From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Steve Franklin: NO MYSTERY (Re: THE IMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION)
Date: 7 Apr 92 12:13:59 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <17691@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:

>And Steve, I was gracious enough not to require you to even put on insulated
>gloves for when you read this, although I think Chris might have been
>correct and your ears will turn 'crimsome'. :]
    I already read your post... Thanks for the false warning. It didn't
really border on witty or offensive. Don't get my hopes up in the future 
please Ron...


>First off, in parts you conveniently deleted, I describe how various
>couples could have relationships without sex, and hinging a relationship
>on sex is a sure way to wind up in court. (or so I've heard) Eventually,
>at least within my experience, most people will wind up with children
>who are not a "lost priority or forgotten," as a matter of fact, they
>are generally loved and treated well, primarily because the parents
>waited until they were ready to have them. As for it feeling good I'll
>get to that later....
   I always delete second level replies. Just a waste of bandwidth. Not
much stuff in here that deserves to be read twice, although I'm glad
you think mine is 8)

>As for beer commercials, I generally consider them insulting to a gnat's
>intelligence, if you take them seriously, you really have a problem.:)
   You are so .... wrong. WHether I take them seriously or not, they
are a reflection of society's requirements and mentality. Don't you
get it? They sell beer. If they sell beer, there's a reason for it - they're
appealing to an audience.  A large belly-busted beer-drinking audience. 
And that scares me.

[bunch of stuff deleted. An argument based on "misinterpretation"]


>Calling on the Clue Fairy......need immediate help....
[more stuff talking about thousands of years ago... really interesting...NOT]


>Hey, I never did. <|-]
>Touchy, aren't we?
   Not so much for me, but the other people that your attitude affects.


>Well, the only problems I see are a result of a lack of education and
>a propogation of ignorant attitudes generated by people who don't tell
>their children anything, that way, what they don't know, they won't 
>participate in. 
   What about the attitude you seem to portray that "if you aren't
having sex, you're not normal"... "If you haven't had sex, you're not
normal"... I think that could be a large problem in our society,
and whether you deny it or not, it is a predominant feeling in our society...

>Maybe not, but a hell of a lot of ignorance. What you haven't experienced,
   Ignorance? Does a judge have to have murdered someone to be able
to convict them? Obviously not. NOw, I try not to judge my peers, but it
does not mean that I am not given the right and wisdom to defend my
point of view. It's like a catch-22 huh? If I haven't had sex, then I
can't say anything on the matter, but if I've had sex, then I'm a 
hypocrite? nice...

>As for telling myself I'm "macho" [smirk, snicker, hee hee HAHAHAHAHAHAHA]
>whoooooooo, what a concept. Macho is for uneducated assholes, Steve.
   Heh, once again, I ask you... Do you consider yourself macho?

>BTW, I just realized that pretty much anyone on the net could have said
>what I did, and several are women. Are you insinuating that these women
>would be then considered macho by you?
   I've met a few in my day... 8)

   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