HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak)
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Keywords: From: decay@
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:18:39 GMT

> = (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>...but the self-designated
>[BTW, Ms. Garvin, did you read my COERCED ABORTION post last month?] 
>"pro-choice" abortion-supporting  groups like NARAL, which
>fight tooth and nail against Informed Consent bills that would
>make abortionists reveal just how many medical dangers there are in
>a supposedly "safe, legal" abortion?

Safe, legal abortions are 10 times safer then giving birth, as reported in
several peer-reviewed medical journals.  I'd be interested to see any
counter medical evidence you have at your disposal.

So, not even a nice try, Ny.  Why don't some of those hysterical pro-life
organizations detail the dangers of giving birth, so women can decide if
they want to go through with it?

And wipe that foam off your mouth.
-- 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Steve Novak |    |"Wacker the K"| 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
steven@advtech.USWest.Com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Myths and facts about Planned Parenthood
Organization: LLNL
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 11:56:46 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.132002.2149@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
>In article <1992Aug21.004156.2888@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:

>> 	I saw one interesting omission:

>> 	There was no mention about masturbation.

>> 	Has PP ever promoted that as a safe form of sex?


>But then you'd end up with unknowing guys severing their penises with
>vacuum cleaners and nooses (disgusting but true!).

	I guess that qualifies as an unsafe form of masturbation.

	But many forms of masturbation are, indeed, safe.
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Fetal Independence
Date: 20 Aug 92 12:09:32 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, dsh@zeus.csc.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>A person who does not wish to care for a newborn infant is obligated
>to transfer custody of the infant to another person, and also to
>refrain from killing the infant in the meantime.  The same
>principle should apply to pregnancy.

[...]

>Yes, the mother and the child live connected together.  Now why
>wouldn't the mother forfeit her right to life because she's
>connected to the fetus, rather than vice versa?

I didn't notice who posted this at the top of the article, and by this
point I was going, my god!!!! another raging lunatic pro-lifer! Just
what we need. Only to find out at the end of the article that it is
good old dougie, showing his flaming pro-life, misogynist colors for
all to see, in full form.

Doug, get this straight, the woman is a person, who is here, in the
world, and thinks, breathes, lives. The fetus is not here, in the world,
nor does it think, breathe, but it does live. ["in the world" meaning
distinctly here, separate, touchable, independent] Can you see (please,
oh please) why one [the mother] has precedence over the other [the fetus]?

Try not to be so dense, and use that gray matter for something other
than anal-retentiveness.

Ron
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: More lies
Date: 23 Aug 92 16:15:30 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Aug22.164010.18937@ncsu.edu> dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
> In article <1992Aug20.124614.6376@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> 
> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
> 
> > The hope is that you will attempt to use more honest means to argue your
> > point.  
> 
> Translation: The hope is that you will stop posting quotes which
> support your arguments.  

You post things out of context, ignore entire paragraphs in the
same cases you quote which directly contradict your argument
and which state explicitly that what you are saying just isn't
so, and then act like you proved something.  You're a shifty little
weasel with your quotes and I hope you manage to get an injection
of integrity some time, but I seriously doubt you are capable of
honesty.  You can translate that as you wish, but those who read
here need no translation from you.  They've seen your deceptions too
many times already to require it.  Your translation above is just
another attempt at deception.

Dean Kaflowitz
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: A little known fact...
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 18:16:41 GMT
Distribution: na
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Aug15.150709.3137@ncsu.edu>  dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
> In article <1992Aug14.184425.29185@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
>
> >dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>
> >> The Western ethic against infanticide gained its roots from
> >> early Judeo-Christian thought.
>
> > Substantiate this accusation or retract it.
>
>   "The change in Western attitudes to infanticide since Roman times is,
>    like the doctrine of the sanctity of human life of which it is a part,
>    a product of Christianity."

Says nothing about Judaism.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 00:51:52 -0400 
From: Michael Loomis <ml3e+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Polls show Republicans favor abortion rights
	<1992Aug18.002629.19010@wdl.loral.com>

chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
# dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
# >bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:
# >> The polls show that the majority of Republicans favor choice.  
# 
# - Epitaph for John Campbell, pro-abort Republican US Senatorial
# Candidate in California, who got a new asshole burned for him by
# pro-life Republican candidate Bruce Herschensohn, in the June primary. 
 
#Idiot.  If Herschensohn had lost by the margin he won by, he would
#have demanded and got a recount.  I seem to recall the margin being
#something like 3000 votes.

