From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: Re: Was <insert-your-name-here> dropped during childbirth?
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:43:29 GMT


[misc.test removed from the newsgroups line]

dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
# smezias@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias) writes:
# >dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes to
# ><1992Dec24.170437.15166@wdl.loral.com> bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com(>>): 
# 
# >>> When are you going to answer my question about why you refuse to take
# >>> a position on legislation 
# 
# >> How many times do I have to repeat myself?  I am undecided.
# >> Try reading those three words slowly.  Hopefully it will sink in.
# 
# > Didn't [Mr. Holtsinger] just post his opposition to FOCA?
# 
# Allow me to explain something to you.  When people on talk.abortion
# discuss ``legislation'', they are usually talking about legislation
# to restrict abortion.  Most people understand that.  Obviously you
# don't.  

I missed about 200 articles over the Xmas holiday, so I didn't see Mr.
Holtsinger's response.  However, from what Mr. Mezias quoted I can see
Mr. Holtsinger must have blinked when he should have read the word
`why' in my question.

I already know about his claims to being undecided on legislation that
might restrict a woman's right to obtain an abortion.  I think that
might be a deception, and I've posted my reasons on multiple
occassions in the past here.  I'm not asking for positions I know he
will say he doesn't have.

I haven't hounded him mercilessly about *what* his positions regarding
anti-abortion-rights legislation are since, through concerted action,
a few of us here were able to extract from him the ridiculous claim
that he's `undecided' -- since then, I have been demanding an
explanation for *why* he is still undecided, when his rhetoric is
clearly saturated with anti-abortion-rights sentiment.

He has taken a position on *one* (1) legislative bill -- FOCA.  He has
also said repeatedly that he thinks the Supreme Court decided poorly
in Roe vs. Wade, and that he thinks the right to an abortion should
not be a U.S. Constitutional right, while allowing that States should
be empowered to recognize that right.

(Please correct me if I have misunderstood you or your position has
evolved, Mr. Holtsinger -- I do not mean to put words in your mouth on
those occasions when you are willing to speak for yourself.)

What I want him to answer, and I have been repeatedly asking him in
various forms is:

	1.  Why are you undecided on every pending piece of
	    legislation that might restrict women's abortion rights,
	    yet you can find a way to decide about FOCA?

	2.  If Roe vs. Wade was so bad, how would you like to see the
	    Supreme Court act to change the status quo?

Mr. Holtsinger has been determined to leave these questions
unanswered.  While others have been less charitable, I have waited
until now to decide that he's a despicable liar on the basis of his
brazenly absurd equivocation on this matter.

I've been waiting way too long.  My patience has wasted on him.


-- 
+---------------------------+  ``Man has not a single right which is
| J H Woodyatt              |  the product of anything but might.''
| bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com |                           -- Mark Twain
+---------------------------+  

Newsgroups: talk.abortion