home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!garvin
- From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
- Subject: Re: Estimates of the incidence of illegal abortions
- Message-ID: <C1Dusu.LI4.1@cs.cmu.edu>
- Sender: news@cs.cmu.edu (Usenet News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: morpheus.cimds.ri.cmu.edu
- Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
- References: <1993Jan21.014921.9070@ncsu.edu> <C19Gyv.5tx.1@cs.cmu.edu> <1993Jan22.164351.24570@ncsu.edu>
- Distribution: na
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:02:53 GMT
- Lines: 52
-
- In article <1993Jan22.164351.24570@ncsu.edu> dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
- #In article <C19Gyv.5tx.1@cs.cmu.edu>
- #garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
- ##dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
- #
- ### +##The incidence of illegal abortion in 1860 has NOTHING to do with the
- ### +##ruling in Roe v Wade in 1973. Comparing medical practices across this
- ### +##vast time is like comparing a slide rule with a supercomputer.
- ##
- ### +#Actually, it has something to do with it. Unlike you, Blackmun researched
- ### +#the issue before stating his opinion. You might try learning something
- ### +#about the issue.
- ###
- ### <C0wM37.KE2.1@cs.cmu.edu#
- ### garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
- ###
- ### And now we see Ms. Garvin furiously back-pedaling from that suggestion.
- #
- ## No, I've yet to backpedal from the suggestion that Justice
- ## Blackmun did research into the abortion issue.
- #
- #That's not the suggestion I'm referring to, Garvin. You made
- #the suggestion that the *incidence* of illegal abortion in 1860
- #has "something to do with" the ruling in Roe v. Wade in 1973.
- #Just what is the exact relationship, Garvin?
-
- I stated it above. You even managed to preserve the context this
- time. Maybe you can now manage to read the text that you quoted.
-
- #Remember, we're
- #not talking about the dangers of illegal abortion, as Kaflowitz
- #has suggested, but rather the *incidence* of illegal abortion.
- #Look at the subject line if you forget.
-
- I guess reading the net is really confusing for you, huh, DODie?
- I mean, if you still think that the contents of a particular
- article are always limited to the topic given in a subject line,
- then you must believe that most people, including yourself,
- are insane. Perhaps this explains why you so frequently
- assume that other people share your particular fantasies
- and logical lapses.
-
- I quoted estimates of death rates in the original article.
- You deleted them from your reply, as is your habit, so
- perhaps you have forgotten that they were there. Thanks
- for giving me another laugh - I love it when your selective
- editing makes you look like a fool.
-
- Susan
-
-
-
-