From: kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran)
Subject: Re: Guilty of ... Thoughtcrime!
Summary: Is is Peter Nyikos, or is it Speculation?  You be the judge... 
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on... 
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 03:47:52 GMT

In article <nyikos.717798089@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>In <1992Sep27.085848.166097@watson.ibm.com> Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com> writes:
>
>>In  <1992Sep26.010844.3042@zooid.guild.org>  Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>>>
>>> Actually, I've seen many statistics showing that pregnancy is no greater a
>>> risk for women than the operation to terminate one.
>
>>Where have you seen these statistics?  Everything I've seen says that
>>the risk for carrying to term is much higher.
>
>As usual, you give only mortality figures.  And except for the Alan
>Guttmacher Institute, an affiliate of Planned Parenthood whose stats
>on other things are higly dubious (as I've pointed out to Cochran on the

I've begun to wonder about Peter and his constant whining about "dubious"
and "biased" sources...

Does he consider IBM to be a "biased" source when it announces a new product
line?

Does he consider McDonald's a "dubious" source when it claims to be the #1
fast-food hamburger chain in the world?

>talk.apology thread), it is impossible to tell how far removed these
>other sources are from the PRIMARY sources by the little info you give.
>
>>source: universal almanac, 1990.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Gee, Peter.  Go walk down to your Library, get the Universal Almanac for
1990, and look it up for yourself...

>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>From the Alan Guttmacher Institute, published in "Facts in Brief:
>>Abortion in the United States."
>
>>--     The risk of death associated with childbirth is about 11
>>     times as high as that associated with abortion.
>
>That's officially reported figures.  In 1978, the Chicago Sun-Times
>did an expose in which it uncovered 12 previously unreported deaths
>due to abortion.

Gee, "Dr. Nyikos", I don't suppose you'd care to give us THE DATE THEY
PUBLISHED THIS EXPOSE, would you?  The month?  Anything beyond "1978"?

For that matter, would you care to tell us how the CS-T *KNEW* they had
found a "previously unreported death due to abortion"?  Did they exhume
the bodies and another autopsy, or look into a crystal ball, or what?

>
>>--     the risk of complications with abortion is minimal --
>>     less than 1% of all abortion patients experience a major
>>     comlication associated with the procedure, such as a
>>     serious pelvic infection, hemorrhage requiring a blood
>>     transfusion or unintended major surgery.
>
>And how do they know, when so many women are understandably 
>reluctant to return to a place that butchered them in the first
>place?

[Watch it, Peter.  You're starting to foam at the mouth...]

Peter, when was the last time you knew of a woman going to an abortion
clinic for a blood transfusion?  Around the same time you last heard of
a woman taking her car to a Dentist for an oil change, right?

>
>{Now on to Will and his ex-SO}

Yes, let's talk about Will for a bit...

>
>>> I was speaking from anger, but I never actually threatened her.
>>>
>>> She, however, threatened *me* three times.  Just *who* is the violent
>>> person here?  Me, who dared to have *thoughts* of it, or her, who actually
>>> *threatened* me three times?  You decide.
>
>>Saying "I'll kill you if you tell anyone about this" is not, generally
>>speaking, a serious threat.  (Is it safe to assume that she did *not*
>>kill you?  :-)
>
>Nor is "If she had...I would probably have snapped right there and killed
>her on the spot" ordinarily perceived as a threat at all.  J'accuse the
>pro-choicers of arguing in bad faith when they claim to take it as a 
>threat to kill any woman who does
>not show Will the proper respect.

Personally, I think Will needs to get rid of the anger in his life, and
get out of abusive relationships.

>
>>> This is also an interesting subject matter... How can "pro choice" people
>>> oppose abortion after a sex determination, if they are in favour of abortion
>>> "for any reason and no apologies"?  Will they oppose sex determination solely
>>> because "it just might be a female"?

I don't oppose abortions after sex determination.

>>>
>>> But if one *is* "pro choice" *and* opposes abortion after a sex determination,
>>> then the question arises : What do these people *really* believe?  - In being
>>> Pro-Choice, or Pro-Choice-Only-If-It's-A-Choice-We-Agree-With?

For that matter, what happens if it's proven that homosexuality is genetic?
And they develop a test that 100% guaranteed to tell you if your "unborn child"
is Gay?  Will pro-lifers suddenly want to allow abortions in the case of 
"Rape, Incest, or Homosexuality"?

>
>>You seem to be confused.  Pro-choice is not pro-abortion.  Pro-choice does
>>not mean that you're in favor of abortions at all.  It means that you're
>>in favor of letting the woman make her own choice as to what's best for her.
>>You can oppose abortion for sex selection, or abortion for any reason at
>>all, as long as you don't want to *legislate* your opposition.
>
>That's a pretty good definition of pro-choice, actually.  Trouble is, the
>pro-choicers who are this uncomfortable with abortion are the exception
>rather than the rule in this newsgroup.

Excuse me?  As I've said before, if God snapped his fingers tomorrow, and I
became pregnant, *I would not have an abortion*.

And please stop making blanket statements about people you know nothing about.
--
=kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu | B(0-4) c- d- e++ f- g++ k(+) m r(-) s++(+) t | TSAKC=
=My thoughts, my posts, my ideas, my responsibility, my beer, my pizza.  OK???=
=   "Wendy? Yes, Lisa? Is the water warm enough? Yes, Lisa? Shall we begin?"  =
=                                                                     "Prince"=
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism