HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: THIRD TRIMESTER ABORTIONS
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 19:44:20 GMT

<usglkrx.714954308@gsusgi1.gsu.edu> usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman) said:
>forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>>From article by usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman):
>>> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>>> 
>>>>Obviously Ron, you've just refuted yourself, since if the baby is going
>>>>to die anyway due to some defect, there is no reason whatsoever to put it
>>>>to death!
>>> 
>>> Suzanne, let me get this straight.  If you knew someone who was pregnant,
>>> and who had just been told by their doctor that the child was going
>>> to be born with a defect that will cause the child to die within a few
>>> years, you would counsel that woman to have the child?
>>> 
>>> I just want to be certain I understand what you are saying.
>
>>Not only that, but if she didn't think she could deal with raising the
>>child for that short of a time, I would offer to adopt the child myself.

Is this yet another empty plea for unwanted children?  How many people out
there believe that Suzanne will attack the next person who offers to put
her in touch with such a child, ignoring the child's plight altogether?


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel,
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), and Diana (Sorceress), 
and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it all.
-- 
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
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Subject: Re: "only 3 doctors...perform third trimester abortions"
Keywords: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:04:34 GMT

In article <1992Sep04.123617.25948@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
#In  <Bu14nJ.LK.2@cs.cmu.edu>  garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
## In article <1992Sep02.233517.35825@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes
##
## [massive deletions]
##
## #Larry Margolis, wondering why Dishonest Doug relies on the description
## #of a "pro-abort" regarding the organization, but then questions the
## #veracity of the organization's facts on the grounds that it's a
## #"pro-abortion organization".
##
## DOD never answered this, did he?
##
## I wonder why.
#
#Probably for the same reason that he never answered as to whether you
#satisfactorily demonstrated a crucial difference between a late-term
#fetus and a neo-nate.  And he never answered why he was claiming that
#"only 3 doctors perform third-trimester abortions" was unsupported, in
#the very same post in which he was saying he didn't like the source of
#that support.  And he never answered why he has such problems with the
#beliefs of Judaism.

He also never answered why he continues to claim that Roe
guarantees abortion "on demand throughout the entire nine months
of pregnancy"  even though the decision specifically says
otherwise.

Well, DOD, can you answer any of these questions?  

Susan

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Subject: Re: Abortion techniques and fetal survival
Summary: why DOD never cites Webster
Keywords: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 05:14:35 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.192831.23784@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
#In article <1992Sep01.184825.34350@watson.ibm.com> 
#margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:

[text deleted]

## The legislation struck down in Colautti v. Franklin was a Pennsylvania
## law; since then Pennsylvania has passed new abortion restrictions.  These
## were challenged before the Supreme Court.  Some parts were struck down,
## but the requirement that two doctors be present, one just for the fetus,
## and similar provisions also relating to fetal survival in third-trimester
## abortions were *not* struck down.
#
#So what?  Colautti v. Franklin has not been overturned in any
#Supreme Court decision.  

"There is no doubt that our holding today will allow some 
govermental regulation of abortion that would have been
prohibited under the language of cases such as Colautti v.
Franklin 439 U.S. 379, 99 S.Ct. 675, 58 L.Ed.2d 596 (1979)
and Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Inc. 
supra."

from Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (109 S.Ct. 3040
(1989), p. 3058.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: "And maybe flog the little b*tch to teach her a lesson"
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:23:28 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.014234.22338@samba.oit.unc.edu>
Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi) writes:

>	What I *really* want to know is:  why does she feel that someone who
>contracts for the murder of a child shouldn't be punished?
>	Sounds like a lack of family values to me!  >:-)>

In the past she's said that the woman can fool herself into thinking a
z/e/f isn't a child; an abortionist of necessity has enough
information about embryology to know better.

Personally, I find that line of reasoning rather insulting.

And she's always ignored my repeated comments that I got *more*
comfortable about abortion when I studied embryology, not less
(because I found out how long it took the brain to develop).

-- 
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.

Cthulhu for President -- when you're tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Observations
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 04:51:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.220116.131@bmw.mayo.edu> bmc@mayo.edu (Bruce Cameron) writes:
><1992Sep3.173838.8528@advtech.uswest.com>, stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
>|> In article <1992Sep2.024720.23681@midway.uchicago.edu> eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>|> >In article <1992Sep1.172929.12103@advtech.uswest.com>
>|> >stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
>|> >
>|> >>I would be much happier with a constitutional amendment that requires
>|> >>the consent of the father before abortion is allowed.
>|> >
>|> >You do realize, of course, that this gives my lover (possibly my
>|> >rapist) control over my body equal to mine?
>|> 
>|> Wrong.  It gives the father equal control over your reproductive system
>|> only in so far as to whether or not you are allowed to abort the child,
>|> and of course, that control can only be exercised if you are pregnant.
>|> 
>
>So, if the father is to have equal control over the mother's
>reproductive system should the woman be pregnant and considering
>termination of said pregnancy then at what point and under
>what circumstances does the mother have equal control over the
>father's reproductive system (you do believe in equal rights
>don't you)?

This is the current system: if a father uses his reproductive system
to create other children while the mother is pregnant, he is very likely 
to be punished by losing his children.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Subject: Re: Third party request
Keywords: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 05:20:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep02.023428.15936@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
#In  <Btx4r8.D50.2@cs.cmu.edu>  garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
## Holtsinger claims that a law currently being enforced in
## Pennsylvania cannot be enforced.  Can someone explain his
## reasoning to me, please?
#
#He apparently believes that a lie repeated sufficiently often acquires a
#ring of truth.


You're probably right.  

I just hope that someone has archived all of the posts which refute
his lies about various court cases.  He'll probably try all of
them again now that a new semester has started and he has a
fresh audience.  

Susan


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Subject: Re: Pro-Choice Challenge (WAS THIRD TRIMESTER ABORTIONS)
Date: 2 Sep 92 17:18:07 CDT

In article <a3kn0p-.ray@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>kevin@cfctech.cfc.com (Kevin Darcy) writes ...
>>In article <BtKotw.HGH.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
>>>Supporters of legal abortion usually take this opportunity
>>>to point out the fact that a third trimester fetus differs
>>>from an infant in a very obvious way, leaving aside developmental
>>>differences.  A third trimester fetus is living inside a
>>>woman and is affecting her health.
>>
>>If I swallow your pearls, are they mine, Susie? The "inside the woman" 
>>argument is simplistic and ill-formed. Please reformulate.
>
>Your conclusions are simplistic and ill-formed.  While the pearls might
>not be yours, she has no right whatever to go after them.  Even though
>they are her pearls, you still have the right to control your body and
>prevent her from cutting you open to get at them.
>
You really think she'd still want 'em?

muriel
standard disclaimer
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Only God Can Help Us!
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 19:34:44 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <24533@oasys.dt.navy.mil>  bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense) writes:
> In talk.abortion, nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
> >In <24410@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense) writes:
>
> >>Nyikos proves again that he is completely clueless. Peter (very appropiate)
> >>there are over 200,000 women per year that die in Brazil,
>
> >Why do you feel the need to shift over to Brazil?
>
> Perhaps because it is a country that presently has made abortions illegal.
> It is an apt example of what could happen in this country if the same
> is done here.

I thought it was because there was a large number of women dying there
from illegal abortions.  Did you mean to say that over 200,000 women
die, or over 200,000 women die from illegal abortions?

> Well, I was hoping I had them archived. Anybody archive that post with
> the Brazilian abortion figures?

I'll see if I can dig them up.

> >200,000 women (and men too)
> > who die each year in Brazil, by the way.  They haven't
> >yet found the cure for "We've all got to go some time."
>
> I'm sure that more than 200,000 die each year two. How many I couldn't
> tell you at the present, as I don't have an almanac  handy.

Over a million people die annually in Brazil.  The population of Brazil
is a hair over 50% women.  (Source:  World Population Growth and Aging,
Keyfitz / Flieger)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:34734 talk.bizarre:28721
From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: been In Thearpy Long?????
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:36:59 GMT
Organization: California State University Sacramento

In article <Bu0AtI.2Io@phage.cshl.org> boutell@cshl.org (Tom Boutell) writes:
>In article <1992Sep3.103852.7379@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>>
>>PPPS: and since you asked: Yes my Dick Is Bigger....
>>
>
>ImproperAllegations OfSanityOr In SanityIs NotaProperBasis
>ForADickSize War.

Didn't you know? Drieux is a computer virus looking for methods of
reproduction. 

If you don't killfile it immediately, it will spread onto your hard
drive, and it will ... uh-oh... I can't stop the Drieux Virus... 

WordsSlammedTogether WithoutAnyCommonSenseWhatsoever ExceptToThe
JerryBrownSpaceCadets WhoCallDrieuxTheirFriend.
 
>-T

>Not drieux
>But an inedible simulation

Rats. And I could have _sworn_ I put a signal scrambler on as a
defense against the Drieux Virus. :)

>-- 
>Tom Boutell, boutell@cshl.org
>
>Clausthaler is the best non - alcoholic beer in the known universe.


=============================================================================
>##       "My logic is based on ... a religious perspective which says
>##  that personhood begins at birth (actually a month after birth if
>##  we want to be precise)..."
>##    -- Gloria Feldt,
>##       chief executive, Planned Parenthood of Central and Northern Arizona

>##   "I see nothing extreme or reprehensible about this statement."
>##     -- garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) <BtnDAw.Iwo.2@cs.cmu.edu>
=============================================================================
|Pro-Contraception   Pro-Freedom of Religion, Speech & Sexual Orientation   |
|Pro-Privacy    Pro-Humanism   Pro-Freedom of Choice 	Registered Democrat | 
|                                                                           |
|			Card-carrying member, NRLC                          |
|           Dedicated to achieving civil rights for the unborn              |
=============================================================================
BBBBBB     OOOOOOOO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    Founder: Steve Chaney 
B    B     O      O   S         S          <chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu> 
BBBBBBBB   O     OO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    
BB     B   O     OO        SS        SS    Borg Operating 
BBBBBBBB O OOOOOOOO O SSSSSSS O SSSSSSS O  Space Systems, Revision 2.0 

	       The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS. 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Possible Cause of the Problem...
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:58:26 GMT

nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
] In <17s3nmINN73o@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
] 
] >There are lots of folks who decide not to repeat some of the dumb things
] >Suzanne says.  Maybe you have more sense than we had hitherto dreamed of.
] 
] Don't be so hard on Suzanne. [This refers not so much to what you've just 
] said as some of the things I've heard before.] 
] Her heart is in the right place about
] 99% of the time.  I wish I could say the same for you.

Well to be frightfully honest,
Most Humans have their hearts 
just to the left of their centerline...
about three fingers up from the xyphoid...

Try to remember this if you try to perform CPR on a Human.


ciao
drieux

ps: does this mean we can now have a 'battle of the Old Broads'?????


-- 
If I have Told You Once, I've Told You a Thousand Times:
To Keep Good Girls From Going Bad,
Put them back in the Refrigerator.
This Also Works for Stale NFS Handles.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Observations
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 19:45:47 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Sep1.172929.12103@advtech.uswest.com>  stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
> In article <1992Aug31.220151.12113@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes
> >In  <1992Aug31.162715.17289@advtech.uswest.com>  stevens@eatdust (John Stevens)
> >> In article <1992Aug27.045340.13162@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> smccabe@author.ecn.p
> >> ?????  But that is JUST what YOU are doing.  You are trying to make
> >> the right to abortion a law on the basis of "because I say so".
> >
> >Actually, no.  If there weren't people trying to *take away* the right
> >to abortion, there wouldn't be anyone attempting to codify it into law.
>
> So there are people who are attempting to codify it into law.  So your
> 'no' is wrong.

Actually, no.  I was disagreeing with "on the basis of 'because I say so'".
The only reason the FOCA was written was to thwart the efforts of those
trying to remove the protections of Roe v. Wade.

> >We're willing to let each individual make the abortion decision according
> >to their own belief system.
>
> And this is exactly the reason I'm here.  Because it isn't an individual
> decision.  It is the decision of TWO people, father and mother.

And what if the two people disagree?

> I have no problem with allowing other COUPLES to make their own decision
> about abortion.  But what you are pushing for, is to cut out the father
> entirely

No, what I'm pushing for is to keep abortion safe and legal.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:33560 talk.religion.misc:14895
From: emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Clinton == !Choice
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:30:56 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: hernes-sun

In article <l9ni49INNorq@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> lape@cs.utk.edu (Bryon S. Lape) writes:

>	Regardless of his stance on abortion, Clinton does not support an
>American's right to choose.  This is ashame since he claims to be
>"pro-choice."  Well Gov. Clinton, I want to choose my doctor and where my
>kids can go to school.  I do not need the government telling me.

The way I understand it, Gov. Clinton advocates school choice but
does not support government financing of religious schools.

>Bryon Lape

Eric
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach)
Subject: Re: THIRD TRIMESTER ABORTIONS
Originator: forgach@gemini.tuc.noao.edu
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:53:33 GMT

From article by usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman):
> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
> 
>>Obviously Ron, you've just refuted yourself, since if the baby is going
>>to die anyway due to some defect, there is no reason whatsoever to put it
>>to death!
> 
> Suzanne, let me get this straight.  If you knew someone who was pregnant,
> and who had just been told by their doctor that the child was going
> to be born with a defect that will cause the child to die within a few
> years, you would counsel that woman to have the child?
> 
> I just want to be certain I understand what you are saying.

Not only that, but if she didn't think she could deal with raising the
child for that short of a time, I would offer to adopt the child myself.


SF
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis)
Subject: Re: Who was "Dennis Hall"?
Organization: University of Virginia Health Sciences Center
Distribution: world 
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 21:04:37 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.172947.17529@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:

}        ... and by his fellow pulpit-goer, Galen. 

