home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31 / NN_1992_31.iso / spool / talk / abortion / 52943 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1992-12-24  |  1.0 KB  |  26 lines
  1. Newsgroups: talk.abortion
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!usc!rpi!keegan
  3. From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
  4. Subject: Re: Equal protection dead end? 4.
  5. Message-ID: <vyv2txr@rpi.edu>
  6. Nntp-Posting-Host: hermes.acm.rpi.edu
  7. Organization: T.S.A.K.C.
  8. References: <34473@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU> <34476@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU> <34481@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU> <1992Dec22.172635.27009@rotag.mi.org>
  9. Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 13:24:44 GMT
  10. Lines: 14
  11.  
  12. kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
  13. ->smezias@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias) writes:
  14. ->>If someone wants to advocate a legislative agenda of restricting the
  15. ->>rights of some traditionallly disenfranchised group, I will certainly
  16. ->>accuse them of hating this group.  
  17.  
  18. ->It has not been proven that the primary intent of the legislative agenda is
  19. ->to restrict the rights of women. The position of pro-life has been, is, and
  20. ->probably always will be, to protect fetal life.
  21.  
  22. you're in a better position than most to address what
  23. is and what is not the primary intent of the
  24. anti-choice wackos, aren't you?
  25.  
  26.