HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:21:47 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.170827.10525@uoft02.utoledo.edu> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.uto
ledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:

>Consider: If my son needs food to live, and I can only provide that
>through working, should I be forced by law to feed him?
>
>if you're going to have kids then be responsible for them. if
>you don't want children and the responsibility they entail then for
>chrissakes use a condom or simply stop fucking around.

Or get an abortion.

Sorry, I just couldn't resist.  :)

But seriously, condoms aren't 100% effective (nothing is--not even a 
vasectomy!) and chastity is not an option.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Please let Marrou debate! -- and CNN's Crossfire
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 9 Oct 92 01:08:13 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

adesai@leland.Stanford.EDU (Atit Dinkarrai Desai) writes:
> 
> If the right-to-lifers really cared about life, why don't they adopt
> some third world babies, there are millions dying which could be 
> saved each year, including many in this country.

many do. many more would like to, but can't, given the !@#$ed up
beaurocracy that surrounds adoption in this country. it's more
profitable for the news to show Operation Rescue, so you'll never
hear about the people who would love to adopt and can't.

that's why i'm libertarian -&- pro-life. if the choice is open
there will be more chance to make the right one.

jason

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,` Democrat:    Give us your money. _We'll_ solve your problems. `,`
`,` Republican:  Give us your money. We'll ignore your problems.  `,`
`,` Libertarian: Keep your money. Solve your own problems.        `,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: rdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Roger B. Dubbs III)
Subject: Re: Marrou on Larry King
Keywords: Marrou, Libertarian, publicity
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 04:33:22 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.011044.10488@uoft02.utoledo.edu> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
>Andre Marrou was guest for the second half of Larry King Live tonite.
>(Monday, it's still night for me.) IMHO, he did a very good job of 
>explaining the Libertarian position in the half hour he had. It did 
>made me realize how far-out Libs must appear to the average person.

Interestingly enough, I watched the show with my German roommate.  He
was singularly unimpressed.  His snorts of derision at the education
issue for instance showed me just how far we have to go before the LP
appeals to the common man.

>Marrou did an admirable job of making concise statements that addressed
>the issues. Even the callers seemed satisfied, although a few sounded
>indignant or shocked at first. "Did I hear you correctly? You want
>to abolish the IRS? How will we pay for defense?" The way he spoke
>reminded me of English politicians, who tend to be more deliberate
>and spend less time waffling or posing.

Unfortunately, having heard Marrou speak before, I could almost recite
his answers for him.  I wish we could get away from the stock answers a
bit.


>feeling that were he allowed to debate he would win handily. The 
>man's skill at using time and addressing issues is refreshing when 
>compared to the rhetoric and innuendo we get from the other 3.
>

I do not think he would "win" the debates, but he would give a
respectable showing.  I think Nancy Lord would have blown away Stockdale
though, from what little I saw of the VP debates.

/Roger
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.libertarian
From: ethridge@bnr.ca (Allen Ethridge)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Keywords: abortion,platform
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 23:28:09 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.150628.8580@doug.cae.wisc.edu> bodoh@cae.wisc.edu (Daniel Bohoh) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.112134.26220@hemlock.cray.com> khj@cray.com (Ken Jopp) writes:
>>The libertarian position on abortion has to be pro-choice.
>>A fetus is physically imposing itself on its "host."
>>She should be under no obligation to indulge the imposition.
>>
....
>
>If she doesn't want to indulge the imposition, she should either use
>birth control or not have sex.  Persons are supposed to be responsible
>for their own actions, aren't they? 

Then why isn't the embryo held responsible for its own conception?  After all,
neither the woman nor the man forced the ovum and sperm to become a single
cell and start growing.

If she (or he) had used contraception and it failed (since none of them are
perfect) would abortion then be acceptable?
-- 
allen@well.sf.ca.us
ethridge@bnr.ca
my opinions are my own
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:26:33 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.175103.14437@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct15.171347.3707@mcs.anl.gov> shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Mi
|> chael A. Shaffer) writes:
|> >>But seriously, condoms aren't 100% effective (nothing is--not even a
|> >>vasectomy!) and chastity is not an option.
|> >
|> >Why?
|> 
|> Do you mean I have to explain why requiring every person in the world
|> who does not want to become a parent to practice chastity is not an 
|> option?  Are my Libertarian brothers and sisters really this clueless?
|> 
|> Steve Conley
|> Don't be afraid of your freedom!

I didn't say that everyone in the world who did not want to become a parent
had to practice chastity. I ask why that wasn't one of the options. There
are many options.

If you don't want to become a parent but are willing to accept what
God/Fate/the gods/the force deals out you can...

1. take precautions and accept the results if those precautions fail.
2. You could practice chastity.
3. Give the child up for adoption if you don't want to keep it.

If you absolutly can not stand to be a parent you can do all of the above
except number 1.

Currently you also legally have the option of murdering the inconvenient
child.

The point is that your statement is false. Chastity may not be a popular
option (not even one I would choose in the ultimate sense of being
celibate - there are other definitions) but it is an option. It can be
done.

				mike
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 12 Oct 92 02:17:54 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
> 
> However, there are anti-choice Libertarians (typically the 
> religious types from the  Advocates for Self-Government) in Ohio 
> who, while being a minority, have enough clout to prevent the LPO 
> from having a firm pro-choice stand. I'm hoping that will change 
> at the next LPO convention in June '93 (in Columbus! Come if you 
> can!), since I'm *militantly* pro-choice and I think we look WEAK 
> for not having a position on this issue.  I think all our 
> candidates in Ohio are pro-choice, though.

hmmm. one of the things that attracted me to the Libertarian party in 
the first place was the number of *non* militant pro-abortion types.
-you- may think we look weak, but there are quite a few of us who 
rather like that the Libertarian party includes people with a wide 
variety of opinions who work together anyway.

> Every political party has its kooks.  Anti-choice Libertarians are
> amoung ours.

the same may be said about yourself. the goal of personal 
responsibility and privelege is bigger than that of abortion. 
you'd be a fool to turn down the support of other people who are 
working toward that goal just because they wish to extend life and 
liberty to a group you don't.

jason "LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..." steiner

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,`   "Renaissance Now! Think Universally, Act Selfishly" - Tim Starr   `,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 17:51:03 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.171347.3707@mcs.anl.gov> shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Mi
chael A. Shaffer) writes:
>>But seriously, condoms aren't 100% effective (nothing is--not even a
>>vasectomy!) and chastity is not an option.
>
>Why?

Do you mean I have to explain why requiring every person in the world
who does not want to become a parent to practice chastity is not an 
option?  Are my Libertarian brothers and sisters really this clueless?

Steve Conley
Don't be afraid of your freedom!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Keep pressuring CNN! (It's working)
From: Andrew Lewis Tepper <at15+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 15:23:58 -0400 
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

I got a card from the National LP yesterday urging all libertarians to
call ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN to request more (any!) coverage of Marrou.
I'm glad to see that Andre will be on Larry King Live, and I think the
best thing to do is to keep the momentum going by calling afterwards and
saying how informative, etc it was. (suck up a bit :)  Maybe if they
think it's not just Libertarians calling it will look better.) I called
the numbers yesterday, and CNN said that they have been receiving _many_
calls requesting coverage. Two of the other three had received some
calls, and one said my call was the first. Anyway, here are the numbers
again in case you'd like to call:

ABC 1-212-456-1000
NBC 1-212-664-4971 or 1-212-664-2333 (I think the 2nd is direct)
CBS 1-212-975-4321
CNN 1-404-827-1500

Andy
From: laemmle@sumax.seattleu.edu (Dave Laemmle)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:04:46 GMT
Organization: Seattle University, Seattle, WA

From article <1992Oct12.221845.17197@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, by sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley):
> 
> A woman's ownership over her body and her right to remove any unwelcome
> visitors is just as important as a newspaper's right to print whatever
> it chooses, since all these rights are manifestations of property rights.
> Compromise on one and you compromise on them all.
   
  A womyn may remove any unwelcome visitor as long as she does not kill 
them.             
dave

Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 17:48:29 GMT

>sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
>> ...since I'm *militantly* pro-choice and I think we look WEAK
>> for not having a position on this issue.  I think all our
>> candidates in Ohio are pro-choice, though.
>
>hmmm. one of the things that attracted me to the Libertarian party in
>the first place was the number of *non* militant pro-abortion types.
>-you- may think we look weak, but there are quite a few of us who
>rather like that the Libertarian party includes people with a wide
>variety of opinions who work together anyway.

Let's look at it differently, then:
"Hmmm.  One of the things that attracted me to the Libertarian party in
the first place was the number of *non* militant anti-censorship types.
-You- may think we look weak, but there are quite a few of us who rather
like that the Libertarian party includes people with a wide variety of
opinions who work together anyway."

>> Every political party has its kooks.  Anti-choice Libertarians are
>> amoung ours.

[by 'kooks' I meant people inconsistent with party philosophy, such as
 LaRouche Democrats]

>the same may be said about yourself. the goal of personal
>responsibility and privelege is bigger than that of abortion.
>you'd be a fool to turn down the support of other people who are
>working toward that goal just because they wish to extend life and
>liberty to a group you don't.

"The same may be said about yourself. The goal of personal
responsibility and privelege is bigger than that of animal rights.
You'd be a fool to turn down the support of other people who are
working toward a goal just because they wish to extend life and liberty
to a group you don't."

ATTENTION, EVERYONE!  *This* is why you must have a consistent, rational
philosophy before you take up politics!  Every inconsistency is a crack in
the foundation of our political movement and can lead to failure.

Steve Conley
sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Punk [censored] Libertarian in Leather from OHIO!
From: fsspr@acad3.alaska.edu (Sean P. Ryan, Hardcore Alaskan)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Media coverage for Marrou/Lord (call these #'s!)
Date: 9 Oct 92 15:44:00 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.marrou
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Fairbanks, Alaska...no wait, that's not right...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41.UAC

Does anyone know how to set a Followup-To: line anymore?  This thread
doesn't belong in the majority of the newsgroups it has been posted to.

In article <BvnMy7.90C@encore.com>, rcollins@encore.com (Roger Collins) writes...
>nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>>  First of all, no L.P. presidential candidate has ever exceeded 1%
>>  of the vote, so even if Marrou/Lord are doing that well this year
>>  and Perot is only doing 7% then Perot is still doing *7 times as
>>  well* as Marrou/Lord!   I would say that this IS "much better".
> 
>Perot has never exceeded 0% of the vote.

Yes, but the last independent media candidate received substantially
more votes than the Libertarian candidate, except of course in Alaska. 
That should serve as a lesson to all of you that the media candidates
are automatically going to do better than everyone else, no matter what.

************************************************************************
Sean Patrick Ryan, Hardcore Alaskan*****Internet: fsspr@acad3.alaska.edu
WWIVnet: 220@9704*CFN: au414*IRC: RadioKAOS, Aoxomoxoa*Ph: (907)488-8365
BITnet: FSSPR@ALASKA****Snail: P.O. Box 83381, Fairbanks, AK  99708-3381
***"I'm gonna Kentucky Fried Chickenize your prostate surgery." - Oswald
Bates, In Living Color***Disclaimer?  BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!***
From: bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Limbaugh 1-900 Poll Today
Date: 9 Oct 1992 17:54:51 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


>Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: tomgift@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (gift thomas lyle)
Subject: Limbaugh 1-900 Poll Today
Date: Fri Oct  9 12:22:56 1992

If any of you are interested, Rush is doing a 1-900 poll today of
his voters.  Three numbers for three choices (guess which one he
left out?).  He says, "I *really* want to hear what you think".

Since he's rigged it so you can't  voice support for Marrou via the
poll, you'll have to let him know directly:

Compuserve address:  70277,2502
Internet: 70277.2502@compuserve.com

I don't think he likes the LP much, but a lot of his audience (econ-
omic conservative types) probably do.  I think he boasts something like
12 million listeners.

He's doing another poll Monday.  If you'd like to see Marrou included,
drop him a line.

Tom Gift

tomgift@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
--------------------------------

I think this is a good idea.  I am given to understand, however, that a 
Compuserve mailbox only holds the most recent 100 messages...so keep
sending your messages to him.  Let's fill his mailbox up with complaints,
and maybe scroll it a few times.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 15 Oct 92 01:16:58 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

ethridge@bnr.ca (Allen Ethridge) writes:
> bodoh@cae.wisc.edu (Daniel Bohoh) writes:
> >
> >If she doesn't want to indulge the imposition, she should either 
> >use birth control or not have sex.  Persons are supposed to be 
> >responsible for their own actions, aren't they? 
> 
> Then why isn't the embryo held responsible for its own conception?  
> After all, neither the woman nor the man forced the ovum and sperm 
> to become a single cell and start growing.

c'mon. that's absurd. the parents -know- the risks. (and presumably 
accepted them, or they shouldn't be having that kind of sex anyway.) 
their actions are the -only- part of the  equation that isn't pure 
chance. blaming conception on the embryo is silly. but any port in
a storm...

> If she (or he) had used contraception and it failed (since none of 
> them are perfect) would abortion then be acceptable?

no. contraception is not perfect. it merely reduces the risk.
you won't find "absolves from responsibility" listed on the back of a 
condom package.

jason

--
sorry, my .signature is on strike.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: tomgift@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (gift thomas lyle)
Subject: Limbaugh 1-900 Poll Today
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 16:22:56 GMT

If any of you are interested, Rush is doing a 1-900 poll today of
his voters.  Three numbers for three choices (guess which one he
left out?).  He says, "I *really* want to hear what you think".

