HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Who to listen to?
Summary: Petey Honey must not have much to do today.
Keywords: Petey Honey should get back to work!
Organization: The Sharpstown Army of Slack[tm]
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:22:56 GMT

In article <nyikos.721413390@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>In <1992Nov3.184833.8882@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>>(Stuff deleted)
>>>
>>>Do you *work* to be this clueless, Simon?  Point out to me the proof that
>>>I'm mad at you.  I doubt I'd be laughing at your drivel so much if I were
>>>mad at you.  If you were teling a joke, why did you go to such lengths to
>>>make it appear as anything *but* a joke?  You just concocted that story
>>>after a couple of people gave you a wigging, and rightfully so.  To top it
>>>off, you insinuate that I'm a Clinton supporter -- do you have any proof of
>>>that?  I know I have proof I'm not -- check the Presidential totals for
>>>Harris County Precinct 507 in the next couple of days and see how many votes
>>>Andre Marrou got from there.  Mine will be one of them.  Yep, I'm a real
>>>Clinton supporter, all right...or are you such a loyal Bush sheep that you
>>>can't conceive of any opposition other than a Democrat?  You're the one
>>>that's getting your knickers in a knot because people are rightly pointing
>>>out that you're acting like an idiot.  That's your problem to deal with, not
>>>mine...
>>>
>>>--PLH (don't blame me, I voted Libertarian)
>>>
>>Then I'd like to why, if you voted Libertarin, were you foaming at the
>							 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>mouth upon seeing my jokes about Clinton.  When you attack someone
> ^^^^^
>>for telling jokes about Clinton, it makes you look like a Clinton
>>supporter.
>
>Hmmm...Maybe Simon *was* half as obnoxious as PatricK in this response. :-)
>
>But only half. :-)
>
>And I'd like to compare the documentation of PatricK's alleged "foaming
>at the mouth" with that of Simon's alleged "getting [his] knickers in
>a knot" and "acting like an idiot".
>
>I wonder which was more strident, and which was more justified.

Why should *you* care? Your only interest in this is seeing just how much
ill will you can stir up -- but you're wasting your time, as I already am
convinced that you're just a professional malcontent, where this newsgroup
is concerned.  Did the thought ever occur to you that no one cares what you
think about me, or anyone else?  Evidently not.

--PLH (I'm beginning to believe Keith's right -- Petey's letting quite a few
people use his account...)


-- 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: About that Election thing....
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:50:25 GMT

kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman) writes:
] In article <1992Nov4.183356.15365@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
] ------------------------------------------------------------------------
] >OneTrueGod[tm] Is a wholely OWNED trade Mark of the OneTrueReligion[tm]
] >and your blatant effort to degenerate this into the Public Domain
] >is grounds of legal action.
] >
] >Should You, in the Future, continue this Behavior,
] >they you will Clearly FryInHell[tm]!!!!
] >
] >You have been warned, now cease and desist.
] 
] Father forgive me for i have sinned.  If i promise to vote only for
] OneTrueReligion[tm] Candidates in the next election, will You spare this
] empty vessel Life In Hell?  (or at least The Lawsuit?)


Given that the SpawnOfHell[tm] ToolsOfTheDevil[tm]
stole the Election for God's One Choosen True Candidate,
it is CLEAR that you voted for the WRONG Candidate.

You can Now procede, do not pass go, do not collect $200,
to FryInHell[tm]!!!!!

ciao
drieux

ps: this is not a Purge, it is an Auto de Fe


-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Hickory, Dickory, Dock - Three Mice Ran up a Clock
The Clock Struct one, and the Other Two Called for Air Support.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Subject: Re: Where is the FAQ file?
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:55:10 GMT

dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
->A moderated talk.abortion newsgroup, independent from this newsgroup, 
->would help to deal with some of these questions.  Care to volunteer 
->as a moderator?  

how rude of you dodie! ms. bartley volunteered the last
time you asked this question. i don't believe i ever
saw a reply from you on her kind offer. did you reply
dodie?
From: clifton9220@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: To the discussionaries!
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:00:43 -0600
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

Sorry if I have been a bit behind, but school calls, ya know.  I will try to
keep up now.

I thank God that he has been showing me some personal helps that I thought I'd
share to help others.

---Clinton is not the enemy. --- Just because he is the president that supports
many anti- christian ideals (gay rights, abortion on demand, etc.), he is only
a tool that God uses to wake up his children and to shake the fence that people
are trying to balance on.  We need to love our brothers and sisters (even
clinton) and hate the sin.  This also is true for hating abortion but loving
those who had them.  We need to tell the truth but not judge, that is up to
God.

---The only thing different not from before the election is that now we have a
new challange to face.  Besides, as we see from those resigning before clinton
comes in.  Many experienced people see him for what he was now --talk just
talk.  I don't want to side track, but seeing that he wanted to bomb and begin
a ground war with Serbia just a few months ago.  What will he do know?

I think that is good for now.  Peter -- stay in there and all you others for
the unborn.  Maybe people will wake up soon.

...Ken!
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE)
Subject: Re:One Clinic in each state and Dan King
Originator: jjprice@c00069-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:14:00 GMT


In article <1992Nov5.161646.15488@nas.nasa.gov>, dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King) writes:

|>In article <1992Nov3.184115.27538@ncsu.edu> jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes:
|> 
|>>Did you know there is only one clinic in South Dakota.This is my plan have
|>>only one clinic in each state so that it is a long drive and long waiting lines
|>>once they get there.
|> 
|>And I'm going to work on the opposite.  I will be happy when an organization
|>such as Planned Parenthood is in every community.  The wonderful thing is 
|>you can work on your goal and I can work on mine.  I just think it would
|>be just as wrong for me to attempt to use legislation to stop you as you
|>to use legislation to stop me.
|>
Obviously Dan you missed my point. I was being SARCASTIC !! (sorry for the caps)
Hey Mike (get me some water so I can Doen this Valium stuff) pause (gulp gulp
swallow) Ok I'm better. :)

someone was getting technical about my use of Convienient
|>>-Jeff Price
|> 
|>Dan King
|>
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:46589 alt.flame:14439
From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Victory is at hand for Pro-Choicers
Date: 5 Nov 92 07:19:17 GMT
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less

jxs52@po.CWRU.Edu (Jonathan Sheir) writes:
# 
# All you Anti-abortionists might as well move onto a new pet project like
# prayer in school or something.  The abortion issue is moot as a political
# issue.  Clinton has won and will sign the Freedom of Choice Bill.  It's
# finally over.  Thank God.

Thank you for your blathering content-free flame-bait.  Now.  Kindly
clean the rubber cement out of your cerebral cortex and post something
useful.  Or shut up and die.  You decide.

-----

The point I wish to make in this post is that gloating over Clinton's
electoral victory is neither wise, nor warranted.


-- 
+---------------------------+  ``But I think that until MAGOG can get
| J H Woodyatt              |  some solid Financing, and an exchangeable
| bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com |  currency, we can postpone the second
+---------------------------+  coming for a while.''
                                                  -- drieux, just drieux  
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: eeb1@quads.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: STEVE wants it both ways:
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:02:33 GMT

In article <BxEuo0.IDz@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu
(Don Beaver) writes:
>In article <1992Nov8.034942.7016@midway.uchicago.edu>
>eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:

>>Pro-choicers often call pro-lifers stupid.  But I haven't seen as much
>>of the "all of the other side is stupid; if they were smart they'd
>>agree with me" mentality among the pro-choicers as among the
>>pro-lifers.

>Really?

>Perhaps you're right: to be more accurate, the "pro-choice" political 
>movement commonly seems to favor the mentality, "all of the other side 
>is stupid AND RELIGIOUS; if they were smart they'd agree with 
>OUR MAJORITY OPINION."  Namely, the secular moral majority.

Hm.  The generic claim *I* see made most often by pro-choicers is not
that pro-lifers are religions but that pro-lifers are clueless.  (E.g.
if you knew how bad pregnancy was you'd agree with me.)

-- 
   - E. Elizabeth Bartley, a distant Shadow of

Llarana of Amber, possessor of ten points of Good Stuff
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:47814 news.admin.misc:329
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: Clearly NOT a FORGERY
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:02:34 GMT
	<1992Nov12.185424.18085@wolves.uucp>
	<1e02ccINN1ck@spatula.csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central

Ian> == Ian Dickinson <cudep@csv.warwick.ac.uk> 

 Ian> Perhaps we need an alternative way to register long/lat data for
 Ian> Brian to make use of?

'Tis a thought, 'tis a thought.  Someone suggested using TXT records in
the DNS, something like this:

eff.org.        IN      TXT     "LOC: 44 22 08 N / 71 05 17 W"
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,alt.child-support,alt.da
From: rfs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (richard.f.j.soyack)
Subject: Re: Nadja's Reprehensible Attitude Towards Men
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 14:07:43 GMT

>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?
>
>You just don't get it, do you.
>

(raising my hand) Uhm, I don't get it either.  Aren't they
both covered under freedom of speech?

confused in the back row,
Rich Soyack
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,alt.child-support
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Steeves Does Comedy
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:22:20 GMT

Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
] nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf) writes in alt.abortion.inequity...
] 
] NA> And Steven wonders why women are pro-choice. It's simple, guy. Men didn't
] NA> tend to pay child support when abortion was illegal, they don't want or tend
] NA> to pay it now, and if abortion is again illegal, they STILL won't pay it.
] 
] Why do you link abortion with child support?  Why not link child support with
] *frequency of visitation*?  Indeed, increasing number of studies are showing
] that frequency of visitation and likelyhood of payment, are proportionately
] related (and *highest*, in cases of joint custody)
] 


Thank Goodness you have never tried to link
abortion and child support issues....

Heavens but we would NOT like to say you are
a little slow at remembering what you say.

Now re_read what nadja is saying...

The Legality of Abortion has NOT done much to
change the problems with non_custodial parents
paying their court ordered child support payments.


Now, Back up, Regroup, and Ask yourself:

'will outlawing abortion change anything?'

ciao
drieux




-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Hickory, Dickory, Dock - Three Mice Ran up a Clock
The Clock Struct one, and the Other Two Called for Air Support.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:29:34 GMT

nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
->Linda Birmingham <ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> writes:
->|>>You can not force a
->|>>fetus weighing 6lbs and up, through the vaginal opening
->|>>without causing tearing and subsequent scaring.

->I asked you about a week ago whether you really meant this
->to apply to all women, without exceptions.  I haven't seen
->a reply.  In the absence of a reply, I take your words at
->face value.  

i believe, peter, that you responded to ms.
birmingham's answer. perhaps you simply didn't read
what you replied to. in any case, you should check
these things out before you post, lest your credibility
drop further.

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Look what the NetMail brought this morning...
Summary: Maybe, and maybe not. 
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:19:41 GMT

In article <Bx9GG7.58o@news.udel.edu> roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby) writes:
>In article <Bx5976.746@rice.edu> patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
>>Well, folks, it looks like Steve "Dennis Hall" Chaney is about to do a
>>3.5-forward gainer off the cliff.  I got *two* nice little threats from him
>>this morning when I checked in at the InterMix Chamber BBS, so here is the
>>complete collection of the three letters he's sent me over the weekend.
>
>Sorry to rain on your parade, Patrick, but I think I hold the record, here.
>When I emailed Steve about my discovery last April, I received *five* 
>nasty and threatening notes spaced about 5-20 minutes apart each (and from 
>two different accounts!!)  :-0
>
>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...

--PLH (if he doesn't, well, sometimes you're the windshield...)

-- 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: A RISK IS A RISK IS A RISK....
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:06:33 GMT

In article <-rh1!1m@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>
>>In article <ra_134b@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>>>dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>>>
>>>>This analogy fails because no person is intentionally killed during 
>>>>a medical procedure, other than abortion.
>>>
>>>This statement is not correct.
>
>>How about this one, then:
>
>>	No individuated human organism is deliberately and needlessly killed 
>>	during a medical procedure, other than post-viability abortion
>
>This is not correct.
>
>1.  You have not yet shown a case of a post-viability abortion where
>    a <blahblah> is "deliberately and needlessly killed".  

If it's viable, the killing is "needless". If the killing is a planned
part of the procedure, then it's "deliberate". Do you dispute either of
these equivalences?

>2.  Often, a <blahblah> may be "deliberately and needlessly killed"
>    to, say, obtain a kidney for transplant.  There is no reason why
>    a brain-dead accident victim could not be kept alive indefinitely
>    with mechanical assistance AFTER organs are removed.

If the victim is already brain-dead, then this is not an example of "killing". 
And I find it hard to believe that medical ethics would allow the CAUSATION of 
brain-death for purposes of obtaining organs for transplant. As for the 
general case of withholding life-giving support to non-brain-dead patients, 
even those in a persistent vegetative state, who can only receive nutrition 
via a feeding tube inserted into their stomach, I wouldn't call such deaths
"needless", since the economic costs for supporting such a negligible quality
of life INDEFINITELY give rise to a a compelling "need" argument.

>>??? You have yet to answer THAT one, Cathi, 
>
>Because it hasn't been _asked_, Darcy.  Even _you_ didn't ask a question
>there, just made an assertion and then began screaming that I hadn't,
>somehow, answered it before you posted it.
>
>But just to set your mind at ease, Darcy: the output voltage of a
>difference amplifier.
>
>There.  There's an answer to a question that no one on the net has,
>to my knowledge, asked yet.

Hmmmm... It may be that I asked the question, but my post never made it to
you because I may have posted it from cfctech.cfc.com, and there seems to be
some sort of black hole eating my posts from there. So, while my statement may 
be technically true, I retract the implication that you have avoided my 
question. It's equally, if not more likely, that you never saw it in the first
place.

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame,alt.fan.kevin-darcy
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Subject: *what can one do with a stale source?*
Followup-To: alt.fan.kevin-darcy
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:50:12 GMT

kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
->No, stale Darcy QUOTES are often the main ingredient (or, as Kellmeyer would
->probably put it - "raw material") of Keeganblather. But they don't actually 
->get blatherized (TM) until Keegan gets his filthy mitts on them.

at least you're willing to admit what a horrid and
pedantic writer you are. you do have a point:
reading something you write the second time is
definately worse than reading it the first time.


Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.motss
From: kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman)
Subject: Re: too controversial for NBC
Organization: Boulder CO
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:54:12 GMT

> = scotts@CS.CMU.EDU (Scott Safier) writes:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>CNN News reported today that NBC has banned the producer's of "A
>Different World" from developing stories on the topics of abortion and
>homophobia.  [...]
>My question is, what criterion makes a topic unacceptable?  That the
>issue is multifaceted?  That the differing sides are passionate with
>their arguments?  That the religious right is involved?

If an interest group gets upset that opinions and/or information other than 
their own are given air time, and this interest group is large enough, 
organized enough, and upset enough to disturb the cash flow, then it 
would be unacceptable, from a business point of view, to give air time 
to this information/opinion.  TV is about making money -- it's not about
information, exploring ideas, debate, or public service.

-Brian
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:47685 alt.abortion.inequity:5037 soc.men:19095 alt.child-support:3645
From: nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,alt.child-support,alt.da
Subject: Re: Nadja's Reprehensible Attitude Towards Men
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:23:13 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <prakuser.1@KUB.NL> prakuser@KUB.NL (Algemene practicum User) writes:
>In article <1992Nov7.003620.9584@tessi.com> allen@tessi.com (Allen Warren) writes:
>
>>to have a family at that time in my life.  I know that the Mug which has
>>the "If men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament" saying is somewhat
>>of a joke, there is, in my view, lots of truth in that.  I'm really not all
>>so sure all men would keep their children, 'course since I don't have any
>>research or numbers, I can't back up this statement, but I do have some good
>>references for my making this statement.

Once again, the quote did not come from a 'Mug.' It came from an Emma
Goldman speech. Try the library, guys.
 

-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dsh@odin.uucp (Doug Holtsinger)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: THANK GOD HE'S SLICK!
Date: 8 Nov 92 02:39:33 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <1ddoo4INN1uh@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> 
bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:

> Because Americans
> generally believe that this issue MUST be decided by the woman, a
> man has been elected that will insure that my family is safe from
> you bastards.  

Polls show that the vast majority of women support restrictions
on abortion.  Are they all "bastards", Kaufman?  
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:47985 news.admin.misc:333
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,news.admin.misc
Subject: Purpose of lat/longs
Date: 15 Nov 92 06:25:58 GMT
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper

cudep@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson) writes:
] Yes and it's a pity...
] 
] That's another reason why warwick.uucp is still in the maps, even though we
] haven't run UUCP for many a year.  It makes our long/lat available.
] 
] Perhaps we need an alternative way to register long/lat data for Brian
] to make use of?
] 
] The other reason (as previously mentioned) is so it's unlikely that
] anyone else will start using that name, causing problems with loop
] detection in the Path: header.


1. so there is a good reason to get sites into the UCCP map 
project, and keep it up to date? 

2. I had thought the purpose of the lat/long in the map
entries was for 'targetting purposes' so that the people
at the Bigger Sites would Know where to send the ICBM
when those pipsqueek uucp sites started acting up....


ciao
drieux


-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Hi Diddle, Diddle, the Cat and the Fiddle,
The Cow Blew Up on the Launching Pad
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.women,soc.men