HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade and abortion (was Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 03:49:21 GMT
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<1992Sep10.114559.18850@sniap.mchp.sni.de> frank@D012S436.sniap.mchp.sni.de () :
>gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>: Gee, maybe people should have the right to voice their opposition to black
>: people living next to them, or Jews, or those icky non-Christians (we all
>: know that *real* Americans are Christian Republicans).  Perhaps you don't
>
>Aw Gee, maybe people _should_ have the right to freedom of speech, Gordon...

I agree, Frank.  And Doug's original concern was that somehow the Supreme
Court rulings made it illegal for people to voice their opinions.  I was
attempting to show him that it doesn't really effect the opinions of
people.

>: like it Doug, but bodily autonomy rights should not be left up to the whim
>: of the people.  
>
>No, they should be left to the whim of a small clique instead.

Can you explain a little further.  What clique of people would you like to
leave your rights up to?


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel, 
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), and Diana (Sorceress),
and married to a goddess among women, and 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: smezias@wissel.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Hey, Ata Boy - outta here!
Date: 11 Sep 92 01:01:12 GMT
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

In article <BuDJzy.CEs@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> ata@sage.cc.purdue.edu
(ata boy) writes: 

>"Your honor, my religion requires that I shoot Ronald Bense 
> in the head.  Am I free to practice freedom of religion?"
>
>Freedom of religion does not give anyone free reign to harm
>other people.

(1) If Ronald Bense were occupying your body against your will, say
he were attached to your neck sucking your blood because he is a
vampire, you would have every right to remove him, and probably even
kill him.  That is provided you weren't enjoying it.

(2) A /z/e/f/ is not a person.  If you are confused about this or do
not want to make my word for it, I suggest an experiment.  Try to take
a tax deduction or get a social security number for a /z/e/f/.

SJM
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: "only 3 doctors...perform third trimester abortions"
Keywords: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Date: 6 Sep 92 03:55:26 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <nyikos.715733421@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
#In <Bu37tD.610.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

##I have yet to see your quotes from either of these women.  I
##don't know who they are, and I have only your word as to
##what their stand is on legal abortion.
#
#But you dismissed anything I may quote from Luhra Tivis as
#propaganda.  In advance of seeing any of it.

I think that I said something like, "I haven't seen that
piece of propaganda yet."  You had indicated that it was
a criticism of Dr. Tiller, and one that contradicted everything
that I have read or heard about the man from people who
have worked with him or been his patient.  

Perhaps it's not propaganda, and perhaps I was being unfair.
Perhaps not.  I'll reserve judgment, as I should have done
originally, until you finally produce the quote.

(This is still a different issue that DOD citing the
word of someone who he calls "pro-abortion" as the
reason that he won't accept evidence from a group
that he calls "pro-abortion," isn't it?)

Susan
From: andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Andrew Hackard)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Attention!
Date: 12 Sep 92 17:31:20 GMT
     <1992Sep9.004109.9581@midway.uchicago.edu> 
     <1992Sep9.234727.15439@csus.edu>
Organization: Attack of the Quayle Potatoes

Oh, this is *rich*...

chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>Perhaps some of us would be willing to concede if, say, Ren & Skimpy's

Stimpy.

>Love Child (as he calls himself) 

Teddi?  I could be wrong (I often am), but that doesn't sound too much like
a "guy" name.  Anyone care to set either me or Stevie straight?

>were to own up for that "Vatican Rag"
>bigotry. 

Steve, did you willfully ignore ALL the followups which pointed out that
1)it was a SATIRE, 2)Lehrer (who wrote the song) is himself a Catholic,
and 3)that anyone with a single functioning neuron thinks it's funny?

I'm going to add fuel to the fire and urge someone who isn't in the terminal
stages of sleep dep to post the lyrics to "National Brotherhood Week".  I
need a good laugh.

-- 
--Andrew Hackard                                 If I spoke for UT, this post
  andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu                        would make even less sense.

                              Eddie/Marvin '92:
               We support a kindler, gentler depressive state...
                        as improbable as it may seem.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Pat Robertson's rant letter
Keywords: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date:  7 Sep 92 16:16:15 GMT

In <Bu4swF.37t.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

>In article <nyikos.715735129@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>#In <1992Sep1.175955.24063@samba.oit.unc.edu> Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi) writes:
>#
>#
>##	For those of you (like Mr. Nyikos) who seem reluctant to accept just
>##how loony Pat Robertson has become, here's the AP report on his charming
>##little letter/plea for $$, lifted from talk.politics.misc:
>#
>#HOLD IT!  HOLD IT!  I thought this was all about Pat Buchannan.  


>Did you?

>"Robertson is much too astute to make blanket statements
>like the one you say he suggested."
> - Peter Nyikos <nyikos.715285141@milo.math.scarolina.edu>


>"Hmmm.  Maybe I gave Robertson more credit than he deserves."
>Peter Nyikos - <nyikos.715468090@milo.math.scarolina.edu>

>#What's
>#Pat Robertson doing, plagiarizing his lines?????

>[article deleted]

>#Or is it Pat Buchannan plagiarizing Pat Robertson?

>Or is Nyikos losing his mind?

>Susan

Not quite, but I certainly must have been stressed by all the things I
read before posting these comments.  I kept having a mental image of
Buchannan all the while typing in "Robertson," and maybe because
it was because the original post had to do with the Republican National
Convention (or is my memory letting me down here too?) and I saw
Buchannan on TV, but not Robertson.

Starting back on square one: all bets are off as to how astute Robertson
is.  Buchannan is, but Robertson probably isn't, otherwise his presidential
campaign four years ago would have been a real threat, what with his
million-plus band of loyal followers. 

Now to square two: I still don't have much of a clue as to who Robertson
was really talking about.  All the quotes attributed to him that I have
read so far start in the middle of the sentence and do not say much about
whose agenda he was referring to.  The fact that some of the people
involved were members of mainstream feminist organizations does not rule
out their being also members of splinter groups.

Peter Nyikos



Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Proposal for a moderated abortion newsgroup
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 20:17:14 GMT
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<Sep12.065353.40464@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> sa114984@longs.lance.colostate.edu (Steven Arnold) writes:
><1992Sep2.180138.5239@coopsol.com>, gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>|> >In article <1992Aug31.041628.25063@rotag.mi.org> 
>|> >kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>|> >Would you be willing to serve as a moderator? 
>|> 
>|> Maybe I should volunteer to be moderator.  I can't think of a better
>|> background: pro-abortion, pro-women's-rights, Atheist, intolerant of
>|> "darcy-name-calling" posts, intolerant of hypocrisy...
>
>	...intolerant of a great many things, as a matter of fact...and, of
>course, terribly modest...

A joke son, it's a joke.  I neither have the time nor the desire to
babysit this group.

>|> Gordon
>|> Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel,
>|> Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), and Diana (Sorceress), 
>|> and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it all.
>
>	See what I mean?
>	Pro-abortion and pro-person are mututally exclusive.  

Nonsense.  By being pro-abortion i *am* pro-person.  I repeated it for
clarity, which I see was needed.

>	                                                      Pro-abortion and
>pro-born-person is more like it.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Talk about redundant.


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel, 
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), and Diana (Sorceress),
and married to a goddess among women, and 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.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Peter, do you even know how to READ? (Was: 3 docs in a 3-way).
Summary: Peter?  Read?  Are you kidding? :-)
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on... 
Organization: Not for us.
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:08:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep6.162508.10966@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>In article <nyikos.715733197@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>Sorry, I missed that one.  And it seems so out of character, I find it
>>hard to believe he wasn't being satirical.  Which thread was it on, so
>>I can see the context?
>
>Peter, have you read ANY article on talk.abortion?  I mean, you post so much
>crap here that I assumed you actually READ what you were replying to...

Keep in mind you're dealing with someone who said if he'd known about Dale
Ann's condition, he wouldn't have casually dropped my name into his sleazy
little attempt to repeat Chaney's slur -- but somehow couldn't figure out
that he did it a couple of days *before* Dale Ann landed in the Hermann
Hospital ER...obviously, he's already *had* an excisional biopsy done on his
brain -- and it was all removed...:-)

-- 
Patrick L. Humphrey  (patrick@is.rice.edu)  Rice Networking & Computing Systems
     +1 713 528-3626 at Rice. 776-1541 at home. 667-6554 at Palace Lanes. 
                           I love my country.
                     I *don't* trust my government.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: scotts@CS.CMU.EDU (Scott Safier)
Subject: Re: Chaney's sig
Originator: scotts@MORPHEUS.CIMDS.RI.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<BuHLJH.JKB.2@cs.cmu.edu> <ppg5hc0@fido.asd.sgi.com>
	<1992Sep14.155704.7781@pwcs.stpaul.gov>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:57:56 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.155704.7781@pwcs.stpaul.gov> chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:

   cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio) writes:
   > garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes about Scott Safier:

   >> Your puppy is undeniably cute.  

   > Is that his "golden retriever of love"?  Or was that 
   > Chris Lyman's?

   Labrador.  A nice, friendly dog, but kind of a mooch for attention.

My border collie puppy is cuter than your Labrador, so there :-& <- tongue out

   Is the guy with the 'tiny sex animals' rat still around?

Haven't seen him recently.

________  __
\      / /  \
 \pink/  \__          -+--+-               Scott Safier    (corwin+@cmu.edu)
  \  /      \  _  __   |  |                Center for Integrated Manufacturing
   \/    \__/ (__/\_)_/|_/|_/                                 Decision Systems
        B0/1 f+ w- g k+ s- m(+) e++             Carnegie Mellon
member, T.S.A.K.C.

"We do not have an anti-gay policy... The problems Boy Scouts are
having are with people trying to get in - the gay community, the
homosexuals, the atheists."
Burford Hill, Western Regional Director, Boy Scouts of America. 
5 June 1992, San Francisco Chronicle
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Item for Chaney's study of abortion--adult/child sex link.
Keywords: Nyikos failing other arguments goes for guilt by association
Date: 7 Sep 92 15:46:03 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <nyikos.715654531@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
> In <1992Sep3.150341.16461@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
> >You just said you don't know if they were protesting the child
> >molesting.  You said it right there.  Read it.  As I said, you
> >have no information on that at all but simply speculate about it.
> 
> You are using the word "speculate" in a nonstandard way. 

You say "They'd have protested it if they knew about it."  You
have no information at all to conclude that they knew about it.
To say what they would do if they knew something, which you don't
have any information about, is speculation.  Quite in line
with standard definitions.  Sorry you don't understand the
English language very well.

> >> I've seen real speculation from the pro-choice side.  People
> >> calling me a misogynist, a liar, a man associating with terrorists, 
> >> an unprincipled man, a man lacking integrity--that's real speculation.
> >> None of it backed up by a shred of evidence, nor with valid comparisons to
> >> people who do fit the above descriptions. 
> >That was all based on your own words.  That was interpretation of
> >your attitudes as expressed by you in your postings here.  Your
> >postings themselves provide the direct evidence and those who
> >posted their interpretations quoted your own words and stated
> >their reasons for the conclusions they drew.
> 
> None of which were worth the electrons it took to transmit them.


Ah, a non-answer, now that we see that what was said about you
was not speculation, but opinion based on information in-hand
and directly from the source about whom the opinion was formed.

This one was a real squirmy sort of post from you, Peter.  I
enjoyed it a lot.

Dean Kaflowitz
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach)
Subject: Re: Good News from a Premie!
Originator: forgach@gemini.tuc.noao.edu
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 21:53:28 GMT

From article <Bu1Dxw.ABu.2@cs.cmu.edu>, by garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin):
> 
> While I'm glad that the child survived, and hope that she truly
> has no ill effects, I feel that I do need to point out that it
> is possible to misjudge gestational age by up to four weeks.
> (That was the justification for allowing mandatory viability
> testing at 20 weeks in the Webster decision.)
 
While teams of medical doctors working on a premie in the neonatal intensive
care ward could ~conceivably~ get a child's gestational age wrong, they sure
as heck will get her weight right.  

** 15 ounces **    As human and thriving as the rest of us.


> Could you elaborate on the "lung treatment," Suzanne?

From what my officemate told me of they what treated her nephew with, it's a
synthetic lung secretion to make up for the one lacking in such young premies,
without which many have terrible lung problems.
 
> Susan

Suzanne.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 11:24:00 -0400 
From: Erik Karl Witte <ew2r+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: SIMPLE ANSWER

Notes on a few disingenuous arguments from Mark Ira Kaufman:

1.  The woman with limited financial resources should have spent them on
contraception.  A condom costs 25 cents, maybe 50 at an expensive gas
station.

2.  Okay, you guessed it.  The Pennsylvania legislature just wanted to
get poor women.  That's the goal of all of us in life.  COME ON!  The
intent of the law, and the effect of the law, is to place restrictions
on abortion.

3.  All the picture tell how far through the pregnancy the fetus was.  A
woman knows how far in her own pregnancy she was and can make her own
assumptions.  The pictures show that there really is something alive
inside of her, and give her an idea of what it is.

If you take your point of view, every law and every regulation and every
suggestion anyone has every passed or made is a slap at poor people. 
Stop dodging the issue.  Nothing can ever be totally equitable, but
that's the price you pay for living in a free society.  The simple fact
is, nobody has to have an abortion.  There are alternatives all along
the way, starting even before conception with the purchase of a condom
or a spermicidal jelly or anything else.
From: ata@sage.cc.purdue.edu (ata boy)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Freedom of religion
Date: 10 Sep 92 18:14:21 GMT
Organization: Purdue University

In article <> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:
>In talk.abortion, chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>>|Pro-Contraception   Pro-Freedom of Religion, Speech & Sexual Orientation   |
>				     ^^^^^^^^
>My "religion" states that an abortion must happen if the pregnancy threatens 
>the life of the mother-to-be. It also requires an abortion in cases
>where a new baby cannot be afforded or wanted, provided that in this
>case the potential mother does not wish to carry this fetus to term.
>
>Would I be free to practice this religion in your world? You claim to
>be pro-freedom of religion, after all.

"Your honor, my religion requires that I shoot Ronald Bense 
 in the head.  Am I free to practice freedom of religion?"

Freedom of religion does not give anyone free reign to harm
other people.

Don
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: FOCA: And I quote.....
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 19:23:14 GMT

In article <nyikos.716567656@milo.math.scarolina.edu>
nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>In <1992Sep11.182503.29215@midway.uchicago.edu>
>eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley) writes:

>>Yes, Suzanne, of course z/e/fs are alive; that's why the quotations
>>marks around "on-line"; unlike "myelination", I figured everyone
>>reading a newsgroup was familiar with the term "on-line" and simply
>>wanted to signal that my usage was nonstandard.

>I've got a more fundamental problem.  I still don't know what you
>MEAN by it.  On the other hand, your "somebody home" is beautifully
>self-explanatory, although any number of so-called philosophers today
>make a career out of claiming such expressions are meaningless, or
>redefining them, or deliberately misunderstanding them.

Different way of saying the same thing....

-- 
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.

Cthulhu for President -- when you're tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
From: mills@uga.edu (Kathi Mills)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: SIMPLE ANSWER
Date: 15 Sep 92 12:04:10 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia Economics Department

> Witte

>1.  The woman with limited financial resources should have spent them on
>contraception.  A condom costs 25 cents, maybe 50 at an expensive gas
>station.

Gee, dim bulb, has it never occurred to you that CONTRACEPTIVES FAIL?

>2.  Okay, you guessed it.  The Pennsylvania legislature just wanted to
>get poor women.  That's the goal of all of us in life.  COME ON!  The
>intent of the law, and the effect of the law, is to place restrictions
>on abortion.

So they go about it by attacking the most vulnerable: the young and the poor.

>3.  All the picture tell how far through the pregnancy the fetus was.  A
>woman knows how far in her own pregnancy she was and can make her own
>assumptions.  The pictures show that there really is something alive
>inside of her, and give her an idea of what it is.

1.  You really ought to write more clearly.  2.  Many women DO NOT know
how far along they are (obviously, you don't know EVEN ONE woman who has
been pregnant - you must have been adopted).  3.  The fetus looks radically
different at different stages of pregnancy, and pictures of same can be
quite misleading.  4.  No pictures, unless you mean ultrasound, diagnose
that there is ANYTHING alive in her.  5.  Even if there IS a developing
fetus inside the woman, does not mean that the woman or anyonne else must
fall down and worship it.

>If you take your point of view, every law and every regulation and every
>suggestion anyone has every passed or made is a slap at poor people. 
>Stop dodging the issue.  Nothing can ever be totally equitable, but
>that's the price you pay for living in a free society.  The simple fact
>is, nobody has to have an abortion.  There are alternatives all along
>the way, starting even before conception with the purchase of a condom
>or a spermicidal jelly or anything else.

You are such an idiot.  There is simply no more eloquent way of putting it.

-- 
I feel like a gay man trapped inside a woman's body.

Ferrari (mills@rolf.stat.uga.edu)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Corn (was Re: Badges of Honor)
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date:  5 Sep 92 01:26:23 GMT

In <1992Sep4.014521.20403@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:

>In article <nyikos.715537341@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>}Would you say you are a part of your hang gliding harness?

>Well, this is going to sound a bit corny, but you are one with your
>harness, and even with your glider while you are flying.  Yes, indeed
>I am a part of my harness at times.  Hang gliding is all control 
>by shifting your body ... it's a lot like dancing in the sky.

>I guess that isn't exactly what you hoped I'd say...   sorry...

Actually, it was one of the two alternative things I hoped you'd
say, although I could not have put it so beautifully.

The other thing I hoped you might say is that since your head and
shoulders always stick out of that thing that looks like a body 
bag otherwise (what's the word for it?) you are not in the same 
relationship with your harness that a fetus is with its mother.
Even that would not have gotten you off the hook, but your reply
makes things all the easier for me.

Look for a post next week, "You should have known I'd do this."

>       hang gliding mailing list: hang-gliding-request@virginia.edu 
>     Galen Hekhuis  UVa Health Sci Ctr (804)982-1646 gjh@virginia.edu
>           Remember, behind most silver linings is a cloud...

BTW, I have a brother-in-law who is an avid hang-glider.  Came in 19th
in the Australian National Hang-Gliding Championship one year.  Would
you be interested in being a pen pal of his?  I don't think he has
easy access to e-mail.

Peter Ny.

Newsgroups: talk.abortion