HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: scotts@CS.CMU.EDU (Scott Safier)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Gay Pride .sig of Steve Chaney
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:31:47 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Originator: scotts@MORPHEUS.CIMDS.RI.CMU.EDU

In article <1992Oct15.184727.26677@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
   Sounds like Susan Garvin may not be answering this challenge. 

Get your eyes checked.  I saw answers to this post.

   FACT #1: Which attribution lines, Bogus?  

I believe Susan pointed out that questions are not facts.

   FACT #2: Jesse Jackson said "WELCOME TO HYMIETOWN." He said it in
	    Brooklyn, NY. FACT. I am right and you are wrong.

Steve/Dennis wrote "Jews of New York" asserting "Jews of New York" =
"HYMIETOWN".  Susan pointed out that this is ridiculous.  Chaney/Hall,
who is slightly less intelligent than a street pebble, doesn't
understand.  Let's see if I explain it in simple terms a moron could
understand if Chaney will get it then...

Borgie-boy, "Jewtown" = "Hymietown", "Jews of New York" = "Hymies of
town".   "Jewtown" != "Jews of New York" != "Hymietown".  

   FACT #3: I have posted SEVERAL polls showing that Americans support
	    legal abortions for rape & incest only. NOT "Americans 
	    support rape & incest." FACT! You are wrong and I am right.

How was the question worded?  I can show polls where the majority of
Americans think the government has no business interfering with a
woman's right to choose.

   FACT #4: Rush Limbaugh's book is the fastest selling NONFICTION 
	    book in history according to Simon & Schuster & the NY Times.
	    Where did I say anything about the BIBLE? FACT! I am right
	    again and you are wrong. 

The Bible has sold more copies than any other book.  Is it fiction,
Steve/Dennis? 

   If you have ANY PROOF of anything you have said in this entire
   article, please post it. 

If you have any intelligence, please demonstrate it.

   Why continue with this, Bogus? Why continue to lie when everyone on
   this newsgroup knows you are a bald-faced (perhaps bald-headed, too?
   Shades of S(k)in(h)ead O'Connor?) liar and articles like the one I am
   responding to now, are shining examples of your inability to tell the
   truth. 

Well, your article is a shining example of something.  But it is not
an example of Susan lying.

Scott Safier                                   corwin+@cmu.edu
Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University
        
member, T.S.A.K.C.  B0/1 f+ w- g k+ s- m(+) e++

"Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a cure for AIDS in the marketplace
before Magic Johnson gets AIDS?"
             Vice President Dan Quayle, 11/13/91 (CNN)
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Foetus - special class of citizen?
Date: 13 Oct 92 21:19:07 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, dsh@odin.uucp (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
]How many pregnant women want abortions simply by virtue of the fact
]that a fetus resides within their body, or because the fetus is "using
]her body" against her will?  Probably not too many.

]Many pregnant women want abortions because pregnancy would disrupt
]their life in some manner.  They have *reasons* for wanting an
]abortion which nothing to do with facts such as bodily residence.
]These reasons have moral significance.  Could these reasons be
]used as a sufficiently compelling justification for killing a born
]person?

Doltsinger strikes (whiffs) again. The residency factor is the entire
case. If babes just sprang off a body 3 seconds after sex and conception,
there probably wouldn't be any abortions, although a lot of cells would
die. But I don't expect you to get this point, or any other, as you've
repeatedly shown yourself to have that most interesting characteristic
of lead, high density of low worth.

Ron                          Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
			     The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
			     Make a U-turn to God.
The irony is priceless.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 02:09:54 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

jason@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Jason Hanson) writes:
: >it wasn't that subtle.
: >you're obviously another flag waving, law abiding, epsilon.
: 
: First off, what is an epsilon?  That is the fourth time you have used this
: word.

I believe that he is referring to the category of people known as 
"epsilon semi-morons" in _Brave New World_ by Huxley.  (I hope I
got the right book.  It's the setting where Ford is worshipped as
a deity, sex is abundunt, and everyone's a mason jar baby.)

--
Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

Marrou/Lord in '92
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Date: 8 Oct 92 14:59:25 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.062449.8215@netcom.com> bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
> writes:

>>A man is dying for lack of a kidney, and although he desperately wants
>>somebody to donate the organ to save him, he's unable to get one from
>>another person by himself.  Therefore you say that he's not allowed to
>>have that done.

>However, let us just make a mental note that someone is dying here.

