Science > Abortion > Does Flower Power think this boy should have been aborted?
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Steenkin Man" |
| Date: |
24 Jun 2004 04:28:00 AM |
| Object: |
Does Flower Power think this boy should have been aborted? |
Flower Power argues for the killing of unborn babies who have
disabilities.
This disabled boy got on the best-seller list before he died. He began
writing poetry while only three and eventually produced five volumes
that sold millions of copies.
The world is fortunate that a haggard old hippy didn't get her
knitting needles into him.
Story:
US child poet dies after illness
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3833573.stm
--
num tibi mentireris?
.
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 12:02:04 AM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042156112502%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <JsWdnRW4n7BoCn7dRVn-vA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042146382672%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <2MednVn5a6VkCH7dRVn-iQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042138434152%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <PcudnVyVvpOBCH7dRVn-uA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042135081246%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <RcidnQ4CZY_NDn7dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
You need to get a life Barnes..seriously. I know you are
lonely
and
begging
for attention.
You lied, you couldn't back up your lies, I asked you a key
question..you
realized if you answered it
you could be in a lot of trouble..
Back that up. What question and what "trouble?"
So you, David Barnes from California who claims to be a lawyer
did
receive
an email from Cpl. Robert Heishmans supervisor from Delaware
Department
of
Corrections, and you are claiming that the person or persons
whom
you
received an email from gave
you details regarding Cpl. Robert Heishman from the Delaware
Department
of
Corrections.
Is this correct?
I've told you. YES. Why not ask me again?
So you are admitting that a Delaware Department of Corrections
administrator
has violated Delaware Merit Rules.
I have one supervisor. And with your admission I can proceed to
press
charges with your admission above.
Against who, *****?
Against my supervisor...I have your admission...that was all I needed.
You admitted my supervisor violated Department policy and the Merit
Rules.
Gee. Yeah. Good point. Don't give up your day job, dipshit.
I am not the one who may have to worry about their job.
You might..:o)
Besides, you just told us about YOUR supervisor
(as you have in the past, many times...)
.
And I also called your bluff on the address claim you
made...you
couldn't
produce there either.
I have it. And much more. (Your address is only a part of
it...)
You don't have it, I called your bluff...and that is that...end
of
story.
Dream on.
I called your bluff, you ran...that is that..end of story.
Is that what you do at work, too. Hide while the other guards do the
work and then tell everyone how brave you are?
What I do at work is none of your concern...you just keep stacking those
boxes stockboy.
Back to this again?
Back to what again?
You just claimed to admit that you believe I am a
lawyer who is speaking with your supervisor.
No, I never said I believe you are a lawyer.
I was told to ask you a specific question.
I asked it. Now, if ASCME officials choose to persue you, that is their
choice.
If you are a lawyer, which I know you are not, they will go through the Bar
Association.
I am sure that if you were a real lawyer, they would not be pleased you lied
about state officials.
I called your bluff, you ran away, end of story.
Big talker... <Yawn>
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 12:01:48 AM |
|
|
In article <FvednUxUh-WxB37dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042156112502%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <JsWdnRW4n7BoCn7dRVn-vA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042146382672%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <2MednVn5a6VkCH7dRVn-iQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042138434152%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <PcudnVyVvpOBCH7dRVn-uA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042135081246%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <RcidnQ4CZY_NDn7dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
You need to get a life Barnes..seriously. I know you are
lonely
and
begging
for attention.
You lied, you couldn't back up your lies, I asked you a key
question..you
realized if you answered it
you could be in a lot of trouble..
Back that up. What question and what "trouble?"
So you, David Barnes from California who claims to be a lawyer
did
receive
an email from Cpl. Robert Heishmans supervisor from Delaware
Department
of
Corrections, and you are claiming that the person or persons
whom
you
received an email from gave
you details regarding Cpl. Robert Heishman from the Delaware
Department
of
Corrections.
Is this correct?
I've told you. YES. Why not ask me again?
So you are admitting that a Delaware Department of Corrections
administrator
has violated Delaware Merit Rules.
I have one supervisor. And with your admission I can proceed to
press
charges with your admission above.
Against who, *****?
Against my supervisor...I have your admission...that was all I needed.
You admitted my supervisor violated Department policy and the Merit
Rules.
Gee. Yeah. Good point. Don't give up your day job, dipshit.
I am not the one who may have to worry about their job.
You might..:o)
ROFL!!!!!!! How so?
Besides, you just told us about YOUR supervisor
(as you have in the past, many times...)
.
And I also called your bluff on the address claim you
made...you
couldn't
produce there either.
I have it. And much more. (Your address is only a part of
it...)
You don't have it, I called your bluff...and that is that...end
of
story.
Dream on.
I called your bluff, you ran...that is that..end of story.
Is that what you do at work, too. Hide while the other guards do the
work and then tell everyone how brave you are?
What I do at work is none of your concern...you just keep stacking those
boxes stockboy.
Back to this again?
Back to what again?
Not too bright, are you?
You just claimed to admit that you believe I am a
lawyer who is speaking with your supervisor.
No, I never said I believe you are a lawyer.
I see. So why did you ask and when I said "yes" go nuts?
I was told to ask you a specific question.
***** you. Even you wouldn't be childish enough to tell someone how you
act.
I asked it. Now, if ASCME officials choose to persue you, that is their
choice.
Pursue me for what? LOL!
If you are a lawyer, which I know you are not, they will go through the Bar
Association.
I am sure that if you were a real lawyer, they would not be pleased you lied
about state officials.
I never lied.
I called your bluff, you ran away, end of story.
Big talker... <Yawn>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 12:07:55 AM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042201482743%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <FvednUxUh-WxB37dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042156112502%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <JsWdnRW4n7BoCn7dRVn-vA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042146382672%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <2MednVn5a6VkCH7dRVn-iQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042138434152%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <PcudnVyVvpOBCH7dRVn-uA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in
message
news:300620042135081246%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <RcidnQ4CZY_NDn7dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
You need to get a life Barnes..seriously. I know you
are
lonely
and
begging
for attention.
You lied, you couldn't back up your lies, I asked you a
key
question..you
realized if you answered it
you could be in a lot of trouble..
Back that up. What question and what "trouble?"
So you, David Barnes from California who claims to be a
lawyer
did
receive
an email from Cpl. Robert Heishmans supervisor from Delaware
Department
of
Corrections, and you are claiming that the person or persons
whom
you
received an email from gave
you details regarding Cpl. Robert Heishman from the Delaware
Department
of
Corrections.
Is this correct?
I've told you. YES. Why not ask me again?
So you are admitting that a Delaware Department of Corrections
administrator
has violated Delaware Merit Rules.
I have one supervisor. And with your admission I can proceed to
press
charges with your admission above.
Against who, *****?
Against my supervisor...I have your admission...that was all I
needed.
You admitted my supervisor violated Department policy and the Merit
Rules.
Gee. Yeah. Good point. Don't give up your day job, dipshit.
I am not the one who may have to worry about their job.
You might..:o)
ROFL!!!!!!! How so?
Just hold on to that thought for a while..:o)
You lied about a state official...that isn't smart.
And I have your admission to it as well.
Besides, you just told us about YOUR supervisor
(as you have in the past, many times...)
.
And I also called your bluff on the address claim you
made...you
couldn't
produce there either.
I have it. And much more. (Your address is only a part
of
it...)
You don't have it, I called your bluff...and that is
that...end
of
story.
Dream on.
I called your bluff, you ran...that is that..end of story.
Is that what you do at work, too. Hide while the other guards do
the
work and then tell everyone how brave you are?
What I do at work is none of your concern...you just keep stacking
those
boxes stockboy.
Back to this again?
Back to what again?
Not too bright, are you?
You just claimed to admit that you believe I am a
lawyer who is speaking with your supervisor.
No, I never said I believe you are a lawyer.
I see. So why did you ask and when I said "yes" go nuts?
I was told to ask you a specific question.
***** you. Even you wouldn't be childish enough to tell someone how you
act.
I asked it. Now, if ASCME officials choose to persue you, that is their
choice.
Pursue me for what? LOL!
If you are a lawyer, which I know you are not, they will go through the
Bar
Association.
I am sure that if you were a real lawyer, they would not be pleased you
lied
about state officials.
I never lied.
What a pity...Barnes actually believes his own lies now...serious sign of
mental degradation.
tsk..tsk..tsk
You had your chance to prove your claims...you were not able too. Now I
have your admission that you had a state official give you information about
me, without my knowledge.
That would be a violation of Department Policy and the Delaware Merity
Rules. My supervisor could be fired for this.
But I will let my supervisor worry about that. I got your admission...that
was all I needed.
Of course you will never be able to provide proof..you can't prove a lie.
I called your bluff, you ran away, end of story.
Big talker... <Yawn>
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 12:08:38 AM |
|
|
In article <Tpadne0xhNcXBn7dRVn-sw@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042201482743%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <FvednUxUh-WxB37dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042156112502%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <JsWdnRW4n7BoCn7dRVn-vA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042146382672%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <2MednVn5a6VkCH7dRVn-iQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042138434152%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <PcudnVyVvpOBCH7dRVn-uA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in
message
news:300620042135081246%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <RcidnQ4CZY_NDn7dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
You need to get a life Barnes..seriously. I know you
are
lonely
and
begging
for attention.
You lied, you couldn't back up your lies, I asked you a
key
question..you
realized if you answered it
you could be in a lot of trouble..
Back that up. What question and what "trouble?"
So you, David Barnes from California who claims to be a
lawyer
did
receive
an email from Cpl. Robert Heishmans supervisor from Delaware
Department
of
Corrections, and you are claiming that the person or persons
whom
you
received an email from gave
you details regarding Cpl. Robert Heishman from the Delaware
Department
of
Corrections.
Is this correct?
I've told you. YES. Why not ask me again?
So you are admitting that a Delaware Department of Corrections
administrator
has violated Delaware Merit Rules.
I have one supervisor. And with your admission I can proceed to
press
charges with your admission above.
Against who, *****?
Against my supervisor...I have your admission...that was all I
needed.
You admitted my supervisor violated Department policy and the Merit
Rules.
Gee. Yeah. Good point. Don't give up your day job, dipshit.
I am not the one who may have to worry about their job.
You might..:o)
ROFL!!!!!!! How so?
Just hold on to that thought for a while..:o)
You lied about a state official...that isn't smart.
What was the lie, dim bulb? And why isn't that smart (like you'd know.)
And I have your admission to it as well.
Come on, *****. Do better than this. Christ! Could you be anymore
pathetic?
Besides, you just told us about YOUR supervisor
(as you have in the past, many times...)
.
And I also called your bluff on the address claim you
made...you
couldn't
produce there either.
I have it. And much more. (Your address is only a part
of
it...)
You don't have it, I called your bluff...and that is
that...end
of
story.
Dream on.
I called your bluff, you ran...that is that..end of story.
Is that what you do at work, too. Hide while the other guards do
the
work and then tell everyone how brave you are?
What I do at work is none of your concern...you just keep stacking
those
boxes stockboy.
Back to this again?
Back to what again?
Not too bright, are you?
You just claimed to admit that you believe I am a
lawyer who is speaking with your supervisor.
No, I never said I believe you are a lawyer.
I see. So why did you ask and when I said "yes" go nuts?
I was told to ask you a specific question.
***** you. Even you wouldn't be childish enough to tell someone how you
act.
I asked it. Now, if ASCME officials choose to persue you, that is their
choice.
Pursue me for what? LOL!
If you are a lawyer, which I know you are not, they will go through the
Bar
Association.
I am sure that if you were a real lawyer, they would not be pleased you
lied
about state officials.
I never lied.
What a pity...Barnes actually believes his own lies now...serious sign of
mental degradation.
tsk..tsk..tsk
You had your chance to prove your claims...you were not able too. Now I
have your admission that you had a state official give you information about
me, without my knowledge.
You have been telling me about your supervisor for months.
That would be a violation of Department Policy and the Delaware Merity
Rules. My supervisor could be fired for this.
Go for it. I think he's like to see you try.
But I will let my supervisor worry about that. I got your admission...that
was all I needed.
Are you really this nuts?
Of course you will never be able to provide proof..you can't prove a lie.
Who care what you CLAIM to believe? You know the truth, as do I.
I called your bluff, you ran away, end of story.
Big talker... <Yawn>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 12:14:47 AM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042208387351%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <Tpadne0xhNcXBn7dRVn-sw@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042201482743%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <FvednUxUh-WxB37dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042156112502%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <JsWdnRW4n7BoCn7dRVn-vA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042146382672%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <2MednVn5a6VkCH7dRVn-iQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in
message
news:300620042138434152%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <PcudnVyVvpOBCH7dRVn-uA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in
message
news:300620042135081246%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
In article <RcidnQ4CZY_NDn7dRVn-hQ@comcast.com>,
Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
You need to get a life Barnes..seriously. I know
you
are
lonely
and
begging
for attention.
You lied, you couldn't back up your lies, I asked
you a
key
question..you
realized if you answered it
you could be in a lot of trouble..
Back that up. What question and what "trouble?"
So you, David Barnes from California who claims to be a
lawyer
did
receive
an email from Cpl. Robert Heishmans supervisor from
Delaware
Department
of
Corrections, and you are claiming that the person or
persons
whom
you
received an email from gave
you details regarding Cpl. Robert Heishman from the
Delaware
Department
of
Corrections.
Is this correct?
I've told you. YES. Why not ask me again?
So you are admitting that a Delaware Department of
Corrections
administrator
has violated Delaware Merit Rules.
I have one supervisor. And with your admission I can proceed
to
press
charges with your admission above.
Against who, *****?
Against my supervisor...I have your admission...that was all I
needed.
You admitted my supervisor violated Department policy and the
Merit
Rules.
Gee. Yeah. Good point. Don't give up your day job, dipshit.
I am not the one who may have to worry about their job.
You might..:o)
ROFL!!!!!!! How so?
Just hold on to that thought for a while..:o)
You lied about a state official...that isn't smart.
What was the lie, dim bulb? And why isn't that smart (like you'd know.)
And I have your admission to it as well.
Come on, *****. Do better than this. Christ! Could you be anymore
pathetic?
Besides, you just told us about YOUR supervisor
(as you have in the past, many times...)
.
And I also called your bluff on the address claim
you
made...you
couldn't
produce there either.
I have it. And much more. (Your address is only a
part
of
it...)
You don't have it, I called your bluff...and that is
that...end
of
story.
Dream on.
I called your bluff, you ran...that is that..end of story.
Is that what you do at work, too. Hide while the other guards
do
the
work and then tell everyone how brave you are?
What I do at work is none of your concern...you just keep
stacking
those
boxes stockboy.
Back to this again?
Back to what again?
Not too bright, are you?
You just claimed to admit that you believe I am a
lawyer who is speaking with your supervisor.
No, I never said I believe you are a lawyer.
I see. So why did you ask and when I said "yes" go nuts?
I was told to ask you a specific question.
***** you. Even you wouldn't be childish enough to tell someone how
you
act.
I asked it. Now, if ASCME officials choose to persue you, that is
their
choice.
Pursue me for what? LOL!
If you are a lawyer, which I know you are not, they will go through
the
Bar
Association.
I am sure that if you were a real lawyer, they would not be pleased
you
lied
about state officials.
I never lied.
What a pity...Barnes actually believes his own lies now...serious sign
of
mental degradation.
tsk..tsk..tsk
You had your chance to prove your claims...you were not able too. Now I
have your admission that you had a state official give you information
about
me, without my knowledge.
You have been telling me about your supervisor for months.
That is enough on this topic for now. I have our admission, it was all I
needed.
You had your chance to back up your claims in the past, I gave you plenty of
opportunity, and I even gave you permission.
You were unable to produce. Which I didn't expect you would anyway.
That would be a violation of Department Policy and the Delaware Merity
Rules. My supervisor could be fired for this.
Go for it. I think he's like to see you try.
But I will let my supervisor worry about that. I got your
admission...that
was all I needed.
Are you really this nuts?
Of course you will never be able to provide proof..you can't prove a
lie.
Who care what you CLAIM to believe? You know the truth, as do I.
I called your bluff, you ran away, end of story.
Big talker... <Yawn>
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 12:29:42 AM |
|
|
You had your chance to prove your claims...you were not able too. Now I
have your admission that you had a state official give you information
about
me, without my knowledge.
You have been telling me about your supervisor for months.
That is enough on this topic for now. I have our admission, it was all I
needed.
Let me help you and your "supervisor" with the law. The merit rules
apply only to you. And they aren't law. With regard to "lying to a
state official," why don't you tell us what law you are referring to?
(Because it doesn't exist.) And finally, Delaware laws are only good in
Delaware. No wonder you are a guard.
Now, run away, coward.
You had your chance to back up your claims in the past, I gave you plenty of
opportunity, and I even gave you permission.
You were unable to produce. Which I didn't expect you would anyway.
Are you honestly trying to claim you don't believe me when I say I have
spoken with someone who knows you? LOL!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 12:38:42 AM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042229429366%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
You had your chance to prove your claims...you were not able too.
Now I
have your admission that you had a state official give you
information
about
me, without my knowledge.
You have been telling me about your supervisor for months.
That is enough on this topic for now. I have our admission, it was all
I
needed.
Let me help you and your "supervisor" with the law. The merit rules
apply only to you. And they aren't law. With regard to "lying to a
state official," why don't you tell us what law you are referring to?
(Because it doesn't exist.) And finally, Delaware laws are only good in
Delaware. No wonder you are a guard.
Let me educate you on a few things.
Delaware Department of Corrections has policies.
One of those policies would prohibit ANY state official discussing ANY
issues or business regarding another state official, with a person who has
no business with the Department
without that persons knowledge and/or permission.
Merit Rules also cover this section as well.
Now, run away, coward.
You had your chance to back up your claims in the past, I gave you
plenty of
opportunity, and I even gave you permission.
You were unable to produce. Which I didn't expect you would anyway.
Are you honestly trying to claim you don't believe me when I say I have
spoken with someone who knows you? LOL!
If you had, you would have proven it a long time ago.
I have spoken also with your supervisor, which is how I know you are nothing
more than just a stockboy.
You came very close to getting fired last year. Something to do with you
calling off too many times abusing company
time. You had to beg for your job basically.
From what I was told about you, by your immediate supervisor is that you are
basically lazy and incompetent.
You recently applied for an assistant managers position but due to low
employee evaulation reports you were
denied.
You have also been requested to seek counseling for other problems you are
having.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 01:02:04 AM |
|
|
In article <7O-dnXjMh7wkP37dRVn-gw@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042229429366%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
You had your chance to prove your claims...you were not able too.
Now I
have your admission that you had a state official give you
information
about
me, without my knowledge.
You have been telling me about your supervisor for months.
That is enough on this topic for now. I have our admission, it was all
I
needed.
Let me help you and your "supervisor" with the law. The merit rules
apply only to you. And they aren't law. With regard to "lying to a
state official," why don't you tell us what law you are referring to?
(Because it doesn't exist.) And finally, Delaware laws are only good in
Delaware. No wonder you are a guard.
Let me educate you on a few things.
This will be good.
Delaware Department of Corrections has policies.
Right. And policies aren't law and they only apply to the Delaware
Department of Corrections.
One of those policies would prohibit ANY state official discussing ANY
issues or business regarding another state official, with a person who has
no business with the Department
without that persons knowledge and/or permission.
Bet you can't prove that, but so what?
Merit Rules also cover this section as well.
So what?
Now, run away, coward.
You had your chance to back up your claims in the past, I gave you
plenty of
opportunity, and I even gave you permission.
You were unable to produce. Which I didn't expect you would anyway.
Are you honestly trying to claim you don't believe me when I say I have
spoken with someone who knows you? LOL!
If you had, you would have proven it a long time ago.
I have spoken also with your supervisor, which is how I know you are nothing
more than just a stockboy.
Oooohhh! Now you are in trouble. You see, we stock boys have this
merit system that says whenever anyone speaks to one stock boy about
another stock boy, he can be fired, and so can the person speaking to
him. You are in deep ***** now.
You came very close to getting fired last year. Something to do with you
calling off too many times abusing company
time. You had to beg for your job basically.
Our merit system says you now owe me $100 for saying that. Are you
going to pay?
From what I was told about you, by your immediate supervisor is that you are
basically lazy and incompetent.
"Basically" as opposed top what?
You recently applied for an assistant managers position but due to low
employee evaulation reports you were
denied.
Damn! You DID speak to my supervisor!
You have also been requested to seek counseling for other problems you are
having.
I have to hand it to you. You really figured it out. ROFL!!!!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
01 Jul 2004 11:43:10 PM |
|
|
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042229429366%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
You had your chance to prove your claims...you were not able too.
Now I
have your admission that you had a state official give you
information
about
me, without my knowledge.
You have been telling me about your supervisor for months.
That is enough on this topic for now. I have our admission, it was all
I
needed.
Let me help you and your "supervisor" with the law. The merit rules
apply only to you. And they aren't law. With regard to "lying to a
state official," why don't you tell us what law you are referring to?
(Because it doesn't exist.) And finally, Delaware laws are only good in
Delaware. No wonder you are a guard.
Let me educate you on a few things.
You can't.
Delaware Department of Corrections has policies.
"Policies" are not "laws".
One of those policies would prohibit ANY state official discussing ANY
issues or business regarding another state official, with a person who has
no business with the Department
But you have MADE it people's business.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
02 Jul 2004 05:13:57 AM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<cc2p4u$ed$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
news:300620042229429366%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com...
You had your chance to prove your claims...you were not able too.
Now I
have your admission that you had a state official give you
information
about
me, without my knowledge.
You have been telling me about your supervisor for months.
That is enough on this topic for now. I have our admission, it was all
I
needed.
Let me help you and your "supervisor" with the law. The merit rules
apply only to you. And they aren't law. With regard to "lying to a
state official," why don't you tell us what law you are referring to?
(Because it doesn't exist.) And finally, Delaware laws are only good in
Delaware. No wonder you are a guard.
Let me educate you on a few things.
You can't.
Delaware Department of Corrections has policies.
"Policies" are not "laws".
Policies prohibit any state official to discuss ANY personal business
with a non state official. David Barnes could not have possibly
discussed any business with my supervisors as he claimed. And if it
was true, my supervisor would be severely reprimanded for doing so.
My supervisor is reading this with me as I am responding and he is
prepared to make a statement.
One of those policies would prohibit ANY state official discussing ANY
issues or business regarding another state official, with a person who has
no business with the Department
But you have MADE it people's business.
As I am typing this, my supervisor is looking right over my shoulder
and asked me to let him type this next section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: David Barnes
From: (I do not wish my real name revealed)
Date: July 2, 2004
Subject: Claims made by David Barnes
Mr. David Barnes,
I am his supervisor, and have been for the past year since he was
transferred to my unit.
I have read your comments and I am here only to set the record
straight.
I have never discussed anything with you. Department Policy would
prohibit me to discuss any subject matter with you in regards to
another state official. I would only be authorized to direct you to
the Human Resources department.
The only information you would be allowed to obtain is:
a) If he is or is not an employee for the Department of Corrections
b) His rank
Your statements that indicate you and I have had any conversation are
false.
I have never talked to you by voice or email.
This is the end of my statement....
(end of statement)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The above statement is from my supervisor. If David Barnes wishes to
confirm it was from him, David Barnes can leave a valid email address
and he will contact David Barnes.
If David Barnes is a lawyer, which I have found absolutely no evidence
to show that David Barnes is...I also plan on contacting the American
Bar Association and filing a formal complaint against David Barnes. I
have plenty of post where David Barnes has lied and also stated he is
an attorney.
I also have a few administrators willing to back me up on this
complaint as well.
If David Barnes is an attorney, he obviously doesn't value his
position very well since he has lied about Delaware Department of
Correction personnel.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-liar's argument killed? |
02 Jul 2004 11:03:25 AM |
|
|
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<cc2p4u$ed$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Let me educate you on a few things.
You can't.
Delaware Department of Corrections has policies.
"Policies" are not "laws".
Policies prohibit any state official to discuss ANY personal business
You're too often a liar for anybody to believe you, *****.
One of those policies would prohibit ANY state official discussing ANY
issues or business regarding another state official, with a person who has
no business with the Department
But you have MADE it people's business.
As I am typing this, my supervisor is looking right over my shoulder
and asked me to let him type this next section.
You lie so often and so consistently that nobody should believe
ANYTHING that comes from you.
Your word is worth NOTHING.
`
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-liar's argument killed? |
02 Jul 2004 11:12:02 AM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cc410d$cfe$1@bolt.sonic.net...
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in message
news:<cc2p4u$ed$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Let me educate you on a few things.
You can't.
Delaware Department of Corrections has policies.
"Policies" are not "laws".
Policies prohibit any state official to discuss ANY personal business
You're too often a liar for anybody to believe you, *****.
contact Delaware Department of Corrections and ask them..they will direct
you to Human Resources.
One of those policies would prohibit ANY state official discussing ANY
issues or business regarding another state official, with a person who
has
no business with the Department
But you have MADE it people's business.
As I am typing this, my supervisor is looking right over my shoulder
and asked me to let him type this next section.
You lie so often and so consistently that nobody should believe
ANYTHING that comes from you.
Your word is worth NOTHING.
And of course you snip and ignore everything else.
Contact Delaware Department of Corrections Administration building.
They will direct you to Human Resources and will tell you the same thing.
My supervisor read David Barnes comments very early this morning and typed
his own words
in this post....of course you snipped them due to your own dishonesty and
cowardness.
If you wish to talk directly to my supervisor, give me a valid email
address..I will pass it on to him.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-liar's argument killed? |
02 Jul 2004 11:33:04 AM |
|
|
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
One of those policies would prohibit ANY state official discussing ANY
issues or business regarding another state official, with a person who
has
no business with the Department
But you have MADE it people's business.
As I am typing this, my supervisor is looking right over my shoulder
and asked me to let him type this next section.
You lie so often and so consistently that nobody should believe
ANYTHING that comes from you.
Your word is worth NOTHING.
And of course you snip and ignore everything else.
Because I'm not interested in your fabrications and your lies.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-liar's argument killed? |
02 Jul 2004 03:25:24 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cc42nv$gc1$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
One of those policies would prohibit ANY state official discussing
ANY
issues or business regarding another state official, with a person
who
has
no business with the Department
But you have MADE it people's business.
As I am typing this, my supervisor is looking right over my shoulder
and asked me to let him type this next section.
You lie so often and so consistently that nobody should believe
ANYTHING that comes from you.
Your word is worth NOTHING.
And of course you snip and ignore everything else.
Because I'm not interested in your fabrications and your lies.
Because you are a snibbling coward and you think snipping makes the facts go
away.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-liar's argument killed? |
29 Jun 2004 08:34:44 PM |
|
|
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
Osprey
(For that matter, why are you whining at me, when you told me to "run
along"
not 24 hours ago? Having no short-term memory is a *****, isn't it?)
Run along now little doggie...I kicked you in this debate...I kicked you
to
the curb when you turned yellow in the other post.
Is this really the best you can do? Round around looking like a fool
and claiming people are "cowards?" What a pathetic little person you
are.
Lets you and I get back to our little discussion.
Since when do you "discuss" anything?
I have told you, you have my permission to release this so called
Get a life, *****.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-liar's argument killed? |
29 Jun 2004 08:42:17 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbt5bj$8l5$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
Osprey
(For that matter, why are you whining at me, when you told me to
"run
along"
not 24 hours ago? Having no short-term memory is a *****, isn't
it?)
Run along now little doggie...I kicked you in this debate...I kicked
you
to
the curb when you turned yellow in the other post.
Is this really the best you can do? Round around looking like a fool
and claiming people are "cowards?" What a pathetic little person you
are.
Lets you and I get back to our little discussion.
Since when do you "discuss" anything?
I have told you, you have my permission to release this so called
Get a life, *****.
You know David can't back it up either...
Well I already knew that..:o)
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elmo" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-liar's argument killed? |
29 Jun 2004 09:12:03 PM |
|
|
In article <-7ydneRn9PdqhH_dRVn-ug@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbt5bj$8l5$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
Osprey
(For that matter, why are you whining at me, when you told me to
"run
along"
not 24 hours ago? Having no short-term memory is a *****, isn't
it?)
Run along now little doggie...I kicked you in this debate...I kicked
you
to
the curb when you turned yellow in the other post.
Is this really the best you can do? Round around looking like a fool
and claiming people are "cowards?" What a pathetic little person you
are.
Lets you and I get back to our little discussion.
Since when do you "discuss" anything?
I have told you, you have my permission to release this so called
Get a life, *****.
You know David can't back it up either...
Do you now have to resort to trying to trick people into talking to you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-liar's argument killed? |
30 Jun 2004 08:29:27 AM |
|
|
"Elmo" <anto@sales.com> wrote in message
news:290620041912030718%anto@sales.com...
In article <-7ydneRn9PdqhH_dRVn-ug@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbt5bj$8l5$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <DumpBushInNovember@usa.com> wrote in message
Osprey
(For that matter, why are you whining at me, when you told me
to
"run
along"
not 24 hours ago? Having no short-term memory is a *****,
isn't
it?)
Run along now little doggie...I kicked you in this debate...I
kicked
you
to
the curb when you turned yellow in the other post.
Is this really the best you can do? Round around looking like a
fool
and claiming people are "cowards?" What a pathetic little person
you
are.
Lets you and I get back to our little discussion.
Since when do you "discuss" anything?
I have told you, you have my permission to release this so called
Get a life, *****.
You know David can't back it up either...
Do you now have to resort to trying to trick people into talking to you?
You do know you lie when you claim to want to know the truth and you do
support people who lie?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Somesappywriter" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
28 Jun 2004 06:16:36 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:04:11 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0wvzzv2.fsf@fnord.io.com...
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) writes:
Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:<szkwu1sqryp.fsf@fnord.io.com>...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbneun$d1t$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbmuuf$rsv$1@bolt.sonic.net...
[...]
Wrong, *****. That's NOT how it begins. In humans it begins
with
meiosys.
that is the creation of sex cells idiot.
A clue! ***** isn't as stupid as he pretends!
They alone do not create an
individual human being.
Neither does fertilization, MORON!
Yes, fertilization is the process that begins development of a
individual
human being.
...except when it doesn't -- ever hear of identical twins?
It all begins with fertilization.
Running away from your original claim, are you?
Not at all. It begins with fertilization.
It's right there:
"fertilization is the process that begins development of an individual
human
being".
Correct.
Or it could be dizygote twins or monozygote twins...
You said AN individual.
[...]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
28 Jun 2004 06:55:41 PM |
|
|
"Somesappywriter" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:2m91e0hn2pclvnquc7s2h95nvvg7ffq2rr@4ax.com...
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:04:11 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0wvzzv2.fsf@fnord.io.com...
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) writes:
Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:<szkwu1sqryp.fsf@fnord.io.com>...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbneun$d1t$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbmuuf$rsv$1@bolt.sonic.net...
[...]
Wrong, *****. That's NOT how it begins. In humans it
begins
with
meiosys.
that is the creation of sex cells idiot.
A clue! ***** isn't as stupid as he pretends!
They alone do not create an
individual human being.
Neither does fertilization, MORON!
Yes, fertilization is the process that begins development of a
individual
human being.
...except when it doesn't -- ever hear of identical twins?
It all begins with fertilization.
Running away from your original claim, are you?
Not at all. It begins with fertilization.
It's right there:
"fertilization is the process that begins development of an individual
human
being".
Correct.
Or it could be dizygote twins or monozygote twins...
You said AN individual.
Are you saying that twins are not individuals?
Your trying to sidetrack this issue simply because you and other
pro-choicers lose this argument
everytime isn't working.
Now you are trying to say that twins are not individuals.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Somesappywriter" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
28 Jun 2004 06:58:34 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:55:41 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Somesappywriter" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:2m91e0hn2pclvnquc7s2h95nvvg7ffq2rr@4ax.com...
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:04:11 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0wvzzv2.fsf@fnord.io.com...
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) writes:
Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:<szkwu1sqryp.fsf@fnord.io.com>...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbneun$d1t$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbmuuf$rsv$1@bolt.sonic.net...
[...]
Wrong, *****. That's NOT how it begins. In humans it
begins
with
meiosys.
that is the creation of sex cells idiot.
A clue! ***** isn't as stupid as he pretends!
They alone do not create an
individual human being.
Neither does fertilization, MORON!
Yes, fertilization is the process that begins development of a
individual
human being.
...except when it doesn't -- ever hear of identical twins?
It all begins with fertilization.
Running away from your original claim, are you?
Not at all. It begins with fertilization.
It's right there:
"fertilization is the process that begins development of an individual
human
being".
Correct.
Or it could be dizygote twins or monozygote twins...
You said AN individual.
Are you saying that twins are not individuals?
You words:
"Yes, fertilization is the process that begins development of a
individual human being."
Twins are not a solitary human being, AN individual. In fact, they do
not become human beingS until live birth has commenced.
Learn to read, Del. Tech. Failure.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
28 Jun 2004 07:04:36 PM |
|
|
"Somesappywriter" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:d1c1e0dui5ksr5an0fu1071anathm2ajha@4ax.com...
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:55:41 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Somesappywriter" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:2m91e0hn2pclvnquc7s2h95nvvg7ffq2rr@4ax.com...
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:04:11 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0wvzzv2.fsf@fnord.io.com...
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) writes:
Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:<szkwu1sqryp.fsf@fnord.io.com>...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbneun$d1t$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbmuuf$rsv$1@bolt.sonic.net...
[...]
Wrong, *****. That's NOT how it begins. In humans it
begins
with
meiosys.
that is the creation of sex cells idiot.
A clue! ***** isn't as stupid as he pretends!
They alone do not create an
individual human being.
Neither does fertilization, MORON!
Yes, fertilization is the process that begins development of a
individual
human being.
...except when it doesn't -- ever hear of identical twins?
It all begins with fertilization.
Running away from your original claim, are you?
Not at all. It begins with fertilization.
It's right there:
"fertilization is the process that begins development of an
individual
human
being".
Correct.
Or it could be dizygote twins or monozygote twins...
You said AN individual.
Are you saying that twins are not individuals?
You words:
"Yes, fertilization is the process that begins development of a
individual human being."
Are you saying that twins are not individuals?
Twins are not a solitary human being, AN individual. In fact, they do
not become human beingS until live birth has commenced.
Learn to read, Del. Tech. Failure.
By law they do not become "persons"
They are still, none the less, human beings.
Why are you claiming that twins are not individuals?
For one who calls others failures, you don't know the difference between
personhood and human being.
Go call Michael Moore...maybe he can help you...ROFL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bobs Boyfriend" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
28 Jun 2004 07:57:10 PM |
|
|
In article <vZCdnXBmQ8P4LH3d4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
By law they do not become "persons"
They are still, none the less, human beings.
Let's try this by extension.
Is Dolly a mammal? Dolly was cloned. She was not created by the process
of fertilization. At what point did the mammal exisit and at what moment
was there no live moment?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
28 Jun 2004 08:04:26 PM |
|
|
"Bob's Boyfriend" <together@wyoming.com> wrote in message
news:together-C7E932.20571628062004@nntp.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
In article <vZCdnXBmQ8P4LH3d4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
By law they do not become "persons"
They are still, none the less, human beings.
Let's try this by extension.
Is Dolly a mammal? Dolly was cloned. She was not created by the process
of fertilization. At what point did the mammal exisit and at what moment
was there no live moment?
apples and oranges again.
I am talking about how we are created naturally, you are talking about man
playing God.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bobs Boyfriend" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
28 Jun 2004 09:07:27 PM |
|
|
In article <WZ-dnVXVu_4BIn3dRVn-jw@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Bob's Boyfriend" <together@wyoming.com> wrote in message
news:together-C7E932.20571628062004@nntp.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
In article <vZCdnXBmQ8P4LH3d4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
By law they do not become "persons"
They are still, none the less, human beings.
Let's try this by extension.
Is Dolly a mammal? Dolly was cloned. She was not created by the process
of fertilization. At what point did the mammal exisit and at what moment
was there no live moment?
apples and oranges again.
I am talking about how we are created naturally, you are talking about man
playing God.
At what point did the mammal known as dolly existed.
Hey folks, wanna see an argument end really quickly.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Somesappywriter" |
|
| Title: Re: Wanna see a pro-aborts argument killed? |
28 Jun 2004 07:16:14 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 20:04:36 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Somesappywriter" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:d1c1e0dui5ksr5an0fu1071anathm2ajha@4ax.com...
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:55:41 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Somesappywriter" <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:2m91e0hn2pclvnquc7s2h95nvvg7ffq2rr@4ax.com...
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:04:11 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0wvzzv2.fsf@fnord.io.com...
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) writes:
Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:<szkwu1sqryp.fsf@fnord.io.com>...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbneun$d1t$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cbmuuf$rsv$1@bolt.sonic.net...
[...]
Wrong, *****. That's NOT how it begins. In humans it
begins
with
meiosys.
that is the creation of sex cells idiot.
A clue! ***** isn't as stupid as he pretends!
They alone do not create an
individual human being.
Neither does fertilization, MORON!
Yes, fertilization is the process that begins development of a
individual
human being.
...except when it doesn't -- ever hear of identical twins?
It all begins with fertilization.
Running away from your original claim, are you?
Not at all. It begins with fertilization.
It's right there:
"fertilization is the process that begins development of an
individual
human
being".
Correct.
Or it could be dizygote twins or monozygote twins...
You said AN individual.
Are you saying that twins are not individuals?
| | | | | |
