| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
12 Apr 2007 11:36:13 AM |
| Object: |
Repost: The pre-born child |
The fetus is a pre-born infant, in many ways more truly an infant
than
the one in arms. The word infant means one unable to speak. But the
fetus cannot even have his/her cries heard! The invisible, inaudible
infant before birth is the same infant when visible and audible after
birth. No mysterious transformations are worked by passage through
the pelvic outlet from one location to another. The baby has the
same
family resemblances before birth as after birth. The infant born
prematurely at six months is no more distinct in features and traits
than another infant of the same age still inside the womb.
Though small, naked, nameless and voiceless, the fetus is
characterized
by fetologists as "a young human being, dynamic, plastic, resilient,
and in a very large measure in charge of his/her environment and
destiny." By three months, fetuses are perfectly formed, thumb sized
aquanauts. They swim, somersault, suck their thumbs and imbibe
amniotic fluid. They even refuse it when bitter and take more when
sweetened. They grimace and cry when stimuli are unpleasant,
obviously
aware of pain and discomfort. Their world is alive with sounds and
they respond to flashes of light. Rather than passively inhabiting
the
uterus, they purposely search for comfort by readjusting their
position
with each shift of their mothers' body. Modern research reveals that
it is the fetus more than the mother who directs the pregnancy and is
a
dominant partner in the relationship. Unfortunately, the fetus has
no
defense against violence. That is something only the loving mother
can
provide.
http://www.silentscream.org/
.
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
12 Apr 2007 12:00:10 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> aka "Auric Hellman"
<adhellman@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:1176395772.959365.264960@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
<snip debunked crap>
Repost: "J Young" caught sockpuppeting.
Who does this sound like?:
"There is one victim in this whole scandal and that is Imus himself.
The "ladies" all grew-up in the ghetto; they've been hearing this talk
their whole lives. Suddenly because Imus calls them "nappy haired
hos", they become offended. Gimme a damn break! It's part of their
culture; don't chastise poor Imus for doing the same thing."
From: "Auric Hellman" <adhellman@volcanomail.com>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,tx.politics,alt.gossip.royalty
Subject: "Nappy-haired Hos"
Date: 11 Apr 2007 21:58:49 -0700
Message-ID: <1176353929.162085.311190@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.12.117.10
Oh, those telltale NNTP's:
From: "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,alt.atheism,alt.abortion
Subject: Despicable Jew-hating
Date: 3 Apr 2007 21:24:01 -0700
Message-ID: <1175660641.235801.183570@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.12.117.10
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
12 Apr 2007 08:06:44 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1176395772.959365.264960@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
The fetus is a pre-born infant, in many ways more truly an infant
than the one in arms. The word infant means one unable to speak. But the
fetus cannot even have his/her cries heard! The invisible, inaudible
infant before birth is the same infant when visible and audible after
birth. No mysterious transformations are worked by passage through
the pelvic outlet from one location to another. The baby has the
same
family resemblances before birth as after birth. The infant born
prematurely at six months is no more distinct in features and traits
than another infant of the same age still inside the womb.
Though small, naked, nameless and voiceless, the fetus is
characterized
by fetologists as "a young human being, dynamic, plastic, resilient,
and in a very large measure in charge of his/her environment and
destiny." By three months, fetuses are perfectly formed, thumb sized
aquanauts. They swim, somersault, suck their thumbs and imbibe
amniotic fluid. They even refuse it when bitter and take more when
sweetened. They grimace and cry when stimuli are unpleasant,
obviously
aware of pain and discomfort. Their world is alive with sounds and
they respond to flashes of light. Rather than passively inhabiting
the
uterus, they purposely search for comfort by readjusting their
position
with each shift of their mothers' body. Modern research reveals that
it is the fetus more than the mother who directs the pregnancy and is
a
dominant partner in the relationship. Unfortunately, the fetus has
no
defense against violence. That is something only the loving mother
can
provide.
http://www.silentscream.org/
Why are pro-choicers so quick to dispute their own existence?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam A. Wanderer" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
12 Apr 2007 07:00:13 PM |
|
|
It's just tissue, like an appendix or gall bladder, nothing more. It never
has been or ever will be. Up to the moment of birth, the mother has an
absolute right to federally funded, abortion on demand, without delay or
question, or notification of anyone else. No lies you have dreamt up will
ever change that. No "church" from the Dark Ages will change that. You
only wish to make decisions for others, and bear none of the responsibility,
none of the poverty, pain and suffering that unwanted children bring. When
the bills come in, a decade or two from now that you can't run away from,
for resisting abortion, for promoting unlimited growth (cancer) of
population and for all the other "values" a sick, degenerated, religious
minority brings, remember what you did!
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1176395772.959365.264960@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
The fetus is a pre-born infant, in many ways more truly an infant
than
the one in arms. The word infant means one unable to speak. But the
fetus cannot even have his/her cries heard! The invisible, inaudible
infant before birth is the same infant when visible and audible after
birth. No mysterious transformations are worked by passage through
the pelvic outlet from one location to another. The baby has the
same
family resemblances before birth as after birth. The infant born
prematurely at six months is no more distinct in features and traits
than another infant of the same age still inside the womb.
Though small, naked, nameless and voiceless, the fetus is
characterized
by fetologists as "a young human being, dynamic, plastic, resilient,
and in a very large measure in charge of his/her environment and
destiny." By three months, fetuses are perfectly formed, thumb sized
aquanauts. They swim, somersault, suck their thumbs and imbibe
amniotic fluid. They even refuse it when bitter and take more when
sweetened. They grimace and cry when stimuli are unpleasant,
obviously
aware of pain and discomfort. Their world is alive with sounds and
they respond to flashes of light. Rather than passively inhabiting
the
uterus, they purposely search for comfort by readjusting their
position
with each shift of their mothers' body. Modern research reveals that
it is the fetus more than the mother who directs the pregnancy and is
a
dominant partner in the relationship. Unfortunately, the fetus has
no
defense against violence. That is something only the loving mother
can
provide.
http://www.silentscream.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 02:33:47 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1176395772.959365.264960@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
The fetus is a pre-born infant, in many ways more truly an infant
than
the one in arms. The word infant means one unable to speak. But the
fetus cannot even have his/her cries heard! The invisible, inaudible
infant before birth is the same infant when visible and audible after
birth. No mysterious transformations are worked by passage through
the pelvic outlet from one location to another.
Stupid lie, once born, and after taking one breath of air, a baby can
not return to the womb, and live. The baby can no longer live on
nourishment from the umbilical cord. Instead it has to be fed, and
feeding can be done by just about any one. Up to birth, the developing
infant is solely dependent on the woman's body, taking valuable
resources from her. And in some cases causing her great harm.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
12 Apr 2007 11:34:48 PM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 06:20:55 AM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
17 Apr 2007 12:15:59 PM |
|
|
John D.Wentzky <johndwentzky@alumni.furman.edu> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
All criminals are human beings and since you're a human being then you
must be a criminal.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 06:57:36 AM |
|
|
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
as insane as a bloody hatter
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 07:01:38 AM |
|
|
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f6f9c$0$19246$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
as insane as a bloody hatter
You liked my response?
The logic of it is indisputable.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 09:28:55 AM |
|
|
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f6f9c$0$19246$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
as insane as a bloody hatter
You liked my response?
The logic of it is indisputable.
Let me put is in terms of maths
all infants are people
and
all people are born
implies
all infants are born
does not imply
all people are infants (which is what you said)
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 09:59:06 AM |
|
|
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f9312$0$21840$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f6f9c$0$19246$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
as insane as a bloody hatter
You liked my response?
The logic of it is indisputable.
Let me put is in terms of maths
all infants are people
True.
and
all people are born
Erroenous statement.
There are people who are not born yet.
implies all infants are born
Your second premise is not valid, which invalidates your conclusion.
does not imply
all people are infants (which is what you said)
I didn't say that, obfuscator.
I asked a question.
If Fischer said " infants, by definition, have all been born."
How is he not an infant, by his own statement, if he has been born?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 11:42:08 AM |
|
|
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f9312$0$21840$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f6f9c$0$19246$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
as insane as a bloody hatter
You liked my response?
The logic of it is indisputable.
Let me put is in terms of maths
all infants are people
True.
and
all people are born
Erroenous statement.
There are people who are not born yet.
implies all infants are born
Your second premise is not valid, which invalidates your conclusion.
Show me an unborn infant.
does not imply
all people are infants (which is what you said)
I didn't say that, obfuscator.
I asked a question.
If Fischer said " infants, by definition, have all been born."
How is he not an infant, by his own statement, if he has been born?
which part of "Not all people are infants" didn't you understand?
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 05:09:04 PM |
|
|
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461fb24b$0$6944$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f9312$0$21840$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Martin" <usenet1@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f6f9c$0$19246$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
as insane as a bloody hatter
You liked my response?
The logic of it is indisputable.
Let me put is in terms of maths
all infants are people
True.
and
all people are born
Erroenous statement.
There are people who are not born yet.
implies all infants are born
Your second premise is not valid, which invalidates your conclusion.
Show me an unborn infant.
Why?
Your logic is faulty.
does not imply
all people are infants (which is what you said)
I didn't say that, obfuscator.
I asked a question.
If Fischer said " infants, by definition, have all been born."
How is he not an infant, by his own statement, if he has been born?
which part of "Not all people are infants" didn't you understand?
Is Fischer born or not?
I was addressing his words.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 11:57:10 AM |
|
|
On 13 Apr., 14:01, "John D.Wentzky" <johndwent...@alumni.furman.edu>
wrote:
"Martin" <usen...@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:461f6f9c$0$19246$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfisc...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
as insane as a bloody hatter
You liked my response?
The logic of it is indisputable.
=E0 propos logic: how come your were arrested and convicted for indecent
exposure in 1997, Wentzky? Please, tell us.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 11:02:37 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 07:20:55 -0400, "John D.Wentzky"
<johndwentzky@alumni.furman.edu> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:461f0868$0$14145$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
Meaning you are an infant, right?
He was talking about you, John - but you're not a mental infant, the
term is mental midget.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 12:36:38 AM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
12 Apr 2007 11:43:33 PM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Be prepared to defend your accusations.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 10:54:35 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:43:33 -0400, "Osprey" <NoNeedtoknow@mail.com>
in alt.abortion with message-id
<G-udnTT0BM7hl4LbnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@comcast.com> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Be prepared to defend your accusations.
Anyone who advocate the freedom of choice not be available to a
pregnant woman or who advocates restricting this freedom in any way.
--
Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 12:18:01 AM |
|
|
Osprey <NoNeedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Don't play stupid, ***** - people can't tell when you're trying to
be smart.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 12:51:36 AM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian tactics
to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any of
these people. However, there ARE people (not in this newsgroup) that do
use authoritarian tactics to stop a woman from having an abortion (a
legal procedure, I might add), and also are willing to redefine fetuses
to be "infants".
Be prepared to defend your accusations.
Do you feel that there are accusations I'm making against posters to
this newsgroup? Please show where I have accused anyone.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
12 Apr 2007 11:53:59 PM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any of these
people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks" and then associated that
with "trying to use authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things
against their will".
Now, I have you pinned with your comments and you want to weasle your way
out.
Who were you refering to when you said "these are the same folks"???
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 01:00:20 AM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian
tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any of
these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
and then associated
that with "trying to use authoritarian tactics to force folks to do
things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Now, I have you pinned with your comments and you want to weasle your
way out.
Pinned? Funny. You're making a mountain out of flat ground. There's
no there here, Osprey. Chill out.
Who were you refering to when you said "these are the same folks"???
No one, Osprey.
I am comparing hypocrites that redefine words and attack others for
doing so to those that use authoritarian tactics.
Here, let me diagram it out for you:
A is similar to B.
B also does C.
A has no relation to C.
Get it?
Mice are gray like elephants.
Elephants have long trunks.
Now you're saying that I'm saying mice have long trunks?
Really, you need a refresher course in logic, Osprey.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 12:03:30 AM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdnVP7zqTIk4LbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian tactics
to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any of
these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
LOL..what a moron you are. You have an excuse for everything don't you?
and then associated that with "trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Nope, I do very well at this...it's what bothers you. One of the reasons I
conduct hearings, is because I can read between the lines very well.
Now, you associated that comment directly with "these are the same folks".
Who are the "folks" you are referring to?
Now, I have you pinned with your comments and you want to weasle your way
out.
Pinned? Funny. You're making a mountain out of flat ground. There's no
there here, Osprey. Chill out.
Nope, I got you where I want you right now.
Who were you refering to when you said "these are the same folks"???
No one, Osprey.
Oh, so you just arbitrarily throw out baseless statements for the hell of
it??
I am comparing hypocrites that redefine words and attack others for doing
so to those that use authoritarian tactics.
Here, let me diagram it out for you:
A is similar to B.
B also does C.
A has no relation to C.
Get it?
You're a loser trying to make up a quick excuse.
Mice are gray like elephants.
Elephants have long trunks.
Now you're saying that I'm saying mice have long trunks?
Really, you need a refresher course in logic, Osprey.
You couldn't last five minutes in a court room with me..:o)
You just tried a fancy trick to weasle out of your comments. Typical
liberal...never bright enough to actually stand up and take responsibility.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 12:01:36 PM |
|
|
On 13 Apr., 07:03, "Osprey" <NoNeedtok...@mail.com> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdnVP7zqTIk4LbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian tactics
to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any of
these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
LOL..what a moron you are. You have an excuse for everything don't you?
and then associated that with "trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Nope, I do very well at this...it's what bothers you. One of the reasons I
conduct hearings, is because I can read between the lines very well.
Now, you associated that comment directly with "these are the same folks".
Who are the "folks" you are referring to?
Now, I have you pinned with your comments and you want to weasle your way
out.
Pinned? Funny. You're making a mountain out of flat ground. There's no
there here, Osprey. Chill out.
Nope, I got you where I want you right now.
Who were you refering to when you said "these are the same folks"???
No one, Osprey.
Oh, so you just arbitrarily throw out baseless statements for the hell of
it??
I am comparing hypocrites that redefine words and attack others for doing
so to those that use authoritarian tactics.
Here, let me diagram it out for you:
A is similar to B.
B also does C.
A has no relation to C.
Get it?
You're a loser trying to make up a quick excuse.
Mice are gray like elephants.
Elephants have long trunks.
Now you're saying that I'm saying mice have long trunks?
Really, you need a refresher course in logic, Osprey.
You couldn't last five minutes in a court room with me..:o)
You just tried a fancy trick to weasle out of your comments. Typical
liberal...never bright enough to actually stand up and take responsibility.
I'm starting to think that Osprey and Duke are the same person: they
use the same tactic!!! In a discussion, they play dumb, then they try
to convince us that they're really dumb and they turn out to be
totally dumb!
Do you think you're going anywhere with that Osprey?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 01:16:58 AM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdnVP7zqTIk4LbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying
to "redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian
tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to
use authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their
will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any of
these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
LOL..what a moron you are. You have an excuse for everything don't you?
I'm not sure the need for the insult. Are you attempting to divert
attention away from the subject?
and then associated that with "trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Nope, I do very well at this...it's what bothers you.
Someone call Johns Hopkins. Osprey here can suss out the feelings of a
person through their text.
One of the
reasons I conduct hearings, is because I can read between the lines very
well.
Then why aren't you?
Now, you associated that comment directly with "these are the same folks".
You missed a word when you "read between the lines." That word is "like."
Who are the "folks" you are referring to?
Anti-homosexual bigots. They try to change the laws to disallow
homosexuals from getting married and use authoritarian tactics (like the
death penatly for Matthew Shepard) in order to advance their
anti-homosexual agendum.
Now, I have you pinned with your comments and you want to weasle your
way out.
Pinned? Funny. You're making a mountain out of flat ground. There's
no there here, Osprey. Chill out.
Nope, I got you where I want you right now.
And where is that?
Who were you refering to when you said "these are the same folks"???
No one, Osprey.
Oh, so you just arbitrarily throw out baseless statements for the hell
of it??
You obviously are unable to read.
I am comparing hypocrites that redefine words and attack others for
doing so to those that use authoritarian tactics.
Here, let me diagram it out for you:
A is similar to B.
B also does C.
A has no relation to C.
Get it?
You're a loser trying to make up a quick excuse.
And again with the insults. It seems that, when you are unable to "get"
something on someone, you feel the need to insult them. Tell me,
Osprey, why is this?
Mice are gray like elephants.
Elephants have long trunks.
Now you're saying that I'm saying mice have long trunks?
Really, you need a refresher course in logic, Osprey.
You couldn't last five minutes in a court room with me..:o)
And why would I be in a courtroom with you?
You just tried a fancy trick to weasle out of your comments. Typical
liberal...never bright enough to actually stand up and take responsibility.
Possibly because I'm not accusing anyone (your claim, which I have
refuted) in this newsgroup of anything?
You're the one weaseling out, Osprey, not I.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 12:20:08 AM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:ufqdnYSpLOymj4LbnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdnVP7zqTIk4LbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying to
"redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian
tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to use
authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any of
these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
LOL..what a moron you are. You have an excuse for everything don't you?
I'm not sure the need for the insult. Are you attempting to divert
attention away from the subject?
