HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:26:07 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

goldm@rpi.edu (Mitchell E. Gold) writes:
> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
> 
> >and chastity -is- an option. it's worked before, it will work in 
> >the future and it's working for me right now.
> 
> Don't tell me what my choices are, I'll make them myself.

there's a big difference between telling you what your choices
are and telling you which one to make. i don't -care- what decision
you make, as long as you are willing to take responsibility for
the results.

jason

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,` Democrat:    Give us your money. _We'll_ solve your problems. `,`
`,` Republican:  Give us your money. We'll ignore your problems.  `,`
`,` Libertarian: Keep your money. Solve your own problems.        `,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 14 Oct 92 20:29:45 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
> ask@sei.cmu.edu (Alan Koch) writes:
> 
> >BUT, this still differs from the mother/fetus question.  The 
> >mother did not cause the child to need a kidney transplant, nor 
> >should she have expected one to ever be necessary at the point 
> >where she decided to have a son. Pregnancy is totally voluntary 
>                                                ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^
> >(except in the case of rape), and carrying to  (near) term
> >is ALWAYS necessary to insure the child's viability.
> 
> No it is not!  This may be news to you, Alan, but people *rarely* 
> have sex with reproduction in mind.  Using the same logic, you 
> could say that automobile accidents are totally voluntary, since 
> they don't happen to people who choose not to drive.  People take 
> precautions against pregnancy but sometimes those precautions are 
> not sufficient.  In those cases, an abortion may be chosen.  Globs 
> of protoplasm don't have rights!

you're right that pregnancy is not always -intentional-. that does
not change the fact that people should be responsible for the
effects of their fun, whether they intended pregnancy to happen or not.

auto accidents aren't totally voluntary either, but if i get in
an accident i am -still- held responsible for the damages.
nobody gives a flying freak if i intended to wreak that other
guy's car or not. and if i happened to kill the other driver
i could be held liable for vehicular manslaughter. "But golly,
judge, I was just doing 200 klicks per for the fun of it, and
I -was- wearing a seatbelt!"

i'd rather there not be speed limit laws and laws against sex.
but if a lot of people make a habit of not taking responsibility for 
their mistakes you can expect a backlash that will want to legislate 
both.

jason "how about a seatbelt -and- a condom?" steiner

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,`      "We are errant knaves, all; believe none of us." - Hamlet      `,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: craig@jido.b11.ingr.com (Craig Presson)
Subject: Re: Would someone please post a summary of Marrou's positions?
Reply-To: craig@jido.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, Alabama
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:50:51 GMT

In article <Bw2n7y.AFo@ptimtc.tadw.panasonic.com> jkresse@ptimtc.tadw.panasonic.com (Jim Kresse ATVL ) writes:
   In article <1992Oct13.141935.16251@netcom.com> bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
   >I know nothing at all about Marrou nor the Libertarian party -- I've
   >never even heard them mentioned on the news!  Would someone please
   >post a summary of the Libertarian platform, to satisfy my curiosity?
   >
   >-- 
   >_/_/_/  Brian Kendig                             Je ne suis fait comme aucun
   > _/_/  bskendig@netcom.com                de ceux que j'ai vus; j'ose croire
   >  _/                            n'etre fait comme aucun de ceux qui existent.
   >        "Sex is DEATH!"      Si je ne vaux pas mieux, au moins je suis autre.
   >         -- Barbara Bush                                         -- Rousseau

   There is about a 2-4 page platform which is out there somewhere,
   but I can't track it down right now.

Try think.com, in the directory pub/libernet/LP. Read the program
instead of the platform, it's more newcomer-friendly.

-- cP
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:37:27 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
> shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Mi
> chael A. Shaffer) writes:
> >>But seriously, condoms aren't 100% effective (nothing is--not 
> >>even a vasectomy!) and chastity is not an option.
> >
> >Why?
> 
> Do you mean I have to explain why requiring every person in the 
> world who does not want to become a parent to practice chastity is 
> not an  option?  Are my Libertarian brothers and sisters really 
> this clueless?

ok, how about "don't engage in risky activities unless you believe
that the benefits outweigh the risks"? chastity is 0 risk. people
don't like chastity. so use your imagination (or a condom) and
the benefits and only raise the risk a wee bit. but if the cosmic
dice roll against you just be willing to accept the results. if
you -absolutely- don't want to risk the results then you -absolutely-
shouldn't be gambling. am i against gambling/sex? no, not as long
as people aren't sore losers.

jason

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,` "True love is better than anything, except cough drops."            `,`
`,`                     - The Princess Bride (book), by William Goldman `,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: The Ohio State University
 <1992Oct16.170829.11909@mcs.anl.gov>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 20:16:33 GMT


I wrote:

>>Absolutely right, which is why both partners (or all participants,
>>depending on your lifestyle) should be financially responsible for
>>the cost of an abortion or carrying the pregnancy to term, whichever
>>the mother chooses.  Nobody's trying to eliminate responsibility here,
>>so quit pretending that we are.
>>


Then, completely missing the point, Michael A. Shaffer wrote:

>People have used money to buy your way out of responsibility for years. So
>I guess you would say that if you can afford to bribe the judge so that
>you are not convicted of a crime then you have taken the responsibility
>for it. Note I am not saying that sex is a crime.
>
>Just because you can pay to get out of something _does not_ mean that
>you have taken responsibility for it.
>
>Let's say I had a handicapped brother that required my care. So I get
>tired of feeding him every meal. Well lets see I have $5000. I will hire
>a hit man to waste him. Presto I have displatched my responsibility. To
>use the current vernacular...NOT!

Read this very carefully.  Weigh each word and think about it before
you respond.  I don't feel like repeating this again.

I do not believe that an unborn child has rights, and therefore 
the parents do not have an obligation to that child.  Whether an
unborn child has rights or not is a whole other debate.  However,
I want to make it BRIGHT AND SPARKLING CLEAR that the pro-choice
movement is *not* about "evading responsibility".  It's about
1) a woman's ownership of her own body, 2) the right of women to
choose whether to reproduce, and 3) the belief that unformed humans
do not have rights.  These are philosophical issues with political
implications.

The responsibility I was writing about is the responsibility that
two parents have to eachother.  I believe very strongly that people
should be responsible for their actions (so stop acting like I don't;
it annoys me more than you can imagine), and within the framework
of my pro-choice philosophy helping to pay for an abortion is a
responsible thing for the male partner to do in the case of an
unwanted pregnancy.

Steve Conley
sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
"Welcome to America!  My I take your order please?"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:13:34 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.153307.10557@uoft02.utoledo.edu> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.uto
ledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
>sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
>>
>> ...both partners (or all participants, depending on your lifestyle)
>> should be financially responsible for the cost of an abortion or
>> carrying the pregnancy to term, whichever the mother chooses.
>> Nobody's trying to eliminate responsibility  here, so quit
>> pretending that we are.

>again, we're working from a different set of premises... 

Right, we are and that's a whole different cup of coffee.  I was 
stating this in response to the accusation that the pro-choice 
movement is trying to eliminate the parents' responsibility.
People who say things like that either don't understand the
philosophical premises that the pro-choice position is based on
or are just trying to slander the movement.  

I do not, for instance, believe that the sole purpose of the
anti-abortion movement is to enslave women (though I do believe
that that will be the end result and that there are people in
the pro-life movement who seek that end), so I don't say things
like that about the movement as a whole.  I do, on the other hand,
say it about *some* anti-abortion *individuals*, and I think the
'avoidance of responsiblity' accusation can be leveled at *some*
pro-choice *individuals*, but they do not apply the the movements
as a whole.

Steve Conley
sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
From: ricci@cbmvax.commodore.com (Mark Ricci - CATS)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Marrou on Larry King
Date: 14 Oct 92 13:48:29 GMT
Reply-To: ricci@cbmvax.commodore.com (Mark Ricci - CATS)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Keywords: Marrou, Libertarian, publicity

jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
>This is the second time I've seen Marrou speak, and I have this
>feeling that were he allowed to debate he would win handily. The 
>man's skill at using time and addressing issues is refreshing when 
>compared to the rhetoric and innuendo we get from the other 3.

Not to mention the disgusting display turned in by Quayle and Gore last night.
That debate commission really chose a fine moderator when they threw a dart
and got Hal Bruno.  Why they didn't choose Koppel (unless he said no) is beyond
me because he acted as a single moderator for a Democrat debate during the 1984
primaries and did a great job keeping order.  Bruno was like a substitute 
teacher.

If there's any chance of seeing Marrou on that stage tomorrow night, it's by 
calling the debate commission at:

                      (202)872-1020

I called last night and was able to leave a message on their machine telling 
them that Marrou is on the ballot in all fifty states and has just as much
right to be up there as the other three chuckleheads. 

Mark
-- 
===============================================================================
 Mark Ricci - CATS          | Four candidates are on the ballot in all 50  
 Commodore Applications and | states, yet only three are invited to debate.
 Technical Support          | Why are they scared of the Libertarians?
 ricci@cbmvax.commodore.com | Call the debate commission  (202)872-1020  
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.libertarian
From: gak@wrs.com (Richard Stueven)
Subject: MAJOR LIBERTARIAN VICTORY
Reply-To: gak@wrs.com
Organization: Wind River Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 16:19:12 GMT

Yes, folks, I scored a major victory for the Party last week:  I
convinced my mother to tear the Perot sticker off her car and replace
it with the Marrou sticker I sent her!

OK, so she lives in a cabin by a lake in Eustis Nebraska, not exactly a
hotbed of political activism, but it's something...

---
Richard Stueven        gak@wrs.com         attmail!gakhaus!gak        107/H/3&4

How can you be ignorant of something you didn't know in the first place?
                                                      - Choo

Xref: sparky alt.politics.marrou:1656 alt.politics.libertarian:909
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Keywords: abortion,platform
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:53:01 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1992Oct14.232809.23577@bnr.ca> ethridge@bnr.ca (Allen Ethridge) writes:

>Then why isn't the embryo held responsible for its own conception?  After all,
>neither the woman nor the man forced the ovum and sperm to become a single
>cell and start growing.

If I through a lit match into a room full of dynamite, can I too claim that
I didn't cause the explosion, since I did not force the flame to combine
with the dynamite.  The boom is not responsible for the explosion, I am.
The boom is the result.

Sperm and ova when placed in proximity to each other will unite.  This is
just as much a law of nature as the match and the dynamite.  The
responsiblity lies with the people who allowed the sperm and the ova to 
get together in the first place.

Using protection, that is known to be not 100% effective is not an excuse.

-- 
Mark
My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
Xref: sparky alt.politics.marrou:1463 alt.politics.libertarian:646
From: cbehre@spock.usc.edu (Charles Behre)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: "U." poll
Date: 7 Oct 1992 12:20:48 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: spock.usc.edu
Keywords: poll, college, students, marrou


In article <1992Oct7.004039.13697@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, mporter@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Matthew D Porter) writes:
|> Greetings,
|> 
|>      I just got my new copy of the "U." (the national college magazine) here at
|> Ohio State.  Here are the results of an (800) call-in unscientific poll 
|> conducted Aug 25 to Sept 15:
|> 
|> Q:  If the presidential election were held today, who would you vote for?
|> 
|> [In big blue bold boxes:]  Bush:     Clinton:
|>                             38%         49%
|> 
|> [In small type]
|>      Of the 390 calls from Aug. 25 to Sept. 15, 190 were for Clinton, 148 for 
|> Bush, 38 fir Libertarian Party's Andre Marrou [hurray!], 8 for Ross Perot and 6
|> for shock-jock Howard Stern [interesting]

Actually, if you ever listen to Howard Stern, you would hear him promote a lot of
Libertarian philosophies even though he doesn't recognize/care that that's what they
are.  He's a promoter of no drug laws, abortion rights, cutting the pork out of 
government, drastically lowering taxes, slashing government handouts, and of course 
his favorite topic - lesbianism.

--Chip
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: When all sides are heard...
Date: 13 Oct 92 15:56:53 GMT
Distribution: us
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

Here in New England, NYNEX, a sponsor of the presidential debates, ran a
cutesy animated commercial after the first debate was over.  It ended with
the voiceover tagline:  

"At NYNEX, we believe that when all sides are heard, people make the best 
choices."

Please take a moment to write a short note to NYNEX explaining to them how
the exclusion of Andre Marrou from the presidential debates violates NYNEX's
beliefs.

Address it to:

Mr. Matthew J. Stover, Vice President
Public Affairs and Corporate Communications
NYNEX
1113 Westchester Avenue, Fourth Floor
White Plains NY  10604 

Mail it overnight mail or or FAX it to him at 914-694-5538.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.libertarian
From: bodoh@cae.wisc.edu (Daniel Bohoh)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:51:41 CDT
Keywords: abortion,platform

In article <1992Oct14.232809.23577@bnr.ca> ethridge@bnr.ca (Allen Ethridge) writes:
>>>The libertarian position on abortion has to be pro-choice.
>>>A fetus is physically imposing itself on its "host."
>>>

>>If she doesn't want to indulge the imposition, she should either use
>>birth control or not have sex.  Persons are supposed to be responsible
>>for their own actions, aren't they? 
>
>Then why isn't the embryo held responsible for its own conception?  After all,
>neither the woman nor the man forced the ovum and sperm to become a single
>cell and start growing.

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.  How can anything
be responsible for how it came into being?  The man and the woman who
have sex increase the probability of conception from 0 to some non-zero
value, which is determined by the laws of physics and genetics.

>If she (or he) had used contraception and it failed (since none of them are
>perfect) would abortion then be acceptable?

Why should it?   Without birth control, there is a high probability that
conception will occur.  With birth control, there is a much lower probability,
but not necessarily a zero probability.  Having responsibility for the 
consequences of having consentual sex is not removed by simply decreasing 
the probability of conception.

Back to the original argument:  the fetus cannot be viewed as an imposition
on the mother's body because it was the direct action of the mother and
father that caused it to be there (assuming consentual sex).
---------------------------------------------------------
Daniel J. Bodoh                  bodoh@cae.wisc.edu
ECE Department                   bodoh@xraylith.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Madison, WI 53706
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 14 Oct 92 22:27:17 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

erik@westworld.esd.sgi.com (Erik Fortune) writes:
> 
> ask@sei.cmu.edu writes:
> > Pregnancy is totally voluntary (except in the case of rape), and 
> > carrying  to (near) term is ALWAYS necessary to insure the 
> > child's viability.
> 
> False.   Accidental pregnancies happen.

other accidents happen too. and yet we still have to pay the price
for 'em.

> I am not required to act on your beliefs (something of a moot point 
> in this particular debate:-).   Neither is anyone else.
> 
> By the same token, you are not required to act on my (or anyone 
> else's) beliefs (trust me, you're glad that you don't have to act 
> on my beliefs:-).
> 
> The difference between us is that I don't try to force you to 
> behave the way that I think you should.

ok. i believe anyone who disagrees with me should be put to a painful 
death. :^) see, it all comes down to "can you kill (or "terminate" or 
"abort" if you want to be euphamistic about it) someone for 
convenience' sake?" most of us would say not. but if a fetus isn't 
human then it's no longer an issue.

so: is it or isn't it? and if so/not, why?

jason

--
  "I'm the keeper of the cheese, and you're the lemon merchant!" - Ren Hoek  
,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: vandal@leland.Stanford.EDU (Levan Frederick Hiemke)
Subject:  A Poll Proposal
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 19:27:17 GMT


There has been some discussion about polls that try to determine who
people are voting for in the Presidential election.  

An issue that I didn't see raised (if I missed it - sorry) was
that I would guess that most of those polled know little to nothing
about the Libertarian Party.  This is related to the issue of whether or
not Marrou's name is on the ballot, but not exactly the same.

A more useful poll for determining the level of Libertarian support in
the country would start by asking the participants if they were familiar
with the Libertarian Party Platform (or, to avoid biasing, perhaps have a list
of parties, real & fictitious, from which the participants could indicate
their political party knowledge).  Then the participants should be asked who
they most agree with, and/or who they will vote for.

Obviously, the percentage of people who would vote for the Marrou 
would be much higher in the population that is familiar with the Libertarian
Party platform.  But, if the results indicate that the percentage of
"informed" voters who support or will vote for Marrou is comparable to the
percentages of people voting for Bush and Clinton (assuming familiarity with
the Democratic & Republican platforms), then the media would be more 
encouraged to present the Libertarian views.   

I believe that the reason Marrou will not fare well in the polls is because
most people don't know who he is or what he stands for.  The media
misinterpret the low ratings in the polls as a lack of support for 
the ideas of the Libertarian Party.  In so doing, they preclude the
masses from becoming familiar with the Libertarian Party and wind up
perpetuating this cycle.

Do you suppose a phone call, or letter-writing, campaign to a major polling 
organization, such as Gallop, would be a worthwhile venture?  Would they 
perform such a poll, and if they did, would the media care?

-Van Hiemke