Pink Kate
#741
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: the reported bear attack
No, I was wrong. Earle meant "What is the current legal definition". (Sorry
Earle).
Dave
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:klG2g.57912$wl.34015@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> I think what Earle means is "Is it a child that matters ? ".
> The answer being in this country "no" if it is less than 18 weeks after
> conception.
>
> I'm all in favour of abortion ; probably better to kill it rather than
have
> yet another addition to our 6 billion population that you probably aren't
> prepared to look after properly as you didn't want it in the first place.
> However there is no point in arguing if the basis for not aborting is
based
> on religion as the "God Told Me So" argument is almost by definition
> irrefutable.
>
> Dave
>
> <Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> news:ljil4296l3995b62iss519e82obv753oi9@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:49:35 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> > >news:j2ok42drnu4f1fj5atglb9g2fa8f7ucgf3@4ax.com.. .
> > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:09:00 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > >> <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >The whole thing hinges on
> > >> >how you define a "child".
> > >>
> > >> Absolute, illogical nonsense. A child (any life, actually) is what
it
> > >> is regardless of any definition. Definitions are conceptual not
> > >> actual.
> > >>
> > >> Worse, such logical contortions never improve civilization, quite to
> > >> the contrary they reduce life to whatever we want it to be. Does
> > >> gulag ring any bells? How about killing fields? Holocausts?
> > >>
> > >It doesn't matter whether you think it is logical or not. What
matters,
> is
> > >what the congress, various state legislatures, and the supreme courts
> have
> > >to say about it. And "definitions", which you seem not to like,
perhaps
> > >because you can't provide one, are the stuff out of which laws are
made.
> >
> > I can provide any number of 'definitions' all as arbitrary and
> > capricious as those which apparently anchor your morality.
> >
> > That was my point, Earle, anybody can make a definition, but they
> > can't make it real. How about your lawn, Earle? That's just folks
> > defining things for you. You think the definition it correct?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com
>
>
Earle).
Dave
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:klG2g.57912$wl.34015@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> I think what Earle means is "Is it a child that matters ? ".
> The answer being in this country "no" if it is less than 18 weeks after
> conception.
>
> I'm all in favour of abortion ; probably better to kill it rather than
have
> yet another addition to our 6 billion population that you probably aren't
> prepared to look after properly as you didn't want it in the first place.
> However there is no point in arguing if the basis for not aborting is
based
> on religion as the "God Told Me So" argument is almost by definition
> irrefutable.
>
> Dave
>
> <Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> news:ljil4296l3995b62iss519e82obv753oi9@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:49:35 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> > >news:j2ok42drnu4f1fj5atglb9g2fa8f7ucgf3@4ax.com.. .
> > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:09:00 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > >> <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >The whole thing hinges on
> > >> >how you define a "child".
> > >>
> > >> Absolute, illogical nonsense. A child (any life, actually) is what
it
> > >> is regardless of any definition. Definitions are conceptual not
> > >> actual.
> > >>
> > >> Worse, such logical contortions never improve civilization, quite to
> > >> the contrary they reduce life to whatever we want it to be. Does
> > >> gulag ring any bells? How about killing fields? Holocausts?
> > >>
> > >It doesn't matter whether you think it is logical or not. What
matters,
> is
> > >what the congress, various state legislatures, and the supreme courts
> have
> > >to say about it. And "definitions", which you seem not to like,
perhaps
> > >because you can't provide one, are the stuff out of which laws are
made.
> >
> > I can provide any number of 'definitions' all as arbitrary and
> > capricious as those which apparently anchor your morality.
> >
> > That was my point, Earle, anybody can make a definition, but they
> > can't make it real. How about your lawn, Earle? That's just folks
> > defining things for you. You think the definition it correct?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com
>
>
#742
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: the reported bear attack
No, I was wrong. Earle meant "What is the current legal definition". (Sorry
Earle).
Dave
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:klG2g.57912$wl.34015@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> I think what Earle means is "Is it a child that matters ? ".
> The answer being in this country "no" if it is less than 18 weeks after
> conception.
>
> I'm all in favour of abortion ; probably better to kill it rather than
have
> yet another addition to our 6 billion population that you probably aren't
> prepared to look after properly as you didn't want it in the first place.
> However there is no point in arguing if the basis for not aborting is
based
> on religion as the "God Told Me So" argument is almost by definition
> irrefutable.
>
> Dave
>
> <Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> news:ljil4296l3995b62iss519e82obv753oi9@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:49:35 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> > >news:j2ok42drnu4f1fj5atglb9g2fa8f7ucgf3@4ax.com.. .
> > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:09:00 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > >> <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >The whole thing hinges on
> > >> >how you define a "child".
> > >>
> > >> Absolute, illogical nonsense. A child (any life, actually) is what
it
> > >> is regardless of any definition. Definitions are conceptual not
> > >> actual.
> > >>
> > >> Worse, such logical contortions never improve civilization, quite to
> > >> the contrary they reduce life to whatever we want it to be. Does
> > >> gulag ring any bells? How about killing fields? Holocausts?
> > >