HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Adrienne's use of "asshole" is unwarranted
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 15 Oct 92 21:01:27 GMT

In <BvzB4I.CsG@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> bgarfink@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (beth diane garfinkel) writes:

>In <nyikos.718309756@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>>I hope Keith Cochran does not get involved in this one.  Let's keep it
>>between Adrienne and Martin, shall we?  {Now do you see why I changed
>>threads?}

>Well, this is a public forum.  It's actually open to anyone who cares to
>post in the ENTIRE WORLD.  Who appointed you referee, anyway?
>						Beth

I was thinking of the feelings of the young woman who had the abortion
two days before she posted in the thread I yanked this follow-up from.

Or are you referring to "I hope Keith Cochran does not get involved
in this one"?  That was an in-joke...well, actually not a joke at all.
Keith Cochran jumped in with some sexual harrassment of me when a woman
said something similar to what Adrienne had said.  I figured it was 
bad enough to go one-on-one with Adrienne in this matter without 
a weirdo like Cochran ganging up on Martin.

Peter Nyikos

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Re: It's just a TV SHOW!
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 22:55:02 GMT

In article <1992Sep23.232409.27608@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>Because in the real world, he's not a Nazi and neither is anyone in
>the GOP. Ask David Duke, whom the GOP beat to dust in Louisiana... 

Huh?  You mean Cal Thomas and Pat Buchanan aren't Republicans?  Of course,
they both aren't really Nazis, either, but they do damned good impersonations!

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

"I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute
 -- where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic)
 how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishoners for whom to
 vote -- where no church or church school is granted any public funds or
 political preference -- and where no man is denied public office merely
 because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the
 people who might elect him."

		-from John F. Kennedy's address to the Greater Houston
		 	Ministerial Association, September 12, 1960.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Mentioning those Economic Issues
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 16:49:28 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.213107.6593@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:

>Notice also that the War on Drugs has driven the price of
>a Kilo of cocaine down from $50,000, Under the Evil Socialist
>Dominated Democratic Days, to a Mere $10,000 Under the Reagan-Bush
>Administration.

	True - and the new competative market has pushed to price and purity
of heroin to new lows. 

	Perhaps, but look at the price of Marijuana! They've taken to drug
of choice for poor and middle class user and made it only accessable to
people who can afford 200-300/oz. LSD - always a favorite with poor 
intellectuals, has kept pace with inflation, but the potency has decreased
rather severely.

	Once again, the rich have prospered and the poor have suffered,
directly as a result of Reagan policies. The upper classes have seen a 
significant savings in what used to be a $1K/wk cocaine or heroin habit,
but the poor smoker or acid head has had to hustle even harder to get the
same high. It's a travesty of justice.

-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
  "[Ronald Reagans] support of George Bush is absolutely not as lukewarm
  and halfhearted as it appears"  -- Ed Meese 1992

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: ALL ARGUMENTS FOR PRO-CHOICE REFUTED HERE!!!!!
Organization: Willy's Pub & Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:26:17 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.043948.14316@newshost.unh.edu>, ss1@kepler.unh.edu (The Rink) writes:
>>>	 1.  A woman should have a choice.
>>
>>Ah.  So you feel you've definitely established that a woman
>>_shouldn't_ have a choice.  
>>
>>I suggest to you that you would be happier living in a country such
>>as Saudi Arabia, where women have few choices in anything.
>
>I don't believe a woman should have a choice to kill her child any more than
>I believe a man should have a choice to kill his child.

They already don't, Einstein -- ever heard of existing statutes against
murder of children?  

>Don't you have anything better to do than go quoting people out of context
>and twisting their arguments into crap like that?

Now *this* is funny, coming from someone who deletes whole paragraphs and
attributions, and claims someone else posted the "documentation" of his
assertions already, so he doesn't need to bother with it...oh, well, one
more loud-mouthed hypocrite won't be noticed very much in here, with all the 
others we've collected lately...

--PLH (if the Avenging Angel were to come through here killing all the real
Christians, he'd never cock his pistol at any of *these* folks...)

Xref: sparky talk.abortion:41383 talk.politics.guns:21898 alt.conspiracy:11077 alt.fan.dan-quayle:5113 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6489 talk.bizarre:33320
From: steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
Subject: Amazing Grates (WAS Re: A Technical Request)
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:54:11 GMT
Followup-To: talk.bizarre
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies

> = (Nathan Engle) writes:
>> = ( Steve Novak) writes:
>>> = Adkins:

>>>It never fails to amaze me to see the frustration that liberals will
>>>demonstrate almost on cue when someone dares to disagree with their drivel.

>>It truly amazes me how Adkins can totally ignore what "his" side posts,
>>and instead paints all "liberals" with the same paintbrush.

>    The only thing that amazes me these days is how people can be "truly
>amazed" that other people continue to act exactly the way they have acted 
>for years. Of course, people have been amazed about that amazement for years 
>so I guess that I should also be amazed that their amazement amazes me. 
>You'd think I would have learned by now.

An amazing reply.

>    Actually one other thing amazes me as well, and that's the way that 
>people cross-post stuff like this in every group they can think of. Is 
>any of this relevant to abortion, guns, conspiracies, Dan Quayle, or Rush 
>Limbaugh? The only group this thread *really* belongs in is talk.bizarre.

I'm amazed Nathan didn't remove some of those newsgroups from his reply.

I didn't, 'cause I'm incorrigible, but I *did* set the "Followup" line.



-- 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Steve Novak |    |"Wacker the K"| 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
steven@advtech.USWest.Com
From: cjhs@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Date: 10 Oct 92 16:22:46 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England

mcbeanb@brandonu.ca wrote:
: In article <ld3bm7INN2um@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh) writes:
: > In article <1992Oct6.023143.20915@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
: [...] 
: > Again, this is truth by blatant assertion. You have admitted that the
: > sperm/egg is human. Now, is it or is it not alive?
: 
: Well, considering a biological standpoint:  Do you remember the 7 or so
: characteristics of living things?  I don't, but I know one of them
: is being able to reproduce, and a sperm can't get together with another
: sperm to make offspring sperm, so I would assume that sperm/eggs are not

A sperm gets together with an egg of the same species. Would you argue
that males are not living because they cannot get together with other
males to reproduce?

The sperm and the egg are the haploid phase of the human life cycle.

In humans, and most "higher" animals, the haploid phase is a single
cell, and the diploid phase is the dominant one. But all are living
organisms in the life cycle of the species in question.

For a contrast, consider the bee. The drone is still in the haploid
part of the bee life cycle.

Science does not give definitive answers to moral questions. It gives
you information which enables you to make an informed moral choice.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker)
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:46:53 GMT

mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:

>If the woman agreed to have sex, than the invitation was made.

Uh, sure, ok.  So tell us, the man that goes home with a woman,
has sex with her, and leaves without ever giving her his name,
what has HE agreed to?  

      [...]

>This is patently absurd.  The risks of pregnancy are well known and have
>been for generations.  

Well, geeeeeeeeeeeeze, Wilson, of COURSE they are.  AND ONE OF THE
KNOWN RISKS OF PREGNANCY IS DEATH.  Random, unpredictable death.
Childbirth puts the body under _incredible_ stress.  Few women are
laying there grinning and squealing "Oh, I'm so at ONE with my
WOMANHOOD!"

>If two or three doctors agree that the woman is
>at risk of dying than an abortion is called for.  Otherwise it is murder.

Weren't you one of the twits who once posted that we should
"err on the side of life"?  And now you're demanding some sort of
CONSENSUS that a woman WILL die before you'll ALLOW an abortion?
Excuse me, but what the hell happened to erring on the side of
life??

Sounds like you don't care about the woman at all.

>Mark

               -rocker
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame,alt.fan.kevin-darcy
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade (was Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:53:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.232014.28570@wdl.loral.com> 
bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com writes:

>"Andrea B. Gansley-Ortiz" <ag1v+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>>>> so he could charge patients more money, and asked sedated patients 
>>>> to get up off the operating table to pay more money. 

>>> Wrongo boopsie.  That line was both funny _and_ dumb.  And we're not
>>> laughing at this alleged women's alleged misfortunes, either.

>> Question. What is funny about the above line?

> It's my turn everybody...

It's your turn to demonstrate your ignorance. 

> ``Ms. Gansley-Ortiz?  Ms. Gansley-Ortiz, can you hear me?''
>
> ``Doctor, she's under sedation.  She can't hear you.''

Abortions are sometimes performed using a local anesthetic. 
The area around the cervix is anesthetized, but the patient
is otherwise awake and generally alert.  I suppose that the 
anesthetic could affect a person's motor control. Now imagine
a woman sedated by a local anesthetic, staggering off the 
operating table to get more money to pay for an abortion. 
Are you still laughing Mr. Woodyatt? 

> Call me naive.  But I just don't think there's a shred of
> truth to this fantasy.

These allegations were made by the abortion clinic's employees.
They're currently being investigated by the state board of
medical examiners. 

>J H Woodyatt (a.k.a. Dr. Strychnine)


Doug Holtsinger

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Is it Christian values or chavinism?
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 21:49:59 GMT

<nyikos.718387487@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
><10467@vice.ICO.TEK.COM> bobb@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine) writes:
>><1992Sep30.072730.14377@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) :
>>>You know, I threw a couple of pieces of bacon in a hot frying pan once.
>>>They sizzled and popped, writhed and curled up, they even changed color.
>>>
>>>I never thought at any time that they were aware and feeling pain.  Do you?
>
>>  All the abortion rhetoric aside, do you really intend to imply
>>  that a human fetus doesn't have the capability to feel pain?  What
>>  gestational age are we talking about?
>
>In the case I quoted at length from, which Storga purposely deleted
>so he could make his tasteless joke, 

No, I didn't.  Are you running for the Rasmussin/Holtsinger/Chaney award
for the most dishonest t.a. post?  You've got a ways to go, but you're
making great strides.

>                                     the little victim of saline
>abortion was at five and a half months, already viable, "that is,
>potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with
>artificial aid,"

Who cares.  The vast majority of abortion occur at or about 8 weeks.

>>"Above all, a god needs compassion"    James T. Kirk
>
>Something we could use more of where the unborn are concerned.

"Without freedom of choice a society dies..."  James T. Kirk, (the Landruu
episode)

Tsk, tsk.  How many petards *can* you hoist at once?


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel, 
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), Diana (Sorceress), and
Beth and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it.
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Hey!   Steve Novak!
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:58:22 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1992Oct13.151521.15156@advtech.uswest.com> steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak) writes:
## = (Susan Garvin) writes:
### = (Eric Rescorla) writes:
#### = (Susan Garvin) writes:

####No, she doesn't.  Regardless of Eric Rescorla's claims that
####he owns the title, your bizarre versions of the cause of
####male homosexuality, fundamental economics, and life in
####general lead me to believe that you're the most twisted
####person on the net.
#
###Now, now, I didn't claim that I own the title. I'm not THAT arrogant.
###I certainly think that Drieux and Novak are some stiff competition.
#
#(Hitching up pants...)  Ya got that right, pilgrim.  
#
###But Suzanne. Nah. She's not half as twisted as me. Just ask Novak.
#
##Okay.
##
##Steve, who's the most twisted person on the net?  (I'd even
##be willing to limit it to the most twisted person on t.a.)
#
#I'll stick to t.a.:
#
#In terms of "bizarre" twisted, our resident ZAP comic.....drieux!  (Clap,
#clap, clap, clap, clap...)  R. Crumb has to go a ways to catch up with
#THIS guy.

Well, that settles that.

#Margolis, Rescorla, Nadja and Cochran, in no particular order, get
#Honorable Mention.

What about you?  

#In terms of mentally twisted, I'd say Forgach is a distant second
#to....Chaney! (Clap, clap, clap, clap....).  Suzanne's chances in this
#category were hurt because her strangeness comes in frenetic spasms,
#while Chaney is weird all the time.
#
#The little Propellor Piglet has mood, intelligence, and
#rationality swings beyond scientific measurement.  Take a bow,
#Denni...er, Steve! 

I'm sure he'll be proud.  Chaney/Hall's recent retreat from
t.a. made me temporarily forget him.  

You're right, of course.  Suzanne doesn't have the consistent
weirdness of Dennis.

#Honorable mention in this category goes to Holtsinger, Arnold,
#Schweikert - and other t.a. members of the Religious Coercion Squad.

Don't forget Petey Honey.  His demands for attention, accompanied
by his odd version of reality, certainly deseve mention.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: ss1@kepler.unh.edu (The Rink)
Subject: Oops. (was Re: ALL ARGUMENTS FOR PRO-CHOICE REFUTED HERE!!!!!)
Organization: Turkey Hall
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 05:12:35 GMT

>...my suspicions are that Mx. Rink posted copyrighted material claiming it
>to be his own.

AACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  I checked back at the original post.  You are right.
There is no credit given.

My deepest apologies to THE LIFE CHAIN PEOPLE.  They are the folks who
published the article:

It came from a pamphlet of theirs entitled "America Must Decide."  The
address given is as follows:

"The Life Chain People"
3209 Colusa Highway
Yuba City, CA  95993

If you want a copy of this publication, write to that address, but stick a
"PLEASE LET ME LIVE" line on top.

