The Chief Instigator wrote:

--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> writes:

Gaia wrote:

Whatever happened to Amanda? ;-)

She's been conspicuously absent, hasn't she? Still licking her wounds, you
reckon, or did her husband take away her Internet?

...or did she move south and transform into "S. Maizlich"? ;-)

Hmmmm, she did pop up at the same time Amanda vanished from radar.......

The Chief Instigator wrote:

--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> writes:

Gaia wrote:

Whatever happened to Amanda? ;-)

She's been conspicuously absent, hasn't she? Still licking her wounds, you
reckon, or did her husband take away her Internet?

...or did she move south and transform into "S. Maizlich"? ;-)

One never knows. They're about on the same grade level (early elementary).

The Chief Instigator wrote:

--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> writes:

Gaia wrote:

Whatever happened to Amanda? ;-)

She's been conspicuously absent, hasn't she? Still licking her wounds, you
reckon, or did her husband take away her Internet?

...or did she move south and transform into "S. Maizlich"? ;-)

One never knows. They're about on the same grade level (early elementary).

--
--sexkitten--
Sneechres on marital rape:
1414fd53.0312142051.5e760545@posting.google.com
Marriage is a contract in which everything is shared, including
bodies. What's yours is his and what's his is yours.
By withholding sex from him you violated your marriage vows. You
stole from your husband what was rightfully his.
1126802087.688528.21760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Making your mind up is called the marriage
certificate. If you want to change it, it's called a divorce.
1414fd53.0311032335.47dd4971@posting.google.com
How would a witnesses' opinion, or a DA's opinion, or
a jurist's opinion, or a judge's opinion of the significance of force
involved be relevant?
The issue is that you think the government and it's
various judicial arms should act as people's parents and guardians,
even when it isn't there and can't possibly mediate what goes on in the
privacy of someone's bedroom without resorting to testimony--"he said,
she said".

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

The Chief Instigator wrote:

--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> writes:

Gaia wrote:

Whatever happened to Amanda? ;-)

She's been conspicuously absent, hasn't she? Still licking her wounds, you
reckon, or did her husband take away her Internet?

...or did she move south and transform into "S. Maizlich"? ;-)

Does Amanda have a history of spreading lies about specific Vietnam vets being
"baby killers"?

The Chief Instigator wrote:

--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> writes:

Gaia wrote:

Whatever happened to Amanda? ;-)

She's been conspicuously absent, hasn't she? Still licking her
wounds, you
reckon, or did her husband take away her Internet?

...or did she move south and transform into "S. Maizlich"? ;-)

Does Amanda have a history of spreading lies about specific Vietnam vets
being "baby killers"?

--sexkitten-- wrote:

S. Maizlich wrote:

--sexkitten-- wrote:

S. Maizlich wrote:

Lars Eighner lied:

In our last episode,
<7jdjf.7483$wf.7337@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>, the lovely
and talented S. Maizlich broadcast on alt.atheism:

Lars Eighner lied:

Why do anti-choice people

No such people, little lars.

call themselves "pro-life"? You don't
see them protesting executions.

I think they feel people who have been sentenced to death have
forfeited their right to life. For the record, and if it makes
you feel any better, little Lars, I am vehemently and adamantly
and unalterably opposed to the death penalty. However, it has
nothing to do with some "reverence for life" crapola, so perhaps
my position doesn't matter to you.

They aren't camping out with
Cindy Sheehan. They clearly are not "pro-life" when it comes to
living persons. And for that matter, they have no problem with
having a tumor or a wart cut off.

A tumor or a wart isn't *a* life. It's living tissue, and if it
comes from a human it's human tissue, but it isn't *a* human.

Exactly!! And neither is a fetus.

Yes, it certainly is. It has all the DNA needed to grow into
complete human being,

...but it isn't one yet.

It is indeed a developing human being.

A "developing" human being, in the same way that a tadpole is a
"developing" frog. IOW, it isn't one yet.

It is human life. I don't care about frogs.

--sexkitten-- wrote:

S. Maizlich wrote:

--sexkitten-- wrote:

S. Maizlich wrote:

Lars Eighner lied:

In our last episode,
<7jdjf.7483$wf.7337@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>, the lovely
and talented S. Maizlich broadcast on alt.atheism:

Lars Eighner lied:

Why do anti-choice people

No such people, little lars.

call themselves "pro-life"? You don't
see them protesting executions.

I think they feel people who have been sentenced to death have
forfeited their right to life. For the record, and if it makes
you feel any better, little Lars, I am vehemently and adamantly
and unalterably opposed to the death penalty. However, it has
nothing to do with some "reverence for life" crapola, so perhaps
my position doesn't matter to you.

They aren't camping out with
Cindy Sheehan. They clearly are not "pro-life" when it comes to
living persons. And for that matter, they have no problem with
having a tumor or a wart cut off.

A tumor or a wart isn't *a* life. It's living tissue, and if it
comes from a human it's human tissue, but it isn't *a* human.

Exactly!! And neither is a fetus.

Yes, it certainly is. It has all the DNA needed to grow into
complete human being,

...but it isn't one yet.

It is indeed a developing human being.

A "developing" human being, in the same way that a tadpole is a
"developing" frog. IOW, it isn't one yet.

not the greatest analogy, a tadpole is outside and separate from its
mother :)