HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Selfishness (was  Re: Compassion (was: Re: I Tend To Be...)
Date: 4 Sep 92 14:01:01 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>From article by katefans@chinet.chi.il.us (Chris'n'Vickie of Chicago):
>>
>> In article <1992Aug27.194956.10215@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgac
>h) writes:
]>>An admirable choice for the woman brave enough to risk it.  I had a
]>>great-aunt whom the doctors BEGGED to stop having children because they
]>>were sure that each next one would kill her.   She had 4, and when her
]>>doctor asked her "Why, why, why?", her answer was, "I can't think of a
]>>more beautiful way to go."

[good article on selfishness deleted.

>All I can say, Vickie, is that this is twisted twisted twisted.

For once, you've hit the nail on the head. Your great-aunt was definitely
twisted, and possible psychotic.

>There's nothing in you that even understands family love at all.

Buggers. I'm willing to bet that Vickie's toe knows more about "family
love" than you and your great-aunt put together. "Family love" is not
engaging in activity that will kill you and selfishly leave your children
behind in this cold world without a mom. "Family love" is making sacrifices,
not engaging in harmful activities, so that you will be around to provide
love, support, and care to your children. I guess one of those "twisted"
comments must have applied to yourself.

Ron

Potassium Benzoate included as a preserver.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby)
Subject: Re: WILL THE REAL MISOGYNISTS PLEASE STAND UP? Case 1.
Keywords: abortion, rape, sexual battery
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 19:29:41 GMT

In article <nyikos.715387086@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>	These people are barking up the wrong tree.  If they would only
>open their eyes a bit, they would see evidence of misogyny from some 
>of the very people they defend as caring about women.  Here is a 

(1) The doctor described in the Miami Herald is about as anti-choice 
as one can get.  
A forced abortion is every bit as infringing upon choice as forced birth.

(2) This docter would never be defended as caring about women based 
on his activities described in the article.

What's your point?

>Peter Ny.
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Revised consistency check
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:06:34 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 <23770@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) wri
>tes:

[...]

>Agreed.

I'm not sure what you agreed with, if it was part or entire, but for
the moment I'll assume it was the entire paragraph, as you didn't pick
any of it out for comment. Therefore I've deleted it.

[...]

>Why is not having an inheritance so terrible?

>Well, it's not like there _isn't_ an inheritance here: my folks have 2
>houses and now a condo, which they aren't exactly planning to give to
>the State when they die of old age.

Maybe they'll sell them and go on an around the world tour, then settle
in a nice comfortable resort for the remainder of their years and spend
most of it. Who knows? I know my parents plan on doing quite a bit of
traveling after they retire. What am I going to do, yell at them annd
tell them "No! You can't go! That's my inheritance you'll be squandering!"???

>The issue is _losing_ what could be coming to you one day.

As you can see, "could" is the operative word here. Actually, knowing
that the money means nothing to him should tell your folks something.

>Can you tell the difference between not having seen a million $ and
>then losing the clear and present promise of a million $ (well, 1/2
>mil in our case)?

If there was a clear promise, I'd have to ask what was going on, and
do your parents intend to enjoy their retirement, or are they only slaving
away for the children.

>>So he evidently was underage, until this time? Earlier, you said he
>>was overage. Sorry about any confusion.

>He was underage when he first got unruly, then when our folks got on
>him, he stayed nice until he got to be an adult, and then he asserted
>that they had no power over his affairs and that they ought to shut up
>and, in not so nice terms, bug off.

He is right, you know. He may have lacked any semblance of tact, but
there is a point when parents should "bug off" and allow their kids to grow
up and live their own lives. They aren't toys that you keep around to
amuse you in your later years.

Ron

Potassium Benzoate included as a preserver.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis)
Subject: Re: control
Organization: University of Virginia Health Sciences Center
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 20:22:34 GMT

In article <nyikos.714851115@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

}Could be you are coming down with a case of MMIMUDCMWTF [My Mind Is Made
}Up, Don't Confuse Me With The Facts], 

No, I have been diagnosed as having that DILLAGAS (Do I Look Like I
Give A Shit) attitude rather than what you suspect.

}You erased the rest of my comment, which would have led to a "Yes"
}answer.  

*sigh*  I "erased" your comment not because it led to a "Yes" answer
(it may have led you there) but because I thought that I, as others,
had read it once, and I thought it might be a bit repetitious to 
repeat it.  Besides being a bit redundant, it might have been like
saying it again.

}Can you find it anywhere except in the writings of Cyril Means [oft
}referred to in RvW], Harry Blackmun [RvW], and James Mohr [_Abortion
}in America_], all of whom have been pretty thoroughly discredited
}by Joseph Dellapenna?

It?  What it?  I probably erased that too.  Having never read the
writings of Cyril Means, James Mohr, (and in the best tradition of
Clarence Thomas) RvW I guess I found it somewhere else.   I 
haven't read anything by Joseph Dellapenna either, although I have
read some pretty good stuff by Joseph Heller.

--
       hang gliding mailing list: hang-gliding-request@virginia.edu 
     Galen Hekhuis  UVa Health Sci Ctr (804)982-1646 gjh@virginia.edu
  chinaware from China, indiaware from India, and underwear from down under
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: And Now, You're A Coatrack!! Was: without even being asked ....
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:15:00 GMT

adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
> trashman@crud.mn.org (Barry Schwartz) writes:
>> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:

>>> ============================================================================
>>> Question: If you don't have truck bombs and thousands of fanatics to
>>>         sacrifice their lives and drive them, how do you scare a 
>>>         nation into giving in to your demands?
>>>
>>> Answer:   Buy coat hangers and encourage women to kill themselves
>>>         with them and call yourself "pro-choice".
>>> ============================================================================

>> It is a shame to lose one's mind.

> Or to not have a mind. [Dan Quayle's quote FITS here!>>

How true!  How true!

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
"No I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should
they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God."  --  George Bush
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis)
Subject: Corn (was Re: Badges of Honor)
Organization: University of Virginia Health Sciences Center
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:45:21 GMT

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...

--
       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...
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Night of the Living Kidney Analogy -- the Sequel
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 27 Aug 92 23:01:08 GMT

In <Btn5CK.1Es@rice.edu> patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:

>In article <nyikos.714852140@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>In <1992Aug24.203014.15935@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> mprc@troi.cc.rochester.edu (M. Price) writes:
>>
>>>In <5737@catnip.berkeley.ca.us> tanj@catnip.berkeley.ca.us (Ren and Stimpy's Love Child) writes:
>>
>>>>Forcing a woman to take these risks against her will is degrading mothers to
>>>>the status of slaves.  How can you require another human being to undergo
>>>>agony and bleeding to satisfy your own mores?
>>
>>>>--Teddi
>>
>>>Oh, silly Teddi! You fail to understand Peter's logic. Obviuosly,
>>>they're not human beings--they're just women!
>>
>>Who authorized you to speak for me?  

>I dunno -- might could be whoever it was authorized you to demand in e-mail
>that I apologize to Chaney for my tasteless remark to him *and* post your
>demand of it because you couldn't figure out your own newsreader, neh?
>:-)

As I told you, the problem was with the newsreader, not my being able or
not being able to figure out.  By the way, I have never used the word 
"demand" in connection with you.  I said, "I think you owe Mr. Chaney
an apology," and "I am more convinced than ever that you owe Mr. Chaney
an apology."  And I never demanded that you post my request that you
apologize, I said, "Mr. Humphry [sic.  I was reading your e-mail address
and could not find the true spelling of your name anywhere.  My apologies.]
could you please post this for me?"

And you complain about Holtsinger and me misquoting you?

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Why Gaymen hate women
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:24:23 GMT

adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
] kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
] >In article <94996@bu.edu> kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
] >>
] >>Hmmm...I suppose all that stuff you wrote about "homosexuality and
] >>misogyny being connected" and  how "gay relationships were naturally
] >>inferior to straight relationships in the eyes of God" and how "children
] >>should not be raised in same-sex households" is all a figment of
] >>my imagination...
] 
] >Let's not forget MissBitch's comment about how Gay men "Hate women because
] >they won't have sex with them".
] 
] I don't understand her logic here (surprise.)  Could someone explain to me
] why a person who had no desire to have sex with a woman would hate her for 
] not wanting to have sex with him?  Seems like the gay man would be just
] happy with that situation. 
] 
] I must be confused.

Allow me to explain it to you.

Hetro Men Like women as Women releave
their sexual urges. This is how Het Women
Know that they are Liked.

What is confusing is why they want to get married,
as then they like One Woman and Hate all the Rest.

You see how it works now.

So If You like Your sister you have to have
sex with her, or you Really Hate her.

