| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
12 Apr 2005 06:07:22 PM |
| Object: |
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
The Indiana House has amended Senate Bill 568 with TRAP (“Targeted
Regulation of Abortion Providers”) language that would subject abortion
clinics to politically motivated regulations not imposed on facilities
offering similar outpatient services. This bill would allow the State
Department of Health to adopt extensive requirements that a clinic must
comply with in order to obtain a license in the state. These provisions
could force many clinics to needlessly undergo extensive renovations, or
even close, in furtherance of the anti-choice strategy to create an
America where abortion is legal, but not accessible. S.B. 568 would make
it more difficult for women in Indiana to exercise their constitutional
right to choose abortion.
Now that S.B. 568 has been amended, it must be approved again by the
Indiana Senate. Your letters and phone calls to your state senators are
needed to prevent this harmful revised bill from becoming law. When you
contact your state senators, you should make some of the following
points:
- Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures provided in the United
States. The risk of a complication arising from a legal abortion is
minimal. Less than 1% of all abortion patients experience a major
complication. In comparison, a woman’s risk of death during pregnancy and
childbirth is eleven times greater.
- This bill could limit a woman’s access to safe and legal abortion care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering abortion care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in Indiana.
- Such onerous requirements are unnecessary because abortion clinics are
already regulated and in compliance with numerous safety requirements.
Physicians in Indiana are required to maintain professional standards and
complete continuing education courses. Clinics are required to comply
with federal requirements, as well as local building and fire codes.
Additionally, to ensure the highest standards of quality care, the
National Abortion Federation has established evidence-based Clinical
Policy Guidelines for abortion care, accessible at
http://www.prochoice.org/pubs_research/publications/clinical_policy.html.
The passage of S.B. 568 as amended could jeopardize the health of women
in Indiana. It is important for you to contact your state senator today
and urge them to oppose this bill.
References:
- See The Alan Guttmacher Institute’s “Facts in Brief – Induced Abortion”
(2003) at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html.
- In 2000, 93% of counties in Indiana had no abortion provider, and 62%
of women in Indiana lived in these counties. See The Alan Guttmacher
Institute’s “State Facts About Abortion: Indiana” at http://www.agi-
usa.org/pubs/sfaa/indiana.html.
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/webreturn/?url=/naf/issues/alert/?
alertid=7363576
.
|
|
| User: "wplanck" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
27 Apr 2005 05:30:38 AM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
The Indiana House has amended Senate Bill 568 with TRAP ("Targeted
Regulation of Abortion Providers") language that would subject abortion
clinics to politically motivated regulations not imposed on facilities
offering similar outpatient services. This bill would allow the State
What services are "similar" to abortion?
Department of Health to adopt extensive requirements that a clinic must
comply with in order to obtain a license in the state. These provisions
could force many clinics to needlessly undergo extensive renovations, or
even close, in furtherance of the anti-choice strategy to create an
America where abortion is legal, but not accessible. S.B. 568 would make
it more difficult for women in Indiana to exercise their constitutional
right to choose abortion.
Now that S.B. 568 has been amended, it must be approved again by the
Indiana Senate. Your letters and phone calls to your state senators are
needed to prevent this harmful revised bill from becoming law. When you
contact your state senators, you should make some of the following
points:
- Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures provided in the United
States. The risk of a complication arising from a legal abortion is
minimal. Less than 1% of all abortion patients experience a major
complication. In comparison, a woman's risk of death during pregnancy and
childbirth is eleven times greater.
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal abortion care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering abortion care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in Indiana.
- Such onerous requirements are unnecessary because abortion clinics are
already regulated and in compliance with numerous safety requirements.
Physicians in Indiana are required to maintain professional standards and
complete continuing education courses. Clinics are required to comply
with federal requirements, as well as local building and fire codes.
Additionally, to ensure the highest standards of quality care, the
National Abortion Federation has established evidence-based Clinical
Policy Guidelines for abortion care, accessible at
http://www.prochoice.org/pubs_research/publications/clinical_policy.html.
The passage of S.B. 568 as amended could jeopardize the health of women
in Indiana. It is important for you to contact your state senator today
and urge them to oppose this bill.
References:
- See The Alan Guttmacher Institute's "Facts in Brief - Induced Abortion"
(2003) at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html.
- In 2000, 93% of counties in Indiana had no abortion provider, and 62%
of women in Indiana lived in these counties. See The Alan Guttmacher
Institute's "State Facts About Abortion: Indiana" at http://www.agi-
usa.org/pubs/sfaa/indiana.html.
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/webreturn/?url=/naf/issues/alert/?
alertid=7363576
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
27 Apr 2005 04:34:52 PM |
|
|
In article <iRJbe.765$Eg.505@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>,
wplanck@indy.rr.com says...
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
The Indiana House has amended Senate Bill 568 with TRAP ("Targeted
Regulation of Abortion Providers") language that would subject abortion
clinics to politically motivated regulations not imposed on facilities
offering similar outpatient services. This bill would allow the State
What services are "similar" to abortion?
Any fairly routine, minor surgical procedures. The sort that take maybe
an hour or so, if that, in an out-patients department, and require (if
at all) maybe a day or two at most off work afterwards. Examples that
spring to mind include routine tooth extraction, vasectomy (?),
breaking/resetting a small bone, removal of small moles/cysts/boils,
stitching small wounds and sometimes removal of stitches, dealing with
ingrowing nails, some contraception insertions/removals, etc, etc...
All those and many more, including routine abortions, are very low risk,
and don't require complex regulations or facilities. In most cases they
could be handled by a qualified nurse etc - no need even for a doctor to
be involved except for supervision. Certainly they don't require the
premises to be equipped with much (if any) hi-tech gagetry such as
fully-equipped operating theatres, though presumably an emergency
referral arrangement would normally be in place with a local hospital
for the odd times that something unexpected happens.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
29 Apr 2005 05:57:27 PM |
|
|
A.) If you deny the fact that the unborn is a living human being,
please read some medical textbooks : ) It's got as much as you and I
do to keep growing and living (a.k.a nourishment). Here is what
happens in the first month alone...
Immediately upon fertilization, cellular development begins. Before
implantation the sex of the new life can be determined.
At implantation, the new life is composed of hundreds of cells and has
developed a protective hormone to prevent the mother's body from
rejecting it as a foreign tissue.
At 17 days, the new life has developed its own blood cells; the
placenta is a part of the new life and not of the mother.
At 18 days, occasional pulsations of a muscle - this will be the heart.
At 19 days, the eyes start to develop.
At 20 days, the foundation of the entire nervous system has been laid
down.
At 24 days, the heart has regular beats or pulsations.
At 28 days, 40 pairs of muscles are developed along the trunk of the
new life; arms and legs forming.
At 30 days, regular blood flow within the vascular system; the ears and
nasal development have begun.
B.) If you believe that killing a living human being, please do some
reconsidering.
C.) If you believe that the unborn are useless because of size, level
of dependence, degree of development, I will provide some analogies.
1.) Size - if we determine the unborn useless because of size, then
you and I are less valuable than Yao Ming because we are smaller in
size. Also men are larger than women... I don't think we'll need
anyone to argue that men are more valuable than women as I am sure no
one with a brain would agree with that. Just because the unborn are
small, does that mean that they are useless? I sure hope not because
then we can start killing toddlers and anyone else who has a growth
problem.
2.) Level of dependence - children are dependent on their parents
for food and a home. Does that make them useless or any bit less
valuable? The old are often dependent on someone to take care of them,
are they less valuable? So too, the unborn is dependent on its mother,
in the same way that many many others are.
3.) Development - we are all at different stages of development in
life, are those who are more developed more valuable than those that
are less developed? A child with a learning disability would be
subject to invaluablility if this were the case.
What gives a person value in life? If we are to attribute what is
valuable and what is not, dependent on our own beliefs, we will fall
again into the type of travesty of slavery, the holocoust and others.
If we deem which lives are worth living and which are not, what is to
stop us from becoming a ugenic society? In fact, this is the ideas
that Margaret Sanger based Planned Parenthood on, and they still
support her today. Sad isn't it? If the unborn is a human being, then
we have only one option... to protect it with the value of you and I.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
30 Apr 2005 01:36:00 AM |
|
|
<mark.fuhrman@gmail.com> wrote:
A.) If you deny the fact that the unborn is a living human being,
please read some medical textbooks : )
Since medical texts do not define what is or is not a human being that
would be a pointless exercise.
It's got as much as you and I
do to keep growing and living (a.k.a nourishment). Here is what
happens in the first month alone...
"Woman? What woman?"
[...]
What gives a person value in life?
Putting money in the plate every Sunday?
If we are to attribute what is
valuable and what is not, dependent on our own beliefs, we will fall
again into the type of travesty of slavery, the holocoust and others.
You could even end up treating pregannt women like animals and slaves,
forced to provide the use of their bodies for the benefit of others.
Oh, that's right, you already do.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
29 Apr 2005 10:36:36 PM |
|
|
wrote:
A.) If you deny the fact that the unborn is a living human being,
please read some medical textbooks : )
Legal codes would be better, since that is where "human being" is
defined/
It's got as much as you and I
do to keep growing and living (a.k.a nourishment).
Fine. Then it can do it without feeding off the woman without her
permission. She has the right to remove it and deny the use of her
body to it, just as any other human being does.
Here is what
happens in the first month alone...
Immediately upon fertilization, cellular development begins. Before
implantation the sex of the new life can be determined.
The woman decides that she does not want to remain pregnant, and
exercises her right to body autonomy and denies it the use of her body.
She takes steps to execute that choice. Now the embryo must breath
and metabolize its nourishment for itself without being about to rely
on any other being, just as all human beings do.
At implantation, the new life is composed of hundreds of cells and
has
developed a protective hormone to prevent the mother's body from
rejecting it as a foreign tissue.
Which means that it does not belong there. It is acting in a parasitic
manner, and the woman has the right to remove any parasitic organisms
from her body if she so chooses.
At 17 days, the new life has developed its own blood cells; the
placenta is a part of the new life and not of the mother.
At 18 days, occasional pulsations of a muscle - this will be the
heart.
So. According to you, it is a human being, which means that it has
been born, is alive, and human. That means that it does not belong
inside the body of another, and the host has every right to deny it use
of her body and get rid of it.
At 19 days, the eyes start to develop.
At 20 days, the foundation of the entire nervous system has been laid
down.
At 24 days, the heart has regular beats or pulsations.
At 28 days, 40 pairs of muscles are developed along the trunk of the
new life; arms and legs forming.
At 30 days, regular blood flow within the vascular system; the ears
and
nasal development have begun.
Your point? None of that gives the fetus any right to use the woman's
body without her express and on going consent.
B.) If you believe that killing a living human being, please do some
reconsidering.
That sentence makes no sense. And you are not talking about a human
being, you are talking about an embryo that is living in a parasitic
and detrimental manner with its host, i.e. the woman. And the woman is
not a slave, so she has the right to remove any parasitic organism from
her body. If you believe, erroneously, that a fetus is a human being
and has rights, then remember that the woman's rights to her own body
trump everyone else's, and she has every right to deny the use of her
body to anyone for any reason, and by force if necessary.
No matter how you slice it, the woman has the right to get an abortion
if she does not want to remain pregnant.
C.) If you believe that the unborn are useless because of size,
level
of dependence, degree of development, I will provide some analogies.
1.) Size - if we determine the unborn useless because of size, then
you and I are less valuable than Yao Ming because we are smaller in
size. Also men are larger than women... I don't think we'll need
anyone to argue that men are more valuable than women as I am sure no
one with a brain would agree with that. Just because the unborn are
small, does that mean that they are useless? I sure hope not because
then we can start killing toddlers and anyone else who has a growth
problem.
Never been an argument, except as a strawman as you are using it.
2.) Level of dependence - children are dependent on their parents
for food and a home. Does that make them useless or any bit less
valuable? The old are often dependent on someone to take care of
them,
are they less valuable? So too, the unborn is dependent on its
mother,
in the same way that many many others are.
Difference. A fetus depends on the woman to breath for it, digest and
metabolize food for it, get rid of its waste for it, and the embryo
TAKES what it needs from the woman's body if necessary, and harms her
in many other manners, all while fooling the auto-immune system of her
body to avoid being rejected for the parasitic organism that it is. No
human being needs to do any of that.
3.) Development - we are all at different stages of development
in
life, are those who are more developed more valuable than those that
are less developed? A child with a learning disability would be
subject to invaluablility if this were the case.
Human beings can breathe the atmosphere, so they are developed enough
in that manner. They can digest and metabolize their own food, so they
are developed in that manner. They do not live INSIDE a human being,
because they are human beings, and human beings do not live inside
other human beings.
What gives a person value in life? If we are to attribute what is
valuable and what is not, dependent on our own beliefs, we will fall
again into the type of travesty of slavery,
Which is what you seem to want to inflict on women, by taking away
their right to control their own bodies, and forcing them to suffer the
hardships and tortures of an unwanted pregnancy.
the holocoust and others.
If we deem which lives are worth living and which are not, what is to
stop us from becoming a ugenic society?
You obviously care nothing about the lives of women, since you desire
to demand that they suffer without recourse.
In fact, this is the ideas
that Margaret Sanger based Planned Parenthood on, and they still
support her today. Sad isn't it?
That people like you exist? Yes, it is.
If the unborn is a human being,
Which it is not.
then
we have only one option... to protect it with the value of you and I.
And that means that the woman has the right to get an abortion, since
she has the right to deny anyone and anything the use of her body and
its resources at any time and for any reason.
Unless, of course, YOU consider women to chattel and who's opinions you
do not consider worth considering.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
30 Apr 2005 11:59:48 AM |
|
|
In article <1114815447.046103.3710@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
mark.fuhrman@gmail.com says...
If you deny the fact that the unborn is a living human being
It isn't.
To qualify for the status of 'human being' it is necessary to have been
born... by definition.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
27 Apr 2005 09:49:33 AM |
|
|
wplanck wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
The Indiana House has amended Senate Bill 568 with TRAP ("Targeted
Regulation of Abortion Providers") language that would subject
abortion
clinics to politically motivated regulations not imposed on
facilities
offering similar outpatient services. This bill would allow the
State
What services are "similar" to abortion?
Most outpatient surgeries, since we are talking about medically.
Especially OB/GYN services for women.
Mark Sebree
Department of Health to adopt extensive requirements that a clinic
must
comply with in order to obtain a license in the state. These
provisions
could force many clinics to needlessly undergo extensive
renovations, or
even close, in furtherance of the anti-choice strategy to create an
America where abortion is legal, but not accessible. S.B. 568 would
make
it more difficult for women in Indiana to exercise their
constitutional
right to choose abortion.
Now that S.B. 568 has been amended, it must be approved again by
the
Indiana Senate. Your letters and phone calls to your state senators
are
needed to prevent this harmful revised bill from becoming law. When
you
contact your state senators, you should make some of the following
points:
- Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures provided in the
United
States. The risk of a complication arising from a legal abortion is
minimal. Less than 1% of all abortion patients experience a major
complication. In comparison, a woman's risk of death during
pregnancy and
childbirth is eleven times greater.
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
- Such onerous requirements are unnecessary because abortion
clinics are
already regulated and in compliance with numerous safety
requirements.
Physicians in Indiana are required to maintain professional
standards and
complete continuing education courses. Clinics are required to
comply
with federal requirements, as well as local building and fire
codes.
Additionally, to ensure the highest standards of quality care, the
National Abortion Federation has established evidence-based
Clinical
Policy Guidelines for abortion care, accessible at
http://www.prochoice.org/pubs_research/publications/clinical_policy.html.
The passage of S.B. 568 as amended could jeopardize the health of
women
in Indiana. It is important for you to contact your state senator
today
and urge them to oppose this bill.
References:
- See The Alan Guttmacher Institute's "Facts in Brief - Induced
Abortion"
(2003) at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html.
- In 2000, 93% of counties in Indiana had no abortion provider, and
62%
of women in Indiana lived in these counties. See The Alan
Guttmacher
Institute's "State Facts About Abortion: Indiana" at
http://www.agi-
usa.org/pubs/sfaa/indiana.html.
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/webreturn/?url=/naf/issues/alert/?
alertid=7363576
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
12 Apr 2005 06:42:17 PM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
The Indiana House has amended Senate Bill 568 with TRAP ("Targeted
Regulation of Abortion Providers") language that would subject abortion
clinics to politically motivated regulations not imposed on facilities
offering similar outpatient services. This bill would allow the State
Department of Health to adopt extensive requirements that a clinic must
comply with in order to obtain a license in the state. These provisions
could force many clinics to needlessly undergo extensive renovations, or
even close, in furtherance of the anti-choice strategy to create an
America where abortion is legal, but not accessible. S.B. 568 would make
it more difficult for women in Indiana to exercise their constitutional
right to choose abortion.
Now that S.B. 568 has been amended, it must be approved again by the
Indiana Senate. Your letters and phone calls to your state senators are
needed to prevent this harmful revised bill from becoming law. When you
contact your state senators, you should make some of the following
points:
- Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures provided in the United
States. The risk of a complication arising from a legal abortion is
minimal. Less than 1% of all abortion patients experience a major
complication. In comparison, a woman's risk of death during pregnancy and
childbirth is eleven times greater.
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal abortion care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering abortion care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in Indiana.
You don't like children?
- Such onerous requirements are unnecessary because abortion clinics are
already regulated and in compliance with numerous safety requirements.
Physicians in Indiana are required to maintain professional standards and
complete continuing education courses. Clinics are required to comply
with federal requirements, as well as local building and fire codes.
Additionally, to ensure the highest standards of quality care, the
National Abortion Federation has established evidence-based Clinical
Policy Guidelines for abortion care, accessible at
http://www.prochoice.org/pubs_research/publications/clinical_policy.html.
The passage of S.B. 568 as amended could jeopardize the health of women
in Indiana. It is important for you to contact your state senator today
and urge them to oppose this bill.
References:
- See The Alan Guttmacher Institute's "Facts in Brief - Induced Abortion"
(2003) at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html.
- In 2000, 93% of counties in Indiana had no abortion provider, and 62%
of women in Indiana lived in these counties. See The Alan Guttmacher
Institute's "State Facts About Abortion: Indiana" at http://www.agi-
usa.org/pubs/sfaa/indiana.html.
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/webreturn/?url=/naf/issues/alert/?
alertid=7363576
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
12 Apr 2005 07:23:34 PM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
12 Apr 2005 09:09:18 PM |
|
|
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation that has a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of AGE, RACE, and
GENDER!
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lefty" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
18 Apr 2005 10:45:03 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message news:<x9%6e.56666$vL3.56487@bignews4.bellsouth.net>...
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
Johnny screeched;
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Lefty replied;
This from the racist turd who called another poster a "jewboy" who was
afraid to get the Final Solution he supposedly deserves.
Your hypocrisy is the stuff of legend, you Nazi POS.
Johnny asserted;
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation that has a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of AGE, RACE, and
GENDER!
Lefty replied;
How does forbidding discrimination make unwanted pregnancy any more
bearable?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
13 Apr 2005 08:28:39 AM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would. You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda. I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife of nearly
20 years. But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred, even when
you know it's a lie.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation that has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker> Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people. You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you
really are.
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
13 Apr 2005 07:23:36 PM |
|
|
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me?
DAMN!
You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda.
FITS!
Yours doesn't and mine does.
LOL!!!!!!!
I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife of nearly
20 years.
Who cares?
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred, even when
you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation that has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people.
You understand very little.
You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you
really are.
You do that against yourself.
My words show me to be vastly superior to you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
13 Apr 2005 10:33:53 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal abortion
care. By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations
on clinics that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of
abortion practice, passage of this bill could result in clinics being
closed to women seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this
type of legislation could also discourage health care providers from
offering abortion care and exacerbate the provider shortage that
already exists in Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me? DAMN!
You post to a public newsgroup and demand that no one respond? No one will
accuse you of being overly modest.
You don't have any evidence that this is true, but you'll accept any lie
so long as fits your agenda.
FITS! Yours doesn't and mine does. LOL!!!!!!!
Fits are something you throw on a frequent basis, it would appear.
I've already told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife of
nearly 20 years.
Who cares?
You don't care about anything but your own insanity, Whacksky. (I've been
married for seventeen years and change. You're just frustrated because no
woman will get anywhere near you.)
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making false accusations
- you just continue to spew your hatred, even when you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
If that was true, there'd be no infants anywhere in your little county in
South Carolina.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation that has a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of AGE, RACE,
and GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
You're not going to get your last request, whatever it is. (You'll never be
qualified for a Blue Bell Moo-lennium Crunch.)
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already born people.
You understand very little.
You certainly don't understand anything beyond your insanity at all.
You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you really are.
You do that against yourself.
My words show me to be vastly superior to you.
....at being a whining psychotic, indeed.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 2, San Antonio 1 (April 10)
NEXT GAME: Friday, April 15 vs. Chicago, 7:35
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lefty" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
18 Apr 2005 10:47:56 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message news:<_Hi7e.76787$wo1.10706@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me?
DAMN!
You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda.
FITS!
Yours doesn't and mine does.
LOL!!!!!!!
I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife of nearly
20 years.
Who cares?
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred, even when
you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation that has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people.
You understand very little.
You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you
really are.
You do that against yourself.
Johnny snivveled;
My words show me to be vastly superior to you.
Lefty replied;
Only deeply insecure people need to assert their supposed superiority.
We can infer from this that you actually feel quite ~inferior~ to the
poster. Your feeling is justified.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
14 Apr 2005 09:22:03 AM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations
on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of
abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me?
DAMN!
Yes I am, and it really pisses you off that I keep exposing your
hatred.
You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda.
FITS!
Yours doesn't and mine does.
LOL!!!!!!!
Heh, as usual, you still have no evidence ot prove your claim. Keep on
lying christian hypocrite.
I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife of
nearly
20 years.
Who cares?
You apparently...
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred, even
when
you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
Then you'd better quit hating...
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation that
has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
More evidence that you're a complete idiot.
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people.
You understand very little.
Which means you understand even less, given that you think it applies
to unborn fetuses. No wonder you have no regard for the law, you don't
even understand it.
You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you
really are.
You do that against yourself.
My words show me to be vastly superior to you.
Only when it comes to your insanity...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
14 Apr 2005 01:02:48 PM |
|
|
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113488523.138091.126140@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated regulations
on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of
abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me?
DAMN!
Yes I am, and it really pisses you off that I keep exposing your
hatred.
Hatred of who?
LOL!!!!!!
I never killed any children or advocated killing them in utero.
You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda.
FITS!
Yours doesn't and mine does.
LOL!!!!!!!
Heh, as usual, you still have no evidence ot prove your claim. Keep on
lying christian hypocrite.
I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife of
nearly
20 years.
Who cares?
You apparently...
Why are you Pro-Choice?
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred, even
when
you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
Then you'd better quit hating...
I do NOT kill babies.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation that
has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
More evidence that you're a complete idiot.
LOL!!!!!!!
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people.
You understand very little.
Which means you understand even less, given that you think it applies
to unborn fetuses. No wonder you have no regard for the law, you don't
even understand it.
You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you
really are.
You do that against yourself.
My words show me to be vastly superior to you.
Only when it comes to your insanity...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
15 Apr 2005 09:56:20 AM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113488523.138091.126140@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated
regulations
on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of
abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed
to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type
of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists
in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me?
DAMN!
Yes I am, and it really pisses you off that I keep exposing your
hatred.
Hatred of who?
Women who are pregnant who want an abortion. How many times do I have
to say this to you?
LOL!!!!!!
I never killed any children or advocated killing them in utero.
Me either...
You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda.
FITS!
Yours doesn't and mine does.
LOL!!!!!!!
Heh, as usual, you still have no evidence ot prove your claim.
Keep on
lying christian hypocrite.
Gee, Johnny skipped right past this one. I guess he still doesn't have
any evidence to prove him claim.
I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife of
nearly
20 years.
Who cares?
You apparently...
Why are you Pro-Choice?
I am pro-choice because I don't believe that my morality should trump
the rights of others. I think abortion is a bad thing, however, that
doesn't mean I have the right to infringe on every woman's rights and
force her to live by my moral standards.
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred, even
when
you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
Then you'd better quit hating...
I do NOT kill babies.
Me either...
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation
that
has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of
AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
More evidence that you're a complete idiot.
LOL!!!!!!!
Gee, even more evidence...
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people.
You understand very little.
Which means you understand even less, given that you think it
applies
to unborn fetuses. No wonder you have no regard for the law, you
don't
even understand it.
You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you
really are.
You do that against yourself.
My words show me to be vastly superior to you.
Only when it comes to your insanity...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
15 Apr 2005 10:36:14 AM |
|
|
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113576980.768094.56400@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113488523.138091.126140@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated
regulations
on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of
abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being closed
to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this type
of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already exists
in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me?
DAMN!
Yes I am, and it really pisses you off that I keep exposing your
hatred.
Hatred of who?
Women who are pregnant who want an abortion. How many times do I have
to say this to you?
You are so sure of that yet it has no basis in reality.
There is a man involved in every pregnancy. Even artificail insemination
uses some man's sperm.
Your agenda to obfuscate and distract the attention away from the men who
are impregnating the women who procure abortions is another reason your
gender bias card is going to fail you when you are trumped with equal
rights.
The position if gender bias in abortion is unsupportable in the USA.
How long do you expect women to be your fodder for abortions while you deny
the truth that men are invoved in every pregnnacy?
Why do you play off abortion as if only women are involved?
LOL!!!!!!
I never killed any children or advocated killing them in utero.
Me either.
Why are you for it killing them in utero then?
..
You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda.
FITS!
Yours doesn't and mine does.
LOL!!!!!!!
Heh, as usual, you still have no evidence ot prove your claim.
Keep on
lying christian hypocrite.
Gee, Johnny skipped right past this one. I guess he still doesn't have
any evidence to prove him claim.
I have no need to prove anything to you.
I am not required to prove anything to you.
I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife of
nearly
20 years.
Who cares?
You apparently...
Why are you Pro-Choice?
I am pro-choice because I don't believe that my morality should trump
the rights of others.
You think this has to do with morality?
I thought you went by the law.
Why are you for laws which contradict other laws?
I think abortion is a bad thing, however, that
doesn't mean I have the right to infringe on every woman's rights and
force her to live by my moral standards.
Gender bias, again?
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred, even
when
you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
Then you'd better quit hating...
I do NOT kill babies.
Me either...
Yet, you support the activity by rallying for it.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation
that
has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis of
AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
More evidence that you're a complete idiot.
LOL!!!!!!!
Gee, even more evidence...
I am laughing *at* you.
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people.
You understand very little.
Which means you understand even less, given that you think it
applies
to unborn fetuses. No wonder you have no regard for the law, you
don't
even understand it.
You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you
really are.
You do that against yourself.
My words show me to be vastly superior to you.
Only when it comes to your insanity...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
15 Apr 2005 12:55:46 PM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113576980.768094.56400@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113488523.138091.126140@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in
message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and
legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated
regulations
on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of
abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being
closed
to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this
type
of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from
offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already
exists
in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me?
DAMN!
Yes I am, and it really pisses you off that I keep exposing your
hatred.
Hatred of who?
Women who are pregnant who want an abortion. How many times do I
have
to say this to you?
You are so sure of that yet it has no basis in reality.
Based on your postings here, I'm right on the mark. If that's not the
case, perhaps you should find a better way to express your true
feelings.
There is a man involved in every pregnancy. Even artificail
insemination
uses some man's sperm.
Your agenda to obfuscate and distract the attention away from the men
who
are impregnating the women who procure abortions is another reason
your
gender bias card is going to fail you when you are trumped with equal
rights.
The position if gender bias in abortion is unsupportable in the USA.
How long do you expect women to be your fodder for abortions while
you deny
the truth that men are invoved in every pregnnacy?
Why do you play off abortion as if only women are involved?
Is there a reason you're complaining about something that I've never
said? Or, are you trying to change directions again?
LOL!!!!!!
I never killed any children or advocated killing them in utero.
Me either.
Why are you for it killing them in utero then?
I'm not, why do you continue to lie about that?
.
You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda.
FITS!
Yours doesn't and mine does.
LOL!!!!!!!
Heh, as usual, you still have no evidence ot prove your claim.
Keep on
lying christian hypocrite.
Gee, Johnny skipped right past this one. I guess he still doesn't
have
any evidence to prove him claim.
I have no need to prove anything to you.
I am not required to prove anything to you.
Keep running away then. I don't care either way, however, don't get
upset when I continue to point out your unwillingness to support your
claims.
I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife
of
nearly
20 years.
Who cares?
You apparently...
Why are you Pro-Choice?
I am pro-choice because I don't believe that my morality should
trump
the rights of others.
You think this has to do with morality?
I thought you went by the law.
Why are you for laws which contradict other laws?
Which laws do you think I support that contradict one another?
I think abortion is a bad thing, however, that
doesn't mean I have the right to infringe on every woman's rights
and
force her to live by my moral standards.
Gender bias, again?
I can't help it your god made it so that only women can get pregnant.
It appears you wish to remove rights simply because women ovulate.
Based on your logic, we should deny women the right to have ovarian
cancer removed since it's a gender biases procedure. Or, perhaps we
can require men to stop having prostrate surgery since that procedure
would discriminate against women. Neither of these make any more sense
than what you're asking.
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred,
even
when
you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
Then you'd better quit hating...
I do NOT kill babies.
Me either...
Yet, you support the activity by rallying for it.
I don't rally for killing babies. And, no one I've ever met has
rallied for that either.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation
that
has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis
of
AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
More evidence that you're a complete idiot.
LOL!!!!!!!
Gee, even more evidence...
I am laughing *at* you.
Right back at ya...
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people.
You understand very little.
Which means you understand even less, given that you think it
applies
to unborn fetuses. No wonder you have no regard for the law,
you
don't
even understand it.
You just can't help but show the world what a dumbass you
really are.
You do that against yourself.
My words show me to be vastly superior to you.
Only when it comes to your insanity...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics! |
15 Apr 2005 03:13:23 PM |
|
|
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113587746.015291.274360@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113576980.768094.56400@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113488523.138091.126140@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113398919.905200.70170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113351814.839495.173320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in
message
news:Xns9636C289A8D6Ckeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
Oppose Targeted Regulation of Indiana Clinics!
Contact Your State Senators Today
<snip>
- This bill could limit a woman's access to safe and
legal
abortion
care.
By imposing unnecessary and politically motivated
regulations
on
clinics
that are irrelevant to the functionality and safety of
abortion
practice,
passage of this bill could result in clinics being
closed
to
women
seeking reproductive health care. Enactment of this
type
of
legislation
could also discourage health care providers from
offering
abortion
care
and exacerbate the provider shortage that already
exists
in
Indiana.
You don't like children?
You don't like women?
I also assume you are racist and into whoremongering.
Of course you would.
You;re still talking to me?
DAMN!
Yes I am, and it really pisses you off that I keep exposing your
hatred.
Hatred of who?
Women who are pregnant who want an abortion. How many times do I
have
to say this to you?
You are so sure of that yet it has no basis in reality.
Based on your postings here, I'm right on the mark. If that's not the
case, perhaps you should find a better way to express your true
feelings.
There is a man involved in every pregnancy. Even artificail
insemination
uses some man's sperm.
Your agenda to obfuscate and distract the attention away from the men
who
are impregnating the women who procure abortions is another reason
your
gender bias card is going to fail you when you are trumped with equal
rights.
The position if gender bias in abortion is unsupportable in the USA.
How long do you expect women to be your fodder for abortions while
you deny
the truth that men are invoved in every pregnnacy?
Why do you play off abortion as if only women are involved?
Is there a reason you're complaining about something that I've never
said? Or, are you trying to change directions again?
I never changed directions.
The Supreme Court changed direction in 1973.
Are you going to wake up and realize that it was NOT the people of the
United States of America that changed directions, and that it was an
unrepresentative, non-legislative, non-representative decision handed down
by the Supreme Court instead of a representative act to start abortion on
demand?
LOL!!!!!!
I never killed any children or advocated killing them in utero.
Me either.
Why are you for it killing them in utero then?
I'm not, why do you continue to lie about that?
If you are Pro-Choice, you are for the unqualified killing of humans in
utero via an illegal, gender-biased, unrepresentative, unconstitutional,
adjudicatory decision.
.
You don't have any evidence that this is true,
but you'll accept any lie so long as fits your agenda.
FITS!
Yours doesn't and mine does.
LOL!!!!!!!
Heh, as usual, you still have no evidence ot prove your claim.
Keep on
lying christian hypocrite.
Gee, Johnny skipped right past this one. I guess he still doesn't
have
any evidence to prove him claim.
I have no need to prove anything to you.
I am not required to prove anything to you.
Keep running away then.
Running away?
I don't care either way, however, don't get
upset when I continue to point out your unwillingness to support your
claims.
What claim(s)?
I've already
told you that I've only been with one women, EVER - my wife
of
nearly
20 years.
Who cares?
You apparently...
Why are you Pro-Choice?
I am pro-choice because I don't believe that my morality should
trump
the rights of others.
You think this has to do with morality?
I thought you went by the law.
Why are you for laws which contradict other laws?
Which laws do you think I support that contradict one another?
Maybe if you would read the various laws you would discover the laws which
are in opposition to one another..
I think abortion is a bad thing, however, that
doesn't mean I have the right to infringe on every woman's rights
and
force her to live by my moral standards.
Gender bias, again?
I can't help it your god made it so that only women can get pregnant.
Still holding onto gender bias?
Still wimping out?
It appears you wish to remove rights simply because women ovulate.
What rights?
How can it be right if a law which predates Roe V Wade forbids
discrimination on the basis of gender?
Based on your logic, we should deny women the right to have ovarian
cancer removed since it's a gender biases procedure.
Now, you act as if pregnancy is a disease.
Now, you act as if a necessary treatment is somehow similar to something
that you address with a gender-specific rights perspective.
And, where is the crime in treating women who have cancer?
The law says nothing about criminalizing legal activities on the basis of
gender, yet it does say that discriminating on the basis of gender is
illegal.
Or, perhaps we
can require men to stop having prostrate surgery since that procedure
would discriminate against women.
Sorry, but you are not considering this in light of the law.
Neither of these make any more sense
than what you're asking.
*****.
Criminalizing and discriminating are opposites.
But, that doesn't keep you from lying about me or making
false accusations - you just continue to spew your hatred,
even
when
you know it's a lie.
Hatred kills babies.
Then you'd better quit hating...
I do NOT kill babies.
Me either...
Yet, you support the activity by rallying for it.
I don't rally for killing babies. And, no one I've ever met has
rallied for that either.
You seem to be rallying in this newsgroup for killing unborn humans.
This issue is not the type where you can sit on the fence.
This issue requires you to be either for the law as it is now, or against
it.
There really is no in between in this matter.
There is very little NEED for abortion on DEMAND in a nation
that
has
a
Civil Rights Act which forbids discrimination on the basis
of
AGE,
RACE, and
GENDER!
<snicker>
Your last request is a snickers?
More evidence that you're a complete idiot.
LOL!!!!!!!
Gee, even more evidence...
I am laughing *at* you.
Right back at ya...
Apparently, you aren't aware that it only applies to already
born people.
You understand very little.
Which means you understand even less, given that you think it
applies
to unborn fetuses. No wonder you have no regard for the law,
you
don't
even understand it.
You just can't help but sh | | | | | | | | | | | |