Campbell lost this primary by a margin large enough to make a recount
silly.  The lose however was due to Sonny Bono's presense  in the race. 
Bono and Campbell are both moderate Republicans.  Without Bono, Campbell
probably would the Republican nominee.  Barbara Boxer is a lucky woman.
From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:02:58 GMT
Distribution: na

In article <1992Aug18.174641.11684@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.161225.18174@pwcs.stpaul.gov> 
>chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>
>>dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>
>>> If Lyman said "All people deserve support for their right to discriminate
>>> against homosexuals", then that statement would carry a very objectionable
>>> implication that all people would _want_ to discriminate against
>>> homosexuals. 
>
>> On the other hand, I could say, "Doug Holtsinger deserves to be spanked until
>> his cheeks are bright pink."  That's not implying in the least that, "Doug
>> Holtsinger _wants_ to be spanked until his cheeks are bright pink," is it?
>
>Nobody believes that they should have a right to receive an unwanted
>spanking.  
>
>>Chris Lyman  -  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  -  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
>>"... all women think alike on the issue of abortion ..." -- Doug Holtsinger
>
>Chris Lyman is a sexist for believing that all women think alike on 
>the issue of abortion.
>
I don't think Chris said anything that would imply that "all
women think alike on the issue of abortion."  You, on the other 
hand, seem to think that while other born humans enjoy many
rights, the right to be alive is the only one a pregnant woman
gets.  You've even advocated taking greater risks with her
life if there's a chance of saving the fetus.  Who's the sexist
here, Doug?  Projecting again?

muriel
standard disclaimer
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Date: 19 Aug 92 21:43:03 GMT
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<1992Aug16.223747.11792@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) said:
><Bt3HvD.DHM@news.cso.uiuc.edu>tbuckley@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Tim Buckley) writes:
>>dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>>>best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
...
>>> A member of the human species is actually a dog or a spider?  That is the 
>>> funniest thing I've read all week.  You're in desperate need of a biology 
>>> lesson.  
>
>> I smiled as well but that was because I assumed he was being facetious.
>
>I didn't think he was kidding.  I constantly see attempts by 
>the pro-aborts to de-humanize the child in the abortion debate, 
>and his attempt was no different from the others that I've seen. 

One wonders Doug, why do you continue to ignore the one pro-abortionist
who agrees that a fetus is both human and a life?  You keep harping about
how all us pro-abortioners claim the fetus isn't human, while ignoring
that I have several times corrected pro-choicer and pro-lifer alike.

The fetus is human, it is alive.  The fetus is not a person, nor is it a
child.  Clear enough, Doug?


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.
-- 
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: cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker)
Subject: Re: Minutes of ba.t.a committee meeting
Distribution: world  
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 03:58:30 GMT

chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:

>NOT. I can move on from where I work now (which means you're doubly
>wrong because I am already hired, selling and working with CPU's), to
>Egghead Software, a local store, and begin selling for higher wages &
>komish. And I'm months away from being a viable $35/hr computer
>consultant. I could do that already if all I did was help people with
>UNIX. I may not be as good at it as you, but I already write workable
>and worthwhile programs on UNIX (BSD). Heck, I already help people
>with it, so who knows? In a year or so, I, too, might be getting paid
>to hack Unix. And MS-DOS.  

This is pathetic.  On a net populated with world-famous figures like
Marvin Minsky (yes, he does post), this pup is bragging about getting
hired in a computer store.  He further thinks that he's dangling a
carrot by suggesting that soon he may get an even _more_ prestigious
job.

And if I were the little hallucinator's mother, I'd be _very_ frightened
by the absolute fascination he has with his "inheritance".

                  -rocker
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)
Subject: Re: Minutes of ba.t.a committee meeting
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:14:47 GMT



|rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu writes:
|chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
|>NOT. I can move on from where I work now (which means you're doubly
|>wrong because I am already hired, selling and working with CPU's), to
|>Egghead Software, a local store, and begin selling for higher wages &
|>komish.

|So you're a salesdroid. Man, you sure know how to impress a guy.
|I'm impressed. Aren't you, CJ?

Yep.  I'm really impressed.  So impressed, in fact, that I've
just remembered that I have to keep a promise to you, Eric.
There's something about Chaney that just irresistably reminded
me of my obligations.  Yes, I'm going to sing "Log" for you now,
Eric, in Chaney's honor:

It flails and wails
And writes bad email
And acts like it's in a fog
It's log, log, log!

Log, log,
it's big, it's heavy, it's wood.
Log, log,
it's better than bad, it's good.
Everyone knows it's log--
Steve's brain is a log.
	(from Blammo!)

Oops.  Oh dear.  Like Alice Liddell, I must complain that the
words seem to have come out all wrong.

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
There is a sensibletter, which promise somethink, said she.  I cannot 
make himportance in his lettery pompous ink no, my dear, I think not.  
					--Jane Austen with some help
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker)
Subject: Re: Who takes care of the unwanted mother? 
Distribution: world 
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 06:37:11 GMT

chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:

>Delete the Pat Ira Roby Gang and you'll see a lot of this style from a
>me and lot of pro-lifers who wouldn't otherwise be slamfested right off 
>of USENET. 

It's kinda pathetic when someone believes that people they've never
met, who are thousands of miles away, are in such complete control
of that person's own actions.

                                 -rocker
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: The Red Button Scenario
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:00:41 GMT

In article <cy-yt7c@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>
>dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>
>>bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com writes:
>
>>>sa114984@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU (Steven Arnold) writes: 

>>>> 	To help clarify the issue, let me offer "The Red Button Scenario."
>
>>> I love it. This whole post was just amazing. Irrationality on parade.
>>> Truly bizarre.

>> It was no more irrational or bizarre than the "famous violinist" scenario
>> that the pro-abortionists like to trot out, or rocker's "The Value of a
>> Man" post.  

> Interesting.  The only medical doctor who posts to this group labels
> _The Value of a Man_ as "the best analogy to what women go through
> during pregnancy that I've ever seen", quite a few women who have had
> children laud the post as being parallel to their experience, and yet
> you, who are neither of these things, smugly label it as "irrational
> and bizarre".

I did not label your scenario "irrational and bizarre". I said that
Mr. Arnold's scenario was NO MORE irrational or bizarre than your
scenario, i.e. if Mr. Woodyatt wants to ridicule Mr. Arnold's 
scenario, then he must also ridicule your scenario.  Mr. Woodyatt 
chose to remain a hypocrite. 

>                       -rocker

>> "Take responsibility for your children, or we will force you to do it."
>>  -- Bill Clinton, speaking at the Democratic National Convention

I'm glad you pro-abortionists like my .sig!


Doug Holtsinger

 "Take responsibility for your children, or we will force you to do it."
  -- Bill Clinton, speaking at the Democratic National Convention


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:08:23 GMT

In article <1992Aug16.184201.5867@ncsu.edu> dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>In article <FOX.92Aug15221819@graphics.nyu.edu> 
>
>> So you would be pro-choice if the technique was more humane?
>
>Killing an innocent child can never be done in a humane fashion. 

So exactly why do you bring up techniques of abortion as an argument against
it?  When you do so, you seem to imply something that you don't mean to imply.

Dougie, instead of this strange argumentation style you seem to have developed,
why not just speak (write, actually) plainly so we don't have to guess what
your point is?

Or don't you *want* us to understand the meaning behind your words?

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

"I stopped believing in Santa Claus when I was six.  Mother took me to see him
 in a department store and he asked for my autograph."
							-Shirley Temple
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman)
Subject: Re: A little known fact...
Organization: NCAR, Boulder CO
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 19:58:04 GMT

> = dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) says:
>The Western ethic against infanticide gained its roots from
>early Judeo-Christian thought. 

This "fact" may or may not be true, but it is not obvious and 
absolutely no effort has been made to substantiated it.
Congratulations!  You have created blantant assertion in it's purest form.
-Brian
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Just Plain LIES!! (was Re: The facts about Roe, Doe, and Colautti)
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:30:06 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA

dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
: 
: Mr. Margolis, what are you talking about?  Mr. Greenfield has ignored
: three of my sources, and his entire argument rests upon the opinion
: of an author who's held conflicting views on Roe v. Wade.  Now he's 
: reduced to slinging insults and false allegations; he's no longer
: able to engage in constructive debate.  When that happens, we usually
: say that a person has lost the argument...
: 
: Would you care to address the issue?

I have never seen you post a reasoned argument - only quotes out of context.
If you change that habit, some of us might respond. Until then, I will, in  
general, continue to ignore your substanceless posts.

Bill
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: without even being asked ....
Summary: ...or even thinking, as usual.
Organization: Patrick, getting late in the evening
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 12:19:37 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.115640.6837@crd.ge.com> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com> writes:
>without even being asked, the chaney/hall person posting as
>chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>
>-> Came out of the 12th grade hitting a high of 3.66
>-> and a total GPA around 3.0. Yeah, like a kid with a
>-> bad childhood at home (which wasn't true for me) and
>-> computer bashers on his ass at school (which was the
>-> case for me), can actually do that and graduate @
>-> 17.
>
>wow. that's, gulp, wonderful dennis. what were your sat
>scores?

I'd like to see those, myself -- funny thing, though, is that I didn't have
a bad childhood, didn't *have* computers in school (who had 'em *anywhere*
in the mid-'60s?), was busy having a good enough time in high school to
finish up with only a 2.6 GPA...and if I'd graduated a week and a half
earlier, I'd have gotten out of high school at *16*.

(In case Dennis Chaney doesn't believe that, he's advised to check it out --
R. E. Lee HS, Houston, Class of 1972...:-)

-- 
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. 

        Beware of being the Roller when there's nothing left to roll...
From: steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: More character assassination
Date: 20 Aug 92 20:15:17 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies

> = (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>> = Larry Margolis writes:
>>> = Doug Holtsinger:

>>> Pro-aborts are pursuing the strategy of character assassination. 

>> When you lie, 

>Name one instance.

When you stated RvW was essentially abortion on demand.

>> quote out of context, 

>Name one instance.

Your Clinton "responsibilities" quote.  You didn't even get the sentence
right.  That is blatantly out of context.

>> or edit quotes in a deceptive fashion

>Name one instance.

The same Clinton quote mentioned above.  THAT was easy.

>Once and for all, put up or shut up.

Oh, we already have many times, DJR.  Go play in the street, wouldja?  

(You know, there _is_ therapy for pathological liars.)



-- 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Steve Novak |    |"Wacker the K"| 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
steven@advtech.USWest.Com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: without even being asked ....
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 09:55:26 GMT
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Distribution: na

<1992Aug22.180345.8176@midway.uchicago.edu> eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <av_nsdc.gordons@netcom.com>
>gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>>When Mr Chaney, Mr Kellmeyer, and Mr Holtsinger have apologized for their
>>racial slander of pro-choicers then I would expect to see Patrick 
>>make amends.
>
>I find racist comments offensive regardless of what other comments
>have gone before.

As is your right.

>I also find offensive the idea that whether or not Patrick should
>apologize to Steve Chaney is dependant on what Mr Kellmeyer and Mr.
>Holtsinger do.

Again, it's right to feel so.


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.
From: HUMPHRY@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Get it *right*, Dennis.)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Who was "Dennis Hall"?
Date: 16 Aug 1992 05:22:28 GMT
Organization: Rice University

In article <1992Aug16.003415.17098@csus.edu>
chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
 
>
>In article <Bsy4qz.9vE@rice.edu> patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
>
>                Shhh, Scott.
>                We know you're posting as Pat Harumphrey because
>                you both lie the same way.
 
What a hoot.  If that was the case, the finger would be pointing straight
at you -- you're far and away the best known liar in *this* newsgroup,
even more so than Rasmussen himself.
 
Come on, Steve.  Let's see just how much of a boy you are.  March your
fat black ass down here and tell me I'm a liar, to my face.  (I hope
you don't mind doing it in the presence of a few witnesses, and I hope
you like being humiliated.  On second thought, why should *I* care what
you think?  What you get, you won't expect.)
 
--PLH, thankful he's not a parent to such a waste of DNA as one Steve Chaney
 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman)
Subject: Re: THIRD TRIMESTER ABORTIONS
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 18:52:04 GMT


   By opposing third trimester abortions, it implies that not ALL
abortions should be banned.  Does this mean that those who oppose
third trimester abortions would allow abortion on demand, for any
ADULT woman, in the FIRST trimester, who can PAY for her abortion
with her OWN money?  Yes or no?  If the answer is no, it is clear
that third trimester abortions are not an issue for you, although
you all bellow continuously about them.  So is it third trimester
abortions, or ALL abortions that is really the issue?  If you are
against ALL abortions, would you please shut up about this aspect
abortion, when it really does not mean anything to you?  Abortion
rights is an issue that does not have the time to kill on zealots
that whine about facets of this debate that are nothing more than
diversions from their true feelings?  I suspect that most of you,
if not ALL of you, that whine about third trimester abortions are
nothing but anti-abortion zealots who really want to ban abortion
for women, no matter in which trimester the abortion takes place,
no matter who pays for it, no matter how young or old she is, and
no matter how much suffering to the woman or the baby this forced
pregnancy might inflict.  
-- 
   "We're going to have the best educated American people in the
world."                              Dan Quayle - Sept. 21, 1988