From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: 9 Oct 92 16:50:28 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems

In <1992Oct7.193946.24559@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) writes:

>In article <Bvrz74.7yt@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bruce Varney) writes:
>>In <1992Oct7.163134.17826@nwnexus.WA.COM> jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle) writes:
>>
>>>Hey Bruce...I don't give a damn about what's in any dictionary except a law]
>>>dictionary.  When you're talking about taking away people's rights, you're
>>
>>	I am not talking about taking away anyone's rights 

>This statement is not correct.
>>                                                            - I am talking
>>about giving people the rights they deserve - formost of which is the 
>>right to live.
>>
>>>A fetus is NOT a person, check up on the law.  A child is a BORNED person,
>>>check up on the law.  You will have to change all of these to have it 
>>>your way.  Until you do, the legal definition--the only one I care about--
>>>stands.
>>
>>	I don't really give a shit what you care about you heartless
>>bitch. I am sick and fucking tired of hearing all this women's rights shit.

>Bruce, I am sure that I will not be alone in flaming you for
>this misogynic outburst.  Though the honesty is refreshing,

You most certainly will not be. I won't call it flaming though,
simply an indication to this disturbed youngster that perhaps
psychiatric counselling is in order.

>you are a loathesome insect for trying to create a subset 
>of human beings who would have less rights than all other
>born persons--namely women of childbearing age.  You are also
>a dishonest and cowardly cretin for failing to admit that
>your proposals would remove existing rights from women.
>Your restrictions would cost many women their education
>or their careers.  Others would lose their health or their
>lives.

>More importantly, you odiferious rodent, in your newbie
>cluelessness, you have just insulted a woman who is known
>in this group to have _recently_ carried an unplanned and
>possibly difficult pregnancy to term.  She is a _mother_
>of two children, who knws many, many, things about the
>experience of pregnancy, childbearing, and child raising
>that you will never know.  Usually, you pro-female-slavery
>types at least make some _pretense_ of respect for motherhood.

>>Get this fucking straight once and for all - ABORTION IS NO MORE A WOMEN'S
>>RIGHTS ISSUE THAN ABOLITION WAS A SLAVE OWNER'S RIGHTS ISSUE.

>Shouting does not make it so, child.  All other born persons
>posess the right to the autonomy of their own bodies.  You
>wish to remove that right from pregnant women, and when we
>point out what you are doing, you think you can override our
>objections by shouting us down.  What happens next if shouting 
>and swearing fails?  Will you hit someone? 
>>
>>	Just because you do not see fit to respect the rights of others
>>to live does not mean that I have to agree with you. Don't like my
>>choice of words? Don't like me calling a fetus a child, and calling
>>abortion murder? Tough shit. Truth hurts, doesn't it??
>>
>Your rudeness and inaccuracies will only hurt your side in the
>end.  I suggest you keep up the good work, though.  It usually
>takes a great deal more effort on the part of pro-choicers to 
>demonstrate that a desire to restrict abortion via legislation
>is motivated by hatred of women, and the desire to control them.

>muriel
>standard disclaimer

Sorry to butt in on your post Muriel. As to the object of your wrath
I would suggest to that young man that he refrain from posting for
a few month's and that he read this Lady's posts. It will provide
him with more education than he is obviously receiving where he is.

REB

Standard whatever
Newsgroups: talk.abortion