Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate

APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9, 1994 128
rohuck@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (HUCK ROBERT O) writes:
>james g. keegan jr. (keegan@helios.acm.rpi.edu) wrote:
[deletions]
>: : Do you get my point?
>: is it that you, like most anti-choicers, need to shriek
>: emotionally laden words like "kill defenseless
>: children" in the hope of intimidating teh few who might
>: believe you?
>Readers please note - Mr. Keegan offered no proof to support his claim,
>he merely threw around charges of intimidation. If you cannot address
>the issues I discussed, save the bandwidth.
And readers...while you’re at it, please note that Mr. Huck has
been ignoring questions I asked of him. For example, when he earlier
stated that granting a fetus full rights from the moment of conception
was the safest alternative I asked
"Safest for whom?"
no reply
As when I also asked him if he has the right to be inside my body
against my will
Oh...he must be saving bandwidth :-)
>: : Furthermore, I refuse to defend myself or any other pro-lifer I know
>: : against charges of sexism.
>: that makes sense. it wouldn’t work anyway.
>Once again, you conveniently deleted what came next. For those who did
>not read my previous article, I went on to say that any woman I know (even
>those who are pro-choice) know that I am not a sexist. Fortunately,
Ah...and you can’t be a bigot because your best friend is a (whatever).
Sorry...but your stated stance concerning abortion speaks for you,
Robert. If your views discriminate specifically against a gender (women),
that’s sexist...no matter what your friends think.
>my friends are open-minded. Mr. Keegan obviously is not. He seems to
I do not see Mr. Keegan discriminating against women here.
see you doing such...who is "open-minded"?
I do
>have a litmus test to determine a person’s level of mysogyny.
>is never that simple.
Sexism
As you’ll someday (hopefully) find out.
Nora