HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu (Keith A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: You want to win.
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 17:06:49 GMT


[Deleted:  Jennifer's brillant idea for a new law to help solve the abortion
problem.  Go back to that article, and re-read it.]

Jennifer:  I think you should send it to congress.

Although, I think that if the father wants to keep the child, and the mother
doesn't, then after signing the legal stuff, the father should be required to
pick up the medical expenses for the pregnancy, birth, etc.  And there should
definitly be a clause in there about if the women's health is in danger, the
contract is null and void instantly.

I am, though, disturbed by the "you have 180 days to decide, or you have to have
an abortion" statements.  Just like I'm disturbed by the "you have to carry the
pregnancy to term" statements the pro-lifers make.
--
=kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu   |  !uunet!nyx!kcochran  |  kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu  =
=B(0/1/2/3) f- t w- c- d- s++(+) m e++ r(-) p k(+) <--My BearCode, if you care=
=My thoughts, my posts, my ideas, my responsibility, my beer, my pizza.  Ok???=
=Ex-Girlfriend of Rocker, Susan, and Linda, and Damm Proud Of It!! And, FWA!!!=
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: jbates@pinocchio.encore.com (John Bates)
Subject: Re: The Right to Exist
Organization: Encore Computer
	<1992Apr7.141153.5249@hemlock.cray.com> <1992Apr8.014927.5236@ncsu.edu>
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:28:28

In article <1992Apr8.014927.5236@ncsu.edu> dsh@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu
(Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>In article <1992Apr7.141153.5249@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com 
(Muriel Nelson) writes:

>A fetus is no less human than any other human life. If it is not a human 
>life, then what is it? All humans should have the same right to existence. 

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here, but can you please explain to
me exactly what you mean by "human life" and "human"? You seem to be using
them in several different senses.

Let me clarify my position: A fetus is human. It carries human DNA. So does
every part of every person. Your appendix is human, your hair is human,
and your toenails are human. 

A human life? Do you mean human tissue that is alive, or do you mean a
living person? If you mean human tissue, do you believe that your appendix
has the same rights that you do? If you mean to imply that it is a living
person, what makes it so? What is your definition of person? Why is an
eight week old fetus equivalent to a twenty-three year old?

I don't extend rights to all that is "human". Humanness covers a wide span
of possibilities. I extend rights to "people". The fetus does not qualify.

John
From: cs060110@athena.ecs.csus.edu ( )
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Summary: The Truth Is..  
Organization: California State University, Sacramento
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 00:28:55 GMT

In article <1992Apr07.072555.8447@liebe.uucp> kevin@liebe.uucp (Kevin Brawley) writes:
>ac10+@andrew.cmu.edu (Alison Rebecca Colman) writes:
>
>>Hi everybody,
>
>>I went to the "We Won't Go Back" march yesterday, and I had a terrific
>>time. It was quite incredible. I have never seen so many folks in one
>>place at once. The speakers were inspiring, I met lots of friendly
>>people, and I am more dedicated to the cause than ever.

Alison! It's the guy from alt.personals, soc.singles, etc.! I finally
wandered onto this net. A little gunfire there for a while, but I'm
rearin' to help you folks out now.. e-mail me soon!  

Now, on to Kevin Brawley... 

>>Cheers,
>>Big Al  
>
>"...never seen so many folks in one place..."
>
>You obviously missed last years Pro-Life march on D.C. where they out-
>numbered the Pro-Death 2:1.  I don't have this years figures (yet).

 Pro-Death? 

 Well, here are this year's figures for the anti-abortion march: 70,000.
 
 Yessiree, folks, that's 70,000 versus 500,000. We had more people at
that pro-choice march for women's lives, than Saddam Hussein had troops
in Kuwait! We had more pro-choicers at that march, I believe, than all
the American troops who died in World War II - about 3 times as many. If
that 1 million count is more accurate, we had almost as many people willing 
to fight for choice, out there, as there were Allied troops lined up against 
Wham Bam Saddam...  

 If we lose this election season, folks, I think we should all drum
ourselves on the head with a thighbone of an ass, because there is no way
in hell, with an army bigger than that of some nations, that the
pro-choice movement could lose. Unless we sit on our butts.  

>Kevin Brawley
>

- Dennis Hall. 

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kevin@liebe.uucp (Kevin Brawley)
Subject: Re: Pro-Abortion Airheads
Organization: Liebe Company
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1992 07:11:20 GMT

mjln_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Mikeey J. Lin) writes:

>	I would be a little more careful if I were you Theodore. I believe
>the speaker wanted the right of privacy to her body. I'm not even going to
>think about what you were implying by your statement. :& As for those your
>comments about those "loudmouths", I think you are truly IGNORANT if you
>actually think you solutions will solve the abortion problem. There are too
>many different situation to consider, too many opposing views. If you don't
>like something, state it politely and logically.     
>	
So where is the politics and logic in your post?  From what I read you're
simply telling him that he is wrong while insinuating he is "IGNORANT".

> 	Who are you to judge whether most abortions are done "for the
>sake of convience". Have you ever had an abortion? Do you know the situations
>of most of the women who had abortions? Think twice before you answer.
>By the way, one more comment about "Pro-Abortion Airhead" from you will
>probably get you... (you figure it out, you're smart enough) Be nice dude!

You're so right.  He should have been much more careful when stating a
politically incorrect idea.  So, pro-abortionists can't be airheads? or
he's just no allowed to verbalize it?  

While we're at it:  A year ago the press reported the Pro-Death rally
turnout as some incredible number.  The Park Service in D.C. said they
only had a small fraction of the number they claimed.  The Pro-Life
rally (according to the Park Service) outnumbered their opposers 2 to 1.
Does anyone have RELIABLE figures from this year?

Kevin Brawley
From: kristyp@coos.dartmouth.edu (Kristy Patterson)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Libertarian Party's offical views on abortion
Date: 17 Apr 92 14:05:35 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <1992Apr16.143110.5507@vax.oxford.ac.uk> annan@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <16851@plains.NoDak.edu>, compton@plains.NoDak.edu (Curtis M. Compton) writes:

>> In order to justify making abortion illegal, you must bestow rights upon the
>> fetus that other humans do not have.  No human has the right to force
>> another to be their slave.  No human has the right to use your resources
>> without your consent.  To say that a fetus has these rights is tantamount to
>> saying the unborn are a superior class of people to the born. 

>So presumably, abortion should be legal up to 9 months, then? And perhaps
>beyond? After all, we wouldn't want to suggest that a young baby is a
>"superior" person to an older one (who has no rights to your resources).

This doesn't make much sense to me; in a country where abortion is legal,
presumably a woman wouldn't *have* a baby if she wasn't willing to share
her resources with it.  If she wasn't willing to extend her resources to
it, she would have had the abortion *before* birth.

Besides, I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that Curtis was talking primarily
about biological resources, not financial resources or maternal care.
(Please don't tell me that the baby needs breast milk; I realize that it is
a biological resource a baby needs, but it doesn't really affect the point,
IMO.)

>> Curtis M. Compton

>James Annan.

-Kristy

-- 
  +=================+=======================================================+
  |Kristy Patterson | "I was saving it for your college, but then I thought |
  |kristyp@mac.     | 'The only way she's going to college is in a cake at a|
  +=================+  frat party'."======================-Dinosaurs========+
From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:15:18 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <1992Apr8.182506.1980@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> mprc@troi.cc.rochester.edu (M. Price) writes:

>In <1992Apr7.214014.10886@cs.dal.ca> franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
>(ungrammatical grumbling deleted)   
  heh - sorry. don't proofread my posts. If I send them to you first,
will you be sure to for me? Doesn't seem to bother many people. Maybe
you'd get a kick out of it?

> So, if a woman has NO TIME for a family (namely her own), and
>especially if she is exceptionally busy trying to undo some of the
>damage and crap that society has bred (maybe she's a doctor, social
>worker, teacher, minister, caregiver, politician etc.), so that she would
> have NO TIME to
>responsibly care for a child of her own, and she finds herself pregnant,
>it's apparently OK for her to have an abortion. After all, like the man
>said, each individual has his/her own calling in lfe, and NO ONE has the
>right to deny it.

   DO you even read my posts? Or do you look for a few incriminating
words and then pounce? In any case, I said a priest has no time
for children - thus the act of CELIBACY. If a woman has no time for
children and knows this before hand, then she can wait for sex. Otherwise
our sympaty goes with the fetus. Thanks for TRYING to take my words
out of context...

> >   And by the way darkstar@u.washington.edu (Alden Hackmann), your
>>frigging follow-up was weak, offensive, and absolutely lacking in humor.

>     What, you mean you thought my original posting WAS humorous? What
>are you, sick?
   Dude, READ PLEASE. I said it LACKED in humor. If it wasn't MEANT
to be funny, then it was a waste of a post. Go read it again. If you don't
see a desperate attempt at sarcasm and wit, then mail me. I don't expect
to hear from you...

>>   steve (MICHIGAN LOST!!!!!!!!!!!!! ugh)
>>-- 
>>aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
>>sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
>>qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
>>zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA

>Whatever.

   Hey man, do you have no life outside of this newsgroup? Don't watch
basketball? Don't like humor? Man, you are a case...
   I can't help it - it's my .sig. I'm not gonna delete it so that I appear
more serious when I post to talk.abortion... okay?
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: mleigh@infocenter.encore.com (Madeline Leigh)
Subject: Re: Steve Franklin's "good trade" (Was Re: You want to win.)
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 21:17:53 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.115058.18267@cs.dal.ca>, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
> In <703276263@lear.cs.duke.edu> gazit@duke.cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit) writes:
> >In article <1992Apr14.125259.22918@cs.dal.ca> franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
> 
> >Steve, have you ever talked (not shout, talk) with a woman who had an
> >abortion?  Have you ever talked with a woman who had an illegal abortion?
> >Do you care about their horrors?
>    Many times. That is why I want to do away with the two sources
> to the problem. 1) abortion, and 2) society's ignorance and lack of
> care for the mother...
> 
> >Please read the following article, it will not change your mind but
> >at least you will *know* what your "good trade" really means.
>    Hmmm. Makes you think doesn't it? You know, I have found a weakness in
> myself. I should (and somewhat DO) feel utterly compassionate towards the
> woman who had to end the fetus' existince this way, under the stress of
> unsupporting parents, and perhaps a somewhat unsupporting SO. But,
> in any case, I also have this little voice inside of me that is enraged
> by those that take the law into their own hands.

me too.  That's why I had such a problem with thousands of tax dollars
required to control those folks in Wichita who took the law into their
own hands.  That's why I'm not too happy about those who do such "nice"
things (like bombing clinics, shrieking at women, distorting facts, and
just plain lying) in the name of love, in the name of goodness, and with
a (false IMO) claim to respect for life.>

    This doesn't change my mind any. I have run into many females who have
> gone the route of the home-made abortion. If she only had some support

have you, I mean really?  It just stretches the imagination a bit, that
(just guessing) a college-aged man who's spent what I'd guess to be the
majority of his adult years in a post Roe era would run into so many
females who have gone the route of home-made abortions when they've
been perfectly legal lo these past twenty years.  If you've indeed
sought out older women who were forced into such actions (and lived
to tell about it), then I commend you for that.

 > throughout her pregnancy, I imagine there is a good chance she would have
> kept the baby. But, her parents were the first sign that she would 
> end the pregnancy, and perhaps much of the guilt should rest with them.

how does this foot with the strongly held belief among anti-choicers
that parents MUST be notified? 
>    steve


Madeline
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The Right to Exist
Date: 8 Apr 92 16:54:02 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:

>Heck, didn't you know? Christians are against capitol punishment too.
>Man shall not ever empower another man/womans life but to defend his
>own.

I guess all that killing, raping, and pillaging blessed by the church
in the crusades was because they were all defending their own lives.

Don't bother responding with I shouldn't judge you by what somebody
did centuries ago, your 'holy' church would like nothing better than
to get rid of the infidels even today. Likewise, it seeks to force its
beliefs on all through legal action since brainwashing obviously hasn't
worked on most of us.

Ron
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Abortion and Marriage (was Re: Some Park Service Estimates)
Date: 15 Apr 92 03:16:21 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon



Actually, I just like the subject line on this thread.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: THE IMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION ON OUR SOCIETY
Date: 14 Apr 92 13:27:26 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
>In <1992Apr13.173029.24847@nwnexus.WA.COM> jbrindle@nwnexus.WA.COM (Jennifer Br
>indle) writes:

>However, now that there are no periodic variables to direct our cycle
>of sex, Trojan Condoms makes millions while our Population growth is
>on the decline BIG time.

Good, we could probably use a billion less people on Earth. Too bad
it's actually *growing*. Why don't you pull your head out, get a breath
of freshh air, and get a reality check. I'm really beginning to wonder
about the education system in Canada, but then, you're probably a real
abnormality.

>>"Mother Nature" didn't allow for open-heart surgery, vitamin tablets,
>>aspirin, fingernail clippers, or even clothing, but that doesn't mean
>>that we can't utilize them, does it?

>   One saves lives, one doesn't. I don't think this isa fair analogy

Only one saves lives Steve, the rest just improve the quality of life
or prolong it. Trojans could also be said to save lives, in those cases
where the woman can't have babies. In any case, they don't end lives,
just prevent them from being conceived. You have a problem with this?

Ron
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Sorry, did I miss anything?
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:30:21 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Distribution: na
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, mills@uga.edu (Kathi Mills) writes:

>Mmmmm ... a club of men without girlfriends who *want* girlfriends?
>Now this I can't resist ...

Promises.....

>I might be your *ex-lover* ... I'm nobody's "girl," and it sounds
>more sophisticated.

Sounds good to me. *ex-lover* does have a sophisticated sound to it.
What do you say?

Ron
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Kathi, please be careful
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:08:30 GMT
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<1992Apr12.165452.17782@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis) said:
>In a previous article, gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) says:
>
>>H******** when refering to pro-choicers too.  Usually we'll hear about the
>>guiding Christian influence that established this great country, and how
>>the evil pro-choicers are practicing a genocide of the "unborn".
>>Conveniently they forget what their guiding Christian influence did to the
>>American Indian, as in - near complete genocide of the indigenous
>>population on the basis of "heathenism".  The plight of the American
>>Indian is swept under the rug while these "caring folk" go off to Romania
>>to adopt children, send millions of dollars to Ethiopia, send millions fo
>>dollars to Israel, send food and clothing to Russia, etc.
>>
>>David Rasmussin once had the gall to claim that there were never any mass
>>geneocides carried out by a western democracy.  How soon we forget...
>
>Gordon.......................
>
>don't blaim past mis-justices on a certain group. 

Really?  Who should be blamed?  Do you know what "heathen means"?  Do you
know how many American Indians were enslaved by the "saving grace" of the
Christian monks?  Do you know how many religious artifacts and practices
were destroyed and changed by the Christian influence?  Do you care?
Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

>                                                  You have no
>earthly idea what your ancestors did....

You talk like the genocide wasn't actively going on just a mere 100 years
ago.  We're not talking 1000 of years you know.  And I _do_ have an
earthly idea of what my ancestors have done.

>                                        so stop being "more-
>poltically-correct-then-you." BTW, what the hell are you doing
>to prevent world hunger?

It's a little too late to prevent world hunger.  I do donate money and
good to local charities.  I also support organizations that work for
ecological conservation.  That really is the only way we will ever help
people, by helping the earth to support the food supply.

BTW, what are you doing to help the American Indian?


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boyfriend of Susan,
Muriel, Cathi, and Nora, and married to the sweetest woman in the world,
and darn proud of it.
-- 

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: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Susan, Muriel, Cathi, please read this...;-)
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 08:09:25 GMT

<1992Apr11.053217.87152@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) said:
><1992Apr10.230121.25145@midway.uchicago.edu> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>#<1992Apr8.182426.10884@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes
>
>##Gordon
>##Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boyfriend of Susan,
>##Muriel, Cathi, and Nora, and married to the sweetest woman in the world,
>##               ^^^^^^^^
>##and darn proud of it.
>#
>#We're proud of you, too, Gordon. In fact, we get together sometimes
>#to have slumber parties and talk about you; don't we, girls?
>
>Of course we do.  Cathi and I have some other ex-boyfriends in
>common, too.  Allow me to recommend Dan King and Dean Kaflowitz 
>and Keith Cochran and Patrick Humphrey and Jim Keegan once again.
>It would give us that much more to talk about while we eat all 
>that junk food and try on each others clothes.  

Do women really do that at slumber parties?  The clothes trying part I
mean.  I can't imagine getting together with my buddies and trying on
their clothes.  The fact that they are all a few inches taller and quite a
few pounds heavier not withstanding.

>I'm inviting Kathi and Linda to my next sleepover, too.  They
>may or may not have dated Gordon.

Uh, sure they have, I, uh, think...  Well, if they want to be
ex-girlfriends they just have to let me know.

>I'm really hoping that I can get a new ex-boyfriend with gills,
>too.

Is this for the reason I think it is?  Maybe you just need someone with
good breathing control.


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boyfriend of Susan,
Muriel, Cathi, and Nora, and married to the sweetest woman in the world,
and darn proud of it.
-- 

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: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: Hypocrisy, Bloody Hypocrisy
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 23:02:24 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.120705.20735@cs.dal.ca> franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
>In <1992Apr13.231907.18378@cs.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Apr13.215858.14639@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>>>Mary could have said no to the pregnancy before the pregnancy even began.
>>Scripturally unsubstantiated bullshit--RC dogma or not.
>>Back it up or don't say it, Suzanne. We've been through this one before.
>
>    Awhhh jeez Eric, don't be such a dork.
Eat me.

> First of all, Suzanne wasn't
>the one who brought up the "scripturally unsubstantiated bullshit". SOmeone
>else did remember? In any case, what you consider "scripturally unsubstantiated"
>we call our faith and the message of God. And you're wrong. SO much of the 
>bible is documented from various forms of text. Just because you dont' see 
>any value or truth in it doesn't mean that hundreds of millions of us don't. 
No, shithead. EVEN if one grants the premise that the Bible is literally
true, blah blah blah, one has no grounds for the conclusion that Mary
gave consent. While I understand that it is RC dogma, that's ALL it is.
There is no reason to derive it from the text itself.

-Ekr


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431, Honda CM400 rider          rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Yale University Department of Chemistry            We hack anything.
My mind is now for rent: C/Unix,Vacuum Tech,Machining,P-Chemist. Hire me, eh? 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion