| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Papa Jack" |
| Date: |
24 Apr 2004 11:35:42 AM |
| Object: |
Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
On April 25, 2004, the NY Times posted an article by Robin Toner
titled: "Abortion's Opponents Claim the Middle Ground." Go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/25/weekinreview/25tone.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5006&en=7371bcf08e9ab63d&ex=1083470400&partner=ALTAVISTA1
_____________________________________________________________________
Excerpts:
[...]
"Today, as they assemble on the Washington Mall, the
movement faces a far more complicated and in some
ways more challenging political landscape. The anti-
abortion movement is more confident, more sophisti-
cated and far more ensconced in the government,
with allies now in control of the House, the Senate
and the White House. Its legislative goals are incre-
mental, careful and popular with Americans who
would oppose an outright ban on abortion, even if
this agenda is considered by its opponents to be a
stealthy chipping away of rights. The anti-abortion
movement has, in many ways, become part of the
establishment.
[...]
"But President Bush, who opposes abortion except in
cases of rape and incest and to protect the life of
the woman, tried to defuse the fears of moderate
voters early on. He said that he did not believe the
country was ready for a ban, and talks more gener-
ally about creating a "culture of life."
[...]
"The current Congressional agenda of the anti-abortion
movement is a series of steps aimed at restricting abor-
tion and recognizing the "personhood" of the fetus.
Legislation already passed includes the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban Act, aimed at a procedure performed in
the second or third trimester, and the Unborn Victims
of Violence Act, which makes it a separate offense to
harm a fetus in a federal crime committed against a
pregnant woman....
[...]
"'I recognize this incremental strategy is not uni-
versally embraced in the pro-life movement,' Dr.
James C. Dobson wrote last year in a collection of
essays, 'Back to the Drawing Board: The Future of
the Pro-Life Movement.' 'Our goal must always be to
bring about a decisive end to this evil practice,
with public policy that matches public sentiment.'
[...]
"...But they find themselves fighting legislation
that, in and of itself, seems unobjectionable to
many moderates - among the voters and in Congress.
David O'Steen, executive director of the National
Right to Life Committee, asserted, "Fighting things
like the partial-birth ban shows an extremism that
the American public rejects."
[...]
"...Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster, said, 'The
percentage of people who say they're for the woman's
right to abortion at all times under any situation
is very small, as is the percentage who say women
should not have abortions for any reason.'
[...]
_____________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack comments:
This article is an accurate portrayal of the overall
Pro-Life strategy.
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression. This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
For now, we will chip away and educate.
.
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 03:18:03 PM |
|
|
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah. Those "Pro-aborts" need to get past the "euphemisms."
While we are at it, perhaps help those who insist on using proverbs to
begin to realize that a friend in need is a friend indeed and those who
use idioms in this "dog-eat-dog" world need to "come to grips."
This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
You mean that our "culture of death" consists of "chop shops?"
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
Oh! Right. "Abortion on Demand." (Which, as the USSC has stated,
doesn't exist.)
For now, we will chip away and educate.
For now you will propagandize to the simple minded. And the trend will
continue. Then, one day, just as with slavery, womans suffrage, child
labor laws, and all those other freedoms that conservatives opposed and
for which liberals fought, we will all look around and wonder how
anyone could be so callous as to deny people they basic freedoms and
rights. (And the conservatives will try to take the credit...)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 03:23:07 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Loose Cannon" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 04:20:37 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com...
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
I see Ostrich's reading comp is as deficient as ever. Apparently college
isn't taking.
As far as the "honest" nature of his creative snipping...nothing's changed
there, either.
"Where is there dignity unless there is honesty?"~Cicero
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 06:54:46 PM |
|
|
In article <FSAic.10498$e4.7538@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Loose Cannon <looseain't@this.com> wrote:
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com...
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
I see Ostrich's reading comp is as deficient as ever. Apparently college
isn't taking.
As far as the "honest" nature of his creative snipping...nothing's changed
there, either.
"Where is there dignity unless there is honesty?"~Cicero
Imagine what his day to day lide must be like.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MyTwoAngels" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 04:29:03 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:20:37 GMT, "Loose Cannon" <looseain't@this.com>
wrote:
[...]
I see Ostrich's reading comp is as deficient as ever. Apparently college
isn't taking.
Assuming he's still in attendence.
[...]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 09:02:18 AM |
|
|
MyTwoAngels <krisblakemy2babies@xmsg.spamu.com> writes:
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:20:37 GMT, "Loose Cannon" <looseain't@this.com>
wrote:
[...]
I see Ostrich's reading comp is as deficient as ever. Apparently college
isn't taking.
Assuming he's still in attendence.
[...]
That's assuming they haven't shown him the door.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 09:00:58 AM |
|
|
On 25 Apr 2004 09:02:18 -0500, Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote:
MyTwoAngels <krisblakemy2babies@xmsg.spamu.com> writes:
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:20:37 GMT, "Loose Cannon" <looseain't@this.com>
wrote:
[...]
I see Ostrich's reading comp is as deficient as ever. Apparently college
isn't taking.
Assuming he's still in attendence.
[...]
That's assuming they haven't shown him the door.
I think in his case especially they would have to do much more than "show"
him the door.
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 10:21:33 AM |
|
|
Galen Hekhuis <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> writes:
On 25 Apr 2004 09:02:18 -0500, Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote:
MyTwoAngels <krisblakemy2babies@xmsg.spamu.com> writes:
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:20:37 GMT, "Loose Cannon" <looseain't@this.com>
wrote:
[...]
I see Ostrich's reading comp is as deficient as ever. Apparently college
isn't taking.
Assuming he's still in attendence.
[...]
That's assuming they haven't shown him the door.
I think in his case especially they would have to do much more than "show"
him the door.
In that case, the picture of him that was at firststateforce.org was
evidently taken *before* they slammed the door on him...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "MyTwoAngels" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 10:37:51 AM |
|
|
On 25 Apr 2004 10:21:33 -0500, Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com>
wrote:
Galen Hekhuis <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> writes:
On 25 Apr 2004 09:02:18 -0500, Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote:
MyTwoAngels <krisblakemy2babies@xmsg.spamu.com> writes:
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:20:37 GMT, "Loose Cannon" <looseain't@this.com>
wrote:
[...]
I see Ostrich's reading comp is as deficient as ever. Apparently college
isn't taking.
Assuming he's still in attendence.
[...]
That's assuming they haven't shown him the door.
I think in his case especially they would have to do much more than "show"
him the door.
In that case, the picture of him that was at firststateforce.org was
evidently taken *before* they slammed the door on him...
The door slamming probably improved his appearance.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 11:47:21 AM |
|
|
MyTwoAngels <krisblakemy2babies@xmsg.spamu.com> writes:
On 25 Apr 2004 10:21:33 -0500, Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com>
wrote:
Galen Hekhuis <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> writes:
On 25 Apr 2004 09:02:18 -0500, Patrick Lee Humphrey <patrick@io.com> wrote:
MyTwoAngels <krisblakemy2babies@xmsg.spamu.com> writes:
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 21:20:37 GMT, "Loose Cannon" <looseain't@this.com>
wrote:
[...]
I see Ostrich's reading comp is as deficient as ever. Apparently college
isn't taking.
Assuming he's still in attendence.
[...]
That's assuming they haven't shown him the door.
I think in his case especially they would have to do much more than "show"
him the door.
In that case, the picture of him that was at firststateforce.org was
evidently taken *before* they slammed the door on him...
The door slamming probably improved his appearance.
Considering the number of times the door likely had to be slammed on him
before the picture was taken, I'm not sure I want to know what he looked like
before...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 06:22:07 PM |
|
|
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
You obviously do not read for comprehension. You clearly do not
understand the context in which Barnes used that term.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 06:52:19 PM |
|
|
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-C461B4.19220724042004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
You obviously do not read for comprehension. You clearly do not
understand the context in which Barnes used that term.
Oh, I can read very well, and I also know what pro-abortion means..unlike
many of you.
Question: How can you support a woman's right to make a choice that you
don't favor being legal?
That is, if you are claiming you are not pro-abortion
.
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 07:29:21 AM |
|
|
In article <ZpednaxKBtQKYBfdRVn-uw@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-C461B4.19220724042004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
You obviously do not read for comprehension. You clearly do not
understand the context in which Barnes used that term.
Oh, I can read very well, and I also know what pro-abortion means..unlike
many of you.
Question: How can you support a woman's right to make a choice that you
don't favor being legal?
That is, if you are claiming you are not pro-abortion
Huh? I favor choice and I favor legal abortions. I am not "pro-abortion"
because I do not favor abortion as a forced option. Somehow, I suspect
my response will go right over your head.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 07:54:32 AM |
|
|
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-2FCE99.08292025042004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <ZpednaxKBtQKYBfdRVn-uw@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-C461B4.19220724042004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa
Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
You obviously do not read for comprehension. You clearly do not
understand the context in which Barnes used that term.
Oh, I can read very well, and I also know what pro-abortion
means..unlike
many of you.
Question: How can you support a woman's right to make a choice that you
don't favor being legal?
That is, if you are claiming you are not pro-abortion
Huh? I favor choice and I favor legal abortions. I am not "pro-abortion"
because I do not favor abortion as a forced option. Somehow, I suspect
my response will go right over your head.
So you don't favor abortion being legal then.
After all, that is what pro-abortion means
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 10:25:45 AM |
|
|
In article <I_mdnaAg5pBxKRbdRVn-gw@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-2FCE99.08292025042004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <ZpednaxKBtQKYBfdRVn-uw@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-C461B4.19220724042004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa
Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
You obviously do not read for comprehension. You clearly do not
understand the context in which Barnes used that term.
Oh, I can read very well, and I also know what pro-abortion
means..unlike
many of you.
Question: How can you support a woman's right to make a choice that you
don't favor being legal?
That is, if you are claiming you are not pro-abortion
Huh? I favor choice and I favor legal abortions. I am not "pro-abortion"
because I do not favor abortion as a forced option. Somehow, I suspect
my response will go right over your head.
So you don't favor abortion being legal then.
After all, that is what pro-abortion means
Heishman, quit being such a moron. Everyone here knows of your
twisted-***** attempts to distort the position of others rather than
accept what they say. "Pro" means "in favor of." He isn't in favor of
abortion. If you feel the need to lie about what others think it only
demonstrates the weakness of both you and your position.
Only little children make the stupid kind of claims you make. You,
yourself, claim you are not a guard. They same ignorant source of the
word pro-abortion says you are. Stop focusing on the word
pro-abortion. It proves you are weak and childish. Look up hypocrite,
instead.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 07:15:24 PM |
|
|
In article <ZpednaxKBtQKYBfdRVn-uw@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-C461B4.19220724042004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
You obviously do not read for comprehension. You clearly do not
understand the context in which Barnes used that term.
Oh, I can read very well, and I also know what pro-abortion means..unlike
many of you.
The idea that you know ANYTHING that others don't know is truly
laughable.
Question: How can you support a woman's right to make a choice that you
don't favor being legal?
That is, if you are claiming you are not pro-abortion
Stop with the stupid talk. This is really old and discredited. What
next? The Holocaust didn't really happen?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 10:55:06 PM |
|
|
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-C461B4.19220724042004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
You obviously do not read for comprehension. You clearly do not
understand the context in which Barnes used that term.
Oh, I can read very well,
Then you are, as usual, lying outright. Which is your first and last refuge.
You're just a scummy *****.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 09:07:52 AM |
|
|
Shawn Hearn <srhi@comcast.net> writes:
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Finally, Barnes is honest about what he and others who claim to be
pro-choice are...
You obviously do not read for comprehension. You clearly do not
understand the context in which Barnes used that term.
Actually, Heishman the Cross-Dressing Cop Reject doesn't want to understand
the contextm as it would interfere with his obsession with getting back at
someone he's supposedly ignoring -- David. (Heishman's not exactly known for
being the brightest crayon in the box.)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 06:54:45 PM |
|
|
In article <yP-dnYq6pYgdURfdRVn-sA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <VoteKerry@dbarnes.com> wrote in message
news:240420041318039378%VoteKerry@dbarnes.com...
In article <6f9e1b49.0404240835.4419c20@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
That leaves you out, doesn't it?
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression.
LOL! Yeah.
" Those "Pro-aborts" "
Barnes is honest...
I see how it's done...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Papa Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 05:00:44 PM |
|
|
On April 25, 2004, the NY Times posted an article by Robin Toner
titled: "Abortion's Opponents Claim the Middle Ground." Go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/25/weekinreview/25tone.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5006&en=7371bcf08e9ab63d&ex=1083470400&partner=ALTAVISTA1
_____________________________________________________________________
Excerpts:
[...]
"Today, as they assemble on the Washington Mall, the
movement faces a far more complicated and in some
ways more challenging political landscape. The anti-
abortion movement is more confident, more sophisti-
cated and far more ensconced in the government,
with allies now in control of the House, the Senate
and the White House. Its legislative goals are incre-
mental, careful and popular with Americans who
would oppose an outright ban on abortion, even if
this agenda is considered by its opponents to be a
stealthy chipping away of rights. The anti-abortion
movement has, in many ways, become part of the
establishment.
[...]
"But President Bush, who opposes abortion except in
cases of rape and incest and to protect the life of
the woman, tried to defuse the fears of moderate
voters early on. He said that he did not believe the
country was ready for a ban, and talks more gener-
ally about creating a "culture of life."
[...]
"The current Congressional agenda of the anti-abortion
movement is a series of steps aimed at restricting abor-
tion and recognizing the "personhood" of the fetus.
Legislation already passed includes the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban Act, aimed at a procedure performed in
the second or third trimester, and the Unborn Victims
of Violence Act, which makes it a separate offense to
harm a fetus in a federal crime committed against a
pregnant woman....
[...]
"'I recognize this incremental strategy is not uni-
versally embraced in the pro-life movement,' Dr.
James C. Dobson wrote last year in a collection of
essays, 'Back to the Drawing Board: The Future of
the Pro-Life Movement.' 'Our goal must always be to
bring about a decisive end to this evil practice,
with public policy that matches public sentiment.'
[...]
"...But they find themselves fighting legislation
that, in and of itself, seems unobjectionable to
many moderates - among the voters and in Congress.
David O'Steen, executive director of the National
Right to Life Committee, asserted, "Fighting things
like the partial-birth ban shows an extremism that
the American public rejects."
[...]
"...Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster, said, 'The
percentage of people who say they're for the woman's
right to abortion at all times under any situation
is very small, as is the percentage who say women
should not have abortions for any reason.'
[...]
_____________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack comments:
This article is an accurate portrayal of the overall
Pro-Life strategy.
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression. This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
For now, we will chip away and educate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 05:59:52 PM |
|
|
Papa Jackass <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/25/weekinreview/25tone.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5006&en=7371bcf08e9ab63d&ex=1083470400&partner=ALTAVISTA1
_____________________________________________________________________
Excerpts:
"But President Bush, who opposes abortion except in
cases of rape and incest and to protect the life of
the woman, tried to defuse the fears of moderate
voters early on. He said that he did not believe the
country was ready for a ban, and talks more gener-
ally about creating a "culture of life."
[...]
By killing tens of thousands of people in two wars.
_____________________________________________________________________
This article is an accurate portrayal of the overall
Pro-Life strategy.
It's more of the same outright lies.
You claim you want to protect life even as you promote
death.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Papa Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
26 Apr 2004 05:42:40 AM |
|
|
On April 25, 2004, the NY Times posted an article by Robin Toner
titled: "Abortion's Opponents Claim the Middle Ground." Go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/25/weekinreview/25tone.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5006&en=7371bcf08e9ab63d&ex=1083470400&partner=ALTAVISTA1
_____________________________________________________________________
Excerpts:
[...]
"Today, as they assemble on the Washington Mall, the
movement faces a far more complicated and in some
ways more challenging political landscape. The anti-
abortion movement is more confident, more sophisti-
cated and far more ensconced in the government,
with allies now in control of the House, the Senate
and the White House. Its legislative goals are incre-
mental, careful and popular with Americans who
would oppose an outright ban on abortion, even if
this agenda is considered by its opponents to be a
stealthy chipping away of rights. The anti-abortion
movement has, in many ways, become part of the
establishment.
[...]
"But President Bush, who opposes abortion except in
cases of rape and incest and to protect the life of
the woman, tried to defuse the fears of moderate
voters early on. He said that he did not believe the
country was ready for a ban, and talks more gener-
ally about creating a "culture of life."
[...]
"The current Congressional agenda of the anti-abortion
movement is a series of steps aimed at restricting abor-
tion and recognizing the "personhood" of the fetus.
Legislation already passed includes the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban Act, aimed at a procedure performed in
the second or third trimester, and the Unborn Victims
of Violence Act, which makes it a separate offense to
harm a fetus in a federal crime committed against a
pregnant woman....
[...]
"'I recognize this incremental strategy is not uni-
versally embraced in the pro-life movement,' Dr.
James C. Dobson wrote last year in a collection of
essays, 'Back to the Drawing Board: The Future of
the Pro-Life Movement.' 'Our goal must always be to
bring about a decisive end to this evil practice,
with public policy that matches public sentiment.'
[...]
"...But they find themselves fighting legislation
that, in and of itself, seems unobjectionable to
many moderates - among the voters and in Congress.
David O'Steen, executive director of the National
Right to Life Committee, asserted, "Fighting things
like the partial-birth ban shows an extremism that
the American public rejects."
[...]
"...Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster, said, 'The
percentage of people who say they're for the woman's
right to abortion at all times under any situation
is very small, as is the percentage who say women
should not have abortions for any reason.'
[...]
_____________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack comments:
This article is an accurate portrayal of the overall
Pro-Life strategy.
Most important is the education of middle-America --
those who think of themselves as moderates and shy
away from extremes.
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression. This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
For now, we will chip away and educate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
26 Apr 2004 11:38:29 PM |
|
|
In article <6f9e1b49.0404260242.1348774@posting.google.com>, Papa Jack
<papajack@stic.net> wrote:
On April 25, 2004, the NY Times posted an article by Robin Toner
titled: "Abortion's Opponents Claim the Middle Ground." Go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/25/weekinreview/25tone.html?pagewanted=1&ei=500
6&en=7371bcf08e9ab63d&ex=1083470400&partner=ALTAVISTA1
_____________________________________________________________________
Excerpts:
[...]
"Today, as they assemble on the Washington Mall, the
movement faces a far more complicated and in some
ways more challenging political landscape. The anti-
abortion movement is more confident, more sophisti-
cated and far more ensconced in the government,
with allies now in control of the House, the Senate
and the White House. Its legislative goals are incre-
mental, careful and popular with Americans who
would oppose an outright ban on abortion, even if
this agenda is considered by its opponents to be a
stealthy chipping away of rights. The anti-abortion
movement has, in many ways, become part of the
establishment.
[...]
"But President Bush, who opposes abortion except in
cases of rape and incest and to protect the life of
the woman, tried to defuse the fears of moderate
voters early on. He said that he did not believe the
country was ready for a ban, and talks more gener-
ally about creating a "culture of life."
[...]
"The current Congressional agenda of the anti-abortion
movement is a series of steps aimed at restricting abor-
tion and recognizing the "personhood" of the fetus.
Legislation already passed includes the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban Act, aimed at a procedure performed in
the second or third trimester, and the Unborn Victims
of Violence Act, which makes it a separate offense to
harm a fetus in a federal crime committed against a
pregnant woman....
[...]
"'I recognize this incremental strategy is not uni-
versally embraced in the pro-life movement,' Dr.
James C. Dobson wrote last year in a collection of
essays, 'Back to the Drawing Board: The Future of
the Pro-Life Movement.' 'Our goal must always be to
bring about a decisive end to this evil practice,
with public policy that matches public sentiment.'
[...]
"...But they find themselves fighting legislation
that, in and of itself, seems unobjectionable to
many moderates - among the voters and in Congress.
David O'Steen, executive director of the National
Right to Life Committee, asserted, "Fighting things
like the partial-birth ban shows an extremism that
the American public rejects."
[...]
"...Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster, said, 'The
percentage of people who say they're for the woman's
right to abortion at all times under any situation
is very small, as is the percentage who say women
should not have abortions for any reason.'
[...]
_____________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack comments:
This article is an accurate portrayal of the overall
Pro-Life strategy.
Propaganda?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Anderson" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 12:23:27 PM |
|
|
On 24 Apr 2004 09:35:42 -0700, (Papa Jack) wrote:
.....
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression. This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
And what? Make abortion illegal. Been there, done that, sane people
feel that women should be allowed to seek medical services from
licensed medical practitioners.
The fact remains that unwanted pregnacies will contiue to happen and
will continue to be aborted -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as
a society, is whether or not we will allow women to have legal
abortions.
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
We do not have abortion on demand for any reason. This is just
another of the many lies of Pro-Lifers.
For now, we will chip away and educate.
How do you intend to 'educate' when you run from questions and
constantly post blatant lies?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Murdoc" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 07:41:02 PM |
|
|
(Paul Anderson) wrote in message news:<408aa12a.88984268@news.la.sbcglobal.net>...
On 24 Apr 2004 09:35:42 -0700, (Papa Jack) wrote:
....
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression. This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
And what? Make abortion illegal. Been there, done that, sane people
feel that women should be allowed to seek medical services from
licensed medical practitioners.
The fact remains that unwanted pregnacies will contiue to happen and
will continue to be aborted -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as
a society, is whether or not we will allow women to have legal
abortions.
The fact remains that [drug dealing] will continue to happen and will
continue to be [dealt] -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as a
society, is whether or not we will allow [people] to have legal [drug
dealings].
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
We do not have abortion on demand for any reason. This is just
another of the many lies of Pro-Lifers.
So are you saying there are instances (therefore reasons), where
abortion will be denied?
For now, we will chip away and educate.
How do you intend to 'educate' when you run from questions and
constantly post blatant lies?
How do you intend to educate when you allow women to kill their unborn
fetuses (or is it fetii, :-S )?
Murdoc
.
|
|
|
| User: "EvilZak" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 01:43:18 PM |
|
|
(Murdoc) wrote in message news:<458ebeb6.0404241641.1da1725a@posting.google.com>...
elcoyote@netzero.net (Paul Anderson) wrote in message news:<408aa12a.88984268@news.la.sbcglobal.net>...
On 24 Apr 2004 09:35:42 -0700, (Papa Jack) wrote:
....
The fact remains that unwanted pregnacies will contiue to happen and
will continue to be aborted -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as
a society, is whether or not we will allow women to have legal
abortions.
The fact remains that [drug dealing] will continue to happen and will
continue to be [dealt] -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as a
society, is whether or not we will allow [people] to have legal [drug
dealings].
Actually, though it's a whole different issue, the use of
currently-illegal drugs is as much a matter of choice and bodily
autonomy as the right to choose abortion.
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
We do not have abortion on demand for any reason. This is just
another of the many lies of Pro-Lifers.
So are you saying there are instances (therefore reasons), where
abortion will be denied?
ALl the time. Because the doctor is anti-choice and will try to lie to
the woman about how pregnant she is and how much time she has. Because
the doctor thinks that the woman's family or partner should be
informed and their permission sought. Abortion is illegal beyond a
certain number of weeks of pregnancy, remember?
For now, we will chip away and educate.
How do you intend to 'educate' when you run from questions and
constantly post blatant lies?
How do you intend to educate when you allow women to kill their unborn
fetuses (or is it fetii, :-S )?
How do you intend to educate anyone when you are too stupid to be able
to understand that women are human beings?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
25 Apr 2004 07:34:48 AM |
|
|
In article <458ebeb6.0404241641.1da1725a@posting.google.com>,
(Murdoc) wrote:
elcoyote@netzero.net (Paul Anderson) wrote in message
news:<408aa12a.88984268@news.la.sbcglobal.net>...
On 24 Apr 2004 09:35:42 -0700, (Papa Jack) wrote:
....
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression. This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
And what? Make abortion illegal. Been there, done that, sane people
feel that women should be allowed to seek medical services from
licensed medical practitioners.
The fact remains that unwanted pregnacies will contiue to happen and
will continue to be aborted -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as
a society, is whether or not we will allow women to have legal
abortions.
The fact remains that [drug dealing] will continue to happen and will
continue to be [dealt] -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as a
society, is whether or not we will allow [people] to have legal [drug
dealings].
We do. "Legal drug dealings" happen every day in most areas of
the United States in places where alcohol and/or tobacco are sold.
In some states, such as Pennsylvania and Utah, the government even sells
the alcohol and profits by it.
How do you intend to educate when you allow women to kill their unborn
fetuses (or is it fetii, :-S )?
Women can do what they want with their bodies, so it is not for me "to
allow women to kill their unborn" nor is it for you or anyone else. Be
that as it may, since the rate of abortion actually declines in areas
where they have good sex ed programs, it is entirely possible. In fact,
those who oppose abortion would best be served by using education as
their means to reduce the practice, not force of government.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 08:01:36 PM |
|
|
In article <458ebeb6.0404241641.1da1725a@posting.google.com>, Murdoc
<murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote:
elcoyote@netzero.net (Paul Anderson) wrote in message
news:<408aa12a.88984268@news.la.sbcglobal.net>...
On 24 Apr 2004 09:35:42 -0700, (Papa Jack) wrote:
....
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression. This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
And what? Make abortion illegal. Been there, done that, sane people
feel that women should be allowed to seek medical services from
licensed medical practitioners.
The fact remains that unwanted pregnacies will contiue to happen and
will continue to be aborted -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as
a society, is whether or not we will allow women to have legal
abortions.
The fact remains that [drug dealing] will continue to happen and will
continue to be [dealt] -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as a
society, is whether or not we will allow [people] to have legal [drug
dealings].
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
We do not have abortion on demand for any reason. This is just
another of the many lies of Pro-Lifers.
So are you saying there are instances (therefore reasons), where
abortion will be denied?
Of course.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 10:53:41 PM |
|
|
Murdoc <murdoc_0@hotmail.com> wrote:
elcoyote@netzero.net (Paul Anderson)
The fact remains that unwanted pregnacies will contiue to happen and
will continue to be aborted -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as
a society, is whether or not we will allow women to have legal
abortions.
The fact remains that [drug dealing] will continue to happen and will
continue to be [dealt] -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as a
society, is whether or not we will allow [people] to have legal [drug
dealings].
And it is. Most drugs are available legally. Most drug dealings
are legal.
Do you have a point?
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
We do not have abortion on demand for any reason. This is just
another of the many lies of Pro-Lifers.
So are you saying there are instances (therefore reasons), where
abortion will be denied?
Of course there are. Are you stupid?
Rhetorical question. Don't try to answer it.
For now, we will chip away and educate.
How do you intend to 'educate' when you run from questions and
constantly post blatant lies?
How do you intend to educate when you allow women to kill their unborn
fetuses (or is it fetii, :-S )?
And so you resort to the usual lies and hate.
Business as usual from the pro-liar moron.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Anderson" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Lifers Claim the Middle Ground |
24 Apr 2004 09:18:07 PM |
|
|
On 24 Apr 2004 17:41:02 -0700, (Murdoc) wrote:
elcoyote@netzero.net (Paul Anderson) wrote in message news:<408aa12a.88984268@news.la.sbcglobal.net>...
On 24 Apr 2004 09:35:42 -0700, (Papa Jack) wrote:
....
Once folks get past the screen of euphemisms in the
Pro-Abortion philosophy (i.e., "choice," "woman's
right to," "reproductive rights," etc.), they find
nothing but an ugly, gory scene of death, destruc-
tion, and depression. This is the reality which
the general public must be shown over and over.
And what? Make abortion illegal. Been there, done that, sane people
feel that women should be allowed to seek medical services from
licensed medical practitioners.
The fact remains that unwanted pregnacies will contiue to happen and
will continue to be aborted -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as
a society, is whether or not we will allow women to have legal
abortions.
The fact remains that [drug dealing] will continue to happen and will
continue to be [dealt] -- legally or illegally. *OUR* choice, as a
society, is whether or not we will allow [people] to have legal [drug
dealings].
Did you have a point, or were you just trying to prove that you have
no idea of the differences between illegal drugs and abortion.
Abortion on demand for any reason is a major evil
in our culture and must be eventually eliminated.
We do not have abortion on demand for any reason. This is just
another of the many lies of Pro-Lifers.
So are you saying there are instances (therefore reasons), where
abortion will be denied?
DUH!
For now, we will chip away and educate.
How do you intend to 'educate' when you run from questions and
constantly post blatant lies?
How do you intend to educate when you allow women to kill their unborn
fetuses (or is it fetii, :-S )?
That's another of your many lies. I do not allow women to kill their
unborn fetuses.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
