HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Abortion and Infanticide
Date: 24 Jul 92 14:52:37 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: What a concept!

In article <1992Jul24.141922.13907@athena.mit.edu>, purdon@cons1.mit.edu (James Purdon) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.223210.8435@ncsu.edu> dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>>Fine. Is any pro-choicer willing to answer my questions above?
>
>I'll take a stab at them, if you will first answer the following
>questions:
>
>1. Are you also David Rasmussen?

Not likely -- Doug was doing his tap dance in this group while Wavy Davy was
down here terrorizing the campus police at Rice...:-)

>2. Do you know David Rasmussen?

Likely -- they both posted from the same domain and machine for a while.
(Besides, the pace-and-click act is probably pretty notorious at State, by
now...)

>3. Do you know David Rasmussen's mother?

Ouch!  That's *cold*.  (Probably not, but if he was reading this group a
couple of years ago, he'd know where she lives, since the MuffinThang was
thoughtless enough to post her address...)

>Jim
>
>Once I was single.  Now I am married.

The time flies -- our second anniversary is coming up in less than three
weeks.  (Dale Ann won't let me forget it, either. :-)

-- 
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. 
                        The SubGenius MUST have Slack!
            (but not *this* late in the evening, er, morning, dammit.)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: vlsi06@nest.ece.uc.edu (Gregory S Clausen)
Subject: Re: The MOB?! (formerly: Supreme Court)
Organization: Unversity of Cincinnati, ECE Dept
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 18:09:09 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.190147.6402@wam.umd.edu> judi@wam.umd.edu (Jay T Stein -- sounds like Nirvana) writes:
>>Abortion is extremely profitable today.  It is a multi-billion dollar
>>industry which the mob has infiltrated in a few areas of the nation.
>
>I demand support for this claim, lest you be considered just another
>person who will say anything, no matter how wrong or hateful, to further
>your cause.

I do hate the mafia.  Write to the FBI.

--
Abortion Stops a Beating Heart.

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: What *is* Homophobia (formerly: SLAMMING HOMOSEXUALS...)
Keywords: From: decay@
Date: 21 Jul 92 13:48:20 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Jul20.233800.8729@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
> Take the entertainment industry too (Julio Iglesias claims to have slept
> with over 3,000 women, how many women do you think Mick Jagger has had?).

According to Billy Wyman's book, _Stone_Alone_, Wyman was the band's
leader at some time in the seventies, and Jagger was way
behind.  While their record-keeping practices appear a bit shoddy,
Wyman recorded something like (and this from memory) 169, while
Jagger was woefully behind with about 31.  The band was then
actually at what I would consider the height of its popularity,
as well as doing most of its touring.  As a matter of speculation,
I wouldn't think Jagger had passed 200 yet.  Hardly a record to
compare with that of Mr Iglesias.  I must say that I found the
accounting a bit distasteful, but then I guess one does get bored
when touring.  The book was not worth the price, being little more
than a sustained whine coupled with an extended album cover of
sorts.  I don't recommend _Stone_Alone_ to anyone.

I do think one might consider Magic Johnson's numbers in this
matter, since the discussion included not only number of partners
but the matter of spreading disease.

Mr Chamberlain's record is prodigious, but I find myself skeptical
of such extraordinary numbers.  20,000 is an awful lot.  Did the
man do anything except play basketball and couple?  When did he
eat?  Did he ever sleep?

Maybe he was a premature ejaculator, allowing him extra time to
accomplish his task.

I tell you, the mind reels from the implications.  Even now, as
I write this, the room has begun to swim before my eyes and the
SPARCstation that was before sitting sedately on a corner of my
desk appears to be dancing a merenge with my 7505 set.

Dean Kaflowitz
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:29306 alt.flame:11436
From: keegan@pan.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame
Subject: franklin defends darcy
Date: 28 Jul 92 15:16:01 GMT
Reply-To: james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com>
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Disclaimer: i speak for myself only, unless noted otherwise

franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve "edified" Franklin) writes:
-> keegan@pan.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:
-> >darcy expresses pleasure that a loved one of one of his 
-> >many adversaries has been sexually abused.
-> 
-> >franklin defends darcy.
-> 
-> >darcy and franklin; the similarities are overwhelming.
-> 
-> 
->    You see, you state I was defending Darcy. 

you were. does it embarass you?

-> I ask you to consider what he actually meant.

shouldn't he have done that?

->    I was merely giving Darcy a chance. 

did he let you down?

->    I truly believe that Darcy did not intend to poke fun at
-> sexual abuse, because the initial statement seemed to imply
-> that the individual (as an adult) had partaken in child/adult
-> sex at some time in his life.

darcy's replies have since proven your belief wrong, haven't 
they? 

bigots and homophobes have been flocking to darcy since he
arrived on the net. you're no different, it appears.

-- 
----
charter member   ...   T.S.A.K.C.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: BUSH
Reply-To: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 00:51:43 GMT

In article <nq9ug5o@fido.asd.sgi.com> 
cj@eno.corp.sgi.com (C J Silverio) writes:

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

>>In article <BryM3I.MDI@wrs.com> string@wrs.com (String) writes:

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

>>>>In article <Brt4z3.AKr@wrs.com> string@wrs.com (String) writes:

>>>>> Pro-life: yeah right, he's just pandering to the religious right. "We 
>>>>> just want to protect that cute little infant's life!" Funny thing how 
>>>>> so many cute little babies grow up in the streets of America with no 
>>>>> education or hope for a job.

>>>>> And how many cute little babies are filling up america's prisons after
>>>>> committing really heinous crimes like being black.
>>>>> Some life. 

>>>> Are you suggesting that black babies can be killed because they might
>>>> grow up to become prison inmates? 

> Only Holtsinger could take a bitter comment about racism in
> American society, and turn it into an accusation that the
> poster is racist.  Holtsinger-- master of the twisted words.

Where did I accuse the poster of racism? I did no such thing.
(In e-mail, he finally answered "no" to my question).


>>> Please refer to my last follow-up to the same knee-JERK reaction that 
>>> you've submitted.

>> Please answer the question directly. Are you suggesting that black babies 
>> can be killed because they might grow up to become prison inmates? Your
>> last follow-up didn't address the question which I am asking. A "yes"
>> or "no" answer would be sufficient.

> Actually, the followup did, but Holtsinger deleted it.
> Nice guy, that Holtsinger-- really honest.

He didn't answer my question in any of his follow-ups.


>cj@eno.corp.sgi.com    C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720


Doug Holtsinger

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker)
Subject: Re: Dear Operation Rescue
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:13:18 GMT

chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:

>Patrick Humphrey throws a "Dennis" in in order to get a non-response
>from me. 

It's refreshing to see you admit that the articles you post are not
responsive to anything.

                            -rocker
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker)
Subject: Re: "Pro-Lifers" Are Really Pro-Death
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 07:50:52 GMT

forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:

>From article by heath@athena.cs.uga.edu (Terrance Heath):
>> 
>> -- 
>> "Black men loving black men is THE revolutionary act!"
>> 			-Joseph Beam_


>Yeah, that oughta wipe themselves out _real_ efficiently.
>Just give it the timespan of one generation.

Teeeee heeeeeeeeee!!  :-)  :-)  :-)

Suzanne, please don't ever stop posting these gems.  Just when I think
I might be actually annoyed by t.a, I come across one of these priceless
bits of humor.

This is on a par with your statement that pro-choicers will wipe them-
selves out within a generation.  (OH NO, I've already _started_ the 
next generation of pro-choicers!  Whoooooooops, guess it won't be THIS
generation.....!)

But on the dark and ugly side, Suzanne, why this apparent wish to see
black men wiped out?

>SF

                   -rocker
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Subject: Re: What *is* Homophobia (formerly: SLAMMING HOMOSEXUALS...)
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 03:43:19 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.012328.16153@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>I find it pretty strange to see people advocating something designed for
>something totally unrelated -- birth control --, as a method of desease
>control!

What an ignorant comment!  Um, condoms were originally introduced to stop
the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

>Don'tcha get it?  Condoms were _never_designed_ to stop a virus millions of
>times smaller than a sperm.    WhatEVER gives you the idea that it would??

Bzzzzttthht.  Intact latex condoms are impermeable to free HIV.  This is
tested regularly.  It's part of the design.  Even allowing for this,
HIV is usually transmitted in carrier cells such as macrophages which
are many times larger than a sperm cell.

>Many people aren't very smart either.

QED

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.bizarre
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Beware the DickSizeWars!!!!
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:23:20 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.133107.27393@pwcs.stpaul.gov> chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>> chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>>> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
>
>>>> Last Saturday, one of them had a piece of posterboard on his
>>>> back.  On the posterboard, he'd glued a wooden Celtic cross.
>>>> To the cross, he'd glued a rubber rat.
> 
>>>> The rat, I am told, represents the tiny sex animals that
>>>> tempt us and result in our being sent to burn in eternal
>>>> hellfire.
>
>>> Funny thing.  I'd always thought of _my_ 'tiny sex animal' as
>>> a big, friendly Labrador retriever.  It would be pretty hard
>>> to get one of those on a posterboard!
>
>> Mr Lyman, you are here with, and here to fore, 
>> forewarned that any more postings of this sort 
>> will be construed as an explicit Call for a 
>> DickSizeWar, and that No Mercy will Be Shown,
>> No Quarters Offered.
>
>Mr. Hampe, let me inform you that, contrary to How Things Are Done
>in YOUR particular Town of Iniquity, in MY Town of Iniquity, it
>takes a lot more than QUARTERS to get a young man to show his
>privates.  YOU have been living cheap for far too long!!!

While I may not be worthy of participation in a DickSizeWar, my stereo
speakers are larger than any of yours.  Except maybe cj's.
--scott
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.birthright
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Governor Casey for '96 President?
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 04:13:20 GMT

In article <4ePWVKm00WBNQ7HNB9@andrew.cmu.edu>, Thomas Oligino <to0b+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>> 
>>My summary opinion: Governor Casey should have, or should in the future,
>>run for US President.
>
>If my vote means anything he will have plenty of time because Im sure as
>hell not voting for him for govener next time around. 

Doesn't it strike you as funny that Casey would get such vehement "support"
from someone who lives 2000 miles away?  Chaney (or Hall, or whatever he
calls himself this week) gets off easy that way -- he doesn't have to exert
the effort to go out and actually *vote* for his candidate of the moment.
If he'd been old enough to be in college in '88, I expect he'd have been
campaigning for Clayton Williams in our gubernatorial election...

(actually, if Chaney/Hall/whoever is so stuck on Casey, that in itself is a
fair argument for voting against him anyway...:-)

-- 
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. 
                  Support term limitations for politicians:
                 two terms -- one in office and one in jail.
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Frankly admits opressive stance (was: IS COMPROMISE POSSIBLE... YES?)
Keywords: From: decay@
Date: 22 Jul 92 19:37:02 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <BrpnBo.8K7@cs.dal.ca> franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve "edified" Franklin) lies:
[text deleted, before and after]
>From Susan's interpretation, I am oppressive and dictatorial, solely
>because I request the removal of her right to abortion. 

I don't have a right to abortion, idiot.


You and your friend Darcy may think that you know what I
think.  It obviously bothers neither of you to be consistently
wrong.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Notable "Pro-life"/Anti-Choice Quotes
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Date: 30 Jul 92 20:55:41 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

csulaima@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Cynthia Renee Sulaiman) writes:

>Received this in the mail yesterday, thought someone could make use
>of it:



>"For those who say I can't impose my morality on others, I say
>just watch me."
>                --Joseph Scheidler

Joe can watch me exercise my second Ammendment rights.  This fool actually
threatened to picket Moody Bible Institute because they weren't sufficiently 
frothing at the mouth pro-life.  Needless to say he decided against it...
it seems that an MBI employee dared him to try...;-)

>"Sex education in our schools are promoting incest."
>                                                    --Rev. Jimmy Swaggart

This from a man caught with a prostitute....defrocked, too.

 -Steve
--
 The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                        -------------------
     adams@spss.com                           Phone: (312) 329-3522
     Steve Adams                              Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dgp@atlas.wustl.edu (Don Porter)
Subject: Re: OR conviction overturned
Keywords: From: decay@
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 14:03:09 GMT

<1992Jul23.012753.218622@cs.cmu.edu> (Susan Garvin) writes:
> The "necessity defense" has been used lots of times, with
> varying degrees of success.  Many anti-nuke protesters
> have used it.  O.R. almost always tries it.  

Isn't the trouble with this defense that it depends on the 
political views of the judge as to whether it works?  Then
we have not rule by law but rule by judges.  I'm reminded
of Amy Carter's acquittal after blocking access to CIA
on-campus interviews several years back.  The "necessity
defense" seemed incredibly silly in that context, but it
worked.

|   Don Porter | dgp@saturn.wustl.edu | Washington University in St Louis   |
|  "The effect of liberty to individuals is, that they may do what they     |
|   please; we ought to see what it will please them to do, before we       |
|___risk congratulations." -- Edmund Burke._________________________________|
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.birthright,alt.abortion.inequity
From: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Pro-Life? (was Re: Hypocrites?)
Reply-To: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 02:06:37 GMT

In article <lefty-300792174350@lefty.apple.com> lefty@apple.com (Lefty) writes:

>dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
 
>> In article <adams.712521565@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:

>>> What the "Pro-Life" people want is an end to abortion.  Period.  
>>> Therefore, the proper appelation would well be "anti-abortion." 

>> Not necessarily. Many of the pro-life people also oppose euthanasia
>> and the use of anencephalic infants as organ donor sources. 

> In what possible sense can opposition to the use of anencephalic infants as
> organ donors be construed as being "pro-life"?

Killing anencephalic infants for their organs is wrong because they
are innocent persons. I hesitate to generalize here, but most pro-lifers 
that I know oppose the killing of innocent persons; they are not
just "anti-abortion". (Anencephalics do have a brain stem, they are
generally not "brainless"). 

> Several months ago, there was a fairly well publicized case in which the
> parents of an anencephalic baby desperately wanted their child's organs to
> be available for transplant.  My recollection is that they were opposed by
> a "pro-life" group, and the case was taken to court.  The parents wishes
> were disallowed, as I recall, after the court ruled against them.
>
> Their baby died; it would have under any circumstances.  Quite likely
> several other children who could have benefitted from the organs, had they
> been transplanted, died as well.  In what sense is this a "pro-life"
> stance?

There were no other children who could have used the organs of that 
anencephalic infant. The press played up the story as if hundreds 
of children were desperately waiting to receive organs, but there 
were none that matched. 

And we don't kill terminally-ill people with brain diseases for their 
organs, so why should anencephalic infants be killed for their organs? 


>Lefty (lefty@apple.com)


Doug Holtsinger

Xref: sparky talk.abortion:29304 alt.flame:11433
From: keegan@pan.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame
Subject: does chaney/hall want some sex?
Date: 28 Jul 92 15:08:03 GMT
Reply-To: james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com>
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Disclaimer: i speak for myself only, unless noted otherwise

the chaney/hall thing, posting as
chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
-> Now, Patrick Humphrey can do what he always wanted: Go to
-> florida and screw that cute little 12 year old he's been
-> eyeing, or so I heard.. ]-)
-> 
-> After, of course, Susan Garvin gets finished with her... 

sounds to me like a little boy who wants some sex, for the first
time, and who likes darcy's style.


-- 
----
charter member   ...   T.S.A.K.C.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Subject: Re: Well, I lost that article...
Date: 23 Jul 92 12:47:20 CDT

In article <1992Jul23.003313.18002@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>
>[Me and Bill Overpeck were talking.  I said that state schools should teach
>children that their bodies are their own, and that nobody has the right to
>use them against their wills.]
>
>[Bill asked, something along the lines of, so do you think the schools should
>teach about abstinance?]
>
>If they're going to teach it in terms of being the only 100% guaranteed,
>foolproof method of avoiding pregnancy, and all STD's, yes.
>
>If they're going to teach it in terms of "Saving yourself for your future
>husband/wife, because sex is for marriage", then no.
>
>If they're going to teach it in terms of "Six is ikky; be abstinant", then no.
>
>If they're going to teach it in terms of "The Bible says..", then no.

I could not agree more, Keith.  I also think values can
be taught in terms of academics, in ways we could almost 
all agree on.  In teaching someone to read and write, teaching 
them that plaigarism is an abuse of that process is also 
appropriate.

A good, well-rounded sex ed program, IMHO, should attempt 
to impart some understanding of the emotional vulnerability 
that often accompanies sexual intimacy.  I don't think 
it would violate most folks' values to point out that it's a 
good idea to be cautious of the feelings involved in sexual 
situations.  In that context, I have no problem with sex ed 
presenting abstinence as an emotionally healthy response to 
the problems of pubescent sexuality.

NB: I have a vested interest in persuading teens that the
postponement of sexual activity can be a Good Thing.

muriel
standars disclaimer
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: judi@wam.umd.edu (Jay T Stein -- low in cholesterol and saturated fat)
Subject: Re: THE REAL LOWDOWN ON "CLOT," "CLUMP OF CELLS," AND "FETUS"
Originator: judi@rac1.wam.umd.edu
Organization: WACDTF, Washington, D.C.
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 18:15:55 GMT

What: <1992Jul28.151803.7987@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>
Who:  fusco@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Andrew Fusco)

[snip snip]

>Nevertheless, one could argue that Schenck's primary purpose was to
>impress upon people what a fetus looks like before an late term abortion.
>No matter how deceptive his language may have been, it would never change
>the fact that he was holding a real human fetus.

I don't like the implication here at all.  It sounds like you're saying
that if he was being deliberately deceptive (or even outright lying),
then he was justified because he was holding a "real human fetus."

So it's okay to lie if it forthers your cause?  I thought that that was
what *we* got accused of doing.
--
     _____     __      __               -=* Jay T Stein *=-
   |   |      |  \    /        
   |   |  in  |   |  |               Internet: judi@wam.umd.edu
|__|   |      |__/    \__               GEnie: J.STEIN18

But still I fear and still I dare not laugh at the madman.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:28436 alt.politics.homosexuality:5116
From: dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: What *is* Homophobia (formerly: SLAMMING HOMOSEXUALS...)
Keywords: From: decay@
Date: 22 Jul 92 23:37:52 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <adams.711845329@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Jul22.211155.13409@amhux2.amherst.edu> twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>>>
>>>People aren't monogamous.  Welcome to the real world.
>
>>fusco is not part of the real world.  He is living in the world of
>>his bible, which is about 1500 years ago.
>
>More like 1900 for the New Testament, and as much as 3000 or more for
>the Old.


First off, fusco is clearly a new testament kind of guy.

Though I am no biblical scholar, I do know that Jesus theoretically
died in like 35AD.  I was under the impression that most of the new
testament was written several hundred years later...


Jeff
-FWA
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The world according to propeller-boy - part 1
Keywords: Chaney does hypocrisy
Date: 24 Jul 92 20:30:10 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <p2hm#g_.ray@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
#chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes ...
##Your intellegence has devolved to the level of a paramecium, not to
##mention your blatant, in-your-face lies. 
#
##		  Pro-Choice means pro-adult/child sex! 
#
#Anyone _else_ notice any inconsistencies here?

I think that I know the source of Chaney's new .sig lie.
I think that some adult who supports legal abortion said
"fuck you" to him.


Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion