From: steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak)
Subject: Re: Simon Booth comes out pro-choice
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 15:53:28 GMT

> = (Ted Krueger) writes:
>> = ( Steve Novak) writes:
>>> = (Ted "Blinders" Krueger) writes:

[...]
>>>This is such crap.  Perhaps you feel this way, but the leaders of 
>>>NOW and NARAL certainly do not.  Please watch next time any state 
>>>tries to enact things like parental notification or waiting periods 
>>>which just might have the chance of reducing the numbers of abortions.

>>Parental notification, to anyone thinking through the possibilities, is
>>so useless that anyone more aware than Krueger (e.g., an opossum) can
>>figure out the cruel scenarios that would result.
>>
>>Just to help Teddy Bear along, I'll give him one leetle example:
>>
>>  A pregnant girl required to "notify" abusive parents that her father
>>  has impregnated her. 

>Oh!  Now I get it!  

Hardly.  You're not even close; you, sir, will *never* "get it".  It's fun
watching you thrash around like this, though:

>If Junior's (or Juniorette's) daddy will beat them 
>up if the authorities tell daddy that they ran a stop sign, then we 
>cannot make a law mandating that daddy be told that they ran the sign?

I nominate this statement's author for Head Shoved Farthest Up Rectum.

I'll speak slo-o-o-owly, Ted: in your rather puzzling analogy, where's the
part where daddy FORCED Junior to run the stop sign?  Now, aren't you
embarrassed at your thick-headedness?

Or are you indicating APPROVAL for incestuous daddy power?

>Yeah!  That's it!  We make laws based on whether or not Junior's daddy 
>will beat him up.  Why should we let the fact that beating up Junior 
>is itself against the law stand in the way of protecting Junior with 
>any infinite number of legal protections, regardless of what else 
>those legal protections do.

Naturally, laws against kids getting beat up hasn't stopped a huge
number of parents from beating the shit out of their kids.  ...And our
laws against incest, additionally, haven't done anything to keep 1 in 5
girls and 1 in 7 boys from being sexually molested, almost always by
relatives.

Since you sound so bitter, do you have an anecdote of your own in this
area?  I certainly hope you're not a parent yourself.

>Matter of fact, we all know that Junior's daddy will beat him senseless 
>if he finds out that Junior robbed the liquor store (since we all agree 
>that the law banning daddy from beating Junior is no deterent), so why 
>don't we make it illegal for anyone to tell daddy that Junior is a thief?

Hee hee.  Lucky for you, it's not illegal to beat the hell out of logic.

>Gee Whiz!  Why don't we just make all communication between daddy and 
>Junior (or Juniorette) subject to judicial screening.  We all know that 
>all of a child's problems are causes by those stupid parents anyway.

Many are.  People like you that ignore these facts are part of the
problem.     

>p.s.  Steve, whenever you post and resort to name-calling (opossum), 
>      you reinforce my belief that liberals don't know how to debate.

Aw, poor baby.  Is that why you came up with so many brainless
analogies?  You could send them to Rushie-poo; maybe he'll send you the
home version of "Hate Your Neighbor".  




-- 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Steve Novak |    |"Wacker the K"| 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
steven@advtech.USWest.Com