Since he's rigged it so you can't  voice support for Marrou via the
poll, you'll have to let him know directly:

Compuserve address:  70277,2502
Internet: 70277.2502@compuserve.com

I don't think he likes the LP much, but a lot of his audience (econ-
omic conservative types) probably do.  I think he boasts something like
12 million listeners.

He's doing another poll Monday.  If you'd like to see Marrou included,
drop him a line.

Tom Gift

tomgift@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu


Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.libertarian
From: kde@boi.hp.com (Keith Emmen)
Subject: Re: Presidential Debates
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:24:21 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1scd1 PL4

Oxymoron Alert!!

mlee@esd.dl.nec.com (Michael Lee) writes:
> 
> PROVE IT WITH A SCIENTIFIC POLL.
> 

Oxymoron alert off.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.clinton
From: zzz@byron.u.washington.edu (Sample)
Subject: Abortion Funding for the Poor
Reply-To: zzz@byron.u.washington.edu (Sample)
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 22:22:43 GMT

If poor women can't get abortion funding
(as Marrou suggests) then we all will pay
for that "unwanted" child.
     What would Morrou do for those who need
welfare?  Should the weak just "freeze and starve"?
     I like the Libertarian views -- but
I wonder about the "weak people".  Under
Marrou, will I "freeze and starve" to death
when my luck runs low?

Please email -- I don't get alt.politics.marrou.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: steve-b@access.digex.com (Steve Brinich)
Subject: Re: Would someone please post a summary of Marrou's positions?
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 22:28:07 GMT

  Essentially, the Libertarian Party takes the position that the role of
government should be greatly reduced -- most Libertarians believe that the
only proper government function is peacekeeping (national defense, police
protection, resolution of legal disputes, and the like).
  Libertarians argue that the amount of government we have today is both
morally wrong (since it routinely violates the basic rights of life, liberty,
and property) and inefficient (since government programs tend to ossify into
self-perpetuating bureaucracies).

  A few examples of Libertarian positions:

  NATIONAL DEFENSE:  The purpose of the American military is the defense of
America.  The United States should not pursue a self-appointed role of
"world policeman{; this wastes American blood and treasure and encourages our
economic competitors to take advantage of a free ride.
  The nation's defense should combine a professional all-volunteer military
(the draft and registration for same should be abolished) and the traditional
American militia.

  ECONOMICS:  The free market should be restored; the only proper place for
government interference is the punishment of theft, fraud, and the like.  In
particular, the plethora of special-interest subsidies should be ended.
  Taxes should be reduced to the minimum necessary to support the basic
functions of government; the personal income tax should be abolished.

  CRIMINAL JUSTICE:  The only true "crimes" are violations of the rights
of others (theft, force, fraud, and the like).  Laws against victimless
so-called "crimes" should be repealed.
  In particular, the War On Drugs should be ended.  Prohibition did not
work in the 1920s and does not work today; in both cases, the result is
merely to feed a criminal subculture.  In addition, the War On Drugs is
one of the most common excuses for government violations of the rights
guaranteed by the Constitution.

  I'll stop here for now; you'll probably pick up Libertarian positions on
other issue if you follow this thread.
From: goldm@rpi.edu (Mitchell E. Gold)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:53:58 GMT
	<1992Oct14.210712.10533@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

In article <1992Oct14.210712.10533@uoft02.utoledo.edu> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
>sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
>> But seriously, condoms aren't 100% effective (nothing is--not even 
>> a  vasectomy!) and chastity is not an option.

>if condoms aren't 100% effective then use a combination of methods
>or get a vasectomy. either way, you're still taking a risk & should
>be responsible for what happens regardless.

>and chastity -is- an option. it's worked before, it will work in the
>future and it's working for me right now.
>jason

Chastity is not necessarily _an_ option, it is your option.  Do not presume
to tell me how I may not express my love to my SO.  I've chosen a number of
methods to minimize the chance of pregnancy, but if these methods do not work
and we can not afford to raise a child at this time, abortion is still an
option for us. This does not mean that I would use abortion normally as a
birth control method, but if that hundreth of a percent of a chance of none
of the birth control working, of ovulation and insemination actually being
viable all at that particular point in her cycle, then she and I are left
with an unpleasant but necessary option. (insert hopes for RU-486 as one more
intermediary step in prevention) 

Don't tell me what my choices are, I'll make them myself.
--
Legalize freedom, vote Libertarian
Mitch Gold, sundance@rpi.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Project Vote Smart
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Distribution: alt
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 07:22:46 GMT


Actually, Vote Smart is the Republican program, while the Democrat's
program is called
VOTE STUPID.


Simon

_____________________________________________________________
Liberals are but cockroaches before us.