There, I think that's everything.

Again, I'm sorry for my oversight.  And thanks to the soul who unwittingly
called my attention to it.
-- 
Samuel Stoddard, the Weapons Master           JESUS IS LORD!!  HALLELUJAH!!!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in
   thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
*=----                      --=* Romans  10:9 *=--                      ----=*
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R SULAIMAN)
Subject: Re: Abstinence isn't effective or dirty
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:59:18 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.142712.12235@news.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>That's not fair. If you're practicing abstinence, then you don't
>have sex. If you get weak and have sex, then you weren't practicing
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>abstinence, and it's not a fair criticism of abstinence per se.

Gee, Eric, have you and Stephen King been collaborating on a new book
"Carry's Mother;  The Return"?

:-)

CRS
From: ecaxron@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Graham)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: INFO: pro-choice protestors deny freedom of speech
Date: 16 Oct 92 14:59:00 GMT
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <7704@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, 
     sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) writes...

>Graham won't be answering, of course.

It is true I shouldn't, since the probability of Garvin saying anything
important is small, and the probability of her saying anything supportable
smaller still.  But the "of course" drew me out.

>I do wonder where this article was printed.  I'd be surprised
>if it was in the FFL newsletter - they claim to subscribe to
>the "seamless web" philosophy, so they'd look pretty strange
>singing the praises of Bob Casey.

That's "seamless garment."  And Casey does subscribe to it too, for the
most part.

New York Times, followed by Plain Dealer.  While I am quite certain you
will once again not do your homework, you may still look it up.  And you
may be certain that those in authority of FFL are outraged, as I am.

>I agree with Ron, though.  Why do so many people think that
>the right to free speech guarantees that people listen to you?

And why is it that an audience that came specifically to hear Casey speak,
and in some cases *to argue with him*, was denied the opportunity?  Doesn't
the right to free speech exist for *their* benefit as well?  As Mr. Bense
pointed out, Casey could have spoken elsewhere - the same applies to those
who protest.  Anyone who doesn't want to listen can leave.  The others came
because they wanted to listen, and they were also denied Casey'r right to
speak.

Let's face it, Ms. Garvin, you believe in free speech only for those who
agree with you.  And you would hold one freedom for ransom to get another.
Ah well, I have better things to do than to picket mutual admiration societies.

RG

"We should all be working to reduce the number of abortions."  -  Bill Clinton
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:42291 talk.politics.misc:51383 alt.rush-limbaugh:7254
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: 13 Oct 92 14:57:07 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1992Oct13.052621.144287@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:

In  <9568@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COMLM:  mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:

LM:Wrong.  It's a pleasure craft.  You didn't invite anyone else on board.
LM:If you left it at the dock, there wouldn't be any problem, but it's your
LM:boat and you decided to take it out for a little fun.  A passenger was
LM:neither invited nor welcome.

If the woman agreed to have sex, than the invitation was made.

MW:Are you trying to say that the mother will die if the baby is not aborted.
MW:As I stated previously, I am not opposed to self defense.  And this case
MW:would fall within the self defense doctrine.

LM:I'm saying there's a chance.  You just don't know, but if you wait until
LM:you know for sure, it might be too late.

This is patently absurd.  The risks of pregnancy are well known and have
been for generations.  If two or three doctors agree that the woman is
at risk of dying than an abortion is called for.  Otherwise it is murder.

-- 
Mark
My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Attention! (Chaney and Humphrey)
Date: 8 Oct 92 19:39:50 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <nyikos.718564643@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
> In <1992Oct1.023954.15548@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
> >No, clueless twit.  But I do hope you see the light
> >and ask Chthulhu to enter you rlife and fill it with all
> >the things he can fill it with.
> 
> >And if ministers and such can run for president, then why
> >not minor deities?  Why vote for a mouthpiece when you can
> >have a mouth?
> 
> "I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream."  Judging from what Elizabeth 
> has told me about Chthulu in an earlier post, Dean seems to be
> wishing a similar fate on Chaney as the narrator in the just-mentioned
> Harlan Ellison classic short story is depicted as suffering.

Although I suppose Peter means this to be a lighthearted
posting, it is so typical of his style that I thought it
merited mention.  See, my remarks were fairly vague, Peter
uses it to speculate and assign specifics to my thoughts,
which he does not know.  One of the reasons I don't think
very much of what our resident expert in set theory has to
say is that so often his remarks are based on nothing but
the most irrelevant of his own imaginings.

Dean Kaflowitz
Newsgroups: talk.abortion