It really is very simple.

ciao
drieux

ps: actually gay men hate het women as they have
such lousy taste in accesories.... I mean did
you see what that Dog fell out of the house wearing
the other day...

pps: gay men hate lesbians as lesbians can beat them up.

ppps: small people hate tall people as they prevent
effective photosynthesis.

pppps: tall people hate small people as its hard to
tell them from chiggers and ticks.

ppppps: skinny people hate fat people because for unnatural
reasons they have nifty aerodynamic features that makes it
useless to try and draft behind them while bicycling.

pppppps: UnSkinnyPersons hate those twigs as its often
hard to spot them when they turn sideways......


pppppps: Bad people hate Good People for ALL the Wrong Reasons.

ppppppps: Good People hate Bad People For all the right Reasons.




-- 
If I have Told You Once, I've Told You a Thousand Times:
To Keep Good Girls From Going Bad,
Put them back in the Refrigerator.
This Also Works for Stale NFS Handles.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:35012 alt.abortion.inequity:3516
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: Re: Observations
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:59:35 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<1992Aug31.145731.12606@advtech.uswest.com> stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) said:
>In article <a3andz+.ray@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
...
>And everybody wants to impose their belief system on the rest of the
>country through the use of law.

Please answer this simple question directly:  If you come to me with a
problem and I say, "It's your decision, your choice", how does that
qualify as imposing my belief on you?  I'm speaking in the context of
abortion, ok?

Another question:  In the above simple scenario, would it be better if you
came to me with a problem and I said, "You can *only* do such-and-such,
you have no other choice"?  Which would you prefer, if it were you?

You're beginning to sound an awful lot like Tommy Kelly.


Gordon
-- 
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: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: Life at Conception? [prev: Legal Questions]
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 21:10:52 GMT

sean@Unify.com (Sean P. Curley) writes:

> In my mind the debate over abortion comes down to whether or not the ____ is
> a zybote/fetus or a child (read human) at conception (reference my article on
> abortion in historical comparision in alt.abortion.inequity).  If it is not
> human then you can do any bloody thing you want to it (please no slams from
> animal lovers), but if it _is_ human then abortion is pre-meditated murder.

You need not feel squeamish about using the terms zygote or fetus.  Those are
the correct medical terms, after all.  And you'll get no argument from me that
the z/e/f is human; what you will get is a question like this:

Why should the z/e/f have rights that no other member of the human race has?

> You can't take your argument half way just because it gets you to where you
> want to be.  People that say the ____ is human at conception and don't
> consider abortion murder are self-serving people comming up with incomplete
> arguments.

Sperm and ova are human too.  What's your point?  I find it amusing that you
refrain from calling the product of conception a zygote or a blastocyst or an
embryo or a fetus (that's dehumanizing, right?) but instead refer to it with
four underscores.

And your idea that people who don't believe that abortion is murder are self-
serving doesn't wash and is insulting to boot.  Many of us are generous with
our time and resources to worthy causes.

> I do think that smoking and drinking during pregnancy should be illegal and
> should be considered child abuse.

I think that smoking and drinking during pregnancy is stupid, but unfortunately
there's no way to legislate against stupidity in a free society.  Or don't you
want a free society no more?

> As for spontaneous miscarriges, etc.  There is no intent of wrong doing, there
> is no "assistance" as someone mentioned so there is no crime - most crime does
> come down to _intent_.

Some crimes come down to negligence.  Negligent homocide, reckless endangerment,
etc., etc.

> As for rape, incest, etc.,  Again - if you consider it life, then consider it
> life - don't go half way...  It is incredibly regretful and unfortunate that
> the life was created in such a way and I would feel for any person in such a
> position, BUT IT IS STILL LIFE (HUMAN).

Sure, continue the rape or the sexual abuse for another nine months.  Great
therapy for the victim.

Hey, sorry to be uncivil, but I am _not_ impressed.

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
"No I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should
they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God."  --  George Bush
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Proposal for a moderated abortion newsgroup
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:09:31 GMT

People don't seem to have read the original proposal carefully.
A moderated talk.abortion newsgroup would serve alongside the
existing non-moderated talk.abortion newsgroup.  People who
had their articles rejected on the moderated newsgroup could
post to the non-moderated one.  Talk.abortion would remain
untouched. 

If we can find a solution to the moderator/volume problems,
then I plan on putting out a CVD.  

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Observations
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 22:01:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Aug31.162715.17289@advtech.uswest.com>  stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
> In article <1992Aug27.045340.13162@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> smccabe@author.ecn.purd
> >
> >I don't think it is an unreasonable request to ask that those
> >who are trying legislate what actions I may take with my own body
> >base that legislation on something more than "because I say so."
>
> ?????  But that is JUST what YOU are doing.  You are trying to make
> the right to abortion a law on the basis of "because I say so".

Actually, no.  If there weren't people trying to *take away* the right
to abortion, there wouldn't be anyone attempting to codify it into law.

> You DO NOT occupy the moral high ground here.  You too are trying to
> force your belief system on others.

We're willing to let each individual make the abortion decision according
to their own belief system.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman)
Subject: Re: The myth of "unrestricted abortion on demand throughout pregnancy"
Organization: NCAR, Boulder CO
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 20:25:05 GMT

> = decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>[...]   Call 1-800-777-TEXT and ask for a transcript of the
>60 Minutes telecast of this past Sunday (August 20th?), which
>was a repeat, about the Lambs of Christ.  I had it on in the
>background while I was working and they did state that there
>are only three doctors in the US who perform third trimester abortions.

To be more accurate, I think the statement was that there are only three 
doctors in the US who in SPECIALIZE third trimester abortions.
But this is almost irrelevant.   Is there anyone who thinks a woman 
who needs a 3rd-tri abortion should be content to go to someone who is 
unfamiliar with the procedure?   Unfortunately the answer is "yes", or worse 
yet, that they should be content to be unable to obtain the needed abortion.

BTW, I found the "Lambs of Christ" to be their own worst enemy, specifically 
when they explain/rationalize in their own words what they do and why.
Also when their words contradict what actually happens (often on film)
(death threats, drive-by shootings, arson, psychotic harrasment of relatives).
Can anyone post the text of the 60 Minutes piece?

-Brian
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject: Re: Observations
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 20:27:50 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.165853.11816@advtech.uswest.com> stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
>In article <1992Aug31.211903.25718@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:
>
>>And if you didn't want to donate it without strings attached,
>>you should have contracted for what uses that cell could be used before
>>providing it.
>
>Which is a statement of personal belief, not fact.  My belief is that the
>woman should be aware of the possibility of pregnancy, and be prepared to
>carry through (just as the man has to) in the event of a pregnancy.
>
>My beliefs are just as valid as yours, so if you tell me what I 'should'
>do, then I take it I have the right to tell you what YOU should do.

The difference might be that while we can all believe what everyone "should" and
"shouldn't" do, we are not all out trying to make laws to force people to 
do the things we think they should be doing.

There is a group of pro-life folks who *are* trying to make laws to force
people to do what *they* think is right for them.

I support your right to CHOOSE what you want to do with yourself. That is
why I'm pro-choice.  If you want to smoke cigarettes, torture yourself,
shoot heroin, smoke dope, drink till you puke, masturbate, or kill your-
self, more power to you.  That is *your* choice.  While I may not agree with
what you are doing with your body, it is about all you really have and I'm
not going to try to force you to do one thing or another with it.

The pro-life folks, on the other hand, will.




-- 
David Knapp                                      University of Colorado, Boulder
Perpetual Student                                   knapp@spot.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: REWRITING HISTORY: Adulterated RvW versions: FAQ, recent post...
Keywords: may be, is, established fact
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 23:04:57 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.164340.25851@ncsu.edu>
dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>I've seen another adulterated version of Roe v. Wade.  Elizabeth 
>Bartley recently re-posted an article written by Virginia Metze
>which contained an omission about the "health" exception for
>post-viability abortions.  The last sentence in the included 
>paragraph omits the exception to save the "health" of the mother. 

I not only did not repost this article, I don't even remember seeing
it (not that I read everything on talk.abortion).

-- 
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.
From: kevin@cfctech.cfc.com (Kevin Darcy)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Extremism
Date: 1 Sep 92 23:35:17 GMT
Organization: Chrysler Financial Corp., Southfield, MI

In article <1992Aug31.114058.4973@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
>In article <1992Aug31.034140.24681@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org 
>(Kevin Darcy) writes:
>
>}Triplespeak. Quadruplespeak. Thanks for explanation, Galen. It's all clear
>}as mud now.
>
>At least I can speak.  If there were anyone else in the entire world that
>had expressed confusion about this, perhaps I could take you comments a
>bit more seriously.  

Do you doubt that there at least two people "in the entire world" that would
find your words capable of multiple, conflicting meanings? Hyperbole is a
dangerous thing, Galen. Use it wisely, or not at all...

								- Kevin