From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: The answer!!!
Summary: What was the question again?
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 08:49:27 GMT

<1ddsrqINNk8q@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de> frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes:
><1992Nov4.183330.8464@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>><1992Nov2.224040.8360@iscsvax.uni.edu> clifton9220@iscsvax.uni.edu said:
>>>We all hurt from the pains of this world.  Well, we won't get over the pain
>>>till we see the problem
>>>
>>>The problem is not women's rights.  Under current law women can do all that men
>>>can.  This real problem is getting everyone to use the law correctly.  We don't
>>>need more useless words.  We need to educate the people.
>>
>>I see the problem this way:  if people would allow others to live their
>>lives *their own* way there would be a lot more peace in the world.  If
>>people respected others rights we'd be much better off.  Of course,
>>education is the only way to achieve this solution.
>
>Be careful.  I get worried when people (including myself) start talking
>about "education being the only solution".  It's the kind of phrase which,
>if said with the right intonation and phrasing, would make a nice echo now
>in Nuremberg.  How do you suppose people can be educated for freedom?  

People can be educated *about* freedom:  What the freedoms in this country
cost in terms of lives and suffering, What horrors that can arise when
people give up freedom for a little safety or moral "warm fuzzys", Where
their freedom ends and the next person's freedom begins...

*That* kind of education.  I get the idea you read "indoctrination" where I
wrote "education".

>However you want to do it, prepare to be disappointed.  The military won't
>like you putting any notions of freedom into people's heads, and the churches
>won't thank you either.  Most governments have a vested interest in the
>suggestibility of people too - so don't expect much support there.

You have me at a disadvantage, sir -- Of what country do you speak?

>>>The problem is not the death of unborn children(they are not cats or dogs, you
>>>know).  
>>
>>They are also not children.
>
>They are not _legal_ children, but they _are_ _unborn_ children.  

In as much as you are an "undead corpse".  Or, in the case of cremation,
an "unburn pile of ashes".  Or, in the case of burial at sea, "an uneaten
piece of fish food".  Get the picture?

>                                                                  And the
>entities we are talking about here mostly turn into children, which cats and
>dogs have yet to do.  

Depends on who you talk to. ;-)

>                      Nothing to do with abortion of course, but remember to
>be free.

Huh?

>>>        It is the lack of respect for life.  
>>
>>Are you a vegetarian?  Are you suggesting everyone should become a
>>vegetarian?
>
>I guess he meant human life.   Remember those things that are free?

You mean 'people'?

>>Why not allow the woman to choose her own lifestyle?  Don't you think they
>>are capable of deciding things for themselves?
>
>Don't they need to be educated for freedom first?

"About", not "for".

>>BTW, abortion is the *only* birth control method, technically.
>
>Get up the yard.

Pardon?

>>>The real problem in the world is the debates of people not really looking for
>>>the answer.  
>>
>>We wouldn't need an answer if we didn't have a problem, now would we?
>
>Education wouldn't be the solution if we didn't have a problem, now 
>would it?

I guess in some strange way you're agreeing with me.

>>>             The answer in my opinion(you may have others) is Jesus for he can
>>>help with the bad times and give us more of the good times.
>>
>>He doesn't appear to have done much toward this end.  Could it be that he
>>is not aware that there is any problem?  Seriously, why do you think a myth
>>is going to have any power to help when there is no evidence that he can?
>
>There is _some_ evidence, just not _sufficient_ evidence.  

Circumstantial hearsay.

>                                                           Again, get up the
>yard, and stop insulting Christians.  Jesus had a go at education for freedom
>too - and it seems to me that he has a better chance of finally succeeding
>than you have.

Your statements above are difficult to parse.  Where did I claim to want
to "educate" anyone?  And where did Jesus "have a go" at education *for*
freedom?  Jesus didn't teach freedom, he taught restriction and
mind-control.

>Also - as many wicked things have been done in the name of science, pragmatism,
>economics, and freedom as have been done in the name of religion, many of them
>in living memory.  It's all the same problem (and I have no idea what I mean
>by that, so there's no point in asking :-)  ).

Good.  I guess you realize that you have no argument.  I thought it was
just me having trouble understanding you.  I'm relieved to know that you
have no idea what you meant either.

>(oh, and Jesus was once a zygote too :-)

Really?  How inefficient for a god.


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel, 
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), Diana (Sorceress), Beth 
"CJ", and Nadja, and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it.
[space reserved for alternate ex-girlfriends Eric R. and Drieux]
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:47918 alt.abortion.inequity:5094