| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
06 Jun 2004 10:43:18 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
(Poemosophi) wrote in message news:<2f511cb3.0406051157.208c079f@posting.google.com>...
Mr. Humphrey,
I think now is a good time for me to remove my log
from the fire and take time to ponder what I have
learned from both sides of the Abortion issue.
Though we disagree on what the ultimate outcome should be
concerning Abortion, if I was in charge of a ProLife
Organization I would require input from a person like you.
Your libertarian side is something to be respected! :-)
I remain ProLife and will continue to do what I can
(lessons learned) to Save The Unborn People.
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because people
like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any sense at all.Guy
can't even hold a job,from what I've read,and you would let him lead a
movement?Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
.
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
06 Jun 2004 12:38:46 PM |
|
|
(J Young) writes:
poemosophi@poemosophi.com (Poemosophi) wrote in message news:<2f511cb3.0406051157.208c079f@posting.google.com>...
Mr. Humphrey,
I think now is a good time for me to remove my log
from the fire and take time to ponder what I have
learned from both sides of the Abortion issue.
Though we disagree on what the ultimate outcome should be
concerning Abortion, if I was in charge of a ProLife
Organization I would require input from a person like you.
Your libertarian side is something to be respected! :-)
I remain ProLife and will continue to do what I can
(lessons learned) to Save The Unborn People.
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because people
like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any sense at all.Guy
can't even hold a job,from what I've read,and you would let him lead a
movement?Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
Funny...ever since I've been working for the CFR, the Trilateral Commission,
*and* the Bilderbergers, I haven't had to pay much attention to Planned
Parenthood.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 09:24:14 AM |
|
|
(J Young) wrote...
poemosophi@poemosophi.com (Poemosophi) wrote to PLH...
I think now is a good time for me to remove my log
from the fire and take time to ponder what I have
learned from both sides of the Abortion issue.
Though we disagree on what the ultimate outcome should be
concerning Abortion, if I was in charge of a ProLife
Organization I would require input from a person like you.
Your libertarian side is something to be respected! :-)
I remain ProLife and will continue to do what I can
(lessons learned) to Save The Unborn People.
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because
people like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any
sense at all.
I am astounded over your admission that you are losing this battle -
that is a rare bit of candor from someone on the anti-choice side.
But you are wrong about why you are losing. The real reason you are
losing is that your (plural "your") arguments suck. They suck so bad
that you (plural "you") resort to making things up ("abortion causes
breast cancer"), or religious admonishments ("you're going to hell!")
or stupid analogies ("abortion is like the Holocaust!") to shore up
the shifting sands on which you propose to build your "pro-life"
house.
I heard a story recently about a heavy metal band that rigged up a big
pyrotechnical display to put some zing into their show. The first
night they tried it, they managed to set the lead singer on fire. He
was extinguished and only suffered a few 1st degree burns. After the
show, the band was commiserating with the singer backstage, and the
singer observed:
"You know, if we wrote better songs, we wouldn't have to
resort to these crappy stunts."
And the analogy is this - if your arguments were valid, if they could
stand on their own self-evident merits, you wouldn't have to resort to
crappy stunts like making things up, religious admonishments or stupid
analogies.
Guy can't even hold a job,from what I've read,
That describes a lot of people in Bush's economy.
and you would let him lead a movement?
That's not what Poemosophi said - he/she would require input from PLH,
sort of as an advisor or consultant.
Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
There you go - another analogy that sucks. THAT is why you are losing
the debate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dawn" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 02:46:45 PM |
|
|
(Spartakus) wrote in message news:<6ed74dfa.0406070624.8218acb@posting.google.com>...
youngopinions@aol.com (J Young) wrote...
poemosophi@poemosophi.com (Poemosophi) wrote to PLH...
I think now is a good time for me to remove my log
from the fire and take time to ponder what I have
learned from both sides of the Abortion issue.
Though we disagree on what the ultimate outcome should be
concerning Abortion, if I was in charge of a ProLife
Organization I would require input from a person like you.
Your libertarian side is something to be respected! :-)
I remain ProLife and will continue to do what I can
(lessons learned) to Save The Unborn People.
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because
people like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any
sense at all.
I am astounded over your admission that you are losing this battle -
that is a rare bit of candor from someone on the anti-choice side.\
Uh, the opinion from merely one person that the abortion battle is
being lost is just that - the opinion of one person. Neither their
position on the question, or their candor, lends any extra weight
either way.
Anyway, using this forum as a gauge of public opinion on the matter is
like asking a cattle rancher what he thinks of vegetarianism.
Dawn
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 03:46:11 PM |
|
|
Dawn wrote:
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) wrote in message news:<6ed74dfa.0406070624.8218acb@posting.google.com>...
youngopinions@aol.com (J Young) wrote...
poemosophi@poemosophi.com (Poemosophi) wrote to PLH...
I think now is a good time for me to remove my log
from the fire and take time to ponder what I have
learned from both sides of the Abortion issue.
Though we disagree on what the ultimate outcome should be
concerning Abortion, if I was in charge of a ProLife
Organization I would require input from a person like you.
Your libertarian side is something to be respected! :-)
I remain ProLife and will continue to do what I can
(lessons learned) to Save The Unborn People.
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because
people like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any
sense at all.
I am astounded over your admission that you are losing this battle -
that is a rare bit of candor from someone on the anti-choice side.\
Uh, the opinion from merely one person that the abortion battle is
being lost is just that - the opinion of one person.
One person multiplied by many million.
What happened, Marie? Too many people got you on killfile?
Neither their
position on the question, or their candor, lends any extra weight
either way.
Anyway, using this forum as a gauge of public opinion on the matter is
like asking a cattle rancher what he thinks of vegetarianism.
Dawn
--
--sexkitten--If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come
from morons?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "J Young" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 12:45:04 PM |
|
|
(Spartakus) wrote in message news:<6ed74dfa.0406070624.8218acb@posting.google.com>...
youngopinions@aol.com (J Young) wrote...
[........]
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because
people like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any
sense at all.
I am astounded over your admission that you are losing this battle -
that is a rare bit of candor from someone on the anti-choice side.
But you are wrong about why you are losing. The real reason you are
losing is that your (plural "your") arguments suck. They suck so bad
that you (plural "you") resort to making things up ("abortion causes
breast cancer"), or religious admonishments ("you're going to hell!")
or stupid analogies ("abortion is like the Holocaust!") to shore up
the shifting sands on which you propose to build your "pro-life"
house.
I heard a story recently about a heavy metal band that rigged up a big
pyrotechnical display to put some zing into their show. The first
night they tried it, they managed to set the lead singer on fire. He
was extinguished and only suffered a few 1st degree burns. After the
show, the band was commiserating with the singer backstage, and the
singer observed:
"You know, if we wrote better songs, we wouldn't have to
resort to these crappy stunts."
And the analogy is this - if your arguments were valid, if they could
stand on their own self-evident merits, you wouldn't have to resort to
crappy stunts like making things up, religious admonishments or stupid
analogies.
That's the first time I ever heard about a link between breast cancer
and abortion.I'll have to remember to give you credit.You will never
hear me impose my religious beliefs on anyone.
Guy can't even hold a job,from what I've read,
That describes a lot of people in Bush's economy.
What does this assholes incompetence have to do with the other
assholes incompetence?
[.....]
Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
There you go - another analogy that sucks. THAT is why you are losing
the debate.
Why is that a bad analogy? Treblinka saw thousands of innocents
murdered.Planned Parenthood slaughters hundreds of thousands of
innocent babies each year.Each are government sanctioned.Sounds like a
perfect analogy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 02:58:32 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9c2d0f9a.0406070945.6d808491@posting.google.com...
Why is that a bad analogy? Treblinka saw thousands of innocents
murdered.
* Innocent people who were already BORN!
Planned Parenthood slaughters hundreds of thousands of
innocent babies each year.
* You mean they catch the babies at birth and somehow kill them? Odd, I
never heard of that happening.....
Each are government sanctioned.Sounds like a
perfect analogy.
* So we should FORCE all women/girls to bear their unwanted fetuses to dump
into the overloaded child welfare system? Or do you have millions of people
waiting to adopt all these unwanted kids and pay the women's medical bills?
--
FP.........
God said:
"Therefore fathers shall eat their sons in the midst of you and
sons shall eat their fathers...I will send famine and wild beasts
against you and they shall rob you of your children; pestilence and
blood shall pass through you; and I will bring a sword upon you. I,
the Lord, have spoken." Ezekiel 5:10, 5:17
Did he make them turn to cannibalism? Did he find the aroma as pleasing as
when one
burns/roasts an innocent lamb?
============================================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 04:31:15 PM |
|
|
(J Young) wrote...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) wrote...
(J Young) wrote...
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because
people like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any
sense at all.
I am astounded over your admission that you are losing this battle -
that is a rare bit of candor from someone on the anti-choice side.
But you are wrong about why you are losing. The real reason you are
losing is that your (plural "your") arguments suck. They suck so bad
that you (plural "you") resort to making things up ("abortion causes
breast cancer"), or religious admonishments ("you're going to hell!")
or stupid analogies ("abortion is like the Holocaust!") to shore up
the shifting sands on which you propose to build your "pro-life"
house.
[...]
That's the first time I ever heard about a link between breast cancer
and abortion.I'll have to remember to give you credit.You will never
hear me impose my religious beliefs on anyone.
There *isn't* a link between abortion and breast cancer - that was an
example of right-to-liars making things up.
Guy can't even hold a job,from what I've read,
That describes a lot of people in Bush's economy.
What does this assholes incompetence have to do with the other
assholes incompetence?
Since Bush took office, hundreds of thousands of people lost their
jobs, but not through their own incompetence. And in Patrick's
specific case, the incompetence was on the part of Rice University's
administrators, who bought into some assclown consultant's
recommendation that the university's IS functions could be outsourced.
Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
There you go - another analogy that sucks. THAT is why you are
losing the debate.
Why is that a bad analogy? Treblinka saw thousands of innocents
murdered.Planned Parenthood slaughters hundreds of thousands of
innocent babies each year.Each are government sanctioned.Sounds
like a perfect analogy.
Clue #1: What went on at Treblinka was the result of decisions made by
a handful of crazy, evil fascists working within a context of a crazy,
evil totalitarian government. What goes on inside a Planned
Parenthood clinic is the result of decisions made independently by
individual women.
Clue #2: You are equating millions of women who decided independently
to end their pregnancies with a handful of crazy, evil fascists who
conspired to eradicate the Jews.
Clue #3: The decision to abort is made by *one* individual woman. The
scope of that decision is limited to that one woman's pregnancy.
Clue #4: If Planned Parenthood is like Treblinka, why isn't Treblinka
like Planned Parenthood?
Clue #5: What was abortion like *before* the Holocaust???
Your analogy is nothing more than an ad hominem attack on millions of
women, and by extension, anyone who is supportive of their right to
choose when they will bear children, and when they will not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "M is for Malapert" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 08:26:38 PM |
|
|
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406071331.3cfdfde3@posting.google.com...
There *isn't* a link between abortion and breast cancer - that was an
example of right-to-liars making things up.
Latest research:
Int J Cancer. 2004 May 20;110(1):102-9.
Impact of reproductive factors and lactation on breast carcinoma in situ
risk.
Meeske K, Press M, Patel A, Bernstein L.
Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of the University
of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, 1441 Eastlake
Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Incidence rates for breast carcinoma in situ (CIS) have increased markedly
over the past 20 years. Breast CIS, detected primarily on mammography, now
represents 30-45% of all screened detected breast cancers. [Which explains
part of the increased incidence, and women living longer explains another
large part.] We conducted a large population-based case-control study to
evaluate the impact of reproductive factors and lactation on breast CIS
risk. Case subjects were newly diagnosed with breast CIS at ages 35-64 years
between March 1, 1995 and May 31, 1998 (n = 567), resided in Los Angeles
County and were born in the United States. Control subjects (n = 614),
identified through random digit dialing, fulfilled the same eligibility
criteria and were required to have had at least one screening mammogram in
the 2-year period before their interview. Women with a positive family
history of breast cancer had a 2-fold increase in breast CIS risk. Parous
women were at reduced risk relative to nulligravid women (odds ratio [OR] =
0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.46-1.00). Among nulliparous women,
pregnancy was unrelated to breast CIS risk. Among parous women, risk
declined with each additional term pregnancy (p-trend = 0.003). No
associations were found with age at first term pregnancy, induced abortion
or miscarriage. Long duration of breast-feeding (> or =24 months) was
associated with increased risk (OR = 2.00, 95% CI = 1.11-3.60). The observed
effects of family history and pregnancy on breast CIS risk are consistent
with those observed for invasive breast cancer. The results for
breast-feeding are contrary to what has been observed in studies of invasive
breast cancer.
Int J Cancer. 2003 Aug 20;106(2):270-6.
Induced and spontaneous abortion and breast cancer risk: results from the
E3N cohort study.
Paoletti X, Clavel-Chapelon F.
INSERM, Equipe E3N, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
Recent reviews reach conflicting conclusions on breast cancer risk after
spontaneous or induced abortion. E3N is a large-scale cohort study
collecting detailed information on environmental and reproductive factors.
We investigated the relation between breast cancer and a history of induced
and/or spontaneous abortion, using the data from the 100,000 women aged
40-65 at entrance in 1990. Among them, over 2,600 new invasive breast
cancers had been diagnosed by June 2000. Multivariate analysis, adjusted for
known potential confounders, showed no association between a history of
induced abortion and breast cancer risk either in the whole population
(relative risk [RR] = 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.99) or in
subgroups defined by parity or by menopausal status.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003 Mar;12(3):209-14.
Induced abortion, miscarriage, and breast cancer risk of young women.
Mahue-Giangreco M, Ursin G, Sullivan-Halley J, Bernstein L.
Department of Preventive Medicine and Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center,
Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
California 90033, USA.
Early studies of breast cancer raised substantial concern regarding risk
associated with induced abortion and miscarriage. Literature reviews suggest
that study findings depend heavily on the comparison group and that the use
of parous women as a reference group for nulliparous women may artificially
inflate risk. To examine the individual effects of induced abortion and
miscarriage on breast cancer risk of parous and nulliparous women, 744
patients < or =40 years of age and diagnosed from 1983-1988 were matched by
parity, age, and race with controls living in the same neighborhood in Los
Angeles County. In-person interviews were conducted to obtain a detailed
reproductive history. Risk estimates were obtained by conditional logistic
regression using nulligravid women as the reference group for nulliparous
women with a history of incomplete pregnancy and parous women with no
incomplete pregnancies as the reference group for parous women with a
history of incomplete pregnancy. Breast cancer risk of parous women was
unrelated to a history of miscarriage or induced abortion. Breast cancer
risk was reduced among nulliparous women with a history of induced abortion
relative to nulligravid women, although the risk estimate was imprecise.
Risk declined as the number of induced abortions increased (P = 0.04). Our
results do not support the hypothesis that induced abortion or miscarriage
increase the breast cancer risk of young women.
</quotes>
The more studies come in, the more rigorously they are done, the more the
alleged risk disappears. In fact, the last study showed a *decreased* risk
of induced abortion and breast cancer. You won't hear the Bush
administration or Joel Brind or the anti-choicers legiswhores talking about
any of them, though.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "J Young" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 10:42:45 PM |
|
|
(Spartakus) wrote in message news:<6ed74dfa.0406071331.3cfdfde3@posting.google.com>...
youngopinions@aol.com (J Young) wrote...
(Spartakus) wrote...
youngopinions@aol.com (J Young) wrote...
[...]
That's the first time I ever heard about a link between breast cancer
and abortion.I'll have to remember to give you credit.You will never
hear me impose my religious beliefs on anyone.
There *isn't* a link between abortion and breast cancer - that was an
example of right-to-liars making things up.
Guy can't even hold a job,from what I've read,
That describes a lot of people in Bush's economy.
What does this assholes incompetence have to do with the other
assholes incompetence?
Since Bush took office, hundreds of thousands of people lost their
jobs, but not through their own incompetence. And in Patrick's
specific case, the incompetence was on the part of Rice University's
administrators, who bought into some assclown consultant's
recommendation that the university's IS functions could be outsourced.
Sorry.I have to believe Rice University.Their credility rates a little
higher with me than Stalker Pat.
Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
There you go - another analogy that sucks. THAT is why you are
losing the debate.
Why is that a bad analogy? Treblinka saw thousands of innocents
murdered.Planned Parenthood slaughters hundreds of thousands of
innocent babies each year.Each are government sanctioned.Sounds
like a perfect analogy.
Clue #1: What went on at Treblinka was the result of decisions made by
a handful of crazy, evil fascists working within a context of a crazy,
evil totalitarian government. What goes on inside a Planned
Parenthood clinic is the result of decisions made independently by
individual women.
No it wasn't.There was an entire bureaucracy involved,with much of the
citizenry willing to look the other way.
Clue #2: You are equating millions of women who decided independently
to end their pregnancies with a handful of crazy, evil fascists who
conspired to eradicate the Jews.
Dead is dead.Circumstances are irrelevant.Bottom line is that you have
a group of people being eradicated in both situations.
Clue #3: The decision to abort is made by *one* individual woman. The
scope of that decision is limited to that one woman's pregnancy.
Each guard at Treblinka had the power of life and death.
Clue #4: If Planned Parenthood is like Treblinka, why isn't Treblinka
like Planned Parenthood?
????????????????
Clue #5: What was abortion like *before* the Holocaust???
Genocide has been part of history from the beginning.The holocaust was
far from unique.
Your analogy is nothing more than an ad hominem attack on millions of
women, and by extension, anyone who is supportive of their right to
choose when they will bear children, and when they will not.
We of the pro-life movement are pro-woman.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
08 Jun 2004 10:54:44 AM |
|
|
(J Young) wrote in message news:<9c2d0f9a.0406071942.5f1c4a01@posting.google.com>...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) wrote in message news:<6ed74dfa.0406071331.3cfdfde3@posting.google.com>...
(J Young) wrote...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) wrote...
(J Young) wrote...
[...]
Since Bush took office, hundreds of thousands of people lost
their jobs, but not through their own incompetence. And in
Patrick's specific case, the incompetence was on the part of
Rice University's administrators, who bought into some assclown
consultant's recommendation that the university's IS functions
could be outsourced.
Sorry.I have to believe Rice University.Their credility rates a little
higher with me than Stalker Pat.
Rice University is indeed a credible source, but I'd bet *money* that
Rice is not your primary source. If you are referring to an "email"
supposedly reposted by Sc*tt Br*db*ry or one of his sockpuppets, you
should know that Sc*tt is a liar and one of the lowest forms of life
ever to connect to the Internet. If you're any kind of adult human
being, I encourage you to think long and hard about whether or not you
really want to make common cause with this piece of *****.
Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
There you go - another analogy that sucks. THAT is why you are
losing the debate.
Why is that a bad analogy? Treblinka saw thousands of innocents
murdered.Planned Parenthood slaughters hundreds of thousands of
innocent babies each year.Each are government sanctioned.Sounds
like a perfect analogy.
Clue #1: What went on at Treblinka was the result of decisions made by
a handful of crazy, evil fascists working within a context of a crazy,
evil totalitarian government. What goes on inside a Planned
Parenthood clinic is the result of decisions made independently by
individual women.
No it wasn't.There was an entire bureaucracy involved,with much of the
citizenry willing to look the other way.
Thanks for supporting my point. There was little or no independent
thought in carrying out the directives of this evil totalitarian
government. The *decisions* came down from the top - everyone else
was "following orders".
Clue #2: You are equating millions of women who decided independently
to end their pregnancies with a handful of crazy, evil fascists who
conspired to eradicate the Jews.
Dead is dead.Circumstances are irrelevant.Bottom line is that you have
a group of people being eradicated in both situations.
According to your logic, then, all killing is murder - killing in
self-defense is the moral equivalent of killing an innocent person in
cold blood.
Clue #3: The decision to abort is made by *one* individual woman. The
scope of that decision is limited to that one woman's pregnancy.
Each guard at Treblinka had the power of life and death.
None of the prisoners at Treblinka was physically attached to any of
the guards and using that guard's bodily resources against his wishes.
Clue #4: If Planned Parenthood is like Treblinka, why isn't Treblinka
like Planned Parenthood?
????????????????
That stumped you, huh? The logic is very elementary - if A is like B,
then B is like A. So, why isn't Treblinka like Planned Parenthood?
Clue #5: What was abortion like *before* the Holocaust???
Genocide has been part of history from the beginning.The holocaust was
far from unique.
But abortion isn't genocide, for reasons I have already given.
Your analogy is nothing more than an ad hominem attack on millions
of women, and by extension, anyone who is supportive of their right
to choose when they will bear children, and when they will not.
We of the pro-life movement are pro-woman.
That's what you *claim*, but that's not how you *behave* or what you
truly believe. And behavior is a more accurate indication of a
person's true beliefs than words. People who are "pro-woman" don't
equate millions of women with a handful of crazy, evil fascists.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
09 Jun 2004 12:27:34 AM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus)
youngopinions@aol.com (J Young) wrote...
Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
There you go - another analogy that sucks. THAT is why you are losing
the debate.
Why is that a bad analogy? Treblinka saw thousands of innocents
murdered.
People who were NOT living in other people's bodies and threatening
them with harm.
Planned Parenthood slaughters hundreds of thousands of
innocent babies each year.
And there you go again, screeching the same old hate.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
06 Jun 2004 11:01:00 AM |
|
|
On 6 Jun 2004 08:43:18 -0700, (J Young) wrote:
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because people
like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any sense at all.Guy
can't even hold a job,from what I've read,and you would let him lead a
movement?Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
Wait a minute. You claim that you're being bested by an inept fool? Think
for a minute what that says about you. As long as you're making things up,
you might want to make your demon appear a bit fiercer and more cunning.
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Loose Cannon" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
06 Jun 2004 01:02:23 PM |
|
|
"Galen Hekhuis" <> wrote in message
news:kjf6c013kttkmatl6fdf096lfjfmc63pq1@4ax.com...
On 6 Jun 2004 08:43:18 -0700, (J Young) wrote:
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because people
like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any sense at all.Guy
can't even hold a job,from what I've read,and you would let him lead a
movement?Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
Wait a minute. You claim that you're being bested by an inept fool?
Think for a minute what that says about you. As long as you're making
things up, you might want to make your demon appear a bit fiercer and more
cunning.
<bfg>
Actually, "fiercer" is the job of his alpha-sock IBen. "Jon" is the
incarnation of his bungling ineptitude, on display daily.
LC~ IBenGetinKicked does it to himself again.
"The worst loneliness is not to be comfortable with yourself."~Mark Twain
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
07 Jun 2004 05:39:20 PM |
|
|
In article <kjf6c013kttkmatl6fdf096lfjfmc63pq1@4ax.com>,
Galen Hekhuis <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:
On 6 Jun 2004 08:43:18 -0700, (J Young) wrote:
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because people
like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any sense at all.Guy
can't even hold a job,from what I've read,and you would let him lead a
movement?Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
Wait a minute. You claim that you're being bested by an inept fool? Think
for a minute what that says about you. As long as you're making things up,
you might want to make your demon appear a bit fiercer and more cunning.
Yup, how else can a fool win an argument if it is not against an even
bigger fool. The reason the pro-liars keep losing key abortion rights
issues is simple. The pro-liars are wrong. The Constitution sides with
those who are pro-choice. Period.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mother Carmela Cassini" |
|
| Title: Re: Removing A Log From The Fire |
08 Jun 2004 01:35:27 PM |
|
|
Shawn Hearn <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<srhi-E61F78.18392007062004@news-60.giganews.com>...
In article <kjf6c013kttkmatl6fdf096lfjfmc63pq1@4ax.com>,
Galen Hekhuis <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:
On 6 Jun 2004 08:43:18 -0700, (J Young) wrote:
The reason we have been losing the abortion battle is because people
like you think that that a jackass like Pat makes any sense at all.Guy
can't even hold a job,from what I've read,and you would let him lead a
movement?Treblinka would be dwarfed by Planned Parenthood if this guy
had any say.
Wait a minute. You claim that you're being bested by an inept fool? Think
for a minute what that says about you. As long as you're making things up,
you might want to make your demon appear a bit fiercer and more cunning.
Yup, how else can a fool win an argument if it is not against an even
bigger fool. The reason the pro-liars keep losing key abortion rights
issues is simple. The pro-liars are wrong. The Constitution sides with
those who are pro-choice. Period.
Why is it, then, that this same "Constitution" didn't side with Bush
in 2000? What, different Constitution that year?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
