HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Genocide?
From: 9051467f@levels.unisa.edu.au (The Eidolon)
Date: 30 Oct 92 11:43:28 +0930
Organization: That damn kid is still here!

Another from aus.religion, and next I shall stick a VERY interesting
one (which started this thing) called 'Post Natal Abortion'.

In article <73.2ad9b03e@whyalla.unisa.edu.au>, 9051467f@whyalla.unisa.edu.au (Wild Child) writes:
> In article <1992Oct7.010135.4505@funlwb.enet.dec.com>, ollis@redbck.stl.dec.com (Stephen Ollis) writes:
> 
>> 	What is the problem with you Christian dudes? It's fairly clear that
>>>abortion is O.K. The child doesn't feel anything and is not aware of his
>>>impending demise (and therefore doesn't suffer phsycologically). In fact the
>>>same argument can be applied to justify "post-natal abortion", since a child
>>>of
>>>say less than 1 year of age can not understand that he is about to die
>>>(provided the surgeon acts tactfully), and can be put to death in a painless
>>>way.
> 
>> So, where do you draw the line Kevin? Murder has been legalised for the unborn,
> ..
>> stop the age limit being raised? `Oh Billy, my 5 year old, is limiting the 
>> lifestyle I lead. Let's have him aborted...' It's just a small mental leap from
>> this viewpoint to euthanasia... 'Oh I don't want to have look after my sick 60
>> year old father.. let's have him put to sleep'...
>> 
>> Where does it end? When will we learn? When will we change? When will
>> we turn? 
> 
> Hey! Why not take this Reductio Ad Absurdum thing the whole hog! A foetus may
> become a human, so killing it is homicide. A woman can give birth to children,
> so lets charge someone who kills a woman with multiple counts of murder, since
> she may bring other humans! Heck yeah! Those kids could have kids, and those
> kids could have lotsa more kids... Hell, charge her killer with GENOCIDE!
> 
> Waitwaitwait..a man could father many children...charge someone who kills
> a man with genocide too! Whoa.. what about wasted sperm?? Any one of them
> may become a human! Heck YES!! charge any man who has sex with genocide!!
> There's more! Everytime a woman has a period, it flushes out an egg with
> it - that egg may have become a human .. . .charge her with genocide!!
> 
> John McVey, Whyalla campus, Uni S.Australia
> Enic Eng Student & Tekkie G1
> Those who believe in an afterlife will not be dissapointed.
-- 
John J McVey, Whyalla, Uni S. Australia    9051467f@levels.unisa.edu.au
Electronic Engineering student & Terror Tekkie!
Any email can be posted unless I state explicitly otherwise.
+-----------------------------------------------------+    ________
|  Obligatory disclaimer: UniSA hates my opinions...  |  \/Darwin o\
+-----------------------------------------------------+  /\________/
An idea is not responsible for the people who believe in it. Marquis
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:46957 alt.abortion.inequity:4913 soc.men:18794 alt.child-support:3604
From: cj@eno.esd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,alt.child-support,alt.da
Subject: Re: Nadja's Reprehensible Attitude Towards Men
Date: 7 Nov 92 02:32:44 GMT
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com
Organization: SGI TechPubs


In article <qaguTB1w165w@dogear.spk.wa.us>, bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us writes:
|cj@eno.esd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio) writes:
||You equate a mug with political slogans on it with a pin-up
||calendar?  You think that if nude photographs consitute sexual
||harassment, so also must the political content of a mug?

|The point to which makes pin-ups a negative is their degradation of
|the female. A magazine which outrightly describes demeaning of a
|gender is guilty of the self-same negativity.

I think you misread me-- I don't disagree that a pin-up calendar
is probably inappropriate to the workplace.  I disagree that the
mug he described was "sexual harassment".  Steeves seemed to me
to utterly misunderstand sexual harassment in the workplace, to
the point of trivializing it.

---
cj@eno.esd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"All sorts of people who don't know me and my many fine personal qualities 
say absolutely dreadful things about me.  What can you do?  Have them 
killed, of course, but that's *so* expensive." --Jon Carroll
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mills@uga.edu (Kathi Mills)
Subject: DODie Refuses to Put His Money Where His Mouth Is
Organization: University of Georgia Economics Department
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 13:38:27 GMT

> DODie
>> rocker

>> surely you've seen one of the many posts I've made
>> about the fact that when _I_ faced a problem pregnancy, _all_ the
>> support I received was from pro-choicers.  The pro-"life"rs simply
>> turned their backs and walked away.

>I seem to recall seeing a post from a pro-lifer who said that
>she could provide the name and telephone numbers of people in
>your area would be glad to help you with your problem pregnancy. 

*I* seem to recall posting a message a couple of months ago in which I
told you all I was pregnant, and if I did not receive monetary assistance
I was going to have to abort the child.  Despite all of you self-righteous
pro-forcers here who claim the fetus is priceless, not one sorry jerk
among you had the guts to lay down one thin dime, or even write and tell
me where I could get assistance.  Sure, y'all care about the woman.  Right.

>> is that old memory going?  

>I don't know, is yours?

I don't know about your memory, but I'd say your integrity and compassion 
are loooooong gone.

>> And I hear there's a
>> shortage of SIMMs, too.......drag.

>I prefer surface mount, thanks.  

You'd prefer any mount you could get, DOD (or is that DUD?)

-- 
Ferrari (mills@rolf.stat.uga.edu)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Subject: Re: misogyny
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 03:03:16 GMT
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences

In <32349@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU> smezias@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias) writes:

>>>BTW I would not say killing a rapist is violating the rapists rights.  The
>>>rapist abrogated those rights in the act of rape. 
>>
>>Well, *there's* another interesting, non-viable interpretation of the law!
>>A rapist has abrogated his right to live by the act of rape, huh?

>The law is whatever Petie wants it to be or thinks it should be.

I believe the case posed was of someone who killed the rapist while
the rapist was attempting to do the deed, rather than someone who
killed the rapist afterwards in revenge.  If I'm right, it seems to me
the killing would be justified as self-defense.
-- 
Jim Kalb 		"Not drunk is he who from the floor
(jk@panix.com)		 can rise alone and still drink more.
			 But drunk is he who prostrate lies
			 Without the power to drink or rise." (Clough)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby)
Subject: Re: Look what the NetMail brought this morning...
Organization: University of Delaware
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:50:48 GMT

In article <Bx9nGu.6wM@rice.edu> patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
>In article <Bx9GG7.58o@news.udel.edu> roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby) writes:

>>Good Luck, but don't expect much.  It doesn't seem to be a net.sin to 
>>be nasty, deceptive,  or stupid.

>That could be the case, but the reply I got from Dick Smith was a forwarding
>of the response *he* got from Dr. Anne-Louise Radimsky, who apparently is
>sponsoring Steve's account at nextnet.csus.edu.  From her reply, it appears
>that this is far from the first time she's had to deal with Steve's actions,
>and she's getting tired of it -- she said if he was to continue his actions,
>she'd withdraw the sponsorship of the account.  In any case, I think even
>Li'l Stevie Witless will get the message, this time...

I stand corrected!!

Personally, I found it reprehensible and incomprehensible that an Afro-
American would include a graphic portrait of a fictitious Klansmen in their 
own .sig file to make a point.  I know of no self-respecting Jew who would 
include a graphic portrait of a swastika in their own .sig file to make a 
point.  Perhaps the key is "self-respecting"...

It's been a week since Chaney has posted here.  His last words were: 
"Who's Dennis?".  How ironic.


