HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle)
Subject: Re: aborting females
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:49:02 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.015209.22867@u.washington.edu> jnorris@u.washington.edu writes:
>I don't normally follow talk.abortion, but I was wondering about something
>and this seemed to be an appropriate place to ask it. How do pro-choice
>people out there feel about a woman aborting a female fetus because she
>wanted a boy instead? Does a woman's right to an abortion include the right
>to abort a female fetus because she would grow up to be a woman instead of
>a man? I don't know whether this happens in the U.S., but it happens in
>other countries.
>
>Joel
>

Joel, rather than answering your question, I have one for you.  Just how
do you intend to STOP a woman from aborting for that reason, assuming that
abortion is legal?  Let's say that Congress passes a law which says a woman
can't abort for sex selection.  Now, you're a woman and you are pregnant.
You want a female child.  So, you go to your doctor, saying that you might
have a predisposition toward a problem, you want a CVS.  Your doctor orders
one and you get it.  The CVS returns that everything is okay and the fetus is
male.  So, you go to another doctor and say that you're pregnant and you want
an abortion.  The doctor asks you if it's for sex selection and you say no.
You have the abortion.  

There. You've had a "sex-selection" abortion.

The point to all this is this, Joel.  Regardless of anyone's personal feelings
about this, as long as abortion are legal a woman has the right to get one
for ANY reason.  The only way to reduce the number of "sex-selection" abortions
(like there's this epidemic of them) is to ban all abortions.  And that
wouldn't STOP them, only reduce them.  And it would result in a great many
WOMEN DYING!

So, let's not get on the highly flammable issue of "sex-selection" abortions,
as there is no way to stop them, regardless of how disgusting some people
think they are.


Jennifer


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: A mirror for Adrienne Regard's NO OTHER HUMAN...
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:21:38 GMT

 nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

> The book is _Fetal Electrocardiography and
> Electroencephalography_, By Richard Lee
> Bernstine [Charles C. Thomas, Springfield IL, 1961]
                                                ^^^^
My first impulse on seeing the date was to enter pages and pages
of laughter along the lines of:  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

All I have to say is, a _lot_ has happened in 31 years, don't you
agree, Peter?  For one thing, the word 'neuroscientist'  entered
the dictionary in 1963, and the whole field of neuroscience just
sort of took off from there! :-)

We've made a lot of advances in embriology, too, Peter.

-- 
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: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Subject: To clear up any chance of mistakes...  
Organization: California State University Sacramento
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:23:38 GMT

I was alerted by a fellow pro-lifer about the ambiguous meaning of
this sentence: 

>Well, maybe Elizabeth Bartley might prove me wrong and show me worse
>instances. Heaven knows SEVERAL pro-lifers know of those instances.  :) 

I was asked if this meant I was putting Bartley down. 

Actually, if any doubt exists, I meant that the next time I see her
article, she may cause certain pro-aborts to get pissed and, as they
did with Siren, reach lower low's than I ever thought pro-aborts could
go. 

When you have sensible folks trying to think independently on this
issue, the pro-aborts get meaner and crazier, and stupider, and with
Keegan picking Bartley as this round's target for ridicule, who knows
- someone stupider than Keegan might be attracted to join in with
him.

 
=============================================================================
>##       "My logic is based on ... a religious perspective which says
>##  that personhood begins at birth (actually a month after birth if
>##  we want to be precise)..."
>##    -- Gloria Feldt,
>##       chief executive, Planned Parenthood of Central and Northern Arizona

>##   "I see nothing extreme or reprehensible about this statement."
>##     -- garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) <BtnDAw.Iwo.2@cs.cmu.edu>
=============================================================================
|Pro-Contraception   Pro-Freedom of Religion, Speech & Sexual Orientation   |
|Pro-Privacy    Pro-Humanism   Pro-Freedom of Choice 	Registered Democrat | 
|                                                                           |
|			Card-carrying member, NRLC                          |
|           Dedicated to achieving civil rights for the unborn              |
=============================================================================
BBBBBB     OOOOOOOO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    Founder: Steve Chaney 
B    B     O      O   S         S          <chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu> 
BBBBBBBB   O     OO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    
BB     B   O     OO        SS        SS    Borg Operating 
BBBBBBBB O OOOOOOOO O SSSSSSS O SSSSSSS O  Space Systems, Revision 2.0 

	       The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS.
From: smezias@wissel.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Maury Povich and the brainwashing child abusers
Date: 4 Sep 92 15:04:10 GMT
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

In article <1992Sep4.131752.1439@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu
(MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes: 

>>    Of course she is old enough to oppose having an abortion if she
>> became pregnant. The idea that she would have no say is disgusting. She
>> is not, however, old enough to oppose OTHER WOMEN having abortions. And
>> neither are you.
>
>  How old must one be to have an opinion?

The statement to which you responded was unclear, hence leaving an
opening for your question.  I believe the correct statement (I didn't
make the original, so I'm only guessing) is that one is never old
enough to stop women from having abortions that they have freely
chosen.  You may hold any opinion you like about the morality of her
choice, as long as you recognize that it is hers to make.

SJM

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: Observations
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 02:47:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.172929.12103@advtech.uswest.com>
stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:

>I would be much happier with a constitutional amendment that requires
>the consent of the father before abortion is allowed.

You do realize, of course, that this gives my lover (possibly my
rapist) control over my body equal to mine?

Hopefully that phrasing makes clear my objection to this proposal.

-- 
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.

Cthulhu for President -- when you're tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.discrimination
From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: All discrimination is not equal -- or wrong
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 00:00:35 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.004203.22844@ncsu.edu>
dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>Can you name some?  I can't think of any situations where a person
>could "deserve" to be called a name with such clear racist overtones.  

While I certainly agree that Patrick Humphrey's use of the term "fat
black ass" was utterly unjustified, I have to say that they are some
bizarre circumstances when one is justified in using the term.  For
example, if you're trying to distract a drugged crazy from his
hostages so that they can escape, you're justified in calling him (or
anyone else) anything you dam' well please.

-- 
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.

Cthulhu for President -- when you're tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,alt.birthright
From: bmc@mayo.edu (Bruce Cameron)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: Re: Observations
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:01:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Mayo Foundation, Rochester MN. Campus

<1992Sep3.173838.8528@advtech.uswest.com>, stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep2.024720.23681@midway.uchicago.edu> eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
|> >In article <1992Sep1.172929.12103@advtech.uswest.com>
|> >stevens@eatdust (John Stevens) writes:
|> >
|> >>I would be much happier with a constitutional amendment that requires
|> >>the consent of the father before abortion is allowed.
|> >
|> >You do realize, of course, that this gives my lover (possibly my
|> >rapist) control over my body equal to mine?
|> 
|> Wrong.  It gives the father equal control over your reproductive system
|> only in so far as to whether or not you are allowed to abort the child,
|> and of course, that control can only be exercised if you are pregnant.
|> 

So, if the father is to have equal control over the mother's
reproductive system should the woman be pregnant and considering
termination of said pregnancy then at what point and under
what circumstances does the mother have equal control over the
father's reproductive system (you do believe in equal rights
don't you)?

Also, to what lenghts must the man go to prove that he is
the father before he is allowed to exercise his "right" to
equal control over a woman's reproductive system?

-- 
--Bruce

"Truth is ultimately a philosophical concept,...,
 and standards of truth are adequate for practical
 purposes if they are substantially more reliable 
 then the system undergoing evaluation"
				C. E. Metz
---------------------------------------------------
bmc@mayo.edu	(507) 284-3288	fax: (507) 284-9623
Mayo Foundation, 200 1st St SW,	Rochester MN 55905
---------------------------------------------------
#include <std/disclaimer>             ARS -- WD9CKW
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.usage.english,alt.peeves
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: Clearing Up More Term Usage
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:52:08 GMT

drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:

> We Understand that BeZerkley is still behind the time ...

Heck, they never got over the Free Speech Movement!

-- 
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: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: Revised consistency check
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Distribution: world 
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 15:50:53 GMT

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

>> Chris Lyman - email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov - #include <std.disclaimers.h>
>> "... all women think alike on the issue of abortion ..." -- Doug Holtsinger

> Care to print his entire statement? He said "They (pro-aborts) seem to
> THINK that all women think alike..."

Wrong, Mr. Chaney.  The entire sentence was "Chris Lyman is a sexist for
thinking that all women think alike on the issue of abortion," a claim he
hasn't been able to prove.

Do you think I'm a sexist too?

-- 
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: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: All discrimination is not equal -- or wrong
Keywords: Blatant hypocrisy
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:56:30 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.002241.11735@csus.edu>
chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>In article <23768@oasys.dt.navy.mil> 
>bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:

>>Isn't a grown-up (ie adult, person) more than an entity? I think so,
>>that's why we call them a person, or similar terms. An entity, as used
>>here, meant non-person, wich no matter how you weasel, a fetus never
>>is, nor will be, as when it becomes a person, it is no longer a fetus.
>>Hence your statement is meaningless to the original statement.

>A fetus is more than just an entity, too

Truth by Blatant Assertion.

>and to equate them as being less than persons, is discrimination.

True.  However, note that while "discrimination" has very negative
connotations, one can discriminate in a positive fashion by doing so
on valid grouds ... the whole point of our justice system is to
discriminate against criminals.

>The same kind of discrimination that leads friends of yours, like PatricKKK
>Humphrey, to refer to people like me as "black ass".

Utterly false.  Developmentism is not racism, which is not sexism,
which is not ageism, which is not speciesism.  (Discrimination in a
positive fashion, again ... I'm heartily in favor of speciesism.)

--
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: "only 3 doctors...perform third trimester abortions" is unsupported
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 15:55:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep01.044638.5174@watson.ibm.com> 
margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:

>dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:

>>> If they said that there were only X number of doctors who specialized
>>> in heart transplants, I wouldn't assume that there were a number of
>>> additional doctors who specialized in, say, podiatry, but performed an
>>> occasional heart transplant on the side.

>> What does this have to do with the subject?

> They said that there were only three doctors who specialize in third-
> trimester abortions.  You assumed that there were others who performed
> them as well.  I gave an example to show that this assumption does not
> necessarily follow.

But the subject is whether or not 60 Minutes supports your claims.
You said that you were unwilling to admit that 60 Minutes does not
support your claims.  Are you claiming that 60 Minutes does support
your claims, YES or NO? 

>> >> > I note that you deleted the following, as you have every time you've
>> >> > been challenged.
>> >>
>> >> I'm just trying to delete extraneous material.
>> >>
>> >> >  If you can list more doctors that perform third tri abortions,
>> >> >  or you can document for me cases of women getting third-
>> >> >  trimester abortions for "frivolous" reasons, I would of course
>> >> >  change my tune.  Unlike some, I don't knowingly pass on lies.
>
>(Well, you've stopped deleting it, but you still haven't responded.)

It has nothing to do with the subject -- are you claiming that
60 Minutes supports your claims, YES or NO? 


>Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)


Doug Holtsinger

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.child-support,misc.kids,alt.abortion.inequity
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Child Endangerment and parental custody.
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 11:47:44 GMT


First the Question:

If a Parent 'allows' their kid to do anything they want,

AND

that kid has been arrested 42 times before her fourteenth birthday.

Is this time for someone in the Child Welfare Agency to
step in and seek to make the child a ward of the Court?

At least to put that child in a foster Home, or 
someplace where there will be people who will love her?

Now the post that caused this:

mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:

]      I would just like to say that I also had the opportunity to 
] watch that Maury Povich episode yesterday, and Susan Garvin's
] interpretation was quite accurate indeed.  It was frustrating
] to watch the pro-lifers on the panel spew their arguments without
] being able to tell them what was the matter with them (their
] arguments that is).  Brainwashing put aside, those children were
] and will continue to be abused by their parents.  I'm not sure
] if it's good parental practice to allow your 13 year-old daughter
] to be arrested 42 times, and say "it's ok, she wanted to do it,
] I didn't put her up to it."
] 
] Scary people.
] 
] Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca

and a Sad commentary that no one has stepped in
to protect these children.....


ciao
drieux


ps: one also wonders if this daughter will still
be allowed to decide to have an abortion at say, 
sixteen years of age......



-- 
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.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Subject: Re: Fetal Independence
Organization: California State University: Sacramento
Distribution: world 
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 21:30:46 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.044113.21188@wdl.loral.com> bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com writes:
>In article <1992Aug19.221008.1083@ncsu.edu>, dsh@zeus.csc.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
># A person can kill in self-defense only when they can reasonably
># believe that their life is in _immediate_ danger. Most pregnancies
># do not fit that requirement.   
>
>Tell you what, Mr. Holtsinger -- when the lab finishes testing our new
>AndroWomb[TM], we'll have you fitted for one at no costs so you can
>rethink your opinion on whether the prospect of undergoing surgery to
>have eight pounds of bouncing, lovable infanthood removed from your
>body is something that involves _immediate_ danger.

Well, we'll wait until then, shall we? When your little device is
finished, you can do one of two things: 

1) Prove Doug Holtsinger was wrong. 
2) Manufacture a bunch of these devices to incubate fetuses on their
own, seeing as once you've invented the AndroWomb[TM], the abortion
debate would be dead because pro-lifers would have the instant 99%
majority vote to FORCE you to use the device and NOT kill any more
unborn children. 

>In the mean time, what's yer point?

What's YOUR point? You haven't invented the device yet. 


===============================================================================
			Robert Casey for President '96! 
			 This Casey never strikes out.
===============================================================================
Pro-Contraception   Pro-Freedom of Religion, Speech & Sexual Orientation 
Pro-Privacy    Pro-Humanism   And a Democrat to Boot | 
                           <<<=== Pro-Life ===>>> 
===============================================================================
BBBBBB     OOOOOOOO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    Founder: Steve Chaney 
B    B     O      O   S         S          <chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu> 
BBBBBBBB   O     OO   SSSSSSS   SSSSSSS    
BB     B   O     OO        SS        SS    Borg Operating 
BBBBBBBB O OOOOOOOO O SSSSSSS O SSSSSSS O  Space Systems, Revision 2.0 

	       The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS.
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Abortion safer than giving birth
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date:  2 Sep 92 21:17:05 GMT

In <1992Sep01.063728.32934@watson.ibm.com> Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com> writes:

>In  <nyikos.715300439@milo.math.scarolina.edu>  nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>> In <1992Aug27.191315.36800@watson.ibm.com> Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.co
>>
>> >It's not clear that you're interested in learning, if you automatically
>> >dismiss facts because you don't like the source.  Perhaps you'll like
>> >one of these sources better.
>>
>> Thank you.  I saved the info you listed below, although the first
>> table is extremely suspect, and there's nothing to go on.  But I will
>> study the rest of the info very carefully.

>Why is it suspect?  Because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions?

No. Because it does not fit in with what I read in _Aborted Women, Silent
No More_ nor with what I have learned from Charles Wysong, of the
American Rights Coalition, both directly and from his _Abortion Injury
Report_.  I'll have lots more to say over the next couple of months.

>Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: "only 3 doctors ... perform third trimester abortions"
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 1 Sep 92 16:15:32 CDT


In article <1992Aug30.035846.40919@watson.ibm.com>, margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:
> In  <1992Aug29.180604.13845@ncsu.edu>  dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
> >
> > a) Mr. Margolis claims that only three doctors in the United
> >    States perform third trimester abortions, but 60 Minutes
> >    claims that only three doctors specialize in late-term
> >    abortions.
> >
> > b) The transcript does not support the claim of Mr. Margolis
> >    that these doctors perform abortions only for reasons of
> >    serious health problems.
> >
> > The transcript does not mention the source of Stahl's claim
> > about the "three doctors".  I may write to 60 Minutes to ask
> > them for a source.  It doesn't appear that Mr. Margolis is
> > willing to track down the source.
> 
> That's right - I'm not.  As far as I know, it's true.  If you can
> list more doctors that perform third tri abortions, or you can
> document for me cases of women getting third-trimester abortions
> for "frivolous" reasons, I would of course change my tune.  Unlike
> some, I don't knowingly pass on lies.

From the Minneapolis StarTribune, Sat Oct 26, 1991, p5B:

        ABORTION/ Doctor says saline method discarded
[...]
        Saline solution is no longer used as an abortion technique,
        said Dr. Mildred Hanson, who does abortions in Minneapolis.
        "Nobody uses saline anywhere," she said.  "It is accompanied
        by a risk of bleeding and also by a risk of some of that
        saline going into maternal circulation."
[...]
        Today, abortions in the first trimester usually are by
        suction aspiration.  Late-stage abortions are done by a
        surgical procedure.

        Only three or four doctors perform late-stage abortions,
        said Patricia Anderson with the National Abortion Federation.
        "There are a handful of third-trimester abortions that are
        done in instances of serious fetal anomalies or in the case
        of a pregnancy threatening a woman's life.  And only under
        those conditions," she said.
-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion