime time TV for entertainment value
(as in laundromats in Tahlequah, OK), but he/she is mostly
annoying, even for believers.

Explaining swimming to a non-swimmer is infinitely easier than
explaining a feeling of connected-ness to God/the Great Spirit/
a high power/etc. to a non-believer, or even to another believer,
for that matter.

> But now I'm rambling.

And so am I.  But it has occurred to me that religious groups have
better success dealing with fundamental commandments such as "feed
the hungry," and "shelter the homeless" than advocating public
policy or proposing legislation.

> Anyway, you're wrong, Steve.  Adrenne's
> statement reflects tolerance and fairness.

Only to the extent that she affirms the individual's right
to his/her beliefs.

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include standard_disclaimers
T.S.A.K.C.   /  "If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?" - Art Hoppe
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: jbates@pinocchio.encore.com (John Bates)
Subject: Re: The abortion beautiful (was Re: We want lots of life)
Organization: Encore Computer
	<1992Apr9.161522.29452@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
	<1992Apr9.114047.9918@hemlock.cray.com>
	<1992Apr9.192431.6010@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
Distribution: na
Date: 10 Apr 92 15:06:53

In article <1992Apr9.192431.6010@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
>In article <1992Apr9.114047.9918@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) writes:
>> Dean, it's OK to be curious about these things. Let this
>> be a learning experience for you. I would have probably given you
>> a serious answer, even if you'd used a smiley. Moral to this
>> story: there is NO question that is TOO disgusting for someone
>> to answer it for you in t.a.
>> 
>> Next week: Umbilical macrame...

>Okay then.  To hell with the macrame.  You have any good
>recipes for placenta?  How about jellied placenta, like they
>do with eels.  I imagine one could use it in a stir-fry, but
>then practically anything can be stir-fried.  What I am
>interested in is something more creative, a little more
>difficult.  Something to stir the juices of my chefly pre-
>tensions.  Placenta Scarpariello?  Placenta sausage with
>First Urine sauce?

>Dean Kaflowitz, pushing the disgusting button

Does anybody here remember the old SNL commercial featuring
"Placenta Helper"? I think it was Jane Curtin and Gilda Radner
meeting in a supermarket, gossiping about what to do with the
afterbirth...

John, who's getting hungry
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: A question for any MALE prolifer
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 11:22:24 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.061941.278582@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

>Oh, great.
>
>Can someone tell me just which anti-choice group perpetuates the
>myth that Norma McCorvey was represented as a rape victim in
>the Supreme Court case?  I keep hearing this "Jane Roe lied"
>line used as if she never told the truth.  She did.  She did
>so very early on.   
Hmmm...That's not what Tribe, who is usually pretty pro-choice
says. He seems to think that the case went to trial with the
premise that she was raped, but that she said she wasn't
subsequently(pn the order of years)
-Ekr



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431, Honda CM400 rider          rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Yale University Department of Chemistry            We hack anything.
My mind is now for rent: C/Unix,Vacuum Tech,Machining,P-Chemist. Hire me, eh?
From: mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Abortion and Marriage (was Re: Some Park Service Estimates)
Date: 14 Apr 92 01:39:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1992Apr14.013917.279
Reply-To: mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


In a previous article, tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) says:

>For your information, Matthew, I'm happily married, and I imagine that
>if our contraception were to fail tomorrow, my wife probably would decide
>to get an abortion.  We simply cannot manage a child or a pregnancy at this
>point in our lives.  
>

I didn't ask YOU, I asked about the big picture. Open your eyes.
hell....you could be the only married person in the world who
would get an abortion. Probably not true. But I asked for statistics
and the truth, not a bloody poll for you to answer.

>That is *quite* enough.  Cut the innuendo, Matthew.  If you want to say
>"if you had an abortion, it means you're a slut and scummy because you
>had sex outside of marriage", then say it.  None of this "a certain type
>of person" crap.  It doesn't wash.

here we go:

A large portion of women who have abortions are promiscuous and/or
sleep around and/or are sluts. You're in college. Look around you.
Why is it that every relationship has to have sex????? I'm not
against sex in relationships, but if you have it in every one
(whether that be 2 or 100), you're a slut.

later

-- 
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
Organization: HAM--Hackers Against MUDs
Date: Wednesday, 8 Apr 1992 17:24:24 EDT
From: Joy Haftel <JKH107@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
 <1992Apr7.163310.26115@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
 <92099.011358JKH107@psuvm.psu.edu> <1992Apr08.185851.8689@sdd.hp.com>

In article <1992Apr08.185851.8689@sdd.hp.com>, regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com
(Adrienne Regard) says:

>In article <92099.011358JKH107@psuvm.psu.edu> JKH107@psuvm.psu.edu (Joy
>Haftel)
>writes:
>>But the end result is the same (death) for the fetus or child.

>Well, Joy, this is the basic problem I have in dealing with "potential"
>lives in this particular argument.

>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".

Life is a dying process, yes.  But obviously there is some reason to
stay alive, or people wouldn't try so hard to do that, and laws wouldn't
exist to protect people from unprovoked death at the hands of another.
Therefore, we see it as good to delay death for a long time.

Now, a fetus is human (our species) and alive, but at such an early
stage of development that it is invisible and totally dependent on
another person.

>The end result of an egg that doesn't meet a sperm is also death.

An egg is not a full genetic human.

>The end result of a fertiziled egg that doesn't implant is also death.

This cannot be helped.

>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.

This can probably be helped, but for argument's sake it can't.

>What does the 'end result' have to do with it?

Neither a young child who dies nor a fetus who dies experience much
of life or make an impact or contribution to society.  Why is one
expendable and the other one not?

(I think you'll say it has something to do with the woman who
carries the fetus in her body.  But let us assume this child would
be a newborn who requires frequent nursing and constant attention)

Joy Haftel               "Joy, beautiful radiance of the gods,
JKH107@PSUVM              daughter of Elysium, we set foot in your
                          heavenly shrine dazzled by your brilliance."
                                 --Schiller
From: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Date: 15 Apr 92 00:00:53 GMT
Reply-To: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <18147@oasys.dt.navy.mil>  
            bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:
>dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>> A child is not necessarily a born person.
>>
>> Webster's New World Dictionary, Second Edition:
>>
>> child: 1. an infant, baby
>>        2. an unborn offspring

> Well, I must profess, my dictionary says the same thing. It can be an
> unborn offspring. You are correct.

You just referred to a child as an "it". 

> Doug, you can appeal to emotions all you want, but it will never win
> an intellectual, logical argument. 

Posting a definition of the word "child" is not an appeal to 
the emotions. People should be entitled to use the word "child"
to refer to unborn offspring, since the definition exists.  

> A fetus is a fetus, no matter what
> else it might be called that could relate it emotionaly to something
> in your cause. 

You have no evidence for that accusation. This exchange started
because someone referred to the fetus as a "child," and someone
else objected to that usage. The usage was correct. End of story. 
I'll continue to post the definition as long as I see these
stupid attempts to manipulate the meaning of the word.  

Doug Holtsinger
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: The Ego that Ate the Net
Organization: Who, me???
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 17:05:48 GMT

In article <92100.114119ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> Linda Birmingham <ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> writes:
>In  <1992Apr2.054200.10383@rotag.mi.org> Kevin Darcy writes:
>> In article <92091.165901ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> Linda Birmingham
>
>>>Idiot.  The net is not here to serve you, and you alone.
>>
>>Where did I imply that the Net existed to serve me ALONE??
>
>"What constructive purpose did the posting of his private email serve
> TO ME?" Kevin Darcy <1992Mar29.182951.28031@rotag.mi.org>
> ^^^^^^

"To me" is clearly a subset of "to everyone", Linda. This quote therefore 
does -not- imply that the Net exists to serve me ALONE. 

Try again?

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: A question for any MALE prolifer
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:10:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: pwcs.1992Apr15.211027.25131
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works

franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:

> Okay. Jen - take Hellen Keller for example. She couldn't do a whole
> lot let alone express herself until her late teens (maybe early
> teens?) Do you propose that she should have been killed because she
> couldn't waive her right? how foolish of your...

Obviously, Steve, you've never seen that Oscar-winning movie "The
Miracle Worker" starring Anne Bancroft and Patty Duke.  Otherwise,
you'd KNOW that Helen Keller's family simply did not have the ability,
knowledge or expertise to deal with a blind and deaf child.  In other
words, it was more the fault of Keller's family than herself that she
could not communicate.

That scene by the water pump still gives me goosebumps...

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include standard_disclaimers
             /  "If you tell the truth, you never have to remember anything."
T.S.A.K.C.   /                                      -- Mark Twain
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Subject: Re: Sorry, did I miss anything?
Distribution: na
Date: 6 Apr 92 17:06:13 CDT

In article <1992Apr6.201203.28022@cs.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>In article <1992Apr6.194536.26089@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
>>I was trying to help you, Eric.  But if you include DJR, then not only
>>can you form a club for guys without girlfriends, but if any potential
>>girlfriends find out about the association, you'll never get out of
>>the club.
>>
>>I thought the point was that you guys want girlfriends?
>Yeah, but I figured that if there ever was a guy who needed help finding
>a girlfriend, DJR was it...
>-Ekr
>
Uh, Eric,
I'm not sure you are going to garner favor from my gender by 
making it known that you would wish DJR on any one of us...

You guys shouldn't be too quick to dismiss the pleasantries
of acquiring ex-girlfriends here either. We don't make a lot of
demands, and we give _great_ recommendations.

muriel
standard disclaimer
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: pro-choice == pro-(womens' only) choice?
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 21:07:54 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Apr16.062115.10877@rotag.mi.org>  kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
> In article <1992Apr14.161434.22546@sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienn
> >>
> >>Horeshit yourself, Adrienne. The original claim was that you were arguing
> >>against reform. By arguing for the status quo, you implicitly argue AGAINST
> >>reform. I have therefore supported my statement in the preceding paragraph.
> >>Do you have an answer?
> >
> >How does one 'argue against reform' by proposing reform?
> >
> >You see to conveniently ignore the fact that I have posted my own
> >proposals.
>
> Nothing original or noteworthy, I'm sure...

"I'm sure" ???  You mean you didn't even read them?  Then it's not
surprising that you ignored the fact that she posted them, but it *is*
somewhat surprising that you'd say she was arguing *for* the status
quo when she obviously wasn't.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: THE IMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION ON OUR SOCIETY
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:00:18 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:
>In <1992Apr8.041649.27301@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> rfischer@Xenon.Stanford.ED
>U (Ray Fischer) writes:

>>Chapter & verse please.  Identify for me where the Bible says that
>>human life begins at conception, that abortion is wrong, or that
>>a fetus has the same rights as an adult?

>   I dont' have the time or the memory to quote the bible. Go read
>it yourself...

And you claim to know that god said this? Maybe you misinterpreted it?

Maybe one of the many translations misinterpreted it and yo're going
on bad data.

Ron
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Sci. POV 1: Life begins at birth
Keywords: what, birth, moral, ethical, biological, legal
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 00:03:01 GMT

<1992Mar31.101403.21736@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) said:
...
>                              <sigh> Perhaps the memory is starting 
>to go.

Say it isn't so!  It seems like only yesterday we so young, so free, so in
lust...  Ah fair youth, 'tis a pity thou art so wondrous and so fleet 
of foot...


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boyfriend of Susan,
Muriel, Cathi, and Nora, and darn proud of it.
-- 

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.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis)
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Reply-To: mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 01:54:29 GMT


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

>>I'll tell you this.
>>
>>AIDS, aka side-effect of the ME generation's hedonistic lifestyle, will
>>statistically probably never be "my disease." Sure, anyone can get
>>AIDS, or any woman can get pregnant, but certain factors have HUGH
>>effects on probability.
>
>That's exactly the attitude that's going to get you infected, MaThiEu.
>

OK.....let's put this in perspective. I've had sex with one partner.
We were both virgins and have remained monogamous. I made
up my mind a long time ago that if this relationship fails and
we don't get married, then I won't have sex again until I'm married.
Otherwise, that would constitute somthing I call "sex abuse." 
Needless-to-say, there is always the posiibility that she
got it from a blood transfusion that she never had or she might cheat.

Anyways......go to any expert in the AIDS field....or add up the
probabilities yourself.

I'll get hit my a meteor or lightning before I get AIDS. I worry
more about dying in a car crash than AIDS. I am not ignorant. In fact,
I am quite well informed. Let's be realistic. AIDS is a consequence
of actions and life is a bunch of statistics. (BTW, everyone please
do not ignore this disease. Even if it doesn't really have a 
chance of affecting you, it is still a tragedy. Compassion.) Anyways...
   
>And why did you delete *3* lines from me saying that the CDC says 60% of new
>HIV infections are going to occur in the Hetro community?  Don't like the fact?

yeah......but I won't believe it until a few years from now when all the
full blown cases appear.

The CDC took the epedemic model established for the homosexual community
in the early 80s and applied it directly to the heteroesexual
community. Homosexuals tend to have more sex partners than hetros.
The CDC realizes that the model will probably have to be adjusted.
However, in Africa, things are QUITE different. AIDS-2 has been around
long enough in the hetro community to get a good mathematical model
and it is spreading very fast. But anyways people, don't take any chances.


But your points should be noted by some.

Later

-- 
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
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The Value of a Man (repost)
Date: 13 Apr 92 11:58:53 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:
>In <1992Apr10.001711.8919@cco.caltech.edu> anne@cco.caltech.edu (Anneliese Lilj
>e) writes:
>>In article <+44tn#a@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (Cathi Ann Cook) writes:

>>Bzzzzzzzz...nice try. The ultimate biological purpose of a male human is
>>                      to provide genetic diversity for the offspring through
>>                      providing sperm to fertilize the egg. It is NOT
>>                      "startign and supporting families". I know LOTS and
>>                      LOTS of families without males in them.

>   Lots _AND_ lots huh? Well the point remains that all families _are_
>started by males biologically - and, the huge percentage of families
>_are_ supported by males. The only exceptions I can think of are:

Steve, you really are a royal male chauvinist. I'm embarrassed that
you're of my gender, much less my species.

In my area, N. Virginia near D.C., most (something like 80%) of the
families have both adults working. That is because low-end housing that
is in a neighborhood where you won't hear gun-blasts in the middle of
the night starts at approximately $200k.

In addition, many of my friends who are married have wives that earn
as much or more than they do. I only have one married friend who's wife
could be called supported, although she makes over $20k a year.

You definitely show more and more ignorance with each utterance you
make. Why don't you go check the world outside of that little utopian
enclave in Canada and get a reality check?

Ron