Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate
Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate
APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9, 1994 154 >In article , >Matt Friedman wrote: >>I think that the pro-life movement should have taken an acative stand, >>publicly, against that type of terrorism and violence. Since the shootings >>they have condemned the violence, but that’s just locking the barn door. >In the last shooting they took up a fund to support the murderer’s family. >The blood is on their hands. On whose hands? I don’t condone that kind of action. If some one in the prolife camp does that then they to have demonstrated contempt for human life (how ever disgusting that life may be) and are thus not truely pro-life anymore. They’re in the pro-choice camp now. They were free to choose thier course of action and they made that choice. The only difference is that they will be punished for thier crime and the surgions who perform abortions will not be punished for thier crime. Both however have taken a human life and both will have to answer for that eventually. The taking of human life is wrong in all circumstances. He who takes a human life before or after birth is a murderer and I can only pray that they will ask forgiveness in time. Russel. Article 42 Reference 161812 From keegan@helios.acm.rpi.edu Date Thu, Aug 4, 1994 12:02 PM wrote to liar ray: : Is there some reason why you seem to have completely reversed your : position on this issue? Jeez, I hate to say it.....maybe Keegan was : right about you....... what do you mean "maybe?" i’ve documented every claim i made about ray with full reposts. most times this has been done dozens of times as lair ray deletes them and denies their presence. -- "A woman’s rights to her body should stop where the fetus’s body begins." Ray Fischer Article 43 Reference 161828 From BGibbins@harris.com Date Thu, Aug 4, 1994 1:12 PM >In article rohuck@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (HUCK ROBERT O) writes: >>Do you think it’s any accident that illegitimacy rates have skyrocketed
APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9, 1994 155 >>since 1973? In article , kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) wrote: >Illegitimacy rates were starting to skyrocket long before 1973 -- we’re just >seeing the continuation of a long-term trend. Could the two of you please define what "illegitimacy" means? When watching the 6pm news the other night I found a newscaster in error (and I called the station). She said that "children born to unwed mothers have gone up (something like) 75% in the past 10 (or so) years". Then she made a comment that it was "sad that so many children lived with only one parent". Those two only have limited connection. Not all women who are single are NOT living with the father. It just means that they are unmarried. The woman is forced to list her marital status on the hospital admission papers, then this information becomes a part of the "public" record where it is then misinterpreted. BTW, not a flame. entirely accurate. I’m just pointing out that those figures are not Bright Blessings -- Brian ------ Article 44 Reference 161829 From reddeg@VAX309.NHRC.NAVY.MIL Date Thu, Aug 4, 1994 1:31 PM You said: >It is very easy to portray pro-lifers in the worst manner possible. That is >it is easy if you ignore facts. I mentioned this in a posting on another >thread, but it bears repeating here. You say that "there are no ’defenseless >children’ killed in an abortion". Prove it. Offer concrete medical >evidence to support your claim. I will not engage in name calling or >sloganeering. I wish to discuss only facts that can be proved by >scientific methods. In this spirit, I offer the following incontrovertable >scientific/medical evidence. > >1) It is impossible for one person to have two blood types. When a woman >is pregnant, she has her blood type and the unborn child has her or his >blood type. In the case of fraternal twins, there can be three different >blood types. > >2) It is impossible for one person to have 46 pairs of chromosones. When >a woman is pregnant, she has the 23 pairs of chromosones she received >from her parents at conception and the unborn child has his or her 23 >pairs (24 in the case of children with Down’s Syndrome) of >chromosones. > >3) It is impossible for one person to have two hearts beating at different
- Page 103 and 104: CHAPTER 7. THE EXPANDING PUBLIC SPH
- Page 105 and 106: CHAPTER 7. THE EXPANDING PUBLIC SPH
- Page 107 and 108: Appendix A The talk.abortion newsgr
- Page 109 and 110: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 111 and 112: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 113 and 114: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 115 and 116: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 117 and 118: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 119 and 120: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 121 and 122: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 123 and 124: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 125 and 126: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 127 and 128: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 129 and 130: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 131 and 132: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 133 and 134: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 135 and 136: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 137 and 138: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 139 and 140: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 141 and 142: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 143 and 144: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 145 and 146: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 147 and 148: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 149 and 150: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 151 and 152: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 153: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 157 and 158: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 159 and 160: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 161 and 162: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 163 and 164: Appendix B Density Scores Table B.1
- Page 165 and 166: APPENDIX B. DENSITY SCORES 165 Tabl
- Page 167 and 168: Appendix C Supplemental Analysis 16
- Page 169 and 170: APPENDIX C. SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS 1
- Page 171 and 172: APPENDIX C. SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS 1
- Page 173 and 174: APPENDIX C. SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS 1
- Page 175 and 176: APPENDIX C. SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS 1
- Page 177 and 178: BIBLIOGRAPHY 177 Best, Michael L. 1
- Page 179 and 180: BIBLIOGRAPHY 179 Fisher, Bonnie, Mi
- Page 181 and 182: BIBLIOGRAPHY 181 Hiltz, Starr Roxan
- Page 183 and 184: BIBLIOGRAPHY 183 Mansbridge, Jane.
