home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!mmm.serc.3m.com!pwcs!chrisl
- From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
- Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade is unrestricted abortion on demand throughout pregnancy
- Message-ID: <1992Nov20.162934.1161@pwcs.stpaul.gov>
- Sender: news@pwcs.stpaul.gov (USENET news administration)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: krang
- Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
- References: <1992Nov12.213408.3653@pwcs.stpaul.gov> <1992Nov20.005417.9449@ncsu.edu>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:29:34 GMT
- Lines: 73
-
- dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
- > chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
- >> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
-
- >>> Why hasn't anyone addressed the documentation which I have
- >>> provided showing that Roe v. Wade is unrestricted abortion-
- >>> on-demand? I've provided sources from the Alan Guttmacher
- >>> Institute, an ACLU attorney who argued in PP v. Casey,
- >>> a respected Georgetown University law professor, and
- >>> an article written in the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties
- >>> Law Review. Not one person has refuted any of these sources.
-
- >> There were about a half-dozen refutations of your sources last summer, Doug.
- >> J. Greenfield in particular showed how the meaning of the texts you quoted
- >> changed completely when restored to their contexts.
-
- > I remember Jeff Greenfield as being the only person who attempted to
- > address my sources. None of my sources had been taken out of context.
- > Jeff Greenfield made that accusation because he knew he had lost the
- > argument, and he was getting desperate. He couldn't debate me without
- > slinging dirt.
-
- Liar. Susan Garvin saved those posts, in case your memory needs refreshing.
- I had them saved too, but deleted them before I realized that you'd become
- trapped in endless recursion on this issue.
-
- >> [--RvW excerpt deleted--]
-
- >>> Are you telling me that Kathyrn Kolbert, attorney for the ACLU
- >>> in PP v. Casey, is a liar?
-
- >> No, I am telling you that you are a liar.
-
- > I'm simply quoting Kathyrn Kolbert, attorney for the ACLU. You're calling
- > her a liar.
-
- I wish I'd saved all the posts demonstrating your lack of reading skills.
- First you had trouble discerning the difference between "want" and "deserve."
- Now it's "you" and "Kathyrn Kolbert." Do you have any idea how ridiculous
- you look?
-
- >>> Is the Alan Guttmacher Institute a pack of liars?
-
- >> No, I am telling you that you are a liar.
-
- > I'm simply quoting the Alan Guttmacher Institute. You're calling them
- > a pack of liars.
-
- Now you're having trouble discerning the difference between "you" and
- "Alan Guttmacher Institute." When you get up in the morning, how can
- you be sure you're brushing the right person's teeth?
-
- >>> Remember, these people support abortion rights, and they say that women
- >>> can obtain abortions during the third trimester for very broadly defined
- >>> ``health'' reasons.
-
- >> Indeed. It's been pointed out before that less than 100 abortions are
- >> performed in the U.S. after the 24th week. The source of that tidbit of
- >> information is the Alan Guttmacher Institute.
-
- > There are several thousand abortions performed annually after the 21st week
- > of pregnancy (viability starts at around the 22nd to 23rd week).
-
- Viability in how many cases? Suppose, Doug, that through heroic medical
- intervention costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and involving
- hundreds of work hours for medical professionals, 1 preemy at 20 weeks
- of gestation was saved out of, say, 100. Do we say that viability starts
- at 20 weeks?
-
- --
- Chris Lyman / email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov / standard disclaimers
- "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's
- character, give him power." -- Abraham Lincoln
-