-- 
Scott W. Roby           *This sentence no verb.*      "No Matter where you go..
Phys.& Astr.Dept.    ///// / /  /  *|*  \  \ \ \\\\\      there you are!"
Univ.of Delaware    ((((( ( (  (  * + *  )  ) ) )))))   -> Buckaroo Banzai
roby@brahms.udel.edu \\\\\ \ \  \  *|*  /  / / /////   *Standard Disclaimer*
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Subject: Re: Pro-Choice Criteria for Personhood
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 20:02:57 GMT

dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
->I'm not defending killing and leaving persons
->to die; that's the job of the pro-choicers. 

     I am pro-choice.
     <1992Oct31.185907.14514@ncsu.edu>


Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: Chuck.Lavazzi@launchpad.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi)
Subject: Re: Was Clinton's victory America's message to the Anti-Choice?
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:48:20 GMT

In article <rawdon.721351858@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>Note the Followup-To: line.
>
>In <92311.022651KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>Clinton will sign the Freedom of Choice Act (at least, he said he would),
>>and will use R v. W  as a litmus for Supreme Court candidates (at least,
>>he said he would).
>
>>Don't know how many justices he'll get to appoint in his 4 years, though...
>
>I think most expect him to appoint a replacement for Harry Blackmun.
>
>Many think that Byron White and (if memory serves) John Paul Stevens will
>also resign in the next four years.
>
	Not unlikely, although replacing them will simply retain the current
balance on the court, which is still mostly Statist, at least WRT individual
rights. 
>Chief Justice William Rehnquist (whose wife recently died and who I think has
>been having back problems) and Sandra Day O'Connor (for reasons unknown to
>me) have also been mentioned as having outside chances of retiring.
>
	Well, Rehnquist <per a report on NPR this morning) has been making
rumblings about retiring for some time now; seems he's not keen on actually
staying on the Court for life.  And O'Connor just survived breast cancer,
which might have her thinking about stepping down, although there's no real
indication that's being strongly considered.  In any case, both of them
(especially Rhenquist) are unlikely to retire while there's a non-conservative
in the White House.
	Clinton *will* have a shot at appointing around 100 federal judges,
though, which will help to compensate for the Reagan/Bush campaign to stack
the federal judiciary with judges unsympathetic to individual rights, on the
whole.  It could be a lot worse.

	
>My reading of this is that Clinton will probably appoint 2 justices, and
>maybe 3 or 4.
>
>Appointing 5 would be a godsend.
>
	And highly unlikely.
>-- 
>Michael Rawdon				 rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu
>University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI
>

Chuck


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Consensus stuff - the real reasoning
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:42:24 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon



I must have missed the original reply.  Bruce Varney is lecturing
people on netiquette?  Did I miss the post where he apologized to
Jennifer Brindle, too, or has he forgotten about his earlier
behavior?

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: ATUI: In Retrospect (Take 2)
From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
Date: 11 Nov 92 23:16:06 CST
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

In article <1992Nov10.013823.2280@netcom.com>, ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes ...
>
> 1) Too much tendency to take a position then find supporting facts.

This was precisely the case!  I used Eileen MacDonald's book simply to
find things to pick apart.  I didn't read the book, I scanned it and
found parts I could trash.  A few months later, I actually read the book,
and it's really quite a clear minded clever piece which I often found
myself in agreement with.  I still don't like the motive of the book
though, since she wrote it just to come to terms with how she should
be thinking since she's a feminist.  Struck me that she was trying to
find ways to fit into her stereotype rather than think for herself.

> 2) Reveals that peculiar bigotry many conservatives are prone to when
> discussing anything with a "liberal" label. 

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this...

> 3) What's the point of
> writing such a paper if you're not even going to attempt a fair
> treatment?  Sounds like a typically right-wing sort of stunt.  :-)

Uh huh!  Why write a position paper if you don't give your position
an edge?  When I wrote the paper it was my sole intention to make my
position look good...  Borderline propoganda, I suppose, but it was
all based on fact and my own thoughts and ideals.
 
>>If you think the whole thing is a waste of time and bandwidth, too
>>bad for you (and I have lots of time now that I'm unemployed and 
>>awaiting a visa to get to Texas!).
> 
> Texas?!?  Ack, ptui.

Hey, wouldn't you go to Texas once or twice if your fiancee lived there?
Texas ain't so bad.  I've come to understand that there are times that
the term "y'all" is actually appropriate.

Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Saving money instead of saving lives
Date: 7 Nov 92 21:29:06 GMT
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <1992Nov7.052403.19487@rotag.mi.org> 
kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:

>dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>> One doctor was accused of refusing to resucitate an elderly man
>> who had suffered a serious heart attack.  This elderly man
>> was alert and awake, but I was thinking, suppose that this
>> man had been unconscious.  If he had died from the heart attack, 
>> he wouldn't have known that a doctor had ordered that he not be 
>> rescuitated.  He wouldn't have known that he had died, or that 
>> he had suffered.  

> The elderly man's family and friends would suffer from the man's death.

Would we feel differently if the elderly man didn't have any familiy
or friends?

> The elderly man quite possibly still has a lot to contribute to society.

Would we feel differently if he couldn't contribute anything to
society? 

> The doctor has taken a solemn oath to help the sick. 

And doctors take a hippocratic oath not to harm the living.  

> The doctor almost certainly has more than enough income to live 
> comfortably even if he saves the elderly man -- so the only motivation 
> would seem to be unbridled avarice and/or materialism, which is despicable 
> in and of itself.

Would we feel differently if this doctor didn't have enough
income to live comfortably? 

>Kevin


Doug Holtsinger
From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The Mendacity of Gordon Storga
Date: 10 Nov 1992 08:59:56 -0800
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <nyikos.721348814@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>(larry margolis)
>>The Alan Guttmacher Institute does much polling and happens to have
>>lots of statistics available.

>It's a primary source, all right, but it is about as unbiased as a 
>cigarette company doing much polling and gathering statistics on the
>effects of smoking on health.

Ah.

Do you contend that the Alan Guttmacher Institute performs abortions for
profit?

Can you explain your comment above?

Adrienne Regard

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: Cochran's Restriction Considered Harmless (?)
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on... 
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 16:23:13 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.033741.7818@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.165951.3282@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov10.053040.18770@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>>>[This is Kibbles&Bits again...]
>
>>>>Since you called it a >>LEGAL<< restriction, I just assumed you wanted it
>                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>embodied in law. Was I mistaken?
>>>
>>>Yes.  Maybe you should stop assuming things?
>>
>>Please identify my mistake clearly and skillfully, O Great Master of 
>>Doubletalk, I beseech thee, so that I may achieve enlightenment. Please impart 
>>to my so-less-learned mind how "legal restriction" fails to translate into 
>>"restrictive legislation", so that I may come to know the error of my 
>>wicked ways.
>
>See the part I underlined right there?  The part that says, "I just assumed"?
>That's where your mistake is.

But, O Thee of the SpeakingOutOfManyOrifices, my mind is still vexed and
troubled over the difference between "legal restriction" and "restrictive
legislation". Please cast your Pearl of Wisdom and end my torment over this
quandry.

								- Kevin
From: katy@clipper.ingr.com (Katy Yanda)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Telling Tales Out of School
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:22:45 GMT
Organization: Intergraph Advanced Processor Division - Palo Alto, CA

In article <1992Nov4.185811.15530@wetware.com>, drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
> ] <1992Nov2.034128.7999@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) :
> ]
> ] >At long last, Gordon Abandons his Sexist AntiMysoginist Stance
> ] >and accepts that he can have MALE ex-girlfriends!!!!!
> ] 
> ] And you better behave too.
> ] 
> ] For those of you who have never met Drieux I've nesws for you:
> ] He talks just the way he writes.  Incredible.
>  
> 
> Ok Buddy, That's IT!
> 
> Two Can Play At this Game.....
> 
> Eric Rescola ACTS and TALKS like a HyperThyroidEastCoastOverStressedLoonie!
> 
> Larry Margolis - Contrary to His Postings, Is NOT a Mature Responsible
> 		Adult with a Well Reasoned Well Balanced Personality,
> 		And a Clear Victim of his 
> 		EastCoastWimpLiberalZionistComedyCabalBackGround
> 		Not To Mention, does the Rapier Replies LIVE!
> 
> Gordon Storga	- Deserves to be Writing OS/2 apps, as penance for
> 		  his good looks and smarmyways, and the fact that
> 		  He is Married to a CutesyTootsyArtsyFartsy Type.
> 
> Eric Marsh	- Missed His Calling to be a Fundamentalist Preacher.
>  
> ] Gordon
> ] Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel, 
> ] Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), Diana (Sorceress), Beth 
> ] "CJ", and Nadja, and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it.
> ] [space reserved for alternate ex-girlfriends Eric R. and Drieux]
> 
> 
> 
> So THERE BUD!
> 
> ciao
> drieux
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Modern Day Problems:
> 
> just because you may NOT have root on your machine
> does not mean I do NOT have root on my machine!!!!

Uh, I think I agree with Gordon on this one:

drieux DOES talk the way he writes.....



Katy


-- 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.men,soc.women,alt.abortion.inequity,alt.feminism
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Subject: Re: compromise (was Re: Back Again To Father Notification...
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:04:17 GMT

dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

->Roe v. Wade is essentially unrestricted abortion-on-demand throughout
->the term of pregnancy.

this statement is not correct.
[asserted without supporting evidence since such
evidence has been posted dozens of times in response to
holtsinger's comments to the contrary]
From: smezias@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Petie Plays Attributions
Keywords: post, attributions
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:50:27 GMT
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

In article <nyikos.721519779@milo.math.scarolina.edu>
nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes: 

>Although I have made it very clear in several posts that I know very well
>how attributions work, some people in this newsgroup have still seen fit
>to instruct me.  Here is a response I made to Scott Roby which defaulted
>to the local net, in which I try to set him straight on this.

Deletia of a lot of whining about how well Petie does understand
attributions (though, to his credit, he did not repost his SAT
scores).

Unfortunately for Petie, the reason people think he does not
understand attributions is because he frequantly misattributes quotes.
Worse still, he responds in a nasty manner to his own misattributions.
Thus, when Brian McBean used the term buttheaded to describe some
positions, Petie misattributed it to me, and started characterizing my
positions as buttheaded.  Now isn't that buttheaded?

More to the point, I think Petie needs to work on getting his
attributions straight.  When he gets the substance of his attributions
right, people will no longer try to instruct him in the proper form.

SJM
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: Re: The answer!!!
Followup-To: alt.squirrel-cage.christians.halleluja.halleluja.halleluja
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 17:33:25 GMT


Actually, to steal a joke from Sen. Lloyd Bentsen...

	If Jesus is the answer, it must be a very peculiar question.


-- 
+---------------------------+  ``Democracy is the theory that the common 
| J H Woodyatt              |  people know what they want, and deserve to
| bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com |  get it good and hard.''
+---------------------------+                              -- H L Mencken

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King)
Subject: Re: FACTS wanted
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 18:27:14 GMT


In article <yvk1bn-@rpi.edu> cookc@marcus.its.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
 
>_A Question of Choice_, Sarah Weddington, Grosset/Putnam, 1992.

>                    -rocker

>Sarah, now THERE's a Supreme Court Justice....   ;-)
>(yes, I'm kidding, she has no experience as a judge...)
 
If I remember correctly, I don't think a Supreme Court judge
necessarily has to have experience as a judge.  I thought
one of the current Supremes or one in the not to distant 
past had no experience.  I'm not even sure they must have
a law background.
 
I don't think Laurence Tribe has ever been a judge, but his 
name has come up fairly often as a contender for Clinton's
replacement of Blackmun.
 
Dan King
Newsgroups: talk.abortion