HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Consistency on the Email Privacy Issue?
Date: 14 Apr 92 22:04:01 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
>In <18117@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:

>   Actually - no, he's not clueless... maybe tactless and unwise
>   Please, let's end this thread. Or, let us move it to alt.dull?

As for ending this thread, no argument from me. I'm tired of showing
how clueless some people are....

Ron
From: emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: You want to win.
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:55:56 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: hernes-sun

In article <1992Apr15.211613.24020@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis) writes:

>Funny........no side will ever win on this issue.
>there will always be dissention.

Some wars never end, they are just taken up by generation after
generation. I think that this is just another aspect of the most basic
of those wars, that if the right to freedom vs. the stability of a society.

>MaThiEu a. LeWis   "Achtung ya'll........it's good to be down in America

Eric
--
*  Eric Marsh   ---   email: emarsh@sun.com / standard disclaimers apply  *
*  DoD # 1332                                    dragbike pilot for hire  *
*  986cc Ninja street scooter   ----   GS1260 Suzuki Pro-Stock drag bike  *
From: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Some Park Service Estimates (formerly: The March in D.C.)
Date: 12 Apr 92 16:47:27 GMT
Reply-To: dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <1992Apr12.053925.19066@wam.umd.edu> judi@wam.umd.edu (Jay T Stein -- saying hi to Betty) writes:

>"Birth is an event, not an action taken by the mother."    -- Doug Holtsinger

As I told Ms. McCabe, a mother cannot normally act to cause birth to happen, 
birth is an event that happens to her. Birth can be induced with drugs, but
that's not what I was referring to. Please extend me the same courtesy
that I give to you by not quoting me out of context.  
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: jamcdani@zia.. ("jennifer mc daniel")
Subject: Re: do unborn have rights, or duties????
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 22:25:51 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.201357.15490@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>  
bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:
> 
>    Can anything be called a 'right' if it violates someone else's
> rights?  

Well, one doesn't _directly_ have the right to violate another's 
rights, but there are conflicts. I claim that any right can be waived
(without that possibility, the right is merely a duty). Those who
call themselves pro-life want give the fetus the _duty_ to life,
not the right to life. Since it has not yet had a conscious thought, 
it can't waive any rights it may have. When a woman wants to end her
pregnancy, any duty to life which the pro-lifers wish to impose would 
be in direct conflict with the woman's rights.

> Do you have the right to impose your definition of a fetus
> growing inside a woman, if your definition violates some woman's
> rights?

That a fetus grows inside the woman is a fact, not a definition. 
(Am I parsing your sentence the wrong way?) If you mean the definition
of "person," and whether a fetus is one, my argument above applies.
Persons have rights, not just duties, and a fetus can't have the right
to life because it can't choose to _not_ live.

> Besides, do you call an acorn an 'ungrown oak'?  Do you call
> a steel ingot an 'unmanufactured Buick'? 

The latter, no; the former is possible, but ludicrous. Your point
is well taken.

> Have you adopted an HIV-
> positive infant?  Have you adopted a crack-addicted infant?  Have you
> adoptede an infant with Down Syndrome? 

I haven't adopted any child, I haven't given birth to any child, and I
haven't conceived any child. I realize that motherhood involves more than  
just being able to start up the baby factory, and it's simply not for me,  
personally.

> Have you done ANYTHING besides
> oppose abortion to establish 'personhood' for the fetus(such as calling
> for tax deductions for the fetus, habeas corpus for the fetus growing
> inside a woman who is in prison, citizenship for any child of a woman
> who conceived the child on American soil, etc.)?  

Those could be consequents, couldn't they?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
    Jenni McDaniel, Indiana University, Department of Psychology
"All we ever look for: a god...a drug...a great big hug." -KaTe Bush
 Big ol' IU taking the opinions of one undergrad?!? Yeah, right....
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: judi@wam.umd.edu (Jay T Stein -- go ahead & split, mr amoeba man)
Subject: Doug on the Sig (formerly: Some Park Service Estimates)
Originator: judi@rac1.wam.umd.edu
Organization: _W_A_C_D_T_F, Washington, D.C.
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 18:44:42 GMT

Where it was written: <1992Apr12.164727.23413@ncsu.edu>
Who wrote it:         dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)

>> = a fragment of my .sig

>>"Birth is an event, not an action taken by the mother."    -- Doug Holtsinger

>As I told Ms. McCabe, a mother cannot normally act to cause birth to happen, 
>birth is an event that happens to her. Birth can be induced with drugs, but
>that's not what I was referring to. Please extend me the same courtesy
>that I give to you by not quoting me out of context.  

I understand what you're saying, but the tone of your quote nonetheless
serves to degrade what a woman goes through during pregnancy.  That is
why it's in my .sig.  

Don't worry about it - no one reads my posts anyway. <growl>
--
When a man loves a woman, he supports her right to choose.

     _____     __      __      Pro-woman,      /   -=* Jay T Stein *=-
   |   |      |  \    /        Pro-family,    /
   |   |  in  |   |  |         Pro-child,    <  Internet: judi@wam.umd.edu
|__|   |      |__/    \__      PRO-CHOICE.    \    GEnie: J.STEIN18
                                               \
"Birth is an event, not an action taken by the mother."    -- Doug Holtsinger
"[Pregnancy] is like a harmless slavery of sorts."         -- Kevin Welch
"[it's] up to you to disprove [God's] [existence]."        -- Mark Gaylord
From: keegan@sunroof.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Consistency on the Email Privacy Issue?
Date: 13 Apr 92 02:56:51 GMT
Reply-To: james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com>
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.

In article <1992Apr12.224332.13589@watson.ibm.com>
	margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
-> In  <1992Apr12.164925.11673@rotag.mi.org>  kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
-> > In article <1992Apr12.023124.8952@crd.ge.com> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.c
-> > >you've heard of mailing lists, haven't you? (that was in
-> > >the oist you replied to [see below] but you seem to have
-> > >not grasped it's implications).
-> >
-> > So your assertion is that Steven Kellmeyer is a mailing
-> > list, right?
-> 
-> By what giant leap did you arrive at that conclusion?  Seems
-> as though he's saying that Kellmeyer posted private email, as
-> opposed to email that was sent to a mailing list and so
-> semi-public.

oh larry, i don't doubt that kevin knows that. what he doesn't
know is how to get out of the corner he painted himself into when
he defended kellmeyer and attacked susan garvin. his grasp of the
concept of "honor" is about the same as his grasp of the concept
of "honesty." if either exist at all, they do so in terms that
most people wouldn't understand, or find acceptable if they did.

-> Perhaps Linda is right about your reading comprehension...

        'Mr. Darcy may I suggest that you enroll yourself
        posthaste in a remedial english programme, your lack of
        reading comprehension is astounding.  However, until you
        are able to secure such a class, I recommend that in the
        future you read very slowly, saying each word out loud as
        you come to it.  It is possible that this method will
        help to override your megalomaniacal, paranoid, "there's
        a sychophant behind every bush", thought process and
        maybe, just maybe, you will stop presenting yourself as
        such a complete and utter imbecile.'
				Linda Birmingham
				<91147.150725ADMN8647@Ryerson.CA>

linda always did give kevin more gredit than i do.

--
----
charter member   ...   T.S.A.K.C.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Is life so dear or peace so sweet..?
Supersedes: <92102.131129JKH107@psuvm.psu.edu>
Organization: None.  Terminally sloppy.
Date: Saturday, 11 Apr 1992 16:48:48 EDT
From: Joy Haftel <JKH107@psuvm.psu.edu>

In article <1992Apr7.210353.5111@nas.nasa.gov>, dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan
King) says:
>
>In article <1992Apr7.155502.12298@ncsu.edu> dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug
>Holtsinger) writes:

>>The right to exist is supreme above all other rights. Without the
>>right to exist, no other rights are possible, including the right
>>to freedom. Without existence, freedom is not possible. All humans
>>should have an equal right to exist, and since the right to exist
>>is supreme, no human can deny another human the right to exist,
>>unless their own existence is threatened.

>Who was it that said "Give Me Liberty or Give me Death"?

"Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace, but there is no peace.  Our
brethren are already in the field.  Why stand we here idle?
What is it gentlemen wish?  What would they have?  Is
life so dear or peace so sweet to be bought at the price of chains
and slavery?  Forbid it almighty God!  I know not what choice others
may make, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
                     --Patrick Henry

Of course this was about unfair taxation and other things, but it
would be interesting to see it applied to the abortion debate.

Joy Haftel               "Farewell dear, deluding Woman,
JKH107@PSUVM              The joy of joys!"--Burns
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Has anyone seen this ad?
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 18:21:44 GMT

<Mar.27.22.20.23.1992.1667@romulus.rutgers.edu> kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) said:
>In article <1992Mar27.163403.7205@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> alyoung@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (amy young) writes:
>
>> And, as we all know, morals are not something which are set and
>> absolute.
>
>No, we do not all "know" this.  

Stick around then, and be educated.

>                                As a matter of fact, those of us who
>DO know something about this realize that morals are indeed absolute.

Really, many past civilizations believed it to be moral to kill deformed
children, or leave them to exposure.  The Japanese, in this century,
believe that suicide is morally fine, given the proper circumstances (i.e.
to atone for disgrace).  Of course, we now feel that these things are
"wrong".  Seems like 'morals' are relative to culture and time.

You'd have to prove otherwise.

>The only ones who dispute this are the immoral.

Circular argumentation.

>> You're probably immoral when put up against a Wiccan set of
>> expectations, "morals," if you will.
>
>Morals != "expectations".

Perhaps they are not absolutely equal, but they are fairly equivelent.

>> I'm immoral when placed up against the commercialized version of
>> Christian morals.
>
>And you're probably also quite immoral when measured against the
>absolute version of Christian morals.  (I wouldn't know for sure, but
>given the apparent contempt you exhibit against Christianity, I would
>say that this is a safe guess.)
>
>> Do I care?  No.  Because they aren't my own personal beliefs.  
>
>Do you care?  No, because you're immoral and couldn't care less about
>others.

You know, I once asked Suzanne Forgach (via e-mail) what sins she thought 
I as a non-Christian were more likely to commit.  Her response was -
killing people and selfishness.  Let me ask you, what "immoral" things,
besides the obvious non-worship of your god, do you think I as a
non-Christian are more likely to commit.  Try to list a few more than
Suzanne did, please.



Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boyfriend of Susan,
Muriel, Cathi, and Nora, and darn proud of it.
-- 

The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: darcy's hypocrisy (was Re: Dennis Hall posts private E-mail!)
Date: 11 Apr 92 13:11:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: rotag.1992Apr11.131143.6874
Organization: Who, me???

In article <1992Apr9.172524.1861@crd.ge.com> keegan@rosebud.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:
>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>-> keegan@sunroof.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:
>
>-> >i think you're just flaming susan because she's female.
>-> 
>-> As Larry has already noted, isn't this at odds with the
>-> official TSAKC party line that I'm flaming Susan as part of
>-> some "net.vendetta"???
>
>it sure is. of course, i posted such when i replied to larry's
>post and admitted my error. would you like me to repost a copy of
>that reply? you did miss it, didn't you? in it, i agreed with the
>obvious: that you are, in fact, flaming susan garvin as part of
>your net.vendetta.

In other words, you are realigning yourself with the official, orthodox,
TSAKC party line that my criticisms of Susan Garvin are motivated by a 
net.vendetta, right?

Whew! What a relief! Can't have any heresies or schisms in the TSAKC ranks,
now can we...

								- Kevin
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C. (NEW SIGNATURE!)
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:39:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: pwcs.1992Apr15.163948.20715
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works

franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:

>-------------------- Muriel's new .sig ----------------------------------
>Muriel
>Anything I say or do should not make sense.

Steve's projecting, here.

>I sometimes let my pet hamster type some of my talk.abortion posts.

And the little bugger beats Steve hands down every time!  S/he even
types faster!

>I had a lobotomy and they removed my cerebral cortex.

But Muriel still cogitates more effectively than Steve.

>My employer is not responsible for my opinions, nor would he want to
>   be because of their embarassingly idiotic nature.

Many employers are embarassingly idiotic by nature. :-)

>Any posts of mine you don't like aren't by me anyways, but by the
>   infamous Dennis Hall.

I've never met a Muriel post I didn't like, so obviously Dennis Hall is
not forging Muriel posts.

>I will some day be lucky enough to compose eloquent arguments of logic
>   like Steve Franklin who I admire so grealy.

Grealy?  One of those Canadian neologisms we hear so much about?

>I don't even type my posts. I write them up in nice orange crayon and
>   then my mommy types them up for me (when my pet hamster is busy)

Steve, who is generally not trusted with sharp objects, is projecting again.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------

That reminds me:  I have to dash ('-') to the post office and mail
my tax returns.

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include standard_disclaimers
T.S.A.K.C.   /  "If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?" - Art Hoppe
From: mjln_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Mikeey J. Lin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: A question for any MALE prolifer
Date: 6 Apr 92 06:52:59 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <46ztaxb@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:

>Pro-"life" males never cease to amaze me.  As quick as they are to
>sentence women to a "99.99%" chance of death, I have never, ever
>seen a SINGLE ONE who is even willing to SAY that he'd mandate
>any sort of physical requirement of the father.  We've seen tons 
>of weaseling of the "Oh well, I'm sure that I'd do it for my own
>child but I don't think there should be a LAW about it..." variety.

	Hmmm... even though I'm not really a "Pro-Lifer" I think that
the only law we can require of the natural father is that he has to
provide part of the medical bill. I dunno, do you have ant suggestions?
(Let me know if there are some "requirements" that you want from the male)

>So, pro-"life"s, here's your chance to respond to the question that
>I have asked countless times on t.a and that no one has EVER tried
>to answer:
>What equivalent responsibility (if any) do you propose for the
>MALE who got the potentially aborting woman pregnant?

	Like I said before, I think the most we can do is requiring the man
to pay for at least half of the medical costs if the woman decides to have
an abortion. If the woman decides to have the child, the man should be    
required to pay for part of the cost. (I dunno how much though) I think some
kind of "physical requirement" would be nice but I personally cannot think
of any. Again, I'm open to suggestions. :)

>And people wonder why I have little respect for pro-"life" males.

	Hmmm... sorry to hear this. Hope someone'll change your view
of Pro-Life males cause I know not all are bad. Abortion is a touchy issue
and everyone thinks they're right. The problem is, it's hard to say who's
right or wrong. Everyone's got a point. Everyone usually try to do what they
think is best, they mean well. Don't you agree? Well, got to go. I wish you
the best of luck in finding a "respectable" answer to your questions.
                                 
						Mikeey
				    mjln_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
				      (Pro-Choice/ANTI-ABORTION)

PS Just out of curiosity, why do you call yourself "rocker"?
   (I know this is a stupid question, but I'm curious)
 
>                           -rocker
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: The Value of a Man (repost)
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 15:40:47 GMT

In article <k85tvzl@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>
>... I have seen many pro-"life" males on this
>    group smugly assert that they believe in the sanctity of ALL
>    life.  In that case, why should they balk at the opportunity
>    to help a stranger?  It couldn't be that they feel that donating
>    a kidney is INCONVENIENT?  How horrible, not to physically
>    support someone else because of one's own CONVENIENCE!

Gee, the pro-choice Peanut Gallery keeps ripping up Kellmeyer for telling
them what they think. Aren't you doing EXACTLY the same thing here wrt
"pro-life logic", Cathi?

Double delicious, double-standard...

							- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: Kathi, please be careful
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 16:54:34 GMT

rivk@quads.uchicago.edu (nora gayle rivkis) writes:

> My family, most of whom was in America at the time,
> heard over and over again, "I don't much like Hitler, but at least
> he's getting rid of the Jews for us." It's funny; I've heard the 
> same thing myself, about Hussein and about Nasser and about Assad...
> it never really changes.

Back in the forties, Minneapolis, my home town, had a mayor named
Hubert H. Humphrey who made a name for himself in national politics
by standing up for civil rights at the 1948 Democratic convention.

BUT...

I'm ashamed to say it; Minneapolis was also a hotbed of anti-semitism
in those days.  Hardly a month passed without Temple Israel being
vandalized.

Back in my high school days, I had a Jewish girlfriend (not Nora, alas :-( ).
She and I got involved in the civil rights movement briefly, and she taught
me a lot about what it means to be something other than WhiteMaleOfNorthern
EuropeanLineage.

Skol (a Norwegian toast), Nora, and shalom!

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include standard_disclaimers
T.S.A.K.C.   /  "If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?" - Art Hoppe
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Sorry, did I miss anything?
Date: 10 Apr 92 01:38:40 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<1992Apr7.035431.2701@cs.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) said:
><17692@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:
>>mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) writes:
>>><1992Apr6.201203.28022@cs.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Er
>>>ic Rescorla) writes:
>>>><1992Apr6.194536.26089@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com
>>Uh Eric,
>>    Since this *desireable* :) ex-girlfriend has this reaction to DJR
>>(whoever the hell he is, I missed all his threads, evidently) I vote
>>him out, totally hopeless case or not...I'm not in the charity business:)
>All right, all right. No more DJR.

I would think you'd just be happy with a job right now. ;-)  Heck,
ex-girlfriends are pretty reasonable to support too.


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boyfriend of Susan,
Muriel, Cathi, and Nora, and married to the sweetest woman in the world,
and darn proud of it.
-- 

The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: kebbie wants a "neutral adjudicator" to control women's bodies (was Re: Multi-lateral Abortion Decision (was Re: Women in bondage?))
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 14:42:30 GMT

In article <1992Apr16.023509.3073@crd.ge.com> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com> writes:
>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>-> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com> writes:
>-> >-> >-> >-> >kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes to larry margolis:
>-> >-> >-> >-> >-> It's not "obvious" [sic] at all. As long as
>-> >-> >-> >-> >-> the possibility exists that the potential
>-> >-> >-> >-> >-> father, and/or the state, might get an
>-> >-> >-> >-> >-> abortion veto-power, then certainly the LESS
>-> >-> >-> >-> >-> RADICAL possibility of giving this power to a
>-> >-> >-> >-> >-> neutral adjudicator is far more likely, as a
>-> >-> >-> >-> >-> compromise position.
>-> >-> >-> >-> >
>-> >-> >-> >-> >this is a bit excessive, even for a pro-control
>-> >-> >-> >-> >freak like you kevin. now you seem to want so
>-> >-> >-> >-> >badly to lessen women's control of their bodies
>-> >-> >-> >-> >that you want to give that control to a "neutral
>-> >-> >-> >-> >adjudicator."
>[...]
>-> >whose rights do you want to compromise away, kebbie?
>-> 
>-> Please point out the part where I claimed the authority to
>-> make such a compromise.
>
>can't you read your own posts?

Evasion. Please point out the part where I claimed, or even requested, the 
authority to "compromise away" [sic] anyone's rights.

							- Kevin
From: GB0012@SIUCVMB.BITNET
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re:  You want to win.
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:04:00 GMT

franklin at ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
-
>forgach at noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:

...]
-
| I have a lot of respect for Suzanne's posts, not because she is pro-life
| but because she is fair.
-
Yet another guy who falls for those blonde-haired-blue-eyed types ...
-
Suzanne Lucia.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion