| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
29 Dec 2003 08:03:23 AM |
| Object: |
language lesson: pro-abortion |
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
the arguments in favor of the expulsion or termination of a fetus;
favoring the expulsion or termination of a fetus.
Some documentation of the useage of "pro-abortion" has been supplied by
your opponent on this thread
some documentation of common verbiage was supplied, that hardly confers
definition.
If you have some better documentation for your definition
see above
It would seem to me that the more recent innovation of the USE of
pro-abortion is the one currently touted by you
No, the above definitions are supplied from Websters Third New
Internationsl Dictionary from 1966. The definition of pro-abortion
supplied above is not the current usage, but one formatted PRIOR to the
ethical and legal debate surrounding this issue.
The dictionary definition (and it IS a definition) already supplied is
older.
Nope. The dictionary definition supplied by the original poster is a
current dictionary in which common verbiage has been construed as
definition. IT is the "current" usage of pro-abortion, but not the correct
one. I supplied above the correct definition of pro-abortion using the
accepted technique of breaking down the word into a prepositional prefix
and subject word. You can see what happens when that technique is
employed:)
Perhaps you'd care to explain WHY tried and true methods of conferring
defintion are now obsolete and replaced by definition as conferred by
common verbiage?
I go to "The Man":
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by
understanding."-Einstein
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
.
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 08:09:19 AM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break down the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It does NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed that
argument.
the arguments in favor of the expulsion or termination of a fetus;
favoring the expulsion or termination of a fetus.
Some documentation of the useage of "pro-abortion" has been supplied by
your opponent on this thread
some documentation of common verbiage was supplied, that hardly confers
definition.
If you have some better documentation for your definition
see above
It would seem to me that the more recent innovation of the USE of
pro-abortion is the one currently touted by you
No, the above definitions are supplied from Websters Third New
Internationsl Dictionary from 1966. The definition of pro-abortion
supplied above is not the current usage, but one formatted PRIOR to the
ethical and legal debate surrounding this issue.
Ahh!!
So we can use dates now and claim they will either validate or invalidate a
term.
The dictionary definition (and it IS a definition) already supplied is
older.
Nope. The dictionary definition supplied by the original poster is a
current dictionary in which common verbiage has been construed as
definition. IT is the "current" usage of pro-abortion, but not the correct
one. I supplied above the correct definition of pro-abortion using the
accepted technique of breaking down the word into a prepositional prefix
and subject word. You can see what happens when that technique is
employed:)
Perhaps you'd care to explain WHY tried and true methods of conferring
defintion are now obsolete and replaced by definition as conferred by
common verbiage?
I go to "The Man":
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by
understanding."-Einstein
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
From: "james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com>
References: <3fe79cee.29689603@netnews.mchsi.com> Message-ID:
<Xns945EDB74DA6D5keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 02:34:30 GMT
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:irydnUSAAK0Ro3OiRVn-gg@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945ED7B20EBE0keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:EMidnZl9Qt1ep3OiRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
Jimmy, are you pro-abortion?
you lied and falsly claimed i was (and that 5
others were too) in news:3E8EE004.3060101@mail.com
It is obvious that you want to claim you are not pro-abortion.
I said you were.
If you are not pro-abortion, very well I was wrong. I will not
say I lied because I didn't. A opinion is not a lie; however
sometimes opinions can be wrong.
So James Keegan, you are not pro-abortion and I misjudged you.
no i am not, and yes, you did.
thank you for correcting your often repeated false assertion.
From: "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 21:43:39 -0500
Message-ID: <1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com>
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945EDB74DA6D5keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:irydnUSAAK0Ro3OiRVn-gg@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945ED7B20EBE0keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:EMidnZl9Qt1ep3OiRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
Jimmy, are you pro-abortion?
you lied and falsly claimed i was (and that 5
others were too) in news:3E8EE004.3060101@mail.com
It is obvious that you want to claim you are not pro-abortion.
I said you were.
If you are not pro-abortion, very well I was wrong. I will not
say I lied because I didn't. A opinion is not a lie; however
sometimes opinions can be wrong.
So James Keegan, you are not pro-abortion and I misjudged you.
no i am not, and yes, you did.
Good, I am glad you admitted it
thank you for correcting your often repeated false assertion.
Not a problem.
I can not say that James Keegan has claimed he is NOT pro-abortion.
Pro-abortion means
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-abortion
pro-a·bor·tion (pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=proabortion
Main Entry: pro·abor·tion
Pronunciation: "prO-&-'bor-sh&n
Function: adjective
Date: 1972
: favoring the legalization of abortion
- pro-abor·tion·ist /-sh(&-)nist/ noun
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0572700.html
pro-a·bor·tion
(pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-abortion
pro-a·bor·tion (pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736813
pro-a·bor·tion
adjective
favoring legal access to abortion: in favor of open legal access to
voluntary abortion
Legalized means:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=legalized
le·gal·ize ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lg-lz)
tr.v. le·gal·ized, le·gal·iz·ing, le·gal·iz·es
To make legal or lawful; authorize or sanction by law.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/l/l0104500.html
le·gal·ize
(lg-lz)
tr.v. le·gal·ized, le·gal·iz·ing, le·gal·iz·es
To make legal or lawful; authorize or sanction by law.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
Main Entry: le·gal·ize
Pronunciation: 'lE-g&-"lIz
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -ized; -iz·ing
Date: circa 1716
: to make legal; especially : to give legal validity or sanction to
James Keegan has stated he is not pro-abortion. James Keegan has shown he
does not favor and/or support legalized abortion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 08:12:35 AM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:2aedna6hWPYRqG2iRVn-ig@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination
of a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
the arguments in favor of the expulsion or termination of a fetus;
favoring the expulsion or termination of a fetus.
Some documentation of the useage of "pro-abortion" has been supplied
by your opponent on this thread
some documentation of common verbiage was supplied, that hardly confers
definition.
If you have some better documentation for your definition
see above
It would seem to me that the more recent innovation of the USE of
pro-abortion is the one currently touted by you
No, the above definitions are supplied from Websters Third New
Internationsl Dictionary from 1966. The definition of pro-abortion
supplied above is not the current usage, but one formatted PRIOR to the
ethical and legal debate surrounding this issue.
The dictionary definition (and it IS a definition) already supplied is
older.
Nope. The dictionary definition supplied by the original poster is a
current dictionary in which common verbiage has been construed as
definition. IT is the "current" usage of pro-abortion, but not the
correct one. I supplied above the correct definition of pro-abortion
using the accepted technique of breaking down the word into a
prepositional prefix and subject word. You can see what happens when
that technique is employed:)
Perhaps you'd care to explain WHY tried and true methods of conferring
defintion are now obsolete and replaced by definition as conferred by
common verbiage?
I go to "The Man":
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak
minds." "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age
eighteen." "Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by
understanding."-Einstein
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: James now realizes he done the damage |
29 Dec 2003 08:22:44 AM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605DAA3633Dkeegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:2aedna6hWPYRqG2iRVn-ig@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination
of a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
the arguments in favor of the expulsion or termination of a fetus;
favoring the expulsion or termination of a fetus.
Some documentation of the useage of "pro-abortion" has been supplied
by your opponent on this thread
some documentation of common verbiage was supplied, that hardly confers
definition.
If you have some better documentation for your definition
see above
It would seem to me that the more recent innovation of the USE of
pro-abortion is the one currently touted by you
No, the above definitions are supplied from Websters Third New
Internationsl Dictionary from 1966. The definition of pro-abortion
supplied above is not the current usage, but one formatted PRIOR to the
ethical and legal debate surrounding this issue.
The dictionary definition (and it IS a definition) already supplied is
older.
Nope. The dictionary definition supplied by the original poster is a
current dictionary in which common verbiage has been construed as
definition. IT is the "current" usage of pro-abortion, but not the
correct one. I supplied above the correct definition of pro-abortion
using the accepted technique of breaking down the word into a
prepositional prefix and subject word. You can see what happens when
that technique is employed:)
Perhaps you'd care to explain WHY tried and true methods of conferring
defintion are now obsolete and replaced by definition as conferred by
common verbiage?
I go to "The Man":
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak
minds." "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age
eighteen." "Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by
understanding."-Einstein
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
James Keegan, knowning he just killed a argument used by pro-life, realizes
it, and cuts the post apart.
What James has cut, is below this line. The entire post.
Path:
internal1.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border1.nntp.a
sh.giganews.com!firehose2!nntp4!intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews
..com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 08:09:16 -0600
From: "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion
References: <Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166>
Subject: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <2aedna6hWPYRqG2iRVn-ig@comcast.com>
Lines: 292
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.34.53.121
X-Trace:
sv3-nmP4U1zpRSwuOPonN2wPyr0WsvEZt/cusN0OgLDMt0tibjobxcTpEwNQyjMp1KckcNPQHZBD
qpibv/5!/sQADS3R5z0KVLzdq1dwD23vEbaTR1DDJhbU7kahD4wSeNhGaPZ2noua2kmq
X-Complaints-To:
X-DMCA-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
Xref: intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com talk.abortion:771334
alt.abortion:568404
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break down the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It does NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed that
argument.
the arguments in favor of the expulsion or termination of a fetus;
favoring the expulsion or termination of a fetus.
Some documentation of the useage of "pro-abortion" has been supplied by
your opponent on this thread
some documentation of common verbiage was supplied, that hardly confers
definition.
If you have some better documentation for your definition
see above
It would seem to me that the more recent innovation of the USE of
pro-abortion is the one currently touted by you
No, the above definitions are supplied from Websters Third New
Internationsl Dictionary from 1966. The definition of pro-abortion
supplied above is not the current usage, but one formatted PRIOR to the
ethical and legal debate surrounding this issue.
Ahh!!
So we can use dates now and claim they will either validate or invalidate a
term.
The dictionary definition (and it IS a definition) already supplied is
older.
Nope. The dictionary definition supplied by the original poster is a
current dictionary in which common verbiage has been construed as
definition. IT is the "current" usage of pro-abortion, but not the correct
one. I supplied above the correct definition of pro-abortion using the
accepted technique of breaking down the word into a prepositional prefix
and subject word. You can see what happens when that technique is
employed:)
Perhaps you'd care to explain WHY tried and true methods of conferring
defintion are now obsolete and replaced by definition as conferred by
common verbiage?
I go to "The Man":
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by
understanding."-Einstein
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
From: "james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com>
References: <3fe79cee.29689603@netnews.mchsi.com> Message-ID:
<Xns945EDB74DA6D5keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 02:34:30 GMT
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:irydnUSAAK0Ro3OiRVn-gg@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945ED7B20EBE0keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:EMidnZl9Qt1ep3OiRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
Jimmy, are you pro-abortion?
you lied and falsly claimed i was (and that 5
others were too) in news:3E8EE004.3060101@mail.com
It is obvious that you want to claim you are not pro-abortion.
I said you were.
If you are not pro-abortion, very well I was wrong. I will not
say I lied because I didn't. A opinion is not a lie; however
sometimes opinions can be wrong.
So James Keegan, you are not pro-abortion and I misjudged you.
no i am not, and yes, you did.
thank you for correcting your often repeated false assertion.
From: "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 21:43:39 -0500
Message-ID: <1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com>
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945EDB74DA6D5keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:irydnUSAAK0Ro3OiRVn-gg@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945ED7B20EBE0keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:EMidnZl9Qt1ep3OiRVn-iQ@comcast.com:
Jimmy, are you pro-abortion?
you lied and falsly claimed i was (and that 5
others were too) in news:3E8EE004.3060101@mail.com
It is obvious that you want to claim you are not pro-abortion.
I said you were.
If you are not pro-abortion, very well I was wrong. I will not
say I lied because I didn't. A opinion is not a lie; however
sometimes opinions can be wrong.
So James Keegan, you are not pro-abortion and I misjudged you.
no i am not, and yes, you did.
Good, I am glad you admitted it
thank you for correcting your often repeated false assertion.
Not a problem.
I can not say that James Keegan has claimed he is NOT pro-abortion.
Pro-abortion means
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-abortion
pro-a·bor·tion (pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=proabortion
Main Entry: pro·abor·tion
Pronunciation: "prO-&-'bor-sh&n
Function: adjective
Date: 1972
: favoring the legalization of abortion
- pro-abor·tion·ist /-sh(&-)nist/ noun
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0572700.html
pro-a·bor·tion
(pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-abortion
pro-a·bor·tion (pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736813
pro-a·bor·tion
adjective
favoring legal access to abortion: in favor of open legal access to
voluntary abortion
Legalized means:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=legalized
le·gal·ize ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lg-lz)
tr.v. le·gal·ized, le·gal·iz·ing, le·gal·iz·es
To make legal or lawful; authorize or sanction by law.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/l/l0104500.html
le·gal·ize
(lg-lz)
tr.v. le·gal·ized, le·gal·iz·ing, le·gal·iz·es
To make legal or lawful; authorize or sanction by law.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
Main Entry: le·gal·ize
Pronunciation: 'lE-g&-"lIz
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -ized; -iz·ing
Date: circa 1716
: to make legal; especially : to give legal validity or sanction to
James Keegan has stated he is not pro-abortion. James Keegan has shown he
does not favor and/or support legalized abortion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: James now realizes he done the damage |
29 Dec 2003 08:27:05 AM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:JrOdndqiKfMspW2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
[...]
rom: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
the arguments in favor of the expulsion or termination of a fetus;
favoring the expulsion or termination of a fetus.
Some documentation of the useage of "pro-abortion" has been supplied by
your opponent on this thread
some documentation of common verbiage was supplied, that hardly confers
definition.
If you have some better documentation for your definition
see above
It would seem to me that the more recent innovation of the USE of
pro-abortion is the one currently touted by you
No, the above definitions are supplied from Websters Third New
Internationsl Dictionary from 1966. The definition of pro-abortion
supplied above is not the current usage, but one formatted PRIOR to the
ethical and legal debate surrounding this issue.
The dictionary definition (and it IS a definition) already supplied is
older.
Nope. The dictionary definition supplied by the original poster is a
current dictionary in which common verbiage has been construed as
definition. IT is the "current" usage of pro-abortion, but not the correct
one. I supplied above the correct definition of pro-abortion using the
accepted technique of breaking down the word into a prepositional prefix
and subject word. You can see what happens when that technique is
employed:)
Perhaps you'd care to explain WHY tried and true methods of conferring
defintion are now obsolete and replaced by definition as conferred by
common verbiage?
I go to "The Man":
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by
understanding."-Einstein
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 10:08:34 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break down the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It does NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
That's quite an implosion you've had in the last week. Didn't you get
any good stuff for Xmas?
[snip]
---
"The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
-Pierre Trudeau, 1967
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 12:41:10 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:o9k0vvknm6kac8225rjvs2btk7s6raqcsu@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination
of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break down
the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It does
NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan
and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has
just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken
apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed
that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many of his
post.
That's quite an implosion you've had in the last week. Didn't you get
any good stuff for Xmas?
Did you thank your comrades?
[snip]
Snipping what you fear again
---
"The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
-Pierre Trudeau, 1967
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 02:40:32 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:QuKdnQQ6O7Xe6G2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many of
his post.
really?
"If you are going to make the claim, prove it. "
coward bobby heishman posting as osprey
news:8912d58d.0307090126.4a25ab87@posting.google.com:
*smirk*
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 02:43:09 PM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94609F7087898keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:QuKdnQQ6O7Xe6G2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many of
his post.
really?
"If you are going to make the claim, prove it. "
coward bobby heishman posting as osprey
news:8912d58d.0307090126.4a25ab87@posting.google.com:
*smirk*
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
Path:
internal1.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border1.nntp.a
sh.giganews.com!firehose2!nntp4!intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews
..com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 14:41:07 -0600
From: "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
Newsgroups:
talk.abortion,alt.abortion,alt.space.monkey.invaders,alt.spacebastards,alt.s
tartrek.vs.starwars
References: <1bf01442b10265557e57a0cdcc0564f3@news.teranews.com>
<85bcda7a0cee39c8caf486473e08aab2@news.teranews.com>
<6ed74dfa.0312231423.4cdad68a@posting.google.com>
<Xns945AB5C397421keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167>
<0b1c4845e5d02f3de80d970c284f5d8c@news.teranews.com>
<Xns945B83E40FF64keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167>
<f67ace560b96952813130639c250f6bc@news.teranews.com>
<Xns945D8D94266F4keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165>
<dcadf838d069c0f74726612c4d237f83@news.teranews.com>
<Xns94609D94E54CAkeegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167>
Subject: James Keegan's hypocrisy continues
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:41:11 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <f8CdnU7nGpv-DG2iRVn-jw@comcast.com>
Lines: 182
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.34.53.121
X-Trace:
sv3-ZMQQjY2xfAiluD+J9j2CAuhY+AkGWuYSK8iFgEPMBFuZ6X7eaHhQliu3krCgsVPzciNlFaze
uWaiv3T!apc8m9QuxsPDp33hjTslk/SUv0DCLuvkIvDtLlQQl6V8bmiw9Wdj1iCau9i1
X-Complaints-To:
X-DMCA-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
Xref: intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com talk.abortion:771504
alt.abortion:568530 alt.spacebastards:5824 alt.startrek.vs.starwars:455270
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94609D94E54CAkeegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167...
Snubis <snubis@wp.pl> wrote in news:dcadf838d069c0f74726612c4d237f83
@news.teranews.com:
On Fri 26 Dec 2003 01:55:08p, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com>
wrote in news:Xns945D8D94266F4keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165:
Snubis <snubis@wp.pl> wrote in
news:f67ace560b96952813130639c250f6bc@news.teranews.com:
On Wed 24 Dec 2003 12:57:56p, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in
news:Xns945B83E40FF64keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167:
Snubis <snubis@wp.pl> wrote in
news:0b1c4845e5d02f3de80d970c284f5d8c@news.teranews.com:
On Tue 23 Dec 2003 05:52:05p, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in
news:Xns945AB5C397421keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167:
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) wrote in
news:6ed74dfa.0312231423.4cdad68a@posting.google.com:
Snubis <snubis@wp.pl> wrote...
The Compleat List Of Liberal Debating Rules:
[--blah, blah, blah - so what?--]
Is this the same "Snubis" who made up Bible passages from
a non-existent "Book of Hezekiah"?
that would appear to be the he is busy now trying to find
out what the words contained in "abortion is legal" mean,
Get back to me when you figure out how to answer my
question.
you didn't figure out those words yet, eh? do you want me to
help you? if you'd prefer someone else help you, go ahead and
ask: almost anyone can.
I know what your words mean. They just didn't answer my
question.
so you really don't know what the words mean. is english a second
language for you?
Maybe you should improve your English so you can figure out what the
question was asking.
did you figure out what "abortion is legal" means yet?
Did you figure out that YOU stated you do not SUPPORT and/or FAVOR legalized
abortion?
How can you fight for abortion rights when YOU don't SUPPORT and/or FAVOR
its legalization?
Snubis or anyone else for that matter that clearly sees James Keegan is not
only a mental case, he is also a hypocrite and they can copy and save the
information below that proves it.
James Keegan below states he is not pro-abortion. Pro-abortion means one
who favors and/or supports legalized abortion. All sources are provided
below as well as James Keegans on words.
From: "james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com>
References: <3fe79cee.29689603@netnews.mchsi.com> Message-ID:
<Xns945EDB74DA6D5keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.165>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 02:34:30 GMT
James Keegan was asked by me:
So James Keegan, you are not pro-abortion
James Keegan replied
"no i am not"
Pro-abortion means
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-abortion
pro-a·bor·tion (pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=proabortion
Main Entry: pro·abor·tion
Pronunciation: "prO-&-'bor-sh&n
Function: adjective
Date: 1972
: favoring the legalization of abortion
- pro-abor·tion·ist /-sh(&-)nist/ noun
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0572700.html
pro-a·bor·tion
(pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-abortion
pro-a·bor·tion (pr-bôrshn)
adj.
Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736813
pro-a·bor·tion
adjective
favoring legal access to abortion: in favor of open legal access to
voluntary abortion
Legalized means:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=legalized
le·gal·ize ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lg-lz)
tr.v. le·gal·ized, le·gal·iz·ing, le·gal·iz·es
To make legal or lawful; authorize or sanction by law.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/l/l0104500.html
le·gal·ize
(lg-lz)
tr.v. le·gal·ized, le·gal·iz·ing, le·gal·iz·es
To make legal or lawful; authorize or sanction by law.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
Main Entry: le·gal·ize
Pronunciation: 'lE-g&-"lIz
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -ized; -iz·ing
Date: circa 1716
: to make legal; especially : to give legal validity or sanction to
James Keegan has stated he is not pro-abortion. James Keegan has shown he
does not favor and/or support legalized abortion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 03:10:28 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:w9-dnewXTK5EDG2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94609F7087898keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:QuKdnQQ6O7Xe6G2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many
of his post.
really?
"If you are going to make the claim, prove it. "
coward bobby heishman posting as osprey
news:8912d58d.0307090126.4a25ab87@posting.google.com:
*smirk*
well? since you can't prove your claim, what are you going to do now?
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 04:11:00 PM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9460A483B9204keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:w9-dnewXTK5EDG2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94609F7087898keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:QuKdnQQ6O7Xe6G2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many
of his post.
really?
"If you are going to make the claim, prove it. "
coward bobby heishman posting as osprey
news:8912d58d.0307090126.4a25ab87@posting.google.com:
*smirk*
well? since you can't prove your claim, what are you going to do now?
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
Put you back on ignore, like most people. And continue to make sure people
realize that I have proven it. You can rant and rave all you want, I will
not see it.
Buh Bye!!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 04:20:39 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:KcadnUpGhsftO22iRVn-jQ@comcast.com:
well? since you can't prove your claim, what are you going to do
now?
Put you back on ignore, like most people.
run away from your lies, coward bobby.
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
"I also have you on record for not supporting and/or favoring legalized
abortion as well."
-Robert Heishman lying as coward Osprey about Ray Fischer in
<ouednVs5R7Zs5m2iRVn-vA@comcast.com>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
30 Dec 2003 10:22:15 AM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in message news:<KcadnUpGhsftO22iRVn-jQ@comcast.com>...
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9460A483B9204keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:w9-dnewXTK5EDG2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94609F7087898keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.167...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:QuKdnQQ6O7Xe6G2i4p2dnA@comcast.com:
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many
of his post.
really?
"If you are going to make the claim, prove it. "
coward bobby heishman posting as osprey
news:8912d58d.0307090126.4a25ab87@posting.google.com:
*smirk*
well? since you can't prove your claim, what are you going to do now?
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
Put you back on ignore, like most people.
LOL!!!! The typical response from Asspry when he's been beaten. It's
certianly easier to ignore the truth. But, don't fear, he's admitted
that he still reads the posts of those he puts on ignore. And, like
the big ***** that he is, he'll respond to you through someone else's
posting.
And continue to make sure people
realize that I have proven it. You can rant and rave all you want, I will
not see it.
Buh Bye!!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
31 Dec 2003 07:29:02 AM |
|
|
(pr0r3p) wrote in
news:1686c3b8.0312300822.14a074a7@posting.google.com:
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<KcadnUpGhsftO22iRVn-jQ@comcast.com>...
Put you back on ignore, like most people.
LOL!!!! The typical response from Asspry when he's been beaten.
It's certianly easier to ignore the truth. But, don't fear, he's
admitted that he still reads the posts of those he puts on ignore.
And, like the big ***** that he is, he'll respond to you through
someone else's posting.
it doesn't matter whetehr coward bobby responds to my posts or not. i do
like the idea of readers having the chance to see what he posts so they
can judge him.
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
"I also have you on record for not supporting and/or favoring legalized
abortion as well."
-Robert Heishman lying as coward Osprey about Ray Fischer in
<ouednVs5R7Zs5m2iRVn-vA@comcast.com>
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 08:04:45 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in message news:<QuKdnQQ6O7Xe6G2i4p2dnA@comcast.com>...
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:o9k0vvknm6kac8225rjvs2btk7s6raqcsu@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination
of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break down
the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It does
NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan
and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has
just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken
apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed
that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many of his
post.
"many of his post"? Was it one post or more than one, you illiterate *****?
That's quite an implosion you've had in the last week. Didn't you get
any good stuff for Xmas?
Did you thank your comrades?
Why, did they forget to buy you Christmas gifts?
[snip]
Snipping what you fear again
You certianly have a swollen head, don't you?
---
"The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
-Pierre Trudeau, 1967
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 03:14:12 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 13:41:10 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:o9k0vvknm6kac8225rjvs2btk7s6raqcsu@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development; termination
of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break down
the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It does
NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan
and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has
just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken
apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed
that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many of his
post.
And how is that? How does anybody suddenly speak for me without my
say-so?
They don't, that's how.
That's quite an implosion you've had in the last week. Didn't you get
any good stuff for Xmas?
Did you thank your comrades?
[snip]
Snipping what you fear again
---
"The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
-Pierre Trudeau, 1967
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 04:11:49 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:n761vvslhcsml73kns1a796qobot7sqt41@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 13:41:10 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:o9k0vvknm6kac8225rjvs2btk7s6raqcsu@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development;
termination
of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break
down
the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to
be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken
the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It
does
NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan
and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has
just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken
apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed
that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many of
his
post.
And how is that? How does anybody suddenly speak for me without my
say-so?
Ask James, in many of his post he uses phrase like "everyone will agree"
"everyone knows"
That is speaking for all of you.
You can thank him.
They don't, that's how.
Well, I think you need to address that to James Keegan then.
That's quite an implosion you've had in the last week. Didn't you get
any good stuff for Xmas?
Did you thank your comrades?
[snip]
Snipping what you fear again
---
"The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
-Pierre Trudeau, 1967
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 04:22:32 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:o7adnSAuz409O22iRVn-hw@comcast.com:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:n761vvslhcsml73kns1a796qobot7sqt41@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 13:41:10 -0500, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote:
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in
many of his post.
And how is that? How does anybody suddenly speak for me without my
say-so?
Ask James,
"If you are going to make the claim, prove it. "
coward bobby heishman posting as osprey
news:8912d58d.0307090126.4a25ab87@posting.google.com:
coward bobby can't support his claim so he will run away again
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
"I also have you on record for not supporting and/or favoring legalized
abortion as well."
-Robert Heishman lying as coward Osprey about Ray Fischer in
<ouednVs5R7Zs5m2iRVn-vA@comcast.com>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lawrence E. McKnight" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 05:50:40 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 17:11:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:n761vvslhcsml73kns1a796qobot7sqt41@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 13:41:10 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:o9k0vvknm6kac8225rjvs2btk7s6raqcsu@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development;
termination
of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break
down
the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to
be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken
the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It
does
NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan
and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has
just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken
apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed
that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many of
his
post.
And how is that? How does anybody suddenly speak for me without my
say-so?
Ask James, in many of his post he uses phrase like "everyone will agree"
"everyone knows"
That is speaking for all of you.
Everybody knows you are a fuckwit, Osprey. Some of them just don't
admit it.
You can thank him.
They don't, that's how.
Well, I think you need to address that to James Keegan then.
That's quite an implosion you've had in the last week. Didn't you get
any good stuff for Xmas?
Did you thank your comrades?
[snip]
Snipping what you fear again
---
"The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
-Pierre Trudeau, 1967
-
Larry
(this space unintentionally left blank .....
make obvious deletion for email
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 06:00:43 PM |
|
|
"Lawrence E. McKnight" <lawrence.delete.mcknight@sbcglobal.delete.net> wrote
in message news:gdf1vv0mgpk1icfnk3u14qtvpq5n754l31@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 17:11:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:n761vvslhcsml73kns1a796qobot7sqt41@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 13:41:10 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:o9k0vvknm6kac8225rjvs2btk7s6raqcsu@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position,
or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development;
termination
of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break
down
the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right
to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to
favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims
to
be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has
taken
the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It
does
NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to
Keegan
and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he
has
just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be
broken
apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just
killed
that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many
of
his
post.
And how is that? How does anybody suddenly speak for me without my
say-so?
Ask James, in many of his post he uses phrase like "everyone will agree"
"everyone knows"
That is speaking for all of you.
what? nothing?
Oh well
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 04:52:56 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 17:11:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:n761vvslhcsml73kns1a796qobot7sqt41@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 13:41:10 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:o9k0vvknm6kac8225rjvs2btk7s6raqcsu@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position, or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development;
termination
of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break
down
the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims to
be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has taken
the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It
does
NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to Keegan
and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he has
just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be broken
apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just killed
that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many of
his
post.
And how is that? How does anybody suddenly speak for me without my
say-so?
Ask James, in many of his post he uses phrase like "everyone will agree"
"everyone knows"
That is speaking for all of you.
Wrong. Fact that you have to think so underlines the weakness of your
argument.
You can thank him.
They don't, that's how.
Well, I think you need to address that to James Keegan then.
He's never claimed to speak for me.
[snip]
---
"The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
-Pierre Trudeau, 1967
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 05:13:43 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:80c1vvkvai4grgj1orq83rf1k6j45kd4es@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 17:11:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:n761vvslhcsml73kns1a796qobot7sqt41@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 13:41:10 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:o9k0vvknm6kac8225rjvs2btk7s6raqcsu@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:09:19 -0500, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94605C1AE96F9keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166...
From: (LippysBak)
Subject: Re: Ray Fischer's Twenty Bucks per Month
Date: 1998/09/09
Message-ID: <1998090922140900.SAA12339@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
References: <35f6e640.19397642@news.teleport.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
X-Admin:
From:
Okay, HG, please explain where one can get a definition if the
dictionary only shows the USE of a word
by breaking down the word. Such as:
pro: the arguments or evidence favoring a proposition, position,
or
statement; taking the affirmative side; favoring
abortion: the expulsion of a fetus; arrest of development;
termination
of
a fetus
voila', you now have pro-abortion =s:
And thus, James Keegan gives the pro-life the opportunity to break
down
the
word pro-choice, and prove it doesn't mean to favor a woman's right
to
choose.
Thanks James.
When people break down the word pro-choice they see it means to
favor
selection. Thus, if a woman chooses abortion and the person claims
to
be
pro-choice, then technically they favor the choice to abort.
James does not realize yet, the damage he has just done to the
pro-choice/abort side. He shall as this post will prove he has
taken
the
word pro-abortion and broken it apart.
Pro-abortion, means to support and/or favor legalized abortion. It
does
NOT
mean one favors abortion over anything else; however, thanks to
Keegan
and
his recklessness in this post (primarily due to mental illness) he
has
just
hurt the pro-choice/abort camp greatly.
No one can argue any longer that the word pro-choice can't be
broken
apart.
Because James Keegan (self proclaimed speaker of all) has just
killed
that
argument.
And as soon as you can show that one person speaks for all, your
statement will make some sense. Until then, it doesn't.
You can thank James Keegan for that, he speaks for all of you in many
of
his
post.
And how is that? How does anybody suddenly speak for me without my
say-so?
Ask James, in many of his post he uses phrase like "everyone will agree"
"everyone knows"
That is speaking for all of you.
Wrong. Fact that you have to think so underlines the weakness of your
argument.
Well, as I always said. Birds of a feather flock together. Of course being
a hypocrite, you turn a blind eye.
You can thank him.
They don't, that's how.
Well, I think you need to address that to James Keegan then.
He's never claimed to speak for me.
Yea, if you say so.
Hey, did you make sure to thank your comrades yet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 08:35:39 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:HIadnWD8J92-KG2iRVn-vg@comcast.com:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:80c1vvkvai4grgj1orq83rf1k6j45kd4es@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 17:11:49 -0500, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Well, I think you need to address that to James Keegan then.
He's never claimed to speak for me.
Yea, if you say so.
shouldn't you apologize for having lied about that too, then?
--
"James Keegan has shown he does not favor and/or support
legalized abortion."
-coward bobby heishman lying as "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
news:1eednfCfCfJV3nOiRVn-hg@comcast.com:
"I also have you on record for not supporting and/or favoring legalized
abortion as well."
-Robert Heishman lying as coward Osprey about Ray Fischer in
<ouednVs5R7Zs5m2iRVn-vA@comcast.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: language lesson: pro-abortion |
29 Dec 2003 09:11:54 PM |
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
