From: smezias@option.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: I Tend To Ignore Wes Orr Because.
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:30:39 GMT
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

In article <1992Aug18.132016.6271@mcs.gvsu.edu>
orr@newton.mcs.gvsu.edu (Wes Orr {Academic Computing}) writes more of
the usual nonsense in response to me:

>>In article <1992Aug17.134619.931@mcs.gvsu.edu> orr@newton.mcs.gvsu.edu
>>(Wes Orr {Academic Computing}) writes the usual nonsense:
> I appreciate the nonjudgemental attacks on my sensibilities.>

When someone is spewing nonsense about restricting the rights to
bodily autonomy and free reproductive choice, others get judgmental.
When they can't seem to understand simple logic that elicits
irritation as well.

>i too want to prevent unwanted pregnancies but sometimes they still happen.
>When they do there should be a point where an abortion is no longer an option
>and that this point is based on a more compelling argument than viability.

Compelling to whom?  Do you support restrictions on the right of a
parent not to be forced to donate blood to their child?

>>>I believe the fetus to be unquestionable human.  
>>
>>I assume you mean unquestionably human.  An egg and sperm are human
>>also.  So is an appendix.  What's your point?
>Obviously, biology 101 and you never met.  Since when does an appendix
>grow into a living breathing human being?>

Obviously, writing what you mean is beyond your limited abilities: Do
you say anything about growing into a living, breathing human in your
original post?  Now that you have clarified what you meant to say, I
still have a similar reaction: How convenient for your agenda of
legislative control that you ignore the role of the woman in aiding
and abetting the fulfillment of this potential?  Why is it that you
want to force unwilling women to have their bodies used in fulfilling
this potential?  Can you please give us an example of a situation in
which you would force men to do the same?

Deletia:

>>What a wonderful thought.  Unfortunately, the same neo-fascists who
>>are your allies in oppressing the reproductive rights of women will
>>never allow you to adopt because you are homosexual.
>
>Thanks for broadcasting something I stated about myself in passing.
>I would appreciate it if you wouldn't constantly bring up my sexuality
>in this newsgroup.  If I feel it appropriate to bring it up then please
>allow me to do that.  BTW, I am bi, not gay.

You already broadcast it yourself; since I do not consider it a source
of shame myself, I took your mention of it to signal the same.  This
is the first time I have brought up your sexuality.  I brought it up
to make exactly the same point you make by characterizing this single
mention as `constant.'  Your statements are both illogical and
inconsistent.

>Also, those who are pro-life are not fascists.  They believe in their
>convictions.  

Who said fascists were insincere?  If we take the Republican platform
as an example, one can find plenty that is fascist without even
touching what is insincere.  Of course, both are there.

>Those who argue unlimited abortion on demand, although 
>few, are just as extreme.

I support the Freedom of Choice Act, as do the majority of Americans.
Are we all extremists by your creative use of English?

Newsgroups: talk.abortion