From: keegan@pan.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: THIRD TRIMESTER ABORTIONS
Date: 5 Sep 92 11:53:26 GMT
Reply-To: james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com>
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
Disclaimer: i speak for myself only, unless noted otherwise

In article <1992Sep4.145501.16114@acd4.acd.com>
	wdo@TEFS1.acd.com (Bill Overpeck) writes:
-> In <1992Sep2.120609.11146@crd.ge.com> keegan@pan.crd.ge.com 
->    (James G Keegan Jr) writes: >
-> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com 
->    (dean.kaflowitz) writes: >>
-> james g keegan jr 
->    <keegan@crd.ge.com> writes: >>>
-> addressing the chaneyhall thing,
->    decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes: >>>>
-> >>>> And he says his home life was not
-> >>>> dysfunctional, yet look at what it produced.
-> > 
-> >>>> He's one sick little boy.  His mommy and daddy
-> >>>> better get him some serious psychiatric
-> >>>> treatment before his visions of his inheritance
-> >>>> get the better of what passes for his patience.
-> >>>> I won't be surprised if I see him on A Current
-> >>>> Affair somewhere down the road.
-> > 
-> >>> hmmmm. bill overpeck told me earlier today that
-> >>> it was prejudicial to suggest that someone seek
-> >>> psychiatric help when i suggested that DODie do
-> >>> so.
-> >
-> >>> i wonder if he'll think the same here.
-> >
-> >> Yeah, well I wasn't sure what Bill was driving at
-> >> with that one.
-> 
-> > i'm not sure bill knows either. 
-> 
-> Perhaps you think I should "see [my] therapist"?

actually, i hadn't. heck, if you want to, go ahead. i'd
never restrict your choice.

-> > he did just post and say that this type of remark
-> > is prejudicial when it is made to denigrate; an
-> > opinion i don't share.
-> 
-> It reflects prejudice toward people who are truly
-> suffering from legitimate mental disorders, to be
-> sure.

no it doesn't. it reflects an opinion towards the
person to whom it was directed. i think DODie needs
help.

-> > in fact, i'm not at all sure that i've ever seen
-> > this type of remark made in this newsgroup when it
-> > doesn't appear to be made to denigrate, at least
-> > denigrate to some degree.
-> 
-> Me either.  Your admission is refreshing.

all you had to do was ask.

-> > i've seen days where remarks like this are made
-> > several times, by several people. perhaps my post
-> > was the first bill ever noticed, although that
-> > does seen quite unlikely, doesn't it? in fact,
-> > several people posted remarks like mine on the
-> > same day that i did.
-> 
-> "Gee Mom, it's not so bad.  Everyone else is doing
-> it, too".

more likely, it implies that a lot of people share my
opinion of DODie. i'm rather surprised that you don't,
actually.

-> > i suspect he probably had another reason for
-> > singling out my remark. i hope he's not irritated
-> > at the outcome of our net.discussions on other
-> > matters.
-> 
-> The only thing that's mildly irritating about you,
-> Jim (and only over the past year or so), is your
-> evasiveness about your ad hominem behavior.

perhaps you'd provide an example of what you're
referring to bill.

-> You and I have had a number of enjoyable discussions
-> in the (more distant) past, but your style has
-> changed significantly since then.

i'm glad i've continued to grow, and develop, bill.




-- 
----
charter member   ...   T.S.A.K.C.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion