"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkoe1tj9bh.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkpsmd7y19.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkmzhha5p1.fsf@eris.io.com...

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkhd7q8gif.fsf@eris.io.com...

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkzmlibeer.fsf@eris.io.com...

Adam H. <adam@mailinator.com> writes:

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 08:23:41 GMT, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:

"Gaia Barclay" <starchaser@inorbit.com> wrote garbage
Contribute constructively or shut your yap.

This is your idea of 'legitimate' discussion, is it?
Why don't you take your own advice, hypocrite?

I suspect it's because he believes he's not the same as those he's
preaching to.

You suspect wrong.

Maybe you should prove your assertion, for once.

Sounds like a genuine offer. What's your opinion of abortion laws in
say,
the U.S.?

Generally respectful of women's rights to make their own choices in the
first two trimesters, but under attack by busybodies who want to
disregard Constitutional limits so they can force women of any age to
obey their particular kinks...

In other words, "who gives a flying ***** about fetuses?". With that
introduction somehow I don't think you're capable of a rational
discussion on abortion. You're three counties right of Roe v Wade.

I've only been offering my opinions online for sixteen years and
change...and get your numbers straight: since the case that turned into
Roe v. Wade was first submitted in Dallas County, I'm *eight* counties
right of it - Harris County from Dallas County, via I-45, is the eighth
county you'll enter as you head southeast from little d. Meanwhile, I'm
concerned about the woman's right to make her own decisions without
busybodies like you sticking your needle nose into her business. She's
far more likely to know more about the factors affecting her situation
than you (or I) could ever hope to know. That's one reason I've been
pro-choice all these years, and will remain so the rest of my life.

I was going to ask if you have changed your mind at all after spending so
long in one newsgroup.

I trust you have your answer by now.

At this point in time, no. I assume you mean your position has remained the
same, but I am just assuming.

Commenting on what you said, don't you realize that some people look at a
pregnant woman and genuinely and deeply see one person making life and
death decisions for two, just as if she was making them for herself and a
child?

Some do...so? If it's not their fetus, it's not their business.

You state that as if it ought to be self-evident. What if it were newborn
babies we were discussing? I assume that you would *not* say "If it's not
their baby, it's not their business." Yet the difference between one and the
other is as little as a few hours of time passing, certainly a few days,
weeks or months. Why is it hard for you to understand how someone could see
this as making very little difference? Can you understand how they cannot
understand how you CAN think there is a difference? After all, as I am sure
you know, the killing of a fetus by anyone but a doctor under the explicit
orders of the mother is considered homicide in most places, even Canada
where abortion is about as close to on demand as it gets. This firmly
establishes the precedent in law that the fetus is considered to be a human
life, protected from everyone except it's own mother. How can you not find
this in principle at least a little curious, if not troubling?

That's something I learned early, thanks to an Appalachian upbringing
(while growing up in Oklahoma and then Texas).

Do all your moral ideals date back that far, have there been *any* major
changes in your worldview in that time?

If you've never looked at it that way, in fact if you spend a good portion
of your life deliberately NOT seeing it that way, you cannot understand how
abhorrent abortion can seem to that person. They are not overcome with a
desire to mess up or control a woman's life, they are overcome with concern
for the safety of a helpless unborn. I realize the following analogy is not
perfect, but nobody watches a woman kill a newborn child and admonishes
others to mind their own damn business. It's everybody's business. The
similarity cannot be so lost on you that you can't at least begin to grasp
how someone else might feel about abortion, particularly those done in
mid-term or later. It's not being a busybody to care about protecting
innocent human lives. Yes, a woman knows her situation, and yes a child
will change her life, but what other time in life do we choose to kill to
solve our problems? only when our very life is threatened.
Having said all that, perhaps you're right that a woman must ultimately
have the ability to make this choice, but is it right for her advocates to
lie and demean and howl at those of us who have a genuine moral questions?
I don't mind wild and nasty usenet in most cases, I'm no newbie, but this
subject demands respect and it's not getting it.

It's getting it - maybe not as much as it should, at times,

When I see people, so-called "men" like Ray Fischer, Attila, BOB, and others
here and the disgusting tactics they use, the blatant lies and ruthless,
mindless, verbal abuse against people who wish to question the morals that
allow the proliferation of abortion I am discouraged. These types seem to be
in the majority.

but it's still the general consensus in this country that abortion is a
woman's decision to make in at least the first trimester or so of a
pregnancy.

I hate the idea of abortion, yet I hate the idea of outlawing it almost as
much. The fact that it is the consensus is little consolation. I am close to
believing that a condition of ambivalent horror is the only rational way to
view this state of affairs.

The numbers bear that out: approximately eleven of every twelve elective
abortions done in this country are done in the first trimester, and as you
get later in the pregnancy, the electives vanish. The CDC can't find any
credible records of elective third-tri abortions, and there's a logic to
that: a woman who's carried that far has likely decided to see it through,
come what may.

That is a good thing, but the fact remains that a fetus in the eyes of the
law, and in reality, is a distinct and complete human whether it is five
months old or seven, whether the mother has the legal authority to kill it
or not.

Create a culture in which as few women as possible are induced to conclude
that abortion is their best option - without removing the woman's right to
make her own decision - and you'll see this issue disappear. I'd say that
would be a win on both sides.

The idiots here shouting that the fetus is nothing more than a wart or a
toenail, or that it's not a human, are NOT promoting honesty in choice, they
ARE attempting to promote the idea that abortion is an easy, convenient
option.

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkoe1tj9bh.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkpsmd7y19.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkmzhha5p1.fsf@eris.io.com...

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkhd7q8gif.fsf@eris.io.com...

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkzmlibeer.fsf@eris.io.com...

Adam H. <adam@mailinator.com> writes:

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 08:23:41 GMT, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:

"Gaia Barclay" <starchaser@inorbit.com> wrote garbage

Contribute constructively or shut your yap.

This is your idea of 'legitimate' discussion, is it?

Why don't you take your own advice, hypocrite?

I suspect it's because he believes he's not the same as those he's
preaching to.

You suspect wrong.

Maybe you should prove your assertion, for once.

Sounds like a genuine offer. What's your opinion of abortion laws in
say,
the U.S.?

Generally respectful of women's rights to make their own choices in
the
first two trimesters, but under attack by busybodies who want to
disregard Constitutional limits so they can force women of any age to
obey their particular kinks...

In other words, "who gives a flying ***** about fetuses?". With that
introduction somehow I don't think you're capable of a rational
discussion
on abortion. You're three counties right of Roe v Wade.

I've only been offering my opinions online for sixteen years and
change...and get your numbers straight: since the case that turned into
Roe v. Wade was first submitted in Dallas County, I'm *eight* counties
right of it - Harris County from Dallas County, via I-45, is the eighth
county you'll enter as you head southeast from little d. Meanwhile, I'm
concerned about the woman's right to make her own decisions without
busybodies like you sticking your needle nose into her business. She's
far
more likely to know more about the factors affecting her situation than
you
(or I) could ever hope to know. That's one reason I've been pro-choice
all
these years, and will remain so the rest of my life.

I was going to ask if you have changed your mind at all after spending so
long in one newsgroup.

I trust you have your answer by now.

At this point in time, no. I assume you mean your position has remained the
same, but I am just assuming.

Commenting on what you said, don't you realize that some people look at a
pregnant woman and genuinely and deeply see one person making life and
death
decisions for two, just as if she was making them for herself and a child?

Some do...so? If it's not their fetus, it's not their business.

You state that as if it ought to be self-evident. What if it were newborn
babies we were discussing? I assume that you would *not* say "If it's not
their baby, it's not their business." Yet the difference between one and the
other is as little as a few hours of time passing, certainly a few days,
weeks or months. Why is it hard for you to understand how someone could see
this as making very little difference? Can you understand how they cannot
understand how you CAN think there is a difference? After all, as I am sure
you know, the killing of a fetus by anyone but a doctor under the explicit
orders of the mother is considered homicide in most places, even Canada
where abortion is about as close to on demand as it gets. This firmly
establishes the precedent in law that the fetus is considered to be a human
life, protected from everyone except it's own mother. How can you not find
this in principle at least a little curious, if not troubling?

That's
something I learned early, thanks to an Appalachian upbringing (while
growing
up in Oklahoma and then Texas).

Do all your moral ideals date back that far, have there been *any* major
changes in your worldview in that time?

If you've never looked at it that way, in fact if you spend a good portion
of your life deliberately NOT seeing it that way, you cannot understand
how
abhorrent abortion can seem to that person. They are not overcome with a
desire to mess up or control a woman's life, they are overcome with
concern
for the safety of a helpless unborn. I realize the following analogy is
not
perfect, but nobody watches a woman kill a newborn child and admonishes
others to mind their own damn business. It's everybody's business. The
similarity cannot be so lost on you that you can't at least begin to grasp
how someone else might feel about abortion, particularly those done in
mid-term or later. It's not being a busybody to care about protecting
innocent human lives. Yes, a woman knows her situation, and yes a child
will
change her life, but what other time in life do we choose to kill to solve
our problems? only when our very life is threatened.

Having said all that, perhaps you're right that a woman must ultimately
have the ability to make this choice, but is it right for her advocates to
lie and demean and howl at those of us who have a genuine moral questions?
I
don't mind wild and nasty usenet in most cases, I'm no newbie, but this
subject demands respect and it's not getting it.

It's getting it - maybe not as much as it should, at times,

When I see people, so-called "men" like Ray Fischer, Attila, BOB, and others
here and the disgusting tactics they use, the blatant lies and ruthless,
mindless, verbal abuse against people who wish to question the morals that
allow the proliferation of abortion I am discouraged. These types seem to be
in the majority.

When I see people, so-called "men" like Ray Fischer, Attila, BOB, and others
here and the disgusting tactics they use, the blatant lies and ruthless,
mindless, verbal abuse against people who wish to question the morals that
allow the proliferation of abortion I am discouraged. These types seem to be
in the majority.

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote

"Dutch" <no@email.com> writes:

"james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote

"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:

This newsgroup is completely over-run by some very childish people
who have absolutely no respect for anyone else and enjoy lying.

so claims <snip>

If you can't be polite and constructive go away.

If you'd do as you demand of others, you'd have vanished some time ago.

The difference is, I am not *instigating* flame-wars, I am enduring a
barrage of insults until I finally say enough is enough. Tit-for-tat, if
you
know what I mean.

In other words, it boils down to you whining "he did it first!". How old
do
you claim to be?