Let's make another one and that without the mother's support, so is
the fetus. (Are you really this dense, or just this confused?

>>A woman is pregnant with a fetus, and although she desperately wants

>A pregnant woman is not dying.

In this case she takes the role of the potential donor.
The fetus is the one dying.

>>somebody to cut off her support for the fetus, she's unable to do it
>>by herself.  Therefore you say that she's not allowed to have that done.

>I don't think you just "cut off" support.  I believe abortion methods
>require killing first.  I don't think you starve the unborn child from
>the womb.  I could be wrong about this.

Hey, simple snip of the unbilical cord, and that's it. Now comes the
hard part, said fetus will now die (gauranteed) and a further question
is, should we wait until said z/e/f dies, before removing it (it will
in short order) and risk the health of the woman, or since nothing can
be done at this point, shall we go ahead and remove said fetus before
it is completely dead, and remove the risk to the woman. (Note that
this is the case for the majority of abortions, not that odd percentage
of a percentage that could (maybe) live outside the womb at the time
of the abortion.

You're beginning to admit you may be wrong about things, keep it up,
and pompous may be dropped. :)

>the situation, you first need to actively kill the unborn child.  All
>gov't does is to "prevent" someone from actively taking that human life.

All you need to do is remove the support.

>In the earlier situation, someone was already dying.  What gov't does
>in this situation is to "force" people to donate parts.

The fetus is in a constant "dying" state, except for the support of
the mother.

>There is a difference even in the job of government.

Yeah, keep her enslaved as to force a person to become enslaved. Both
are equally reprehensible.

Ron                          Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
			     The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
			     Make a U-turn to God.
The irony is priceless.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer)
Subject: Re: ALL ARGUMENTS FOR PRO-CHOICE REFUTED HERE!!!!!
Organization: Netcom San Jose
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 09:34:33 GMT

ss1@kepler.unh.edu (The Rink) writes ...
>Folks like you posting responses to things you haven't read -- just merely
>scanned -- is the reason why half the world is so deluded.

I read _parts_ of your first post.  It was garbage - pro-life
propaganda (in the most perjorative sense of the word) and a waste of
time.  If you expect me to comment on anything you have to say, you'll
have to improve the signal to noise ratio.

By the way, have you read the Bible or just scanned it?

-- 
Ray Fischer                   "To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady
ray@netcom.com                 of the ignorant."  -- A. B. Alcott
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: Re: Forgive me, I am young...
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on...
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 21:45:59 GMT

In article <1992Oct11.184424.8594@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
# Didn't you get your ProLifeNewSpeak dictionary?
# 
# "No woman can have a child without the kindness of a man".
# 
# (Sorry, I don't remember who the jerk was that posted that originally, but
# I don't have the space to keep archives so I could look it up).

This was John Stevens (whose entire email address was
stevens@eatdust), and this isn't an exact quote but you have not
changed the meaning.

-- 
J H Woodyatt (a.k.a. Dr. Strychnine)
Space Systems/Loral

``Men who have no time to read should devote their time to reading
books of quotations.''
                                              -- Winston Churchill
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:42255 alt.abortion.inequity:4373
From: emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Date: 14 Oct 92 17:19:42 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: hernes-sun

In article <1992Oct12.192054.2478@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
>In article <ldbso2INNbbh@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh) writes:
>> In article <1992Oct8.114408.2452@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
>>>In article <ld3bm7INN2um@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh) writes:

>>>> Again, this is truth by blatant assertion. You have admitted that the
>>>> sperm/egg is human. Now, is it or is it not alive?

>>>Well, considering a biological standpoint:  Do you remember the 7 or so
>>>characteristics of living things?  I don't, but I know one of them
>>>is being able to reproduce, and a sperm can't get together with another
>>>sperm to make offspring sperm, so I would assume that sperm/eggs are not
>>>classified as living things.  Then again, under these constraints, neither
>>>is a zygote.  Then AGAIN, I bet these characteristics are able to be
>>>fulfilled at any life stage (otherwise kids would be non-living things too),

>[...]

>> OK, I've had a vasectomy. Does that mean that I'm dead?

>I assume you were capable of reproduction before your vasectomy, but there
>are of course exceptions to the rule, such as impotent males and
>whatever.  As long as you have the genetic makeup for the hardware
>(no pun intended of course), then consider yourself living.  As for
>those born with both bits-o-genitalia and other such oddities,
>well mutations and whatnot can cause members of a species to be
>sterile, eh?  I'm foggy on an answer to this, maybe a bio prof
>would be able to explain it better.

OK, a few more thoughts for you; the vast majority of ant, bees, and
other hive oriented insects are, as individuals, incapable of reproduction.
For that matter, even had I not my vasectomy I would still, as an
individual, be incapable of reproduction (a woman is required for
the process). 

The origional question was, is a sperm or egg alive? Just as I can
not reproduce without a woman, a sperm or an egg can not reproduce
without their counterparts. I don't think that this means that the
I, woman, the sperm, the egg, the bee or the ant is not alive. 

I think that the definition of life which requires reproduction
is not applicapable at the individual level, but at the species level.

>Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca

Eric
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:42382 talk.politics.guns:22085 alt.conspiracy:11239 alt.fan.dan-quayle:5321 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6789
From: nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Constitutional Questions, and liberalisms....
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:10:26 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <ATAYLOR.92Oct12165713@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
><In article <Bvv752.Ltw@creare.com> inb@creare.com (Ian Brown) writes:
>
><   Anyway, that wasn't what I was intending to argue about.  Liberals don't
><   like rules that don't make sense or favor people who need no favors over
><   those that do.  

>	This statement is false. "Liberals" generally (but not always)
>	favor such absurdities as the Brady bill; a "rule" which
>	makes no sense and favors only the politically connected
>	and criminals....

Since when is Brady and his bunch liberal? Brady was an official in Reagan's
white house, and is hardly liberal by any stretch of the imagination. Reagan
supported the bill, too.

I am considered very liberal, and I oppose ALL restrictions on any civil
right. I like all 10 Amendments in the Bill of Rights, not just nos. 2 and
4.


>       people who need no favors over Ms. Average
>	who wants to be able to defend herself against attack but
>	often cannot because of "rules" that reserve the right
>	of firearms ownership only to the rich/politically connected.
>
>


-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: Allow me to illustrate a minor point of Usenet etiquette
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 21:26:31 GMT

sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
# Now when have I said that sex was evil??  Unless me saying that sex is ok
# between two people in a monogamous relationship is somehow an attack on ll
# sex.  Is their anything in what I said that specifically says to outlaw sex??
# 
# I think not.

Suppose for a moment that I were to post the following in all
seriousness:

	`...Unless me saying that sex is ok between two white
	Christians of opposite gender is somehow an attack on all
	sex... '

What would I be implying?


-- 
J H Woodyatt (a.k.a. Dr. Strychnine)
Space Systems/Loral

``Men who have no time to read should devote their time to reading
books of quotations.''
                                              -- Winston Churchill
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dbn7350@zeus.tamu.edu (NASH, DAVID BENNETT III)
Subject: Re: Sarah Weddington
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 19:39:00 GMT

>In <26300@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil 
>   (Ron Bense) writes: > 
>In talk.abortion, wdo@TEFS1.acd.com 
>   (Bill Overpeck) writes: >>
> 
>>
>> What was forced upon you?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>A set of a beliefs that endorse the notion that abortion is a
>perfectly fine option.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Wait a second, are you saying that you are so dense that you 
believe everything that people tell you??  Do you think that beliefs 
that do not line up with your own are hostile and want to destroy 
"Truth, Justice,and The American Way (as all good christian males 
should live it)"??

Bill, please don't try to play the martyr, you look like an idiot.  

No one is going to put a gun to your head an make your 
girlfriend/wife/lover have an abortion.  Nor will anyone force you
to go to a NOW or NARAL meeting, promise. 

>Roe did the same thing, Ron.  You simply see the concept of "individual
>choice" as a value that supersedes all others.  I don't. 

Again, he is not forcing that concept on you.

> 
>Bill


dbn3.

-- one of the best star pilots in the galaxy.\dbn7350@zeus.tamu.edu
-- an enemy of the Ronald Reagan Republicans.\Texas A&M Biochemistry Undergrad.
-- let's get this show on the road. . .
<EOF>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran)
Subject: Re: Meet Ismail Elguindi, Abortionist
Summary: Will, you're an idiot! 
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on... 
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 23:45:59 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.233936.29308@zooid.guild.org> Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>

[Actually, this bit of tripe was posted by Will for Peter Nyikos.  Why
Peter needs other people to post things for him when his own software
is working fine is a mystery nobody will ever solve...]

>"Meet Ismail Elguindi, Abortionist" was the title of a leaflet distributed

You know, when I was dating Bob, he participated in an interesting case.

There was this plastic surgeon who completly botched 4 or 5 women's surgery.
He refused to try and help them "without more money".  He then moved out
of state for a couple of years, and moved back in to try and start up his
plastic surgery business again.

Needles to say, certain people didn't want that to happen...

I propose that we outlaw all plastic surgery, as it is clearly done just
so the EvilPlasticSurgeons can make money...
--
=kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu | B(0-4) c- d- e++ f- g++ k(+) m r(-) s++(+) t | TSAKC=
=My thoughts, my posts, my ideas, my responsibility, my beer, my pizza.  OK???=
=So tell me something, Kevin.  When are you planning on sending Lefty a "bill"=
=for your archiving services?  Myself and several other people want to know!!!=
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Ok, So booth Really is a Nazi Fan?
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 20:43:19 GMT

In article <bob1.719244848@cos> bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) writes:
Lots of stuff deleted--yes even I do it now too!!

>Simon, child, I hardly think we need worry about out of control liberalism
>here in this country. In Canada, most of my acquaintances belived tha
>I was somewhere to the right of Ghengis Khan, yet here I am considered
>to be a Liberal. Nuff said?
>
>
>REB
What I was planning to discuss in this story is how liberal policies that
are supposed to make things euqal might get taken to far and could alienate
people, who in turn might be driven towards a fascist party.


Simon
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Abortion and Ethnic Purging (Was Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Date: 9 Oct 92 22:03:58 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Oct9.184707.10601@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
#In article <7139@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
##n article <adams.718638072@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
###c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
###
####Abortion is direct killing of our human offspring.  Illegalizing abortion
####does not directly kill women.  Even indirectly, it doesn't unless some
####women choose to bring on death to their offspring and themselves.
###
###Direct or indirect, you're still dead.
##
##No, Steve, you said it wrong.  It's, "Direct or indirect, *she's*
##still dead."
##
##If it were Guerrero who was at risk, he'd probably understand.
##Since it's some hypothetical woman, he could care less.
#
#Why choose death for both human individuals when both can be alive and
#well?

Are you really this dense, or is it just an act?

The alternatives are not (1) abortion is legal and z/e/f/'s die
and (2) abortion is legal and no z/e/f's die.  Can you
understand this?

You are not going to prevent abortion by making it illegal.  

I suggest that you talk to some women who have been pregnant
when they did not want to be.  Your ignorance about what
such pregnancies mean to the women involved is obvious.
Your failure to try to remedy this ignorance is disgusting.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.war.vietnam,alt.conspiracy
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Re: Is George IN the Loop
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 08:48:56 GMT

aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

] In article <1992Oct13.200933.12903@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
] 
] >First OFF, I must Agree with Former JCS ADM Crowe
] 
] I believe (but could be wrong about this) that Crowe resigned from the
] Reagan Administration because he wanted a 600 ship Navy and Reagan wouldn't
] give it to him (in other words, he wanted to spend even more on defense
] than Reagan).

Minor Technical Point: the 'six hundred ship navy' was a Reaganism,
that many of us in the Fleet Giggled About, as You need BODIES to
man them... They Tend Not to float well on their OWN.

You Might have missed the 'OrdMods' that went out, and the lengthening
of the Sea_Shore Rotation Schedule....

So You might like to check this FACT out first before you
blow another HOLE in your foot.

There is a Reason I have Respect for this Man.

] >Why then is it that Nixon, Reagan, AND BUSH, have not even
] >sought a Grand Jury Investigation of this CRIME?
] 
] I don't think Bush has accused Clinton of doing anything illegal
] so a Grand Jury wold be kind of silly woldn't it?

If You will LOOK and READ what I wrote, You would NOTE
that I was talking about the Prima Facia Case of TREASON
that Hanoi Jane Offered the US Governement to establish
that the 'war powers' act was relevant to the matter.

that No such cases have been Presented merely re_inforces
the fact that the Government did NOT have a clear 'state
of war' in affect.

So Clearly the Point Remains that this BUSH league Rhetoric
means that when You DO what we Do NOT LIKE you should do it
where you will not be seen or heard.....

Do try to get some of Your FACTS Straight.

ciao
drieux


-- 
Modern Day Problems:
In any case, don't give up, just type slower :-).
Chimo
Bob.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion