HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: datepper@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Aaron Tepper)
Subject: Re: Cycle 3 in my corresponcence with Mark on fetal tissue
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:34:19 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.225301.2016@noao.edu>, forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne
Forgach) writes:

>From article by mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran):
>>
>> Well then, lets look at this case...
>> From the one anencephalic baby, we could have harvested 1 heart, 2
>> lungs, 2 kidneys, a liver suitable for ressection to provide
>> transplants for as many as 3 others, bone marrow, and 2 corneas.
>> Transplant recipients had been identified with tissue matches for the
>> heart, both lungs, both kidneys, and 2 liver sections. Bone marrow had
>> not been matched yet. Neither had corneas, but they are relatively
>> easy to match.
>>
>> Since people who call themselves Pro-Life took steps to halt any organ
>> donations until after brain death, this is the outcome:
>> The recipients for the heart, both lungs, 1 kidney and 1 liver section
>> are now dead. The other kidney, liver, and bone marrow recipients are
>> still waiting and hoping. The corneas were eventually used.
>
>
>Ya just don't get it, Mark.   Those organs were not the parents' to
>donate. Their baby was STILL USING THEM.   They were HERS, and HERS
>alone, and she had every right to keep them.  For pro-"choicers" who
>that like to talk big about people having the right to THEIR OWN bodies,
>this case shows them up particularly well as the hypocrites they are.

And you're pro-life? If "life" is your most overriding principle, surely
you would jump at the chance to save at least seven lives, maybe more.
(Life's full of tough choices, inn'it?) Can an anencephalic baby even
have an identity beyond numerical identity, or is it merely a mass
of biological tissue shaped like a human being?

Tep
-- 
If you wake up and don't want to smile, if it takes | Dear Lord, give
just a little while, open your eyes and look at the | me chastity...  
day, you'll see things in a different way...        |    but not yet.
              ...don't stop thinking about tomorrow | --St. Augustine
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: judi@wam.umd.edu (Jay T Stein -- abort, retry, ignore?)
Subject: Re: An argument for better sex ed
Originator: judi@rac1.wam.umd.edu
Organization: Wash. Area Clinic Defense Task Force (WACDTF), Washington, D.C.
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 01:59:43 GMT

What: <1993Jan8.234624.9919@ncsu.edu>
Who:  dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)

>> = Stephen Matheson, on Suzanne's "You're blind as a bat.  Just look at
                                     what you married" comment to Patrick

>> Suzanne: your comment is sick.  Your vindictiveness is unhealthy.
>> I think an apology is in order.
>
>Allow me to clue you in to a little game that the pro-choicers
>like to play.  The game is called "enrage the opposition".  [...]

Notice how Doug Holtsinger says "the pro-choicers" with no qualifier.

Remember how Doug Holtsinger chastized me for using "pro-lifers" when
talking about violence from certain pro-lifers, claiming that I was
trying to implicate the entire pro-life movement, despite thte fact
that I explicitly stated otherwise.

Not that I think Doug Holtsinger actually *means* ALL pro-choicers
in the above quote, but see how he demands one standard from me, and
another for himself.

Remember how Doug Holtsinger labels people who have souch double standards
"hypocrites."

Notice how the shoe fits him.

Interesting how he considers her comment a "small flame" though.  Coming
from someone who claims to be a compassionate Catholic, it seemed quite
significant to me.

>I'm actually kind of surprised that Ms. Forgach has been as polite
>as she has been towards these people.
--
     _____     __      __               -=* 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.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE)
Subject: Re: Let me state my view (flames welcome :-)
Originator: jjprice@c00076-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:47:13 GMT


In article <1993Jan10.052907.12605@crd.ge.com>, keegan@pan.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:

|>jjprice@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes:
|>-> Guess what I'M BAAACK....
|>
|>mind-boggling the way everyone leaped in elation,
|>isn't it?
|>
I doubt it.

|>-> 1. A fetus is a human being were as life begins at conception...you
|>->    can't prove otherwise so it must be true.
|>
|>faulty logic. [rest of argument based on first
|>flawed premise deleted.]

Are you willing to kill 1.5 million people just because you don't "think"
that they are a person...Please prove to me that life does not begin at
conception.

-- 
-Jeffrey Price
_____________________________________________________________________
| "When he went, had you gone and had she, if she wanted to and were |
|  able, for the time being excluding all the restraints on her not  |
|  to go also, would he have brought you, meaning you and she, with  |
|  him to the station?"                                              |
| "OBJECTION: That question ought to be taken out and shot!!"        |
|____________________________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Christian Pro-Choicers
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 00:49:00 GMT

In article <2935555418.2.p00168@psilink.com> 
"James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com> writes:
>>Doug Holtsinger <dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu> writes:
>>hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr) writes:

>>> I personally find it repugnant to carry dead unborn babies around in a jar.

>> I remember reading about a public opinion poll conducted during the 
>> early 1960s which showed that 60% of the public disagreed with the
>> protest tactics of people who sought civil rights reforms.  

> 1962:   "My god, Martha, I think there's a nigger in here ordering lunch!"
> Disapproval rate: 60%
>
> 1992:  "My god, Martha, that priest is carrying a dead fetus in his hands!"  
> Estimated disapproval rate: 80%.

I'm not certain what your point is here, but I'll make mine
clear.  Many of the more controversial protest tactics of 
the Civil Rights era, such as sitting at a "whites-only" 
lunch counter, met with a lot of disapproval during that era, 
including disapproval coming from people who supported Civil 
Rights. 

Today, we see that same kind of disapproval directed at people
who carry around "dead unborn babies" in a jar.  I believe we
should allow history to pass judgement on this practice, much 
in the same way that we allowed history to judge the practice
of sitting at a "whites-only" lunch counter.


>jim tims


Doug Holtsinger

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Subject: Re: PatricKKK needs a friend!
Organization: California State University Sacramento
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 22:08:32 GMT

In article <PATRICK.93Jan7103358@rio-grande.is.rice.edu> patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
>
>>Someone, please be PatricKKK's friend so he will stop emailing me! It
>>seems that he absolutely HAS to chat with me whenever something
>>bothers him, and he is causing me grief because of he resulting email
>>pollution.
>
>Well, you're not threatening to "take care" of me "once and for all" any
>more, I see -- so maybe there *is* hope for you...but I'll believe that when
>I see it.

And you're not threatening to meet me with a "surprise" if I meet you in
Texas, anymore.. Well, there is SOME hope for you. 


>(I've made more friends in the past month than you'll have in your miserable
>lifetime, son.  Add that to the other 450 months' collection, and I'd say
>there are an awful lot of people -- some of whom you may well know in person
>-- that you must really hate...)

Come on, PatricKKK, let's not start throwing in your friend Rosey Palm
and her five sisters. But then if we didn't, that would leave you with
NO friends.. Okay, we'll count them. :)

And why do you refer to me as "son"? You fantasize me being YOUR
descendant? Come on, I am a descendant of members of the human species -
there's no way that could happen. 


>[usual racist slur, deleted -- I think he gets off on posting it]

No, but you got off on SAYING it, didn't you?


>--PLH, honestly, I did not say "your fat black ass!" Really!  

- No, he didn't write that, but I thought I'd attach MEANING to what he
has been doing lately. :) 


  --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
		                   /\
       		                  /  \
		                 /    \
		                /      \ 
		               /  KKK   \ 
		              /          \ 
		             / ---   ---  \
		            /  [ ]   [ ]   \ 
		           /                \ 
		          /                  \
		         /      --------      \  
		        /       |      |       \ 
		       /        --------        \ 
		      /                          \ 
		     /                            \ 
		/--------------------------------------\ 
		|      |Come on, Steve.  Let's  |      | 
		|      |see just how much of a  |      | 
		|      |boy you are.  March     |      | 
		|      |your fat black ass down |      | 
		|      |here and tell me I'm a  |      | 
		|      |liar, to my face.       |      | 
		|      |  - PatricKKK Humphrey  |      | 

  --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
  --Steve Chaney: Founder, Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.5--
  USENET Warlord / IRC Channel Owner / Accounts WorldWide / Home Login!
	      (Whooboy that means LOTSA time for all this?)
                  The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS. 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: cj@eno.esd.sgi.com.esd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Take it out of misc.jobs.offered (Re: Gorgeous Women and Lots of Sex!!!!!
Date: 11 Jan 93 18:57:04 GMT
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com
Organization: SGI TechPubs


My favorite Holtsinger post of the week, crossposted to
rec.arts.startrek.current, rec.music.country.western,
talk.bizarre, and rec.humor:

In article <1993Jan11.004428.5152@ncsu.edu>, 
	dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu writes:
|Please keep this thread out of misc.jobs.offered.

Succinct, to the point, doesn't mention bloody fetuses in the
tender environs of misc.jobs.offered, and doesn't lie about Roe
v Wade & third trimester abortions.  Two thumbs up!


---
C J Silverio	cj@sgi.com	ceej@well.sf.ca.us
"I see no reason to even discuss the medical risks, ramifications, and 
history of illegal abortions anyways.  The issue is the life of the 
preborn." --Edward Simmons, a "pro-lifer", in talk.abortion
From: mike@gilligan.East.Sun.COM (Mike Roncadori)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Judgementalism
Date: 12 Jan 1993 08:33:10 -0500
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc., Vienna, VA.
NNTP-Posting-Host: gilligan.east.sun.com

Sometimes I wonder how people can be so smug...

I hear comments like "She hangs out the welcome sign", and
"abstinence is the only surefire way", and "She should have
kept her legs crossed".

To me, these comments are purely judgemental, and reflect an
attitude of self-righteousness that can only come from never
having been placed in really unfortunate circumstances. I'm
sure that there are some real "sluts" out there, who have
had abortions, but have you ever thought to yourself "Why is
it that this person behaves like a slut?". What about the
majority of women who have abortions of "convenience"? Are
they too now "sluts", by virtue of the fact that they made
a decision not to bear a child?

I know a person who was physically abused during her marriage,
and suffered a broken arm at one point. While it is my feeling
that I'd never take that off of a spouse, how can I possibly
make a judgement about her situation when I'm not in it? For
me to call her stupid makes no sense. She did what she had to,
in order to survive, and when she could no longer take it, she
left. Would you call her a sinner, for having abandoned her
marriage? (After all, marriage is supposed to be forever.)

I suspect that many pro-life folks are making value judgements
based upon their own life experiences, which is only natural.
The problem with it is that one's values tend to gravitate to-
ward what one has experienced.

The tendency to call a woman who has an abortion a "slut", or
murderess simply reflects that one has not likely walked in
the same shoes as the woman who decides to abort. Not knowing
her situation (and you can't know them all, even the trivial
ones), how can you consider yourself qualified to make the
decision as to whether or not a woman needs an abortion?

Those who are seeking to outlaw abortion are in effect seeking
to make that decision for everyone, regardless of the circum-
stances. I sincerely hope that those of you who feel so omni-
scient about the circumstances of others never find yourselves
feeling the desperation that some of the women who decide to
abort must surely feel.

Maybe you don't know...

-- Mike

------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinions - not my employer's
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Subject: Re: Documenting claims for Mark Cochran (Was: Proposed...FAQ)
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:20:44 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.071755.5341@midway.uchicago.edu> eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
#In article <1384@blue.cis.pitt.edu> sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
#
##I've never seen Beth Bartley lie about anything on t.a.  I find
##her extremely credible.
#
#Thanks....

You're welcome.

##(That's one reason why I was a bit 
##surprised when Phil Buckland cited her as a source for a rather
##odd claim about late term abortion procedures - I never saw
##Beth confirm Buckland's claim, though.)
#
#Phil was somewhat right.  (If I've guessed correctly, you mean the
#procedure for late term abortions including sucking out the innards of
#the fetus's head to shrink it and let it fit through the birth canal
#without too much stress.)  The New York Times article I read claimed
#that there were three doctors in the U.S. who regularly perform third
#trimester abortions; two cut the fetus up and bring it through the
#birth canal and the third used the procedure Phil mentioned instead
#(partially because, I believe, it revealed the extent or lack of the
#fetus's physical deformities).

Sigh.  "Somewhat right" is correct.  Some bozo asked what the
"preferred method of child killing" was, and Buckland replied
that most late term abortions were done by this method.  (Well,
almost this method.  He claimed that the removal was done either
vaginally *or* through an abdominal incision.)  I guess he
couldn't resist embellishing the truth.

#I've posted this at least once to talk.abortion in explaining how a
#woman might be better able to tolerate a late term abortion than
#either birth or Caesarian.

I must have missed it.  

##I disagree with her
##stand on abortion, as well as her stand on some other issues, but
#
#There wouldn't be a talk.abortion without disagreement....

No, come on, Beth, t.a. would be much more fun if you would simply
adopt my (obviously correct) views.

#And I ultimately think that such solution as can be reached on the
#abortion issue (I think probably no significant anti-abortion laws,
#but some pro-birth ones) can *only* be reached through honest
#disagreement.

Nonetheless, we continue to see half-truths and outright lies.  I
still wonder why so many anti-abortion people don't think that
their case will stand unless they misrepresent things.

Susan
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:54891 alt.flame:17805 talk.bizarre:44136
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Reconciling OT with NT
Date: 9 Jan 93 20:53:53 GMT
Organization: Who, me???

In article <1ikuo6INN3d3@uwm.edu> terri@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (St Theresa of the Net) writes:
>In article <1993Jan5.070734.20380@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>Ho hum...
>>
>
>Kebbin, i don't want any excuses. get the fuck out of my news group. if i
>wanted to hear anything from you i'd go empty the litter box and wonder how
>it touchtypes when i'm not home.

Just _which_ of the three cross-posted newsgroups are you claiming is "yours", 
Little Miss Net.cop?

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Subject: Re: I became pro-life...and pro-choice...
Reply-To: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 05:42:38 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.223002.24142@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.204804.28324@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu 
>(The Reverend Mr. Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>
>}> Tell me Doug, would you rather a brainless fetus be
>}> aborted at 8 weeks or wait until it's born and old enough to feel the
>}> scalding water cooking it's flesh?  For my money, and opinion, I'd rather
>}> the woman had had an abortion.  
>
>}There are several errors in your statements; the most obvious is
>}that an 8 week-old child has a brain.  
>
>That's hardly an absolute.  We doubt that you had a brain at 8
>weeks, as you show no evidence of having one now.  Of course then,
>maybe you were never a fetus...
>

Why does the phrase "Blue Light Special" pop into mind?

Robert Johnston
From: patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: So PatricKKK posts private email now
Date: 6 Jan 93 01:09:44 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Rice University, Houston, Texas

In article <1icsuvINN2g5@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:


   In article <1993Jan5.203530.10053@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
   >... He is 
   >too afraid to apologize to me directly for his racist remarks, so I am
   >perfectly right in making comments to and about his family.


   The mind boggles.  Didn't know that Patrick controlled Steve's manners
   so completely, did we?

   Feh.

I think it's pretty hilarious, coming from someone who posted one of his
diatribes about me in a newsgroup he knew we didn't get here...but he'll be
brought back to reality soon enough.  Dr. Radimsky *has* been known to read
news occasionally, I'm told...:-)

--PLH, she'll have a fun time with Beanie Boy's latest outburst of senile
dementia... 


--
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs)
Subject: Re: Who are you guys?
Organization: Wolfram Research, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 16:53:15 GMT

In <PATRICK.93Jan10095527@rio-grande.is.rice.edu> patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:

>On Sun, 10 Jan 1993 14:49:58 GMT, markp@spider.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) said:

>>Why do people who don't believe in absolute ethical standards
>>get involved in debates over ethical standards? Isn't it either
>>pointless or self-contradictory?

>It's almost as pointless as those who *do* believe in absolute ethics trying
>to impose them upon those who don't...

By definition, absolute ethics apply to everyone. (You seem to
think, "Don't impose your ethics on others" applies to everyone -- you
coercive fascist, you!)

>--PLH, never miss a straight line
        (or think in a straight line :-) )

Mark Pundurs
From: steven@advtech.uswest.com ( Steve Novak)
Subject: Re: Let me state my view (flames welcome :-)
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:26:54 GMT

> = (JEFFREY JAMES PRICE) writes:

>Are you willing to kill 1.5 million people just because you don't "think"
>that they are a person...Please prove to me that life does not begin at
>conception.

Prove it does.

You're still wiping "stupid" off your face from the original post.

Now, go back to kindergarten, pipsqueak.




-- 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Steve Novak |    |"Wacker the K"| 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
steven@advtech.USWest.Com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: March for Life
Organization: It was here just a minute ago...
	<C0o165.971@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 02:17:27 GMT

On Mon, 11 Jan 1993 01:22:53 GMT, smithmc@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Lost Boy) said:

>In article <PATRICK.93Jan4203908@lampasas.is.rice.edu> patrick@lampasas.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan4.190129.13383@bsu-ucs> 00gwmichelin@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu writes:
>>
>>   How many people are going to DC on the 22 to March for Life?
>>
>>Not me -- I already *have* a life, thankyouverymuch...

>How many are going to OPPOSE the March for Life? I'm interested.

So am I -- and I'm hoping it's quite a few.  The battle is far from over
yet.

--PLH, who'd like to be there, but will do his bit locally

--

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chall@eco.twg.com (Charles Don Hall)
Subject: Re: Questions for Pro-Choice advocates
Organization: The Wollongong Group (East Coast Operations)
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 14:38:39 GMT

In <3n-3bc-@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:

>The woman is in NO SHAPE to return to her job.  Many of the jobs held
>predominantly by women (service, clerical) take a _very_ dim view of
>extended absences.  Since we don't live in Happy Bunny Land (thanks...
>Chris?), the longer the surgical recovery time, the greater the chance
>that a woman will LOSE HER JOB due to absence.  

Ahem. 

"Happy BunnyLand <TM> is a registered trademark of the North American
Applied Philosophy Association. Good Fairy action figures sold
seperatly. All rights reserved, and have a _swell_ day."

(The standard usage is "When the Good Fairies take us all to
Happy BunnyLand <TM>, where no one will have to suffer or die
ever again, then [whatever].")
-- 

===========================================================
Charles Don Hall, Licensed Philosopher  (chall@eco.twg.com)
===========================================================