- Page 185 and 186: BIBLIOGRAPHY 185 Pateman, Carole. 1
- Page 187 and 188: BIBLIOGRAPHY 187 Savicki, Victor, D
- Page 189: BIBLIOGRAPHY 189 U. S. Congress, Of
APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9, 1994 155<br />
>>since 1973?<br />
In article , kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin<br />
Darcy) wrote:<br />
>Illegitimacy rates were starting to skyrocket long before 1973 -- we’re just<br />
>seeing <strong>the</strong> continuation of a long-term trend.<br />
Could <strong>the</strong> two of you please define what "illegitimacy" means? When<br />
watching <strong>the</strong> 6pm news <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r night I found a newscaster in error (and I<br />
called <strong>the</strong> station). She said that "children born to unwed mo<strong>the</strong>rs have<br />
gone up (something like) 75% in <strong>the</strong> past 10 (or so) years". Then she made<br />
a comment that it was "sad that so many children lived with only one<br />
parent". Those two only have limited connection. Not all women who are<br />
single are NOT living with <strong>the</strong> fa<strong>the</strong>r. It just means that <strong>the</strong>y are<br />
unmarried. The woman is forced to list her marital status on <strong>the</strong> hospital<br />
admission papers, <strong>the</strong>n this information becomes a part of <strong>the</strong> "public"<br />
record where it is <strong>the</strong>n misinterpreted.<br />
BTW, not a flame.<br />
entirely accurate.<br />
I’m just pointing out that those figures are not<br />
Bright Blessings<br />
--<br />
Brian<br />
------<br />
Article 44<br />
Reference 161829<br />
From reddeg@VAX309.NHRC.NAVY.MIL<br />
Date Thu, Aug 4, 1994 1:31 PM<br />
You said:<br />
>It is very easy to portray pro-lifers in <strong>the</strong> worst manner possible. That is<br />
>it is easy if you ignore facts. I mentioned this in a posting on ano<strong>the</strong>r<br />
>thread, but it bears repeating here. You say that "<strong>the</strong>re are no ’defenseless<br />
>children’ killed in an abortion". Prove it. Offer concrete medical<br />
>evidence to support your claim. I will not engage in name calling or<br />
>sloganeering. I wish to discuss only facts that can be proved by<br />
>scientific methods. In this spirit, I offer <strong>the</strong> following incontrovertable<br />
>scientific/medical evidence.<br />
><br />
>1) It is impossible for one person to have two blood types. When a woman<br />
>is pregnant, she has her blood type and <strong>the</strong> unborn child has her or his<br />
>blood type. In <strong>the</strong> case of fraternal twins, <strong>the</strong>re can be three different<br />
>blood types.<br />
><br />
>2) It is impossible for one person to have 46 pairs of chromosones. When<br />
>a woman is pregnant, she has <strong>the</strong> 23 pairs of chromosones she received<br />
>from her parents at conception and <strong>the</strong> unborn child has his or her 23<br />
>pairs (24 in <strong>the</strong> case of children with Down’s Syndrome) of<br />
>chromosones.<br />
><br />
>3) It is impossible for one person to have two hearts beating at different
Change language