HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.birthright,alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: Re: Shameless attack on pro-choicers in general!
Date: 31 Jul 92 20:18:18 GMT
Organization: California State University: Sacramento

In article <Bs7uMy.Hqt@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com> wreck@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com (R. Cage) writes:
>In article <tgreen.712465124@pv1788.vincent.iastate.edu> tgreen@iastate.edu (Todd Greenfield) writes:
>>I don't expect people to follow my moral decisions.  As you
>>said, you have to deal with reality.  
>
>Reality is that abortion is possible, is very safe when done
>correctly, and avoids most if not all further consequences of
>pregnancy.  If one has an abortion because of this, one is
>dealing with reality quite successfully.
>
>Most other statements you can make about abortion are not
>about reality, they are about religion/philosophy.

Well, then, this one isn't one of the "most" - can you share with us
readers your implication that abortion is safe for the z/e/f involved?

Sounds like a logical, not philosophical, question to me. 

>>yes, it is.  How about if you choose to have sex, be prepared
>>to deal with the possibility of pregnancy.  If you know that
>>you can't handle a pregnancy, avoid getting pregnant.  
>
>And what if someone's method of "handling" it is to terminate
>it in the quickest, safest and most convenient manner available?
>That's certainly dealing with the problem, just like a mousetrap
>deals with the problem of a mouse.

Or a thief deals with the problem of hunger? 

Your response just doesn't hold water.. 

>I bet that this analysis ticks off a few control freaks, who
>want abortion controlled to suit their whims, and a few fanatics,
>who can't abide anyone doing anything forbidden by their particular
>flavor of religion/philosophy.
>
>	"A fanatic is someone who does what God would do, if
>	God only had all the facts."  (something I found.)

To that I respond: 

1) Why is it that the pro-aborts are the least educated human beings in
the world when it comes to scientific facts? 
2) Why is it that pro-aborts were never raised to read an embryology
book before they debate? 
3) Why is it that pro-aborts never want embryologists around? 

Why ask why? --- 

 
===============================================================================
Dan Bredy is gone and there's not a damned thing you can do when I
laugh about it, except bitch, gripe and complain! 
===============================================================================
===============================================================================
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
Subject: Re: THE RAPE/INCEST MYTH.
From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
Date: 21 Jul 92 16:39:05 CST
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

In article <1992Jul20.185900.13472@uceng.UC.EDU>, vlsi06@nest.ece.uc.edu (Gregory S Clausen) writes:
> In response to Mark Ira Kaufman:
>    One of the techniques to support a woman's constitutional right 
> to abortion is to focus on some difficult aspect of abortion.  
> One favorite ploy used by the less intelligent pro-abortion fanatics 
> is to evoke the subject of abortions resulting from pregnancies
> initiated by rape or incest.  They evoke the subject as if it were some 
> significant part of the big picture of abortion in America.  It is 
> usually suggested by these zealots that there are thousands of women in 
> America who are being impregnated daily by rapists and family members.
>    Even someone as publicly untutored as Mark Ira Kaufman should know
> by now that rape/incest abortions are fewer than three percent 
> all the abortions performed in America.  

Isn't the point that if you accept even just a few cases of abortion in
the instance of rape or incest, then you are logically inclined to
accept all other cases of abortion?  Otherwise it's like saying
(ummmm) "Killing babies is wrong, so you can't do it...  Unless of
course the baby has a noticeable birthmark on their left ear"
Sure the analogy to rape/incest, and abortion isn't very good, but do you
see the point?

>    Even with a vivid imagination, the pro-abortion movement will
> lose this battle.  The reason is that they are fighting something
> that ultimately cannot win in the land of life, liberty, and the
> pursuit of happiness.  

Huh?  Where do you live, anyway?  The Cosby Show?  Isn't it over now?
I wonder if Cosby ever addressed abortion.  Hmmmm.
 
> Abortion Stops a Beating Heart.

Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.bizarre,alt.tasteless
From: bagchi@eecs.umich.edu (Ranjan Drzzzzt!  Bagchi)
Subject: Re: "Upon insertation, some pain may be experienced" (Was: CNN...)
Organization: Recreational Creationists, Inc.
	<1992Jul25.184018.29712@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 19:58:36 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.184018.29712@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>Suzanne, I realize you have a hard time dealing with anything in reality, but
>when a woman has an abortion, they _DON'T_ put the z/e/f into a jar for the
>woman to take home like they did with your tonsels when you were a child.

	But would they, if you ask real nice?  p-p-p-please?

	Viva MedWaste ... rj
--
Ranjan Bagchi:   Di.sigsgvirusuise                 Ranjan.Bagchi@umich.edu
oo   oooo  o oo   ooo oo oo   oo       o o  oooo ooo o       o        oooooooo
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: slkg9733@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven L. Kellmeyer)
Subject: Re: Fetal Heartbeat (Re: Supreme Court)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 13:27:05 GMT
Keywords: From: decay@

garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:


>The following quote is from Dr. Len Howard, posted here recently.

>"According to the 17th edition of Williams Obstetrics, one of the three
>positive signs of pregnancy is identification of the fetal heart
>action separately and distinctly from that of the woman.  The three
>methods of identification of fetal heart rate are auscultation with a
>fetoscope, by use of the dopler principle with ultrasound, and by the
>use of sonography.  The heart beat of the fetus can be detected by
>auscultation with a stethoscope by 17 weeks gestation, on average, and
>by 19 weeks in almost all pregnancies.  Fetal cardiac action can be
>detected with appropriate doppler equipment almost always by the 10th
>to 12th week of gestation.  Echocardiography can be used to detect
>fetal heart action as early as 48 days after the first day of the last
>menstrual period.  Real time sonography can be used to detect fetal
>heart action and fetal movement after the second month of pregnancy." 

>Susan

"48 days after the first day of the last menstrual period"  which means
suction currettage abortion, invariably done AFTER the sixth week,
*ALWAYS* stops a beating heart.

Steve Kellmeyer
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Hypocrites?
Organization: BorgBrain's favorite university
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 07:01:20 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.164357.13291@csus.edu>, chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (Steve Chaney | Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.0 ) writes:
>
>I would have written "HYPOCRITES !!!!" but I was making a point. 
>
>Are you a hypocrite? 
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Isn't it funny that pro-choicers, in their mad scramble to refute what
>I said in my stereotypes against pro-choicers, have yet to notice the
>stereotypes laid against pro-lifers every day, on TV and in the
>newspapers? 

Document them, or shut up.

>Even though there are huge numbers of women and people who aren't
>religiously motivated, not to mention liberals of every stripe, in the
>pro-life movement, not to mention a huge feminist group, the media
>never, ever lets anyone see them. All you ever see are Christian
>males, and hardly any minorities, as if that's all there is, in the
>pro-life movement. 

You need to watch something other than your local Fox affiliate, then.
How is it that I see more than just "christian males" when CNN or CNBC, or
one of the local stations here, covers some pro-life antics?

>The media refers to pro-aborts as "pro-choice" and pro-life as
>"anti-abortion."  

So?  Pro-choicers tend to see abortion as one option of many -- but one that
should be available, regardless.  Pro-lifers seem to be primarily interested
in forcing fetuses to be carried to full term, and preventing abortions --
thus "anti-abortion" is a fitting description.  

>And YOU want to complain at me about my shameless attack on
>pro-choicers? Hell, it's nothing compared to what the media does to
>us. So until they stop, I think it's about time that pro-lifers
>started picking up a stereotype list to fire back. 

So much for your valiant defense of honor -- you mean you think two wrongs
make a right?  Keep up the rant, Dennis/Steve -- you're a walking billboard
for the advantages of being pro-choice...

-- 
Patrick L. Humphrey  (patrick@is.rice.edu)  Rice Networking & Computing Systems
     +1 713 528-3626 at Rice. 776-1541 at home. 667-6554 at Palace Lanes. 

                      Chaney's a coward, just as I said.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Talk.abortion comedy
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 10:22:00 GMT


Recently a Young man presente me with what must be a
novel twist in the abortion debate, and strikes me as
down right comical.

On the One hand he wishes me to be liberal and accept as
how there is a 'grey area' and that being a CO could be
a moral option.

On the Flip Side He wants me to understand how as Abortion
Is Morally Wrong.

Excuse me, but there is something SCREAMINGLY CUTE
about that dialectic, and I can see why he might wish
to seperate the two issues. 

It's hard to be a 'sensitive guy' in the 90's....

ciao
drieux

ps: But I just sort of keep bringing up how
as I does Prefer my CloseAirSupport, and thank you verymuch
but I does want my FireMissionRequest PROCESSED YESTERDAY!!!!
{ "to be honest, I don't call you guys for the small talk...." }

pps: And Yes, All You BleedingHeartWimpLiberalStoogesOfYourKremlinMasters
can now CRINGE your LillyLiveredMambyPambyHandWringingLifeStyles....


ObHappyNote: The Young lady of My Dearest Concerns recently bought
me 'tank top' singlet, with a stencil of an UpGunned Sherman Tank, 
and the logo: "Tank Top" on it...



-- 
I Do Not Believe in .sig files
as they are such a Known Waste Of BandWidth,
And Therefore Not a Morally UpRight Choice.
But I Can See the HideousHienousHandOfHeteroSexualityBehindItAll.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: I'm new
From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
Date: 26 Jul 92 17:12:23 CST
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

In article <1992Jul24.185518.17160@coopsol.com>, gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
> <1992Jul8.163343.1909@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca said:
>>In article <90504@bu.edu>, kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
>>> In article <1992Jul6.163633.1901@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
> ...
>>Lemme see if I have this straight:  The problem is overpopulation.
>>The (partial) solution is birth control.  Abortion should be used
>>as birth control.  Maybe you could lobby to have some group of scientists
>>make an inexpensive easy to use home abortion kit that you could pick
>>up next to the condoms and spermicides in the drug store.
> 
> Nearly there -- it's called RU 486.
> 
>>IMO abortion should not be used as a form of birth control.
>>Call me silly if you like.
> 
> OK -- silly.

Gee you're the first to take the opportunity.  Let me now expand
my statement to IMO, abortion should not be used as a form of birth
control until all other methods have failed.  Still call me silly?
(I still don't think abortion should be used as bc, but I'm just
asking if the last staement is silly)
 
> 
> 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.

Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: INFO: Professional Women's Network
Date: 24 Jul 92 00:10:23 GMT
Organization: LLNL

In article <23JUL199209302767@venus.lerc.nasa.gov> ecaxron@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Graham) writes:
:The Professional Women's Network (PWN) is a non-denominational, bi-partisan
:organization which unites professional women to work for the betterment
:of women and for the rights of all members of society.  PWN currently 
:focuses on the abortion issue, believing that the best way to safeguard
:the rights of the elderly, poor, sick and disabled is to establish the
:value of the most defenseless and voiceless in our society: the preborn
:child.

	The proper way to help elderly, poor, sick, and disabled
people is to _directly_ help elderly, poor, sick, and disabled people,
not to worship fetuses, embryos, and fertilized egg cells. And that is
not to mention body cells, with ther complete sets of human genes.

:PWN members believe that abortion and abortifacient contraceptives 
:represent violent and unsupportive responses to real needs.  Women in
:crisis pregnancies need family and community support, not the violation
:of their bodies through abortion or the devaluing and destruction of
:their children.

	Baloney.

	Early abortion is MUCH less "violent" than giving birth.

:PWN's primary emphasis is to educate the public about the realities of 
:abortion - its negative effects on women, families, and children - and
:about abortion alternatives.  We are committed to working for a 
:society that supports women and women's valuable contributions in both 
:the workplace and the home, a society that respects all human life.

	Including _all_ body cells, may I ask?

/Loren
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker)
Subject: Re: "Pro-Lifers" Are Really Pro-Death
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 05:18:00 GMT

slkg9733@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven L. Kellmeyer) writes:

>jxs52@po.CWRU.Edu (Jonathan Sheir) writes:

>>I don't understand how these religious zealots who call themselves
>>"Pro-Life" can do so.  By outlawing abortion, they would be forcing
>>women back in the alleys, and many would die of these illegal abortions.

>Three-part response:
>1) It would "force" both men and women to be responsible for the
>results of their actions.  If they wish to engage in a procreative
>act, then they have to deal with the results of their action.

Garbage.  The absolute most irresponsible reponse to pregnancy is
to ignore it until labor commences, and then to give away the resulting
baby.  How on earth would outlawing abortion address this irresponsibility?

>2) No one can be "forced" to undertake an illegal activity.  

Interesting, considering that you claim women are routinely "forced"
to have abortions by their evil, irresponsible men.  You are now
claiming that this will magically stop once abortion is outlawed?
Either explain how, or get your rants straight.

>3) Killing babies, as long as they are in a womb and being killed by
>the mother's choice, is currently legal.  Why do you refuse to realize
>that ALL of the children involved in abortion are dying?

Because you yourself have claimed that abortions have been known
to result in live births.  Could you _please_ get your rants straight?

>>And many of these people are
>>against teaching the young about safe sex, and then diseases like AIDS
>>spread.

>"These people" teach chastity.  If you don't engage in sex, you have an
>extraordinarily small chance of getting AIDS.  True, many of us are 
>against the use of contraceptives.  But claiming that condoms offer
>protection against AIDS, is like claiming that schools should teach
>"safe" Russian roulette - always wear a Kevlar vest.  After all, teenagers
>are GOING to play Russian roulette, theirs no way to stop them, so we
>really ought to show them how to do it safely.  

And of course, any teenager who ignores _your_ warnings about the horrors
of sex or Russian Roulette DESERVES TO DIE, right?

>>These people are obviously Pro-Death.

>Here's twenty-five cents. Go to K-mart and buy a clue.

I'd suggest that you find another source for your clues, Kellmeyer.
The ones you've been getting at K-mart appear to be faulty.

>SK

                     -rocker
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: darkstar@milton.u.washington.edu (Alden Hackmann)
Subject: Dreiux for Pope!  
Keywords: From: decay@
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 23:55:42 GMT

drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:

>garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

>] Before I can answer any more questions I need to know whether
>] or not you accepted the papal nomination.

>such negotiations, were they to exist, would not be open
>to public discussion given the nature of the proprietary
>knowledge involved, and so I can neither confirm nor deny the
>above alledged allegation, as to so do I might imply that
>there did or did not exist some substance to the alledged allegation.

>ciao
>drieux

Which is to say:  The College of Cardinals hasn't accepted our bribes yet,
and they're holding out for more.  I'm collecting the money, and Susan is
negotiating with the Swiss Guards by fax.  We'll let you know whether we
can get you in or not. 

Imagine: Pope John Paul Drieux I  !!!

Alden 

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.flame
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: What *is* Homophobia (formerly: SLAMMING HOMOSEXUALS...)
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 23:51:02 GMT

<1992Jul9.010747.8255@crd.ge.com> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com> said:
>jfh@greenber.austin.ibm.com (John F Haugh II) writes:
>[homophobic raving deleted]
>
>christ john, get a grip on yourself.

That's not allowed by his church.


Gordon
-- 
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.
From: sprice@eng.auburn.edu (Shannon W. Price)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Arthur S. DeMoss
Date: 31 Jul 92 15:05:30 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auburn University Engineering



I posted a question last week about Arthur S. DeMoss.  Looks like Linda
Birmingham  has been doing her homework.  My original inquiry asked about
the Arthur S. DeMoss Foundation which is currently sponsoring some 
commercials on television.  These commericals always show children
who were "children of parents who chose not to have an abortion."  The slogan
at the end is "Life what a beautiful choice."  Some comments I received 
attacked the DeMoss Fnd for being pro-life, but it almost seems to be a
pro-choice commercial to me since they really stress that the parents had
to make a decision.  Maybe this is a new approach from the pro-choice camp
trying to show the other, less emphasized choice.  

Here's what Linda gave me.... it's a re-post, but I've gotten several 
requests to summarize....


========
Organization: Ryerson Polytechnical Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Tuesday, 14 Apr 1992 14:08:31 EST
From: Linda Birmingham <ADMN8647@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject:    DeMoss Foundation

In article <1992Apr8.133213.27994@acd4.acd.com> Bill Overpeck
writes:

>Whoa.  First, I was referring to the pro-choice agenda, not
>Susan's in particular.  Second, there is no implication that the
>viewpoint of the DeMoss Foundation is religiously motivated.  I
>personally don't know; it may or may not be, but it's misleading
>to assume it.  Not everyone in the pro-life movement bases their
>position on some theological tenet.

"The Arthur S. De Moss Foundation is almost invisible
to the public, since it shuns publicity and doesn't
issue annual reports.  Named for its founder, a born-
again Christian who made a fortune in the insurance
business and died in 1979, De Moss funds various
causes, most of them evangelical.  In 1989 (the most
recent year for which figures are available), its
donations included $2.4 million to Campus Crusade for
Christ, $500,000 to Walk Thru the Bible Ministries,
$225,000 to the Pat Boone Foundation and $130,000 to
the Fellowship of Christian Athletes"

Newsweek, April 6, 1992, "A Hymn to Adoption - Or is it?"


Shannon Price
Auburn University
Auburn, Alabama

sprice@humsci.auburn.edu
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Interesting Notes on the Fetal heart Rate...
Date: 27 Jul 92 01:46:39 GMT
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper

slkg9733@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven L. Kellmeyer) writes:
] 
] I'm sorry, Galen, but you are unequivocally wrong.  The heartbeat is
] quite well-established and pumping blood through the circulatory 
] system by day thirty after conception, thank you.  Abortions are not
] performed until the sixth week after conception (that's Day Forty-Two
] for you folks in Rio Linda) since any earlier attempts greatly 
] increase the possibility of perforating the uterus.  So surgical abortion
] does "stop a beating heart".


it was interesting that on the one hand is len howard,
the silly MD, who points out that some fetal heart
rates can be detected as early as 48 days....

and therein Kellmeyer said that obviously all of them
had to be detectable then....

Now its the case that they are ALL there at 30 days....

Hum....

interesting question....

to I go with the KellmeyerianWay, and oppose
those in the medical field who have been shown
to be enemies of the state.....

Or....

do I just point out that kellmeyer leaps off again
into the wonders 'from some to all' and then goes
one step ahead of that here.....


Oh the moral questions....


ciao
drieux




-- 
I Do Not Believe in .sig files
as they are such a Known Waste Of BandWidth,
And Therefore Not a Morally UpRight Choice.
But I Can See the HideousHienousHandOfHeteroSexualityBehindItAll.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman)
Subject: Re: The Jewish View
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 14:44:22 GMT


   For a less biased and more comprehensive view on abortion from
the Jewish perspective, I recommend "Contemporary Jewish Ethics",
edited by Menachem Marc Kellner.  It contains three essays on the
subject of abortion.  Each of the essays represents a view from a
different branch of Judaism.  Unlike Mr. Haber's post, these will
provide a far greater overview of the complexity of the many ways
that Judaism looks at abortion.
-- 
"The tree of liberty must occasionally be nourished by the blood
of tyrants and of patriots."                    Thomas Jefferson
"Hello? Information?  Would you please give me the home phone of
Pat Buchanan?...Yes.  His address as well, thank you very much."
Newsgroups: talk.abortion