Pulpit-goer?  I repeat:  Pulpit-goer?  I'll bet Dennis ^H^H^H^H^H^H
Steve thinks you stand on a lectern and behind a podium too.

Hey, I'll stand by the comment that I don't think an apology would
be a bad idea, but you can rest assured that I'd buy Patrick a 
beer in a (I was going to say heartbeat, but that might upset
Mr. Clausen) second.  You, however, can also be sure that I'll
slam the toilet seat on your head to keep you from drinking...


--
       hang gliding mailing list: hang-gliding-request@virginia.edu 
     Galen Hekhuis  UVa Health Sci Ctr (804)982-1646 gjh@virginia.edu
  chinaware from China, indiaware from India, and underwear from down under
From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Well, I'm Glad _That's_ Settled! (Was Re: FOCA: And I quote.....)
Date: 27 Aug 92 22:21:09 GMT
Organization: Our Lady of Heavy Artillery

In article <1992Aug26.093844.20481@gmuvax2.gmu.edu>,
cswicego@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Cynthia Swicegood) is kind enough to inform us:
> 
> Abortions are wrong!

Uh huh.

> There's no difference between a fetus, a baby, and an adult, these are just 
> different steps in human development.

Uh huh.

> People say that a fetus isn't anything because it can't survive outside the
> womb, well a baby already born can't survive outside the womb either
> unless someone takes care of him/her and feeds him/her.

Uh huh.

> You're talking about human life, no matter what stage it's at and it's wrong 
> to kill.  Plain and simple.

Well, now that Cynthia has cut through all the confusion for us, I guess
there's no point in discussing the matter any further.

Who wants to issue the rmgroup?

--
Lefty (lefty@apple.com)
C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.
From: frank@D012S436.sniap.mchp.sni.de ()
Subject: Re: Abortion vs. Adoption
Organization: Siemens-Nixdorf AG
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 15:26:16 GMT


eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley) writes:
: 2) If you abort a e/f, you never *have* a child in the first place; if
: you give a child up for adoption, you do have a child (and for better
: or worse, will probably think of him/her for the rest of your life).

And an abortion will slip her mind?  Regardless of whether you *think*
the e/f is a person or not, I'd say a lot of women who have abortions
*feel* that it is/was.  The head is happy but the heart's insane,
as the song goes.  You don't bring a woman who has recently had an 
abortion to the local kid's playground.  Why is that?

Whether this represents a profound truth about abortion, or just 
society's conditioning of the mother, I couldn't say.   But why
should it be that a woman can control her intellect sufficiently
to rebel against society's norms (in my country abortion is illegal)
and not her emotions?

: --
: Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
:             Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.
                                                          ^^^^
                                                        nice to see this



--
Frank O'Dwyer		       			Disclaimer: 
Siemens-Nixdorf AG 	                        I will deny everything
Tel.  : +49 (89) 636-40639                      Fax.  : +49 (89) 636-45860
e-mail: Frank.ODwyer@sniap.mchp.sni.de
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Shrugging off an aborted pregnancy (was Re: Another good reason
Date: 3 Sep 92 17:46:26 GMT
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <1992Sep3.145951.24644@pwcs.stpaul.gov> 
chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:

>dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>
> [--excerpt from Sue Hertz, _Caught in the Crossfire: A Year 
> on Abortion's Front Line_ deleted--]
>
> Boy, that sure was ikky.  Were you grossed out, too,  Doug?  I guess
> this means that you shouldn't go into medicine if you can't handle
> ikky-gross stuff.

And that Rodney King beating was horrible.  Did that gross you out, Lyman?
I guess that means you shouldn't move to Los Angeles if you don't want 
to get beaten by the LAPD, right Lyman?


>Chris Lyman  


Doug Holtsinger


 "For some of us, abortion on demand *is* no more serious than demanding a
  hamburger."
   -- Adrienne Regard
From: tanj@catnip.berkeley.ca.us (Ren and Stimpy's Love Child)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Sarcasm slices both ways
Date: 28 Aug 92 19:36:08 GMT
Organization: Hecate's Sandbox

In article <nyikos.714956031@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
#Anyway the last one addresses just such sarcasm
#as the above and then tells you that these beautifully competent, 
#well-informed, capable, educated women who have determined just how
#much they need to know about childbearing, abortion, the relative
#drawbacks and advantages of each...are so ignorant of yellow page
#listings and other ads for abortion clinics that they have to 
#be protected from THE GAG RULE.

#Gimme a break.

Give me one, and tell those @#&$% sidewalk "counselors" that "abortion
alternative" centers are ALSO listed on the yellow pages.  Even "Operation
Oppress-You" is in the yellow pages.

--Teddi
-----------------Another Catholic School Survivor (12 years!)----------------
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:33043 soc.singles:23257