Not at all, your comment was directed at someone. Now, I am trying to
clarify who that someone is, and you simply refuse to say.
and then associated that with "trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Nope, I do very well at this...it's what bothers you.
Someone call Johns Hopkins. Osprey here can suss out the feelings of a
person through their text.
One of the reasons I conduct hearings, is because I can read between the
lines very well.
Then why aren't you?
Now, you associated that comment directly with "these are the same
folks".
You missed a word when you "read between the lines." That word is
"like."
Who are the "folks" you are referring to?
Anti-homosexual bigots.
Anti-homosexual bigots?
Oh puh-lease..
They try to change the laws to disallow
homosexuals from getting married and use authoritarian tactics (like the
death penatly for Matthew Shepard)
Please tell me who used authoritarian tactics.
As far as I know, more than 80% of the public is very willing to compramise
and accept "civil unions".
What's wrong, you can't compramise???
in order to advance their
anti-homosexual agendum.
And what is this "agenda"?
Now, I have you pinned with your comments and you want to weasle your
way out.
Pinned? Funny. You're making a mountain out of flat ground. There's
no there here, Osprey. Chill out.
Nope, I got you where I want you right now.
And where is that?
Right now between a rock and a hard place because you can't actually support
your comments.
Who were you refering to when you said "these are the same folks"???
No one, Osprey.
Oh, so you just arbitrarily throw out baseless statements for the hell of
it??
You obviously are unable to read.
I am comparing hypocrites that redefine words and attack others for
doing so to those that use authoritarian tactics.
Here, let me diagram it out for you:
A is similar to B.
B also does C.
A has no relation to C.
Get it?
You're a loser trying to make up a quick excuse.
And again with the insults. It seems that, when you are unable to "get"
something on someone, you feel the need to insult them. Tell me, Osprey,
why is this?
Mice are gray like elephants.
Elephants have long trunks.
Now you're saying that I'm saying mice have long trunks?
Really, you need a refresher course in logic, Osprey.
You couldn't last five minutes in a court room with me..:o)
And why would I be in a courtroom with you?
You just tried a fancy trick to weasle out of your comments. Typical
liberal...never bright enough to actually stand up and take
responsibility.
Possibly because I'm not accusing anyone (your claim, which I have
refuted) in this newsgroup of anything?
You're the one weaseling out, Osprey, not I.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 01:25:20 AM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:ufqdnYSpLOymj4LbnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdnVP7zqTIk4LbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying
to "redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian
tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to
use authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against
their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any
of these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
LOL..what a moron you are. You have an excuse for everything don't you?
I'm not sure the need for the insult. Are you attempting to divert
attention away from the subject?
Not at all, your comment was directed at someone. Now, I am trying to
clarify who that someone is, and you simply refuse to say.
Because there is no one.
and then associated that with "trying to use authoritarian tactics
to force folks to do things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Nope, I do very well at this...it's what bothers you.
Someone call Johns Hopkins. Osprey here can suss out the feelings of
a person through their text.
One of the reasons I conduct hearings, is because I can read between
the lines very well.
Then why aren't you?
Now, you associated that comment directly with "these are the same
folks".
You missed a word when you "read between the lines." That word is
"like."
Who are the "folks" you are referring to?
Anti-homosexual bigots.
Anti-homosexual bigots?
Yes.
Oh puh-lease..
And now comes the handwaving brush off.
They try to change the laws to disallow
homosexuals from getting married and use authoritarian tactics (like
the death penatly for Matthew Shepard)
Please tell me who used authoritarian tactics.
As far as I know, more than 80% of the public is very willing to
compramise and accept "civil unions".
And the 20% of the public that isn't?
What's wrong, you can't compramise???
I let it go the first time, but the use of that spelling the second time
showed me that you don't know how to spell that word. It's "Compromise"
and yes, I can.
in order to advance their
anti-homosexual agendum.
And what is this "agenda"?
Agenda is plural for agendum, Osprey.
Their agendum is to make homosexuals second class citizens; those
without the same rights of what they would call "normal people."
Now, I have you pinned with your comments and you want to weasle
your way out.
Pinned? Funny. You're making a mountain out of flat ground.
There's no there here, Osprey. Chill out.
Nope, I got you where I want you right now.
And where is that?
Right now between a rock and a hard place because you can't actually
support your comments.
You're making this outlandish claim (that I'm accusing someone on this
newsgroup of something) and are unable to back it up.
What's the matter, Osprey? Can't back up your claim?
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 12:27:24 AM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:g9ednQa4Cv-siYLbnZ2dnUVZ_vamnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:ufqdnYSpLOymj4LbnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdnVP7zqTIk4LbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying
to "redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian
tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to
use authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against their
will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any of
these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
LOL..what a moron you are. You have an excuse for everything don't
you?
I'm not sure the need for the insult. Are you attempting to divert
attention away from the subject?
Not at all, your comment was directed at someone. Now, I am trying to
clarify who that someone is, and you simply refuse to say.
Because there is no one.
So there are no "folks" then. You just made it up.
and then associated that with "trying to use authoritarian tactics to
force folks to do things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Nope, I do very well at this...it's what bothers you.
Someone call Johns Hopkins. Osprey here can suss out the feelings of a
person through their text.
One of the reasons I conduct hearings, is because I can read between
the lines very well.
Then why aren't you?
Now, you associated that comment directly with "these are the same
folks".
You missed a word when you "read between the lines." That word is
"like."
Who are the "folks" you are referring to?
Anti-homosexual bigots.
Anti-homosexual bigots?
Yes.
Oh puh-lease..
And now comes the handwaving brush off.
They try to change the laws to disallow
homosexuals from getting married and use authoritarian tactics (like the
death penatly for Matthew Shepard)
Please tell me who used authoritarian tactics.
As far as I know, more than 80% of the public is very willing to
compramise and accept "civil unions".
And the 20% of the public that isn't?
Probably most of them are undecided.
What's wrong, you can't compramise???
I let it go the first time, but the use of that spelling the second time
showed me that you don't know how to spell that word. It's "Compromise"
and yes, I can.
Then you can accept a civil union.
As far as your "spelling" comment, I didn't use spell check and I'm in the
middle of a case brief and frankly didn't care to waste time on you using
spell check. I'm simply just taking small breaks at the moment while
reviewing notes.
in order to advance their
anti-homosexual agendum.
And what is this "agenda"?
Agenda is plural for agendum, Osprey.
Their agendum is to make homosexuals second class citizens; those without
the same rights of what they would call "normal people."
And who are these people you are refering to? Start identifying.
Now, I have you pinned with your comments and you want to weasle your
way out.
Pinned? Funny. You're making a mountain out of flat ground. There's
no there here, Osprey. Chill out.
Nope, I got you where I want you right now.
And where is that?
Right now between a rock and a hard place because you can't actually
support your comments.
You're making this outlandish claim (that I'm accusing someone on this
newsgroup of something) and are unable to back it up.
What's the matter, Osprey? Can't back up your claim?
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 01:31:26 AM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:g9ednQa4Cv-siYLbnZ2dnUVZ_vamnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:ufqdnYSpLOymj4LbnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdnVP7zqTIk4LbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for
trying to "redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian
tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried
to use authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things
against their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know
any of these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
LOL..what a moron you are. You have an excuse for everything don't
you?
I'm not sure the need for the insult. Are you attempting to divert
attention away from the subject?
Not at all, your comment was directed at someone. Now, I am trying
to clarify who that someone is, and you simply refuse to say.
Because there is no one.
So there are no "folks" then. You just made it up.
No, the "folks" I'm referring to are not members of these newsgroups (as
far as I know).
and then associated that with "trying to use authoritarian
tactics to force folks to do things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Nope, I do very well at this...it's what bothers you.
Someone call Johns Hopkins. Osprey here can suss out the feelings
of a person through their text.
One of the reasons I conduct hearings, is because I can read
between the lines very well.
Then why aren't you?
Now, you associated that comment directly with "these are the same
folks".
You missed a word when you "read between the lines." That word is
"like."
Who are the "folks" you are referring to?
Anti-homosexual bigots.
Anti-homosexual bigots?
Yes.
Oh puh-lease..
And now comes the handwaving brush off.
They try to change the laws to disallow
homosexuals from getting married and use authoritarian tactics (like
the death penatly for Matthew Shepard)
Please tell me who used authoritarian tactics.
As far as I know, more than 80% of the public is very willing to
compramise and accept "civil unions".
And the 20% of the public that isn't?
Probably most of them are undecided.
And those that aren't?
What's wrong, you can't compramise???
I let it go the first time, but the use of that spelling the second
time showed me that you don't know how to spell that word. It's
"Compromise" and yes, I can.
Then you can accept a civil union.
I do, for now. Civil unions are a "separate but equal" compromise that
I'll have to live with for now.
As far as your "spelling" comment, I didn't use spell check and I'm in
the middle of a case brief and frankly didn't care to waste time on you
using spell check. I'm simply just taking small breaks at the moment
while reviewing notes.
That's fine. I'm just letting you know the correct spelling. :-)
in order to advance their
anti-homosexual agendum.
And what is this "agenda"?
Agenda is plural for agendum, Osprey.
Their agendum is to make homosexuals second class citizens; those
without the same rights of what they would call "normal people."
And who are these people you are refering to? Start identifying.
Pat Robertson. Jerry Falwell. Fred Phelps. For starters.
I am unable to prove if folks such as these are members of these newsgroups.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Repost: The pre-born child |
13 Apr 2007 12:36:31 AM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:LNadnYJ1QIQCiILbnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:g9ednQa4Cv-siYLbnZ2dnUVZ_vamnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:ufqdnYSpLOymj4LbnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdnVP7zqTIk4LbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:q6idndmf3PXVkYLbnZ2dnUVZ_oTinZ2d@comcast.com...
Osprey wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9sadnZkhYLJalYLbnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@comcast.com...
Ray Fischer wrote:
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
The fetus is a pre-born infant,
A stupid lie since infants, by definition, have all been born.
And these are the same folks who lambaste homosexuals for trying
to "redefine marriage."
It would be funny if they weren't trying to use authoritarian
tactics to force folks to do things against their will.
Please identify the person(s) in this newsgroup who has tried to
use authoritarian tactics to force folks to do things against
their will.
I haven't named anyone in this newsgroup because I don't know any
of these people.
You specifically said "these are the same folks"
(a comparison phrase)
LOL..what a moron you are. You have an excuse for everything don't
you?
I'm not sure the need for the insult. Are you attempting to divert
attention away from the subject?
Not at all, your comment was directed at someone. Now, I am trying to
clarify who that someone is, and you simply refuse to say.
Because there is no one.
So there are no "folks" then. You just made it up.
No, the "folks" I'm referring to are not members of these newsgroups (as
far as I know).
Forget the newsgroup, you can't identify anyone..in the newsgroup our
outside.
and then associated that with "trying to use authoritarian tactics
to force folks to do things against their will".
You really need reading comprehension.
Nope, I do very well at this...it's what bothers you.
Someone call Johns Hopkins. Osprey here can suss out the feelings of
a person through their text.
One of the reasons I conduct hearings, is because I can read between
the lines very well.
Then why aren't you?
Now, you associated that comment directly with "these are the same
folks".
You missed a word when you "read between the lines." That word is
"like."
Who are the "folks" you are referring to?
Anti-homosexual bigots.
Anti-homosexual bigots?
Yes.
Oh puh-lease..
And now comes the handwaving brush off.
They try to change the laws to disallow
homosexuals from getting married and use authoritarian tactics (like
the death penatly for Matthew Shepard)
Please tell me who used authoritarian tactics.
As far as I know, more than 80% of the public is very willing to
compramise and accept "civil unions".
And the 20% of the public that isn't?
Probably most of them are undecided.
And those that aren't?
I'm sure a very small percentage are unwilling to accept civil unions and
want marriage.
What's wrong, you can't compramise???
I let it go the first time, but the use of that spelling the second time
showed me that you don't know how to spell that word. It's "Compromise"
and yes, I can.
Then you can accept a civil union.
I do, for now.
Alright then, I too think it's a fair compromise.
Civil unions are a "separate but equal" compromise that
I'll have to live with for now.
As far as your "spelling" comment, I didn't use spell check and I'm in
the middle of a case brief and frankly didn't care to waste time on you
using spell check. I'm simply just taking small breaks at the moment
while reviewing notes.
That's fine. I'm just letting you know the correct spelling. :-)
in order to advance their
anti-homosexual agendum.
And what is this "agenda"?
Agenda is plural for agendum, Osprey.
Their agendum is to make homosexuals second class citizens; those
without the same rights of what they would call "normal people."
And who are these people you are refering to? Start identifying.
Pat Robertson. Jerry Falwell. Fred Phelps. For starters.
I agree, they are extreme.
I don't care for the act of homosexuality at all, speaking for myself. I
think that the "act" itself is just totally against how nature intended
things to be. BUT...I don't hate the person.
I am unable to prove if folks such as these are members of these
newsgroups.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
