From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: "Snapple" Anti-Choice?
Date: 2 Oct 92 12:36:53 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, frank@D012S436.sniap.mchp.sni.de (Frank O'Dwyer) writes:
>bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense) writes:

>: Mmmm..., and your's is less arrogant? Blatant assertion get you there
>: blatantly.

>Ron, this is the last time I will give you advice before I have to
>start sending you bills for consultancy.

Send away. I'll refuse to pay for lack of service rendered.

>All I am saying is that your argument is:

>(a)  Easily refuted. I have given you several counterexamples, which
>     should show you that the destruction of anything and everything
>     just because it does not object to being destroyed, is a bad idea.

But these were all of accepted people, although I don't recall the particulars,
as you've waited here about a week or so after you let the original
drop. (well, maybe I did, I don't know, as I was gone for 5 days, and
our system ran expire in the meantime. It does happen.) If you happened
to ahve listed a PVS state person, then you should know about my previously
posted opinion about euthanasia, where in I state full support for it
also.

>(c)  Fairly offensive.  See (a)

Um, since it only involves entities which are not persons, I don't see
why it is offensive. It is neither sadistic, nor done for mere fun,
but only out of necessity. I don't argue for people to get pregnant
so that they can get abortions, just for the "experience".

>If these reasons are not good enough for you, then I warn you that I may
>have to come on over to 'navy.mil' and transpose the keytops on your
>terminal, if that's what it takes to get you typing sense.

They aren't. Come ahead. The security people would love to talk to you
if you did. :)

>: I'll even mail you to notify you that I posted it. (It should be tomorrow)

>You are going to post something _tomorrow_ that will make me look really
>foolish, after all?

I don't need to, you're doing quite well all by yourself. I just keep
doling out rope.

>Sounds like a _potential_ post you've got there Ron?  Isn't that the type
>of offence that you're always saying children should get the death penalty
>for?

Death penalty for children? Where?!? If you know of any children getting
the death penalty, please let me know. I'll write the lovcal gov. immediately
to tell them what horrendous activities are going on under there noses.
(Oh, you mean abortions.) Well, those are fetuses, sir Dwyer, not children,
kind of like fetal pigs are not pigs, but fetal pigs. There is a difference.

>But since this post of yours is Not Yet Born, I suppose that means it is
>not real, and I can safely ignore it?

At the moment, yes, as I haven't gotten around to writing a concise
version of my opinion yet. It has been stated in several posts, in fragments,
but those have long since expired. I don't expect you to go looking
through the archive site to pull those portions together.

>Tell you what, though, I'm going to follow up this unborn post of yours
>without even seeing it.  You may take this followup of mine, and stick
>whatever the hell you care to write about personhood above it.  O.K.?

Thanks for the opening, but I'll write it at my leisure, so as to ensure
that it is clear and concise. Wouldn't want to make any careless mistakes
on something like personhood, now, would we?

>1) seems like an arbitrary definition to me, Ron.

It is arbitrary, in a sense, although you'll get to point out exactly
where when it's posted.

>2) In the immortal words of Ray Fischer: "why should I give a flaming rats
>   ass about your opinion [ of what constitutes personhood ] ? ".

You don't. Perhaps it will make you think?

>3) Look for a post from me next 4th of July which will make you feel very
>   silly, after all.  In fact I challenge you not to feel silly when you
>   read it.

Are we playing with ourselves now? Watch those tweezers!

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.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:39780 soc.men:17197 alt.abortion.inequity:4175