HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: MEET GEORGE TILLER, LATE-TERM ABORTIONIST Part Two
Keywords: abortion, digoxin, laminaria, Tiller is pro-death
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 30 Dec 92 21:27:41 GMT

In <BzyoB9.BvE@news.cso.uiuc.edu> vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu () writes:

>kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman) writes:

>>pn> =nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>pn> The cold light of reality begins with the fee schedule.  Sixteen to 22
>>pn> weeks, $750; 22 to 26 weeks, $1800.  Beyond 26 weeks, $2200.  

>>I see your not too proud to go for a few cheap shots.

>>(1) Nice innuendo.  (Do you do mathemtical proofs by innuendo too?)

Rotten innuendo.  Clean up your act and I'll address the other questions
you've deleted.

>Gotta share a little story with y'all here.  My mother is an ob/gyn nurse
>and supervisor at a local suburban hospital.  Several weeks ago she was 
>prepping a patient in the hospital for an elective abortion.  The patient
>was completely ready for the operation, and just before they were going
>to start it, the doctor asked the patient if she had brought the money to
>pay for it.  The patient responded that she hadn't remembered, but that she
>would get him the money within two days.  The doctor told her to go home and
>come back when she had the money.  She went home and came back several hours 
>later with the money, and the doctor performed the abortion.

>This story is absolute fact.  I don't know the legal ramifications of
>supplying the names of the hospital or doctor involved so I will not.

I'm not sure myself, but she can call the American Rights Coalition
toll-free at 1-800-634-2224 and will be given this information. 

Sometimes this number is disconnected due to bills (Garvin can tell you
more about them) not being paid on time.  Another source of legal
information is a group in Pensacola whose toll-free number I do not
have with me, but will try to find out for you.

>You tell me, was that doctor interested that patients health?  She was
>ON the table ready for an operation and he sent her home.  Talk about 
>playing with someone's fears and emotions.  Imagine if you were lying on
>the operating table, ready to have someone hacking into your body, and they
>suddenly changed their mind and sent you home.  If that doctor really cared
>about her, he would have trusted her to pay the lousy few hundred bucks.

>My dentist gives me a month to pay her bills.



>Edward Simmonds


>-- my opinions are my own and if you don't like them I'll just repeat them --

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Proposed definitions for FAQ (Was: Reconciling OT/NT)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 03:51:02 GMT

In article <nyikos.725128086@milo.math.scarolina.edu> 
nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

> [... re: definition of pro-abortionists ....]

> [This includes opposing informed consent requirements, requirements that
> abortionists carry a realistic amount of malpractice insurance,
> requirements that abortions be done in EITHER a hospital OR licensed

Believe it or not, some pro-abortionists have actually 
challenged the constitutionality of ordinary medical 
health regulations for first trimester abortions. 

In Abortion Coalition of Michigan v. Michigan Department of
Public Health, 426 F. Supp. 471 (1977), the plaintiffs
argued that 'any state regulation applicable to first
trimester abortions is per se unconstitutional', and
they cited Blackmun's opinion in Roe v. Wade as precedent. 

>Peter Nyikos


Doug Holtsinger

Xref: sparky talk.abortion:52738 alt.society.civil-liberty:7030
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: [ACLU] Reproductive Freedom
Followup-To: alt.society.civil-liberty
Date: 23 Dec 1992 01:42:15 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Dec18.180859.11706@rotag.mi.org>, kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
> In article <1gob1jINN816@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
> >In article <1992Dec16.215545.21544@netcom.com>, ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:

> >> Ah, another tax whiner.  Well bad news kiddo, you DO have a choice.
> >> You're getting services; the government demands that you pay for those
> >> services.  Seems fair to me.  If you don't like it you have two choices.

> >> 1) Vote for different services.
> >> 2) Move out of the country.

> >> Easy, eh?  If you don't like the services the US government supplies,
> >> then live in a different country.

> >Ah yes -- "America, Love It Or Leave It" -- the favorite bumper sticker
> >of American... liberals?

> A superficial analysis. Everyone, short of a pure anarchist and/or someone 
> who is completely ignorant of social philosophy, believes in some form of 
> a Social Contract. 

Wrong, by inspection.  But a neat ad hominem argument, nonetheless.

> The bottom line 
> here is that "love it or leave it" is pretty much ideology-neutral -- you're
> gonna hear it from WHOEVER'S ox is being gored at the time -- so your attempt 
> to associate it with one and only one side of the political fence is baloney.

Snicker.  Maybe you're just too young to realize whose side of the political
fence it's been associated with for the past 30 years.  Or maybe you just have
no sense of irony.
-- 

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Subject: Re: a silly question
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 05:13:14 GMT

dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
->keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
->>dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
->>> Does "TSAKC" do anything besides fabricating "net reputations"?

->> the only people i know of, [Mr. Holtsinger], who'd even speculate
->> about something like that are the cowards who earned
->> their net reputation(s) and, like cowards, need someone
->> or something to blame for their failures.

->I guess that's a "no" answer.

that doesn't surprise me. your interpretative abilities
seem as little developed as your honesty.

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: t.a. FAQ (part 3 of 3)
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 04:18:31 GMT
Distribution: na
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16f by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In <1992Dec31.004750.8742@ncsu.edu> dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>
>Roe v. Wade is essentially unrestricted abortion-on-demand throughout
>the term of pregnancy.

Dougie just can't stop lying about this.  Perhaps we should add the refutation
of his lies to the FAQ?
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Clarifying "Restrictions"
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 03:50:11 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16f by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In <1993Jan1.001959.29643@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.200825.22596@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>>In <1992Dec30.050611.25734@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>>Would "limited pro-concensus" be sufficiently descriptive, you think?
>>
>>"Sufficiently vague" is more like it.
>
>Superficial, Larry. Very superficial.

That too.  :-)

>>I think "arguing for legislation while claiming he doesn't want it"
>>is the most descriptive I've seen yet.
>
>I don't argue for abortion restrictions. I argue only against certain
>absolutist positions. Learn the difference.

What's the difference?  It *sounds* the same as someone arguing for them.
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.society.civil-liberty,talk.politics.misc
From: jap@cbnews.cb.att.com (james.a.parker)
Subject: Re: Is Fire Bombing a Legitimate Form of Free Speach.
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 14:41:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.063438.18622@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>Do you consider fire bombing to be a legitimate first ammendmant issue?

Only if performed in a crowded theater, to legitimize the shouting of "FIRE!"

8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)8-)

				    James Parker
				    jap@cb1focus.att.com
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:52911 alt.abortion.inequity:6173 soc.men:21785 soc.women:21898
From: sfm@manduca.neurobio.arizona.edu (Stephen Matheson)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Aaargh! What *is* the TSAKC, anyway?!?
Date: 24 Dec 92 01:19:56 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

From article <c-v2qnm@rpi.edu>, by keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.):
> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
> ->keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:

> ->>say phoney, have you posted your apology for falsly
> ->>accusing adrienne of posting a forgery?

> ->I've tried TWICE to post something that would set the ball rolling in
> ->the direction of cleaning up this issue once and for all. 

> there is no need to post something to "set the ball
> rolling." you lied in making a false accusation. you
> were exposed as having lied on the day you posted your
> lie. that was a long time ago. you have made countless
> posts since then.

> i don't think that your posting an apology at this late
> daye will regain you any of the credibility you lost.
> on the other hand, i strongly suspect that you will be
> confronted with the fact that you do not have
> sufficient character to deal with your problem over and
> over by numerous posters until you do deal with it.

Keegan on character.  Unintelligible.

> ->It included apologies to (gasp!) you as well as to Susan and
> ->Adrienne and clueless newbies, but my netserver LIED to me both
> ->times that it had been posted and even listed the first attempt
> ->in my index (the second was made during the week-and-a-half news
> ->blackout).  I'll see if I can dig it up today and (groan!) make
> ->a third attempt at posting it.

> this claim rings pretty false to me. i don't know how
> others will see it.

I've seen the apology; Nyikos sent it to me by email before the first
attempt to post.  I don't understand why you doubt his sad story about
the server; your accusations of lying seem to me to be distributed
rather haphazardly.
 
--

Steve Matheson   Program in Neuroscience   University of Arizona
sfm@neurobio.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King)
Subject: Lets all play the Petey Game
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 19:14:10 GMT

Tis the season and all that jazz.  I figure now that Petey is back
I'll give y'all a way-cool gift for the yule season.  It's just
a little game to be played using that master of the SAT's posts.
The object is to take any two of Petey Honey's posts and show 
were they appear to be written by two different people.  The
object is to get two that come in to your newsserver as close
together as possible.  If you manage to have two in the same 
post you get extra points.  Heres an example of what I mean:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
pn>In article <nyikos.724972656@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
L>In <lefty-181292170344@lefty.apple.com> lefty@apple.com (Lefty) writes:
 
L>Seems as though your hero is getting the worst of things here, Mr.
L>Anderson.  You might do better to quietly slink away.  If you keep jumping
L>up and down, yelling, "Don't hurt him!  Don't hurt him!" you're bound to
L>attract attention to yourself. 
 
pn>I'm not doing any of the above, by the way.  I missed out on all the
pn>really substanitive arguments due to netserver failure, and all I'm 
pn>hearing are trivial little echoes that do not justify anything Lefty
pn>is saying--not that I have *ever* seen Lefty give *any* justification
pn>for *any* of his flaming comments.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++  
Followed right on the heals by:
 
pn>In article <nyikos.724980520@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
sn>In <1992Dec18.191718.22011@advtech.uswest.com> steven@advtech.uswest.com ( Steve Novak) writes:
 
sn>  And thanks for admitting the religious basis
sn>for your fanatical anti-abortionism.
 
pn>Thanks for showing us your ability to jump to conclusions on the basis
pn>of insufficient evidence. 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
 
These two posts came to my newsserver as 105926 and 105929.  So they
were separated by 2 other posts.  We can set up some sort of point 
awards such as: 
 
Same article        20 points
1 article apart     15 points
2-5 article apart   10 points
2-10 articles apart  5 points
more than 10 article 1 point
 
Since articles come into each newservicer at various rates and in 
various order we will have to rely on each others honor to post
how far apart each article is.  I guess we will also need to post 
what time we posted the evidence so that if two people come in 
with the same examples we will be able to tell who gets credit 
for the points.
 
Just a little way of making Petey's posts fun to read again over 
the yule season.  His posts have gotten rather boring and this 
should liven them up somewhat.  
 
Thanks Petey,
Dan King


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: The Mendacity of Susan Garvin, Part 2 [Was: Meet Pete...]
Keywords: PHoney does spelling flames
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 18:15:48 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.131937.11625@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
>In article <nyikos.725569327@milo.math.scarolina.edu>, nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>> Of course, there are more flattering explanations, but I leave it up to
>> the minions of Susan and Adrienne to provide them.  (Starting with the
>> ever-helpful Dean Kaflowitz, who will probably be so anxious to help
>> Susan that he won't even bother to contact her to find out HER
>> explanation-- or if he does, he'll hide the fact and try to present
>> it as though it were the objective, well-established truth.)
>
>
>Support this libel or apologize for it.  Show any evidence that I
>do this or have done this.  

Oh, silly me, here I was thinking that "will probably be" indicated a
speculation about a future event. According to the Great Dean, however, 
it refers to present or past events. How could I have been so mistaken?

								- Kevin
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Date: 31 Dec 92 18:51:13 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

I'll take this opportunity to remind everyone that the only member
or official of NARAL who claims that the estimates of deaths due
to illegal abortion were grossly exaggerated is Bernard Nathanson.
This admitted liar is now a leader in the anti-abortion movement.
His claims about NARAL's actions have not been confirmed by any
of the other members.  (Nathanson likes to pass himself off as the
driving force behind NARAL.  If one looks at the early history of
the organization, or reads the words of the other founders, this
claim is contradicted.)

I read some books on abortion that were published in the 50's and
60's.  I'll get the numbers again next week, but the estimates
of abortion related deaths in those books were in line with the
estimates that Nathanson so desperately wants to debunk.  
Further, anyone who asks a doctor who worked in an emergency
room in an urban area before Roe can hear first hand accounts
of how common these deaths were, and how unlikely the claim
that 90% of all abortions were done in doctor's offices is.
The fact that many hospitals had entire wards for treating 
abortion complications is further evidence that this claim
is constructed out of wishful thinking at best.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Slavery Analogy
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Date: 29 Dec 92 17:37:52 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh



Is Skinner really unable to understand that the analogy breaks
down because fetuses reside inside women's bodies and slaves
do not?  He seems to ignore arguments about bodily autonomy.
Perhaps he equates women's bodies with plots of land...

Susan


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran)
Subject: Meet Petey Ny, propoganda specialist.
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: abortion, digoxin, laminaria
Organization: Um, err... I *know* I saw it here a few days ago...
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 01:28:21 GMT

In article <nyikos.724627328@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

[Lots of unsubstantiaqted hearsay garbage deleted]

>	abortion patients were briefly counseled that they could not
>							   ^^^^^^^^^	
>	choose to stop the procedure once it had started, but could
>	^^^^^^
>
Is this supposed to be suprising? face facts Petey. After the
procedure is started, it can't be stoped. The fetus is dead, and
halting the procedure would be a good way to ensure that the woman
dies.
That probably doesn't matter to you though.

[Lots more unsupported hearsay evidence deleted]

>I put "sic" after "oxytocin" because I am under the impression that this
>is the name for the natural hormone, whereas the hormone administered 
>intravenously is known as "pitocin."  BTW, digoxin is a compound related
>to digitalis with similar action on the heart, and is not to be confused
>with the even more lethal chemical dioxin.
> 
Incorrect, as usual, Petey. Pitocin is a brand name for a hormone of
either synthetic or natural origin called oxytocin.
Digoxin is not "related to" digitalis, it *is* digitalis. What is your
problem with it's use to stop a heart?
Jeeez Petey, if you're going to post this gaqrbage, at least make some
minimal effort to get yoru facts straight.

[Irrelevant quote from a story that took place about 15 years ago
deleted]

--
                  Mark Cochran          merlin@eddie.ee.vt.edu
These are the views of my employer. They also represent the views of
your employer, your government, the Church of your choice, and the
Ghost of Elvis. So there.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
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.
Organization: None to speak of...
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 17:43:50 GMT

In article <C015n2.Ipw@ra.nrl.navy.mil> psl@nrl.navy.mil (Paul Lebow) writes:
>
>
>RE: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
>
>In article <28DEC92.21004829@vax.clarku.edu> hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>
>> Do you know of any way to give rights to a fetus without taking away 
>rights 
>> from the pregnant woman?
>> 
>> 				.... Heather.
>
>
[Paul's dodge deleted]
Nice dodge Paul. Now try answering the question.

--
                  Mark Cochran          merlin@eddie.ee.vt.edu
These are the views of my employer. They also represent the views of
your employer, your government, the Church of your choice, and the
Ghost of Elvis. So there.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame,alt.fan.kevin-darcy
From: mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: still more of the GROUP, kevin darcy
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.
Organization: None worth mentioning.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 19:47:09 GMT

In article <-z22#lg@rpi.edu> keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:

[Deletia]

>i think you've hit on one of the key reasons that
>people in several newsgroups poke at kevin. of course,
>there are others. in fact, shortly after kebbin
>appeared in alt.flame, a long time ago, i told him that
>his posting mannerisms were such that, no matter what
>he said, there would be a lot of people who flamed him.
>that observation has come to pass far more dramatically
>than i had imagined.
>
The sad thing is that Kevin does post some resonable, intelligent
articles. But they're buried under mountains of gibberish. If he could
stop the flow of gibberish, and concentrate on the godo stuff, he'd
probably find people a lot less likely to flame him constantly.

--
                  Mark Cochran          merlin@eddie.ee.vt.edu
These are the views of my employer. They also represent the views of
your employer, your government, the Church of your choice, and the
Ghost of Elvis. So there.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,can.politics