HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero)
Subject: Re: I had an abortion two days ago
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 08:55:28 GMT

In article <c6_pr7k.ray@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes ...
>>In article <c!#ptlb.ray@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>>>c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes ...
>>>> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>
>>>  Who's correct?  Is a 8-week embryo a person?
>>An "8-week embryo" is definitely human.
>>BTW, just a small tidbit: the unborn feels pain at 9 weeks.
>
>It appears that a "1" was dropped in front of that 9.  Your should
>proofread more carefully.

See my previous post to this

>
>>There is a difference between that which exists and has been terminated
>>and that which has never existed and as a result, can never
>>be terminated.
>
>And what difference is that?
>
>Besides, an egg exists before _and_ after fertilization, as does the
>sperm.  Both are alive before _and_ after fertilization.
>

I am, of course, talking about the existence of a human life.  Before
conception, it does not exist.  Afterwards, even if it is a product of two
non humans (but it is a human cell), human life exists.  The egg and the
sperms, as individual objects, do not exist in the same form after conception.

>>In the near future, I shall visit you with a an uzi with a silencer, as well
>>as some other goodies and shoot you and kill you for arguing with me.  
>>Terrible?  Nah.  Life & death decisions are made daily.  Killing you is
>>not more terrible than is the universe:
>
>Nor you.
>
>And why do pro-lifers resort so often to images of murder?  Sheesh.
>First Forgach, now you.  Both in the space of a week.  Pro-life my ass.
>
Abortion is not murder.  It is merely a "medical procedure."

Anyway, the above is merely a response to pooh-paahing life and death
decisions as mere trifles, and not worth fretting over.  My last statement,
hopefully, put some importance back into these life & death decisions.

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: jcburt@cs.wm.edu (John Burton)
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Organization: The College of William and Mary
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:57:16 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.141936.10746@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> pettengi@ial3.jsc.nasa.gov (James B. Pettengill) writes:
>In article <2927195477.0.p00056@psilink.com>, "Faustus" <p00056@psilink.com> writes:
>> 
>> Well.. Teddy.. Its sure is nice you aren't a woman.. You never will experience
>> doubts, fears or trepidations of not being able to afford an unwanted child..
>> Your smug all-knowing attitude turns my stomach..I WANT TO SPEW! 
>>
>Catholic Social Services will gladly find a family pay for all 
>medical expenses occured during the pregnancy provided they can adopt the child.
>
>This is how my sister & her husband adopted two of their children.

Thats wonderful for your sister and her husband...too bad it doesn't
do a damn bit of good for the thousands of minority/poor/disadvantaged/
AIDS/crack babies, or even the thousands of kids over 2 years of age
that nobody will adopt because the majority of people able to  adopt 
want white healthy newborns. 

I'm glad Catholic Social Services is doing its thing, but just a few 
questions... last I checked, it cost between $5000 and $10000 for 
"proper" medical care of a woman during pregnancy through delivery
(doctor visits, lab tests, delivery room, etc). In general a couple's
health insurance will NOT pay those bills for someone else. So, *who*
can afford such a service, and what type of child do *they* want...
 
I doubt if this is a solution for the majority of unwanted
pregnancies...

John


Xref: sparky talk.abortion:40535 talk.politics.misc:49491 alt.sex:31915 alt.rush-limbaugh:6523 alt.politics.elections:15128 alt.politics.clinton:8446 alt.politics.bush:7708
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: 5 Oct 92 14:41:23 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <Oct04.222555.96000@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> arsmith@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Alan Smith) writes:

>"Fetuses aren't borned persons." and  "Murder involves, among other things,
>the killing of borned persons." are the only statements  that are absolutely
>TRUE.  All the others are a little too fluid.

Where do you get your definition of murder.  My copy of Webster's says
that murder is the killing of a human being.  No mention of borned.

That leaves "Fetuses aren't borned persons." as the only true statement in
the list.

-- 
Mark
My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc
From: kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran)
Subject: Re: Is it Christian values or chavinism?
Summary: Is it Ignorance, or Stupidity? 
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: Wed, 7 Oct 92 00:24:11 GMT

In article <nyikos.718387487@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>In <10467@vice.ICO.TEK.COM> bobb@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep30.072730.14377@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>
>>>You know, I threw a couple of pieces of bacon in a hot frying pan once.
>>>They sizzled and popped, writhed and curled up, they even changed color.
>>>
>>>I never thought at any time that they were aware and feeling pain.  Do you?
>
>>  All the abortion rhetoric aside, do you really intend to imply
>>  that a human fetus doesn't have the capability to feel pain?  What
>>  gestational age are we talking about?
>
>In the case I quoted at length from, which Storga purposely deleted

Are you reading Gordon's mind, Peter?  Or will you post unbiased,
primary source references showing that he deleted it "purposely"?

>so he could make his tasteless joke, the little victim of saline
>abortion was at five and a half months, already viable, "that is,
>potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with
>artificial aid,"
>in Blackmun's curious phraseology [_Roe v. Wade_, 410 US at 160].

Over 99.1% of abortions occur before 20 weeks.

>
>>"Above all, a god needs compassion"    James T. Kirk
>
>Something we could use more of where the unborn are concerned.

Comparing yourself to God, Peter?  For shame...
--
=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???=
=National Coming Out Day is Oct 11th, 1992. Closets Are A Place To Put Clothes=
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Peter Nyikos' Credentials
Date: 28 Sep 92 13:15:41 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:

>I don't remember it.  Is the bumper sticker reference below related?

For you, anything.

Actually, I asked you how many sides a mobius strip had, since you claim
that a circle had two sides (or was that infinite sides? I don't remember).

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: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: The Sacredness of Cows == The Sacredness of Fetuses?
Organization: LLNL
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 01:09:03 GMT

	Not too long ago, I read an article in a local newspaper about
how belief in the sacredness of cows is continuing to go strong in
India, with cows wandering the streets as drivers try to avoid bumping
into them. Few drivers are willing to blow their horns or bump the
cows with their fenders.

	The article featured the adventures of some official
government cow catchers who often face strong opposition to their
work. One day, some of them went out to retrieve a cow that had found
its way onto the second floor of a government building. None of the
numerous employees there helped them; instead, they were called
butchers and evil men.

	Not only poor people but also some high officialdom worship
cattle; many MP's and other high officials keep cattle on their
official estates.

	In Hinduism, the animal is called "Mother Cow" (_gau mata_),
though this belief is hardly the original belief about cows, since the
Vedas (scriptures dating as far back as 1200 BCE) feature abundant cow
sacrifice. I don't know whether the Harappans (pre-Vedic) slaughtered
cows or not; that could be determined by studying archeological
remains. Marvin Harris suggests that cow worship emerged as a "Mom and
Apple Pie" issue at one time in India, and has stayed around ever
since.

	Cow killing is legal in only 2 of India's 25 states.

	The 120 New Delhi cow catchers caught 10677 stray cows from
January to August of this year (ND has 9 million people, by
comparison).


	This sounds suspiciously like too many opponents of abortion,
who seem obsessed with trying to protect fetuses and embryos and
zygotes at whatever the cost -- and not caring very much about the one
who has to be pregnant with the f / e / z.

	There is also the same sort of insinuation as with the
cow-worshippers, that anyone who tries to get rid of an unwanted f / e
/ z is somehow anti-life and an evil person.


	Some environmentalists also have a reputation for acting a lot
like this, when they try to protect whales, or trees, or Spotted Owls,
or whatever.

Xref: sparky talk.abortion:38968 talk.religion.misc:17314
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Eric Gorr on Biblical support for abortion...?
Date: 28 Sep 92 20:24:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper

egorr@hebb.uoregon.edu (Eric Gorr) writes:
] In article <1992Sep25.010632.3423@cs.yale.edu>,
] rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
] > In article <1992Sep25.005015.4352@nntp.uoregon.edu> egorr@hebb.uoregon.edu (Eric Gorr) writes:
] > >In article <1992Sep24.233635.2494@cs.yale.edu>,
] > >rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
] > Yep. I don't think there is any of that either.
] > To avoid the trouble for you, Ex 21.22 is not definitive for a long
] > series of reasons I can enumerate if you really care.We've already
] > argued Numbers 5, and I wasn't convinced though you should feel free
] > to try.
] 
] Well, as an initial responce, I would encourage you to listen to or get the
] words for:
] 
] What about the Love
] 
] By Amy Grant on the LEAD ME ON cd.
] 
] More is comming...

Excuse me, but I can not find 
'Amy Grant on the LEAD ME ON cd.'
in my bible, has there been a 
new version generated by the AntiAbortionist FetalIdolators....


ciao
drieux


ps: anyone up for the fun of 'hymnalogy' ....




-- 
Modern Day Problems

Does that 'answer' your question,
or should I be a little more vague.
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Threats?
Date: 2 Oct 92 21:12:00 GMT
Organization: Rescorla for himself.

In article <1992Oct2.171032.17861@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>In article <6692@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
>> double standards.  DODie has said publicly that he won't
>> criticze another pro-forcer on the net - he'll only
>> do it in e-mail.  
>This is a lie.
Whether he's said it or not, he just criticized Forgach.
-Ekr



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                 ekr@eitech.com(preferred)
   "Base 8 is just like base 10, really...if you're missing two fingers."
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: "Faustus" <p00056@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Organization: Inferno
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 00:44:07 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink (3.2)

>DATE:   25 Sep 92 21:10:40 GMT
>FROM:   KEN GUILFOYLE <ken@moncol.monmouth.edu>
>
>In article <1992Sep24.232921.10162@pony.Ingres.COM>, garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR) writes:
>> In article <1992Sep24.204032.11507@wetware.com>, drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just  writes...
>
>   What the fuck are you talking about.?
>
>> 

Now this guy knows how to ask the real question...

Faustus
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: A new development
Date: 28 Sep 92 15:14:41 GMT
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works

sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) cites:

"Every reflection on this serious matter must begin from the clear
premise that procured abortion is the taking of life of an already
existing human being." -- Pope John Paul II

An article in yesterday's St. Paul Pioneer Press about the sexual abuse
of children by some Catholic priests began something like this:

"What kind of church proclaims the sanctity of life in the womb while
continually recycling priests who abuse children?"

The article went on to state that the Catholic Church is like a family;
in this case, a dysfunctional family.  While we're going down this road
I remember an archbishop asking the following (quoted from memory):

"Why do we [Catholic clergy] not assert our position on arms control
with the same energy that we assert our position on abortion?"

Perhaps I should apologize to anyone who is _personally_ insulted by
this flame of the Catholic Church.  My intention is energize some sleepy
neurons on this fine Monday morning.

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
           "Remember! Arguments should be FUN!" -- Jessica McGeary
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Subject: Re: KEEP ABORTION AND BANK ROBBERY SAFE AND LEGAL!! (was rights and responsibilities
Organization: California State University Sacramento
Distribution: world 
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 15:52:48 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.045702.14711@ncsu.edu> dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>In article <1992Sep28.024902.23519@midway.uchicago.edu> 
>mec6@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>> I stand up for life too.   That's why when I look at the picture 
>> on page 310 of The New Our Bodies, Ourselves and see the picture with 
>> the caption:  "Woman dead on motel room floor.  Her death was due to
>> an air embolism suffered during an illegal abortion," I want to cry.
>
>I stand up for life too.  When I heard that a woman was 
>arrested in Greensboro NC for robbing several banks so she 
>could buy food and clothing for her children, I stood up 
>for legalizing bank robbery.  That woman should not have
>had to face the risk of being shot and killed during the 
>bank heist.  While bank robbery is immoral, I can't force 
>my morals onto bank robbers by making bank robbery illegal.

After all, don't we have a fundamental right to control our own bodies
against the ravages of hunger which would kill a person far faster
than any pregnancy? I mean, with that awful monster Ronald Reagan and
Reaganomics, putting all those hard working Americans out of work, we
have no alternative but to grant them this fundamental right. Banks
are not persons, you know. 

Why, we could make it so that the hungry could make withdrawals on
request. No informed consent or parental consent or any of that. 

And then after that, we could improve towards TOTAL SOCIALISM! Yeah,
that's the key! 

>That's why bank robbery should be made safe and legal,
>just like abortion. 

Aw, Doug! You forgot the :) :) :) for the humor-impaired.


=============================================================================
-----Steve Chaney: Founder, Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.0-------
	           The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS.
From: kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran)
Subject: Ok, Simon. Let's talk. (Was: Walking through the park one day...)
Summary: Is Simon another one of those "Everybody be celebiate" people? 
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: Tue, 29 Sep 92 23:31:07 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.033302.27751@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>I am upset at the fact that there are instances where an abortion takes
>place simply because a child would be an inconvienience to the parents.

Listen, Simon.  What the hell gives you the right to decide ANYTHING for a
woman or a couple who may live next door to you, or may live 3,000 miles away?

Let me relate a little story to you.  It concerns my sister Cheryl, and her
son Steven.

Steven was basically born without an immune system, and with no sweat glands.
He probably spent 20 of the first 24 months of his life in a hospital.  The
doctors told my sister that he wouldn't live past 2 years of age.  Fortunatly,
my sister (and Steven) said, "to hell with the doctor's ideas", and started
working on Steven's life.  She got the doctors to run every conceivable (and
some "there might be something..." ones) test on him, found out exactly WHAT
was wrong, found out what she and Steven had to do to make sure he survived
it, and did it.

Steven has finally developed most of a "normal" immune system, although he
still has some problems, and his lack of sweat glands cause some problems,
etc etc etc.

If my sister had gotten pregnant during the first 5 or 6 years of Steven's
life, she would have had a choice to make:

1)  Kill Steven.
2)  Have an abortion.

(Her husband, Tom, was pretty much raising the three older children during
this time).

Having another child would have been "inconvient" for Cheryl.  It would
probably mean that she would get to bury Steven, and then go into the
hospital to have another child.

So I'll tell you what, Simon.  Let the people involved in the pregnancy
decide whether or not having a child is "inconvient" enough to warrant
an abortion, ok?

>I'm also concerned about the eugenics aspect to abortion (see my previous
>posts)

As long as the only person who can decide to obtain an abortion to carry the
pregnancy to term is the *WOMAN* involved, "the eugenics aspect" is just
a boogy-man pro-lifers wave around in an attempt to scare people.
--
=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???=
= "I warned Larry about such intellectually dishonest posting."               =
=    -- Peter Nyikos in article <nyikos.717105984@milo.math.scarolina.edu>    =
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Subject: Re: Sarah Weddington
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:59:24 GMT

bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense) writes:
->>wdo@TEFS1.acd.com (Bill Overpec
->>>One also wonders about the intentions of those who maliciously
->>>derogate the religious convictions of others.  If only we were
->>>all Wiccans...

->Maybe it has to do with those who seek to impose their irrational beliefs
->on the rest of us through law. Bill, I though you held yourself above
->this low-level sniping.

how could you have misjudged him like that?


Xref: sparky talk.abortion:39232 talk.religion.misc:17368 sci.math:12432
From: holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,sci.math
Subject: Re: Getting in touch with their bodies and minds [Was: Re: The fundamental question of abortion]
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:21:18 GMT
Organization: Boise State University

In article <1992Sep28.231050.671@ima.isc.com> karl@ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) writes:
>In article <1992Sep28.183627.15025@jetsun.weitek.COM> nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf) writes:
>>In article <nyikos.717624472@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>>It is not only pro-life men (I reject the label "anti-choice") that [...]
>>
>>I would suggest that anti-choice men get [...]
>>As for the label, if the shoe fits, wear it.
>
>If you're going to continue cross-posting to sci.math, please be advised that
>"pro-choice" means that you feel free to derive results that depend on the
>cross product of nonempty sets always being nonempty, and "anti-choice" means
>that you prefer to avoid using that axiom.
>
>I take it the terms mean something else in those other groups.

Get this discussion off sci.math.


-- 
The opinions expressed		|     --Sincerely,
above are not the "official"	|     M. Randall Holmes
opinions of any person		|     Math. Dept., Boise State Univ.
or institution.			|     holmes@opal.idbsu.edu
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:40936 talk.politics.misc:49867 alt.sex:32112 alt.rush-limbaugh:6679 alt.politics.elections:15382 alt.politics.clinton:8743 alt.politics.bush:7935
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 3
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Date: 7 Oct 1992 01:54:32 GMT
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com (C J Silverio)
NNTP-Posting-Host: eno.wpd.sgi.com

---
jason@hal.eel.ufl.edu (Jason Nadrowski) writes:
|>>  Murder involves, among other things, the killing of borned persons
|>   What a convenient definition - but one that you pulled out of
|>   your butt.

|In some states, CA (I think), it is considered murder if an assailant (sp?)
|hurts a pregnant mother and consequently kills the unborn child.  Does not
|that seem like a double standard when you consider abortion is not a crime?

No.  Did you actually stop to think about this before posting?

It's an assault on me if you rip out my tonsils without my 
permission.  It's ordinary surgery if I hire a doctor to do 
it with my permission.   You could also try thinking about it
in terms of property rights.

I'm setting followups to talk.abortion.  This discussion does
not belong crossposted to the entire universe.

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com    C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"There is no expedient to which man will not resort to avoid the real 
labor of thinking." 	--Sir Joshua Reynolds
Newsgroups: talk.abortion