HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 08:43:10 -0500
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: states rights and federal funding

Hi, Kerry:

>Forcing an unwilling populace to accept unwanted law creates hostility
>within the state toward both letter and spirit of said law, and retards
>the natural process toward voluntary acceptance, which would have
>otherwise taken place.

Would you mind expanding on this a bit?  I'm curious what kind(s) of
evidence support the idea that states would uniformly and voluntarily abide
by the letter and spirit of the Bill of Rights without something like the
14th to "force" them into it (I hope I'm paraphrasing the stuff I deleted
accurately).

More generally -- if we accept the presumption that it's better for states
to voluntarily abide by the Bill of Rights etc., how much time do we allow
for compliance to occur?  Suppose, for example, state A decided *not* to
abide by the First Amendment -- and enacted state laws to prohibit "hate"
groups from speech and assembly (is that more than one amendment?  I forget
so easily!).  Would it be better to wait for that state to see the error of
its ways?  Or is it better to "force" them into compliance?

Genuinely interested in your views :)

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 23 Jan 1993 13:52:27 -0500
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: Al Gore

Hi, y'all:
I said:
>>really hopeful that we'll see an end to the "jobs vs. environment" talk,

and -andy replied:

>Are we asserting that there's never a choice, or that when there is,
>we know which way it will go?

Neither.  I (at least) am asserting that we shouldn't begin with the
assumption that a choice is always necessary.  If, after careful study, we
find that such a choice *is* necessary, then we decide individual cases on
their merits.

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 22:58:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject: Re: broader question

Chris says:

>I'm not sure of a complete set of standards, but at the top of the list must
>be no flagrant vioation of the laws of the country.  Yes, some laws may be
>silly to some, but they are still the laws, and as long as they are people
>should be held to them.

But we're not talking about whether or not people should be "held to
the laws"; we're discussing whether or not an individual who is guilty
of a crime, AFTER they have "paid" whatever sentence the law exacts,
should be able to be a full contributing member of society.

No one (that I heard or read) _ever_ suggested that Ms Baird _not_
be held accountable for her crime; what is at issue it whether or not
the commission of _and_ payment for a crime should disqualify an
applicant to high government service.

If you feel that she should be fined, sentenced, etc - we are in
agreement; whatever the law allows for a guilty plea or verdict.
However, you cannot say that _after_ a penalty has been suffered, we
should _continue_ to exact other forms of payment (such as appointee
disqualification).

I have always disagreed with the penalty that takes away voting rights
from convicted felons, in case you're wondering.  If the "system" is
to work, then we must proceed on the presumption of rehabilitation/
second chances.  If you don't accept that, then each crimes' penalty
must be life imprisonment without possibility of parole.



-T.

Uncomfortably awaiting right-wing agreement to that last line...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:48:19 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: where liese is; or, i once was lost, but now am found
              27 Jan 1993 16:38:17 PDT from <JACOBS@125LAW1.LAW.UCLA.EDU>

Stan:

Actually, from what I know of Hitler (and it's a lot), he would probably
have spent his time boring everyone to tears with his loony theories,
if he'd had the chance to jump in on the net (after all, that's
what he spent all night doing, much to the chagrin of those who
were required to have dinner with him.)

--NINAR Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:MEC038@ukcc.uky.edu>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 08:11:35 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: new SC ruling

On Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:27:22 EST Tim Johnson said:

>  Presumably, then, KAT has read the decision?

You are presuming wrong.
>
>  It was my understanding (based on an NPR report) that
>......
>
KAT did not read the decision but read/heard about the
decision (including NPR).  KAT like you is only talking
about his understanding of what is written about the
decision.

Now as the list president you may want to issue an
executive order banning giving opinions about SC
decisions without actually reading them.

You may do that but I will not tell you beforehand
whehter or not I will abide by it.  :-)

>-Tim

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:59:18 CST
From:         Titivillus <T9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Health Care Reform
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> What let me get this straight the Secretary of Defense is on a task force for
>  health care reform, I'm sorry but, I"m not up to date on the new cabinent
>  appt's (I have a very bad memory) Isn't Lee Aspen Defense Secretary, I know

That is Les Aspen (I think), but yes, he is.

>  Lloyd Bentsen, is Treasur Secretary, I can understand that, but a defense
>  secretary, well if that's the case why doesn't Warren Christopher join them,
>  (Sec of State for people like me) What's the logic if you don't mind explaini
>  to me, furthermore, as chair of the task force, Mrs.. Clinton is held directl
>  responsible, with the exception of bad faith and mockery, what's the official
>  liability if she doesn't produce?

1) Les Aspen used to be a Senator (I believe; anyway, he sat on the
hill for a long time) and since all US laws go through the Congress,
Senators are by nature generalists. Although I do not know this, I
would guess that Sec. Aspen has much experience dealing with this
issue.

2) Credibility will be the "carrot and the stick." Up until
this year, she made more than three times the money that he did
as governor Arkansas. She has been involved in politics (including
Beltway stuff) for years. If what she does isn't passible, the
"bad faith and mockery" will hurt.


From the Desk of Dave,
Apparatchik of Dictionaries
(aka Larva, Trip Buster, Dave Zero, Didactic Dave)
t9aa@sdsumus.sdstate.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:47:23 EST
From:         Daniel David Benson <bensonda@STUDENT.MSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Reagan's legacy and the politics of the SC
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

>
> >From:         Stan Jacobs <JACOBS@125LAW1.LAW.UCLA.EDU>
>
> >The Constitution grants specifically grants Congress the right to
> >declare war, and the President the right to wage war.  Unless the
> >Congress is willing to give some of its "war-declaring rights" to the
> >President, they should not assume any of his "war-making rights"...
>
> I don't get it. Please explain to me how the War Powers Act
> usurps the right of the President to "wage war." As far
> as I can tell, it only restricts the right of the President
> (which he doesn't have!) to decide against whom to wage
> war. That decision is properly made by Congress, since
> it is precisely what "declaring war" amounts to.
>
> Jamie
>

The problem is that the Constitution gives the president the role as CinC and
the Congress the power of declaring war. As Vietnam showed us, we need some
definition as to what a war is considered to be so that the Congress won't be
left out of the loop, to borrow a phrase. The War Powers Act merely stipulates
the boundary between what is considered a reasonable warlike activity that
Congress should have some say in and a short military manuever that the
President can conduct on his own. If it is worded properly (and I haven't seen
the text of the act), then it should be able to pass SC scrutiny.

-Dan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Posted-Date:         27 Jan 93 11:04:49 EDT
X-Pmrqc:      1
Priority:     normal
X-Mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R4).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 11:04:49 EDT
From:         richard martin <NACSRWM@ACS2.ACS.NCSU.EDU>
Organization: Administrative Computing Svcs.
Subject:      freedonia
Comments: To: politics@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

whoever asked for the quotes from spy asking for our newly elected
representatives response to the question abt 'what should we be doing
to stop the ethnic cleansing in freedonia ?' (alternately phrased 'do
you approve of what we're doing to stop what's going on in freedonia
?') (freedonia acourse being the country from the marxes 'duck soup')
:

nick smith (r - mich.) 'my impression, henry, is we gotta be very
careful, that moving through the united nations effort has a great
deal of merit right now.'

james talent (r - mo.) 'i think anything we can do to use the good
offices of the u.s. government to assist stopping the killing over
there, we should do.'

corrine brown (d - fla.) 'yes, and you know, i think all of those
situations are very, very sad, and i just think we need to take
action to assist the people.'

jay inslee (d - wash,) 'i have to be honest with you, i'm not
familiar with that proposal, um, but it's coming to the point now
that a blind eye to it for the next ten years is not the answer.'

- r
p.s. anyone who thinks ibm's gonna get anywhere near their previous
position in the computer world knows little of technology. the
shakeups @ ibm & sears et al are permanent and long overdue.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 12:17:49 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Bushwhacking Saddam
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>
>On Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:04:07 -0400 The Integral Differential said:
>
>>..........................  Why do you need a body total?  Whether
>>one person died or a million, the results don't change when N more people die.
>
>WRONG!  That should have been "N+1" not "N".  A big
>difference, you know.
>
>>Brett'
>
>--KAT :-)

        Oops. sorry, I was going to divide both numbers by 0.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Priority: normal
X-mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R5).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:09:05 PDT
From:         Stan Jacobs <JACOBS@125LAW1.LAW.UCLA.EDU>
Subject:      PASSPORT TO THE WORLD
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

Hello, everyone.

I'm quite sure this is not the place to put this message, but for
lack of any better place, I'll put it here anyway...

My name is Stan Jacobs and I am a Politics/International Relations
major at UCLA.  When I was in high school, we had a newsletter called
the PASSPORT which published articles about foreign countries,
cultures and languages.

Now, we are starting the NEW Passport to the World newsletter.  It is
a newsletter for high school, college, and university students and
teachers.  The articles are written by people from countries all over
the world, and we offer a very low subscription rate to schools.  So
far, foreign language teachers have been very enthusiastic about
using The Passport as a teaching aid in their classes.  The Passport
has gotten many students interested in world politics.

The new Passport is primarily a newsmagazine from a different
perspective.  The news from Germany is written by Germans and by
editors here in the US.  The newsletter gives opposing viewpoints
often overlooked by the general American media.

IS ANYONE INTERESTED IN THIS NEWSLETTER?  If you would like more
information about this newsletter, please e-mail me at my Internet
address.  I can get you all of the details about how to get it at
your school.

ALSO, WE ARE LOOKING FOR STAFF MEMBERS!  If you are a student at any
school in the world and would like to be on the staff of an
international publication, please e-mail me.  I can tell you what you
need to know to get started.

FINALLY, please forward this letter to ANYONE/EVERYONE that might be
interested in this newsletter.  (For example, if you are a Chemistry
professor, please print out this message and give it to the Foreign
Language teachers at your school.)


THANK YOU, EVERYONE, for your cooperation and your tolerance of me
putting this newsletter in the wrong place....<smile>...


With Kind Regards,
Mit freundlich Gruessen,

STAN JACOBS
Passport Publications
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 09:53:04 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Health Care Reform
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>
>Ironically, the best position for Hillary--prohibited by this law--
>would have been as Attorney General.  That is where she is most
>qualified.  (Certainly not in health care, and as we've seen in
>Arkansas, not in education...)   The L.A. Times also had another
>article this morning about Hillary's mother--  somebody Rodham--
>being disappointed that Sandra Day O'Connor beat Hillary to the
>Court.  Interesting... to say the least.
>
>--Stan

        I think the best postion would have been prez.  As far as SC justice
goes, I'd like to see her (or anyone for that matter) do a little time as Fed
judge first.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 09:29:08 CST
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Where they gonna go?

I have no doubt that some officers and enlisted personnel will leave
the military when the ban on gays is lifted. Can anyone provide figures
on how many or what pct left the military when blacks were admitted?
Given the current state of the economy, I wouldn't forcast a large
number of people being willing to give up free room and board plus pay
to enter a job market that is heavy on qualified people and light on
opportunity.

Some figures from the government accounting office:

1990 - Number of persons discharged for sexual preference: 932
920 enlisted and 12 officers (anyone else see something strange about
the distribution of terminations?)

Total cost to train 932 replacements:  $27,417,184*

*This figure does not include legal fees
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 23:53:45 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Ronald Reagan lives on
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>courtroom and then we'll really see where the power is. Clinton can only undue
>so much (by appointing new liberal judges) in four years. Will it be enough?
>
>-Dan

        Depends on what you think needs "undone" :).

        Since the president usually represents a sizeable chunk of American
political will, his picks for SC/Fed judiciary can be said to reflect the will
of a sizeable chunk of people.

        As for one person influencing the US court system, that "honor" will
always lie with FDR.

        A lot of Reagan's picks were done on the basis of a single issue (like
abortion), which is (IMO) a bad thing.  Clinton doing the same thing will only
politicize (further) the process.  Let's get back to picking qualified
individuals.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:37:29 EST
From:         jc-s <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Reagan's legacy and the politics of the SC

>Puny Apparatchik,
>
>You are right that it is unlikely that the House would impeach
>a President in the midst of wartime. But they can impeach him
>later!
>
>>1) You can ask them to leave. No one has the power to fire a Supreme.
>
>What's the deal here, Dave? Congress has the power to fire a Supreme.
>Impeachment again. You don't like impeachment, huh?
>
>Jamie

That reminds me. I had meant to ask. Is Big Dave just a dictionary
apparachuahua, or is he a Reference-Guy?

jenna
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 13:18:43 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Hillary & Health Care
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>IMHO, the controversy over Hillary being named as head of the Health
>Care Task Force is raging because she's the First Lady.  A lot of
>people take a dim view of a First Lady who dares to do something other
>than show people around and take care of the family.  How many people
>complained when Bobby Kennedy was named as Attorney General by his
>brother?
>
>Evelyn Duncan

        I'm pretty sure I gave my mom a swift kick in the stomach as soon as I
realized they were brothers.

Brett'
(9/20/63)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet>
X-Truncated: *NOTE* Lines longer than 80 have been truncated. The longest line
             contained 0 characters
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 23 Jan 1993 23:25:55 CDT
From:         Robert Moss <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
Subject:      Uncl: count them bodies
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

>Smoking or non-smoking, the number one cause of death of human beings
>in America today is pre-natal dismemberment.  1.5 million per year.
>And climbing.
>--NINAR Kerry

Glad you're back.

Now that Owl Gore's boss has given us permission to engage in fetal
research, look for the count to go even higher.  It'll be like double
coupon day at the slaughter house.  If you can abort twins, we'll
give you 25 percent off and a free sample of fertility drugs.

---Robert           Kerry '96
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:10:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject: Re: Al: My Story

MMORSE says:

>Al D'Amato can read & WRITE? Will the wonders never cease?

Hey - hey - hey - watch what you say about Al!

Nobody said he could READ!

They just said he'll _write_ a book....



-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:00:24 CST
From:         Titivillus <T9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: what clinton should do?
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> >TALKING TO THE WRONG PEOPLE

> >These politicians have been preaching only to the masses who are
> >already convinced they need jobs. They have made no approach,
> >direct or indirect, to those with authority over the jobs question.
> >And who are they? They are the giant Fortune 500 corporations that
> >control the basic arteries of the economy.

>   If IBM and GM "control the basic arteries of the economy," then how come
> they lost about $9 billion last year between them??

Hardening of the arteries.

>                 ...Just wondering

Dave
t9aa@sdsumus.sdstate.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 20 Jan 1993 20:01:00 EST
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: estimating

On Tue, 12 Jan 1993 07:06:03 EST K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU> said:
> Jerry: Sir, 425000 square feet is about 5000 square yards, times
> 8, that is about $40,000.
Ummmm....in case nobody else noticed, 425000 sq. ft. Is 50,000 sq. yds.
How about teaching some estimation....

>
> The Boss: Good job, Jerry.  Now if you can teach Tom that, you
> deserve to be promoted to be one of my assistants.
>
> --KAT (more thinking--less repetition--longer school hours--
>        longer school year--no summer vacation rather shorter
>        more frequent vacations--smaller classes--higher paid
>        teachers--shorter work days for teachers)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET>
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:27:19 -0500
From:         JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Uncl: Quotable quotes
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

In article <tfilt462514@drew.edu>, Robert Moss <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET> writes:
> "Your abortion can be a rebellious and empowering act.  It is an act
>  through which you can assert yourself; one which can enable you to
>  feel more connected to women around the world.  Indeed, it is a
>  surgical operation with a mission."
>                  - Rebecca Walker, in Harper's Magazine Nov '92
>                    contributing editor
>                    Ms. Magazine
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Mx Walker,
>
> You are a hateful, evil, immoral murderous b____!
>
>                            Sincerely,
>
>
> ---Robert
>
abortion rights does allow women to be in control of their body and not feel
like slaves to their accidental pregancies.  This lets them be more in
control of their lives and be able to truly be equal.  This is
apparently seen as an hateful, evil, and immoral thing to think about
since you seem to be implying she wants to kill to assert herself.
Her hyperbole may be a bit much, but the underling sentiments are
normal in the fight for the freedom of abortion rights.  If you are
implying some abortion rights people go too far, well how surprising.

    -Joe
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU