From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Item for Chaney's study of abortion--adult/child sex link.
Keywords: Nyikos failing other arguments goes for guilt by association
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date:  5 Sep 92 00:55:31 GMT

In <1992Sep3.150341.16461@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:

>In article <nyikos.715465492@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>> In <1992Aug29.135948.22535@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
>> 
>> >In article <nyikos.715043800@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>> >> [Dan King wrote] 
>> >> >Were the pro-lifers picketing the house because he was involved in 
>> >> >child pornography (an illegal act), or were they picketing the house
>> >> >because he performed abortions (A legal act).
>> >> 
>> >> Don't assume the abortions were legal.  Here in Columbia almost every
>> >> abortionist has done 2nd trimester abortions in his clinic, and some
>> >> even admit it openly, even though South Carolina law says all 2nd 
>> >> trimester abortions must be done either in a hospital or a licensed
>> >> clinic, and not one of the clinics in South Carolina is licensed.
>> 
>> >Here we see that Nyikos has no facts on which to accuse the doctor
>> >in question of performing illegal abortions, so he posts idle
>> >speculation in the guise of facts.
>> 
>> You're missing my point.  You said A.  I said, don't 
>> assume A, there's also possibility B.  Now B may be idle
>> speculation, but I did not disguise it as a fact.

>"May be idle speculation?"  Haven't you got the guts to just admit
>that it was speculation, or to say something directly?

Mentioning possibilities and speculating on whether they are
true or not are two different things.  Me, I suspend judgment.

>You know, there have been bombings of clinics, and there are
>quite a few pro-life people who think that is okay. 

A few, probablly. Quite a few--I don't think so.  I certainly
don't think it is okay.

> And there
>are pro-life people who have fired guns at doctors who perform
>abortions

Have there been any instances where the ones who did it confessed
to doing it?

> and many who have not fired guns at these doctors but
>who think doing so is okay. 

I don't think anyone on this net thinks it is okay. I sure don't.

> So don't assume that Peter Nyikos
>hasn't been out there shooting doctors and bombing clinics.
>Now that may be just idle speculation, but then again it may
>not.

Fantasize all you want about me, I stand by what I have just said.
 
>> >> As to why the pro-lifers were picketing, I don't know, but judging
>> >> from the pro-lifers I know, they were probably protesting both acts.
>> >> Certainly if they knew about all his sleazy porn business, they would
>> >> have been protesting both.
>> 
>> >Here we see that Nyikos has no information on the matter at all, but
>> >just speculates that his side would do the right thing if they
>> >knew what it was.  Again, pure speculation and no information.
>> 
>> Not speculation.  Based on a great deal of experience, although I
>> should have worded the above differently: all the pro-lifers I know,
>> had they known about all the sleazy porn business, would have been
>> protesting both.  And I know over a hundred pro-lifers from all
>> across the country.

>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 used
the words "his side", which to me meant more than just the local
Jackson, Mississippi crowd. Sorry if I misunderstood you.


>> 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.

Peter Ny.