HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: About The christian perspective...?
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:19:13 GMT

In <19tbcoINNdai@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:

>In article <1992Sep24.155732.7629@tc.fluke.COM> emery@tc.fluke.COM (John Emery) writes:
>>In article <19nue3INNqc1@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>>>However, I find the idea that *my* notion of sacredness should be FORCED
>>>upon some random woman who has to bear the cost to be a sad and sickening
>>>thing.
>>Just of out curiousity, why is a mother having a child and raising it a
>>sad and sickening thing?

>Having reading comprehension problems?  I believe, if you will diagram the
>sentance above you will discover it breaks out to effectively this:
>   MY notion should be FORCED is a sad and sickening thing.
>This is just my way of politely pointing out that ANYBODY's notion, being
>forced upon others, is a sad and sickening thing. I kinda like my notion,
>after all....

Like my notion that theft is wrong being forced upon certain Romany 
(commonly called Gypsies) who believe they have a Christ-given right to steal?
[Reference: _The King of the Gypsies_, by Peter Maas]
I hope you don't think it's a sad and sickening thing to punish those
who have this philosophy and put it into practice...

>>>Pro-lifers who are pro-life for themselves are fine.  Pro-lifers who define
>>>their beliefs by NEGATING the beliefs of others are to be fought to the
>>>bitter end.

>>I guess first off I don't see it as a fight of bitterness.

Adrienne is bitter.  I've left it at that, and deleted her talk about the 
more hypothetical bitterness of others.

>>God bless you.

>He wouldn't dare.

>Adrienne Regard

Let me indulge in a bit of speculation.  I gather from this, unless 
there is some playful satire behind it, that Adrienne is a confirmed
atheist.  If she had leanings in any other direction, her language
might be closer to that of a Unitarian woman minister who spoke at
the Columbia, SC pro-choice rally this Spring.

This woman spoke after the previous speaker had talked about the
restrictions on abortion that legislators were contemplating.

[The rally was held right in front of the State House.  Legislators
had been debating two bills, one that had metamorphosed from a 
Guam-style "only mother's life" ban to one like the Utah law, and
another similar to the Pennsylvania law of *Casey* fame, except
that it had no spousal consent feature, hence would be in force
today had it passed.]

With obvious reference to these legislators, this Unitarian
minister said, to the approving roar of the crowd,

 "I really have little idea of what God is like,
 but I can tell you one thing: She's pissed off."

Peter Nyikos

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: do Overpeck's flamers have problems themselves? (was: Overpeck's problems)
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 23:09:23 GMT

In article <jhmzqj_@rpi.edu> keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
>rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>->I was referring to your claim that I had contradicted myself.
>
>yes. it was really funny when you included it to defend
>yourself when what it did was demonstrate that you had
>contradicted yourself.
I don't believe that it demonstrates that I contradicted myself, Mr.
Keegan. Perhaps you can explain how I did.

Mr. Keegan: You have asserted that I contradicted myself. You have
yet to substantiate your claim. You have made an assertion. You have
the burden of proof. You have not met it. Perhaps you will have the
intellectual honesty to retract your claim if you cannot support it.
I doubt it, however.

-Ekr






-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                 ekr@eitech.com(preferred)
   "Base 8 is just like base 10, really...if you're missing two fingers."
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Subject: Re: In Suzanne's Defense
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 12:27:52 GMT

forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
->These are merely your feeble failed attempts deduction.   I have never made
->the statement that abortion is murder, because obviously, the word "murder"
->means illegal killing, and at the present time abortion is not illegal.

sure you have. russ anderson just posted several quotes
from you proving that you did.

had you said it only once, i'd probably believe you
had simply forgotten having said it. but you didn't
say it just once, did you?

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: THE SUFFERING OF SOME UNBORN AND THEIR MOTHERS (Case 1)
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 18:02:12 GMT

decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>> I'd like a source that is not so obviously biased as this woman who
>> has been the target of several lawsuits, including one where she
>> allegedly had a woman held down and performed an abortion on her 
>> against her will.

'This woman' being Dr. Mildred Hanson, who, according to her associates,
hasn't lost any of these nuisance suits against her.  (I'd like for Peter
to explain to me how Dr. Hanson, who is 50+ years old, can hold a younger
woman down on a table by force and put a band-aid on her, much less
perform an abortion.)

> Isn't that sooo convenient?  Last I looked, every time you
> posted about one of these lawsuits we discovered they were
> just harassment or the case had been thrown out.  Remember the
> one you posted about the woman who claimed they never informed
> her of cancer, where the court found that the clinic had
> tried for months to inform the woman that she had it?

>> BTW does anyone know of the present status of THIS lawsuit?  My sources
>> are over a year old, and at that time it was still pending.

> I'm surprised you even care.

I asked Peter to post the names of the plaintiff(s) in these lawsuits, so
I could check the public record.  He never responded.  The lawsuit he asks
about now was filed in September 1989.  Surely if the plaintiff actually 
won, it would be trumpeted all over the pro-lie literature.

Seems to me, with Nyikos' obsession with being held down and with handcuffs,
the neighborly thing to do would be to give him a gift subscription to
alt.sex.bondage.

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
           "Remember! Arguments should be FUN!" -- Jessica McGeary

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,talk.religion.misc
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject:  "Good" vs "Bad" and Huricanes
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 20:46:53 GMT

kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
] In article <1992Sep25.171158.20935@nntp.uoregon.edu> egorr@hebb.uoregon.edu (Eric Gorr) writes:
] >True.  But that would be bad interference.  If something it "bad," it
] >shouldn't be done.  Or do you think that doing evil things is ok?
] 
] (And my 'clue fairy' tutu is at the cleaners...)
] 
] Eric, let's look at it this way:
] 
] Was Hurrican Andrew "Good" or "Bad"?  Please explain your reasoning.


proposition #1: Said hurricane was under God's control

p2: God is Good

conclusion: said Hurricane was Good.

p3: Said Hurricane was NOT under God's control

p4: God is Omnipotent

conclusion: The Hurricane made a Moral Choice.

Bad Hurricane, Bad, Bad, Bad Hurricane!!!

ciao
drieux


ps: anyone up for billy connelly's shtickt about
airplanes and mountains....


-- 
Modern Day Problems

Does that 'answer' your question,
or should I be a little more vague.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:39329 talk.religion.misc:17394
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: SATs as an insult (to Brian McBean & Peter Nyikos)
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:33:34 GMT
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science

In <1992Sep28.011929.20842@midway.uchicago.edu> eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley) writes:

>In article <1992Sep21.165259.2332@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
>>In article <19ctqdINNktk@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com>,
>>regard@sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:

>>> How 'bout you post your SAT scores, too?

>>Are y'all just being sarcastic, or do Americans really worship SAT scores?
>>I don't have any...  Is it ok for me to practice rational thought anyway?

>Everyone's being sarcastic.  There was a particularly brainless doofus
>by the name of DJR (David John Rasmussen) who tried to convince
>talk.abortion that he was intelligent by posting his SAT scores.  The
>request to post your SAT scores is an insult around here, implying
>that a) you post stupid articles, and b) you're stupid enough to think
>we'll believe you're smart because you've done well on a
>multiple-choice test.

>Peter, think about the fact that a lot of the pro-choicers around here
>are absolutely convinced you're a brainless twit.

Elizabeth, you ought to know by now that most of the ones who claim to be 
convinced of it are among the bigger clowns in this talk.abortion
group.

I had a problem with seeing no responses to my posts for over a month,
and when the responses started coming in, a great many were from clowns
like Margolis and Hekhuis, and I tailored my responses to them accordingly.

Even now I have the problem, that when I post something thoughtful,
or informative, people often won't respond to it.  Look at all the
un-followed-up posts at the end of your table of contents.  It's the
zanier ones, like the hang-gliding one and the Mirror, that seem
to get more attention.  Thinking I am a brainless twit because of that
would be like judging authors by only their more lighthearted writings.

>  Admittedly, *all*
>pro-lifers come in for a lot of abuse by pro-choicers (at least, I for
>one can't think of an exception), but not all pro-lifers are assumed
>stupid ... so don't assume that you're getting this treatment because
>of your positions.


>Cthulhu for President -- when you're tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

Now, if you were generally perceived as a pro-lifer, I would wager
you would have been called a brainless twit for the above line by now.

Peter Nyikos
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:39019 alt.abortion.inequity:4085
From: nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: Re: Does Nyikos Hold that Abortion is Murder?
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:20:22 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <BvAnLI.AvL@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>
>The "responsibility" of the fetus is irrelevant.  It is not being
>punished or killed for any action of its own.  Its right to life via 
>life support from the woman, however, may depend on whether the woman 
>entered into any obligation to the fetus voluntarily, and whether such 
>an obligation threatens her life or her other rights.

>AGAIN:  I am arguing whether this is *consistent* or not.
>Please avoid "you are advocating" responses, thanks.

It isn't consistent. Given this argument, you would have to make the
same decision in any case of contraceptive failure. (Since the people
involved were obviously not voluntarily accepting a pregnancy since they
had made clear and reasonable plans to avoid one.)
 

-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Thank you for the Confession Ron...
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:00:59 GMT

bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:
] 
] I don't know, as I wasn't a student in a school that
] subscribed to the idea of teaching
] men about women, but concentrated instead on abstinence, by indicating
] all those horrible diseases that would make your wanker fall off.
] 
] (Evidently it had GREAT effect!:)
] 
] Ron 


Need I say anything more??????


ciao
drieux




-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Entropy, Its not Just a Good Idea,
IT's The LAW!!!!!
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: Rendering the Question of Abortion Moot
Keywords: RU-486,Abortion,Birth-Control
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 21:10:44 GMT

In article <BuqFDu.IyK@rice.edu>
patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L. Humphrey) writes:

>It may already be here -- all we've heard of so far is the case of the one 
>woman who got nabbed by the SS, er, Customs people at JFK.  How many more have
>slipped through undetected, I wonder?  (Not many -- yet.  Once RU-486 becomes

I believe that the woman who was caught declared the RU-486 she was
carrying....

>available in Canada, though, look for that to change -- there are a LOT of
>border crossings, and Customs can't handle anything of *that* magnitude.
>All it takes is a look at their success in keeping other illegal substances 
>out of the U.S. to put that notion to bed...:-)

Anyway, I've got my doubts about vast quantities of RU-486 being
smuggled over the border.  It would happen if abortion was illegal,
certainly....  But remember that it *does* very often have side
effects, and you *are* supposed to be under some kind of doctor's
supervision.  By and large, I think it will usually make more sense to
go ahead and take the RU-486 where it's legal.

-- 
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.

Cthulhu for President -- when you're tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: ALL ARGUMENTS FOR PRO-CHOICE REFUTED HERE!!!!!
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1992 04:00:49 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  <1992Oct6.000104.1896@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>  c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>
> Another possible useful source might come from Dr. Philip Ney, chief of
> psychiatry at a major teaching hospital.

Does the hospital have a name?

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.fan.kevin-darcy
From: rgoers@gumdrop.Xerox.COM (Ron Goers)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,alt.birthright
Subject: Re: Don't just whine about media bias. Do something!
Date: 28 Sep 92 20:20:55 GMT
Organization: Imaging Science Engineering & Technology, Xerox Corporation

In article <Bv75BB.9DJ@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>In article <1992Sep25.224506.26902@jetsun.weitek.COM> nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep25.003312.4297@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>>>
>>>Actually, Naziism was the first place where abortion was legal. 
>>>Historically, Rush's opponents are closer to Naziism than he is. 
>>
>>Actually, your forgot the early Soviet Union. Then the Nazis 'legalized'
>>it - but only for 'non-Aryan' women.
>
>Sounds like they were influenced by Margaret Sanger...     :-|
>
>Don
>-- 
>beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged

That's a whole new frightening concept on it's own ...  Are you familiar with her "contributions" to society?

rlg
-- 
Ron Goers @ Xerox Corporation               Email: rgoers@iset.scan.mc.xerox.com

"Time flies like an arrow ...
 fruit flies like a banana"
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: 30 Sep 1992 22:44:14 GMT
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com (C J Silverio)
NNTP-Posting-Host: eno.wpd.sgi.com

---
eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
|Taken from an article by nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf):
|?mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
|?>jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle) writes:
|?>>  Abortion can be a responsible solution to an unwanted pregnancy.
|?>>  Abortion can be a responsible solution to an unwanted pregnancy.
|?>>  Abortion can be a responsible solution to an unwanted pregnancy.
|?>
|?>Try this on for size.
|?>Euthanasia can be a responsible solution to an unwanted burdan.
|?>Euthanasia can be a responsible solution to an unwanted burdan.
|?>Euthanasia can be a responsible solution to an unwanted burdan.

|How about replacing "responsible" with "convienient"?

"Responsible AND convenient"!  Sounds like an excellent
recommendation to me.  I enjoy modern conveniences and  
modern medicine.  I don't enjoy modern Puritans, though,
who seem to want to inflict pain & suffering on other people,
or who think that there's something wrong if people can
escape from accidents quickly & conveniently.

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com	C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"Allow me to say that the arguments with which you have supported this
extraordinary application have been as frivolous as the application was
misjudged.  You have widely mistaken my character, if you think I can be
worked on by such persuasions as these."  Jane Austen
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Overpeck's problems  (Was: Re: Have you herd about the ram?)
Date: 28 Sep 92 21:47:37 GMT
Followup-To: misc.test
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


I'd suggest that you seek some real help instead of confessing
your shortcomings in talk.abortion, Overpeck.  I'm really
not qualified to tell you why the "jokes" you feel compelled
to repeat in this newsgroup all have sexist overtones.  I
think you should see your therapist, and ask *him*.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: And now another semantics nit
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 18:25:48 GMT

c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
# You do know that you cannot call a sperm/egg members of homo
# sapiens. 

Mr. Guerrero, you seem to have a penchant for employing the phrase
`members of the species homo sapiens' (or contractions thereof).

Question:

	...where do I get my membership card?


My point being -- you are specifically defining the set of `members of
the species homo sapiens' so as to include that which you argue should
be considered persons and to exclude that which you argue shouldn't, a
definition which you then use when you argue that everything in the
set of `members of the species homo sapiens' ought to be considered
persons.

No doubt you'd also have the cheek to argue that the set of persons
and the set of objects that conform to requirements for membership in
the set of species homo sapiens are identical sets by a similar feat
of cognition.

(I can't help it.  You know us agnostics.  Always trying to expose the
firmament of heaven as made of cheese.)


-- 
J H Woodyatt (a.k.a. Dr. Strychnine)
Space Systems/Loral

Help keep Las Vegas clean.  Eat your kill.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:38691 talk.religion.misc:17203 alt.atheism:18061
From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Is it Christian values or chavinism?
Date: 27 Sep 92 11:14:06 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
> In article <98PLRB12w165w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
> >rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
> >> In article <23SEP92.20083018@vax.clarku.edu> hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes:
> >> >Also, in the U.S. a woman is raped every five minutes, not every other da
> >> Isn't the standard figure for rape that 1/3 of all women will be
> >> raped at some point in their lives?
> >
> >If you define rape as "sexual intercourse without consent", then I believe
> >recent studies suggest that approximately 40% of female university students
> >in the UK have been raped.  I would therefore suspect that your figure of 1/
> >is a big underestimate.
>
> Ok. Then what's this every 5 minutes stuff?

I suspect that the statistics arise from different definitions of "rape". 
Whilst the definition "sexual intercourse without consent" is to my mind the
most straightforward, there are many other definitions used.  As I mentioned,
in the UK until recently the law was such that sexual intercourse without
consent forced on a women by her husband was not considered rape.


mathew
-- 
"When nothing's funny it gets easy to laugh 
 at the drop of a hat, or a bomb" -- DEVO
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
From: lund@noao.edu (Rich Lund)
Subject: Re: A Technical Request
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:30:12 GMT


drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
: 
: I have been politiely asked in email to 'dumb down'
: my posts for the folks in alt.fan.dan-qualye
: and alt.fan.rush-limbaugh....
: 
What the hell are you ragging on Dan and Rush for and including 
your mindless liberal crap in talk.politics.guns?

Conservatives are way out in front on the RKBA issue and there
is no way some turn the other cheek-love the criminal more than
their self-involve government in every aspect of our life Liberal
son's a bitches like Clinton and Gore are going to fight to protect
our rights.  Now, Rush and Dan may not be perfect, but at least
they aren't shoving socialism and big government down our throats.

: So I will work on typing slower, and using only 
: big block letters, so as not to intellectually 
: stress their Over Workded little Minds....
: 
Maybe the folks with those "Over Workded little Minds" will be
the ones to save you from Clinton's gestapo police.  These folks
with "Over Workded little Minds" might be the ones that don't 
hand their weapons over to government.  They may become the 
'Freedom Fighters' during the next decade or provide security
and stability to a country brought to it's knees by economic 
collapse.
: 
: ciao
: drieux
: 
: ps: are their any TechNical Writers out there with
: prior experience explaining things to MangleMent who
: will be able to offer me some assistance in this area?
: 
-- 
***************** Ten thousand years from now it won't matter anyway.      
Rich Lund       *                    Chill out !!
lund@noao.edu   *
***************** Opinions not sponsored by my employer etc.etc......