From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Nitwits anonymous: call for.
Date: 14 Sep 92 16:17:04 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>In article <24861@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) wri

>Your religion may state that human sacrifice is okay, but it don't
>mean that a non-sectarian society has to go by it.

Take a look at what I really meant. As for non-sectarian, are you implying
that we're a homogeneous society?

>You mean you never understood how things could go AGAINST you as well
>as for you, on this?

Only in your warped view of things. If you abided by logic and reason,
you wouldn't have a toe to stand on.

>Gloria Feldt's religion, she says, actuates personhood one month after
>birth. Does that mean she is being unfairly deprived of her practice,
>in the United States?

Is she? Is she being forced through law to recognize said child as having
personhood? I don't think so, although she is prevented from tossing
said child in a garbage dumpster, the same way that she would be prevented
from abusing horses or dogs, although the punishments differ.

>COME ON, RONALD BENSE - ANSWER THIS DIRECTLY.

I did, which is more than I can say for your normal response.

>>Would I be free to practice this religion in your world? You claim to
>>be pro-freedom of religion, after all.

>What about you?

You can *personally* practice whatever you please, but you may not perpetuate
onto another (meaning person, defined as born human being) things which
are damaging to that other. That's where your limits are. If your religion
preaches that you must go out and cut off hands for your god, then yes,
you are not free to practice your religion. If your religion says you
must kneel every day at high noon to the north pole, you may, provided
you make arrangements not to do so in the middle of a street where you
would be blocking lunchtime traffic. If your religion states you must
kill yourself at 30, go for it.

>>BTW, in case you claim that this is not the tenants of any religion,
>>some have claimed that logic and science are no more than beliefs, and
>>therefore a type of religion.

>Some. Who, pray tell?

I've forgotten, as I wasn't in that thread, but Ray Fisher was, and
perhaps he could be kind enough to post that fellow's name. It would
be a real shame if it was cinder, however, as I was hoping for someone
with half a smidgen of credibility.

>Well, Ronald Bense, why don't we leave the drug users alone, too?

Why don't we? Beats the hell out of me, except it appears that it is
the only way to get to the pushers, who are coercing naive children
into a one-way life that has no choices after the initial mistake. Make
it legal, and a government business, and you no longer have pushers,
and the users won't bother anyone any more than alcoholics. We've already
gone over this one.

>If your reasoning were so correct, it would apply consistently. Seeing
>as it doesn't apply anywhere near consistently, your attempts here to
>crack a joke, aren't working.

Show where it doesn't apply consistently. You have failed, miserably
as usual, to show this.

>A newborn's thoughts aren't know to anyone but intervention is fully
>allowable.

Intervention to stop it? (I know this is not what you meant, but I couldn't
resist.) At least you're not talking to fetuses yet, that is a step
up in some ways from Frau F.

>Nothing in my .sig is hypocritical. Care to provide some proof besides
>the weak bullshit you've decided to nag me with?

That you fail to see it, or refuse to see it, makes it no less hypocritical,
so keep up the good work, and keep reminding everone at the end of every
post that here writes a true hypocrite who has no clue.

>Yup. I would like nothing better than to see the Democratic party
>change.

Me either, they should drop their stupid let the murderers go stance.
Ron

.sigs are getting boring.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion