From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:04:47 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.053505.11068@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>In article <1993Jan25.053225.28717@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan24.220813.12535@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>
>[Deletions]
>
>>Seriously, if you can't tell the difference between choosing one's words
>>carefully when accusing someone of a criminal act, on the one hand, and 
>>making fine linguistic distinctions between various forms of psychological 
>>personality disorders in the midst of Yet Another Abstract Net.debate, on 
>>the other, I think you have some seriously screwed-up priorities there, 
>>Mark...
>>
>So you consider falsely accusing someone of a criminal act in aforum
>with no legal standing to eb a lesser offense then falsely accusing
>someone of having a serious psychiatric problem? 

The question here is the seriousness of the charge. A joke about someone
being "schizophrenic" is not even in the same league as a solemn accusation
of forgery. Don't you agree? Cracks about mental health and/or competency are
continually made in jest, or in net.flames -- "moron", "fool", "idiot",
"psycho", "nutcase". Do you think every instance is meant to be a medical 
diagnosis?

That's a pretty moronic assumption :-)

>You accused Larry of suffering from schizophrenia (although the
>context made it obvious that you should have used multiple personality
>disorder or MPD) and you have accused me of being paranoid.

See above. Those are quite clearly NOT attempts at diagnosis.

>You are either engaging in 'wasteful ad hominem' attacks (you know,
>the ones you complaign about others engaging in), 

This particular exchange is only wasteful because you refuse to admit that
"schizophrenia" is, in a general forum, a perfectly valid way to describe
what you call "MPD".

								- Kevin

"kevin, you've often argued in favor of abortion restrictions."
				James G. Keegan Jr., keegan@acm.rpi.edu
				Sat, 12 Dec 1992 18:55:40 GMT
				<t9g20dp@rpi.edu>

"for years, i've been arguing that you wanted to
 restrict women's right to terminate a pregnancy."
				James G Keegan Jr, keegan@pan.crd.ge.com
				1 Jan 93 03:48:14 GMT
				<1993Jan1.034814.1823@crd.ge.com>

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?                                                                              ?
? "i haven't seen kebbie argue for legislation."                               ?
?				James G Keegan Jr, keegan@pan.crd.ge.com       ?
?				2 Jan 93 00:32:23 GMT                          ?
?				<1993Jan2.003223.3588@crd.ge.com>              ?
?                                                                              ?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

"sure you do, kevin. you argue against women's right
 to terminate a pregnancy quite frequently."
				James G Keegan Jr, keegan@pan.crd.ge.com
				2 Jan 93 14:54:05 GMT
				<1993Jan2.145405.947@crd.ge.com>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion