From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Proposed definitions for FAQ (Was: Reconciling OT/NT)
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:28:06 GMT

In <1992Dec22.063007.50924@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:

>In <1992Dec21.212858.28762@mksol.dseg.ti.com> noonan@mksol.dseg.ti.com (Michael P Noonan) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec21.041610.42537@watson.ibm.com>, margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:
>>|> In <1992Dec21.012812.8797@mksol.dseg.ti.com> noonan@mksol.dseg.ti.com (Michael P Noonan) writes:
>>|> >In article <1992Dec20.223810.17255@netcom.com>, gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>>|> >|> <1992Dec18.213300.4979@mksol.dseg.ti.com> noonan@mksol.dseg.ti.com (Michael P Noonan) writes:
>>|> >|> >
>>|> >|> >First of all, I'd like to point out that most pro-abortionists or
>>|> >|> >pro-choicers are Christian.  Secondly, there do exist atheists who
>>|> >|> >are pro-life/anti-abortion.  So, just what exactly are you implying here?
>>|> >|>
>>|> >|> Sorry Mike, but the three admitted pro-abortioners on this net are hardly
>>|> >|> Christian.  I'd like to know where you get your stats.

Just out of curiosity: who are they?  I know Gordon Storga is one, who are
the other two?

If I have to go through a rigamarole like when I asked who the "other two"
abortionists who specialize in late-term abortions are, please ignore
the above question.  I gave George Tiller's name as the one I knew. [BTW
Part 2 of my trilogy on "Killer Tiller" is still on my boards.  I hope
I can squeeze out time to post Part 3 by Saturday.  Today looks out of
the question, and tomorrow is Christmas Eve and even I take voluntary
breaks from posting for such special occasions as Christmas.]

There followed a message by Susan Garvin with words to the following
effect:  "You and your band of terrorists will just have to do your
own research."  I responded with "I resent that crack about terrorists.
I am no more a terrorist than Mahatma Ghandi or Martin Luther King."
But somebody did eventually post Warren Hern's name, with all kinds of
talk about him being the target of terrorism (or, to pull a Chris Lyman,
being _allegedly_ the target of terrorism).

I am still in the dark as to who the third late-term abortionist is.

>Had you read a little further before responding, you would have seen that
>I doubt you know any "pro-abortionists", much less Christian ones; I have no
>doubt that you know many Christian pro-choicers.

Susan Garvin is at least a candidate for the title "pro-abortionist," 
along with everyone else who sneers at every report of wrongdoing
by LEGAL abortionists while choosing to blind themselves to evidence
that certain illegal abortions never took place.

Proposed definitions for the FAQ:

Pro-abort: One who is pro-abortion.

Pro-abortion: Actively promoting abortion while disparaging pregnancy and
childbirth.  

[This makes Linda Birmingham, Bob Blackshaw, and Adrienne Regard good
candidates for the title.  At one point I said I would call Adrienne
pro-abortion until corrected, but after reading her words that a third
child would make her a happy woman, I decided to put this decision on hold
until I receive additional evidence.]

Pro-abortionist: one who actively opposes anything that makes life more
difficult for abortionists, even if women were to benefit from the 
restrictions.

[This includes opposing informed consent requirements, requirements that
abortionists carry a realistic amount of malpractice insurance,
requirements that abortions be done in EITHER a hospital OR licensed
clinic, requirements that SO's be ALLOWED to witness the abortion,
requirements that women be tested for pregnancy before D&C etc. are 
performed, etc.  It also includes those spreading disinformation about 
these requirements already being in place, while knowing it to be false.]

Pro-choice: (1) one who does not support legal restrictions on the WOMAN
as to choice to abort; and (2) one who does not support such legal
restrictions prior to viability.

A perennial bone of contention on talk.abortion is which of these 
definitions to adopt.  By (1), Elizabeth Bartley is not pro-choice, 
but by (2) she is (coincidentally, because it is not viability that she
uses for her criterion but a certain level of brain function).

>>|> No, he was talking about the three people on the net who claim to be
>>|> pro-abortion; he was saying *nothing* about the millions of us who are
>>|> pro-choice.
>>
>>Then the fault is with my lumping of the pro-abortionists in with the pro-
>>choicers.  I will try to understand the difference; please bear with me.

As you can see, I make distinctions as above.  It is possible to be any
subset of the set {pro-choice, pro-abort, pro-abortionist}, including
(as in my case) the empty set.

>>|> Not only are you wrong, but by referring to them as pro-abortion, you're
>>|> insulting many pro-choicers who are against abortion, but nevertheless
>>|> feel that forcing their moral beliefs on others through laws would be
>>|> a greater evil.

An even stranger example is Steve Adams, who says "abortion is a
responsible choice" to score debating points against a newbie, then
turns around and claims he never believed the statement in quotes
to be correct, at least from a religious point of view (funny, I don't
recalling him mentioning religion when he made that statement to Elizabeth
G.).  He is even predicting that he will very likely be a fundamentalist 
very soon.

You figure it out.

>>|> To pick an extreme example, think of people defending the rights of Nazis
>>|> to speak.  They might be pro-free-speech for Nazis, but that's a far cry
>>|> from being pro-Nazi.

What about the rights of Nazis to exterminate people they consider sub-human?

>The above seems to be your problem.  An abortionist is a person who performs
>abortions.  In this country, only doctors are legally allowed to perform
>abortions (I believe).

I believe it varies from state to state.  In South Carolina, this is true.
How about elsewhere?

MAJOR question:

capitals, spelling and linebreaks inspired by drieux: 

How is it that NO
ControlFreak, ProForcer, AntiChoicer or RightToLifer 
has ever called on for NonPhysicianWomen to be 
prosecuted for ILLEGALLY performing
SelfInducedAbortion?

Could it be that they CARE about women?  Nah...:-)

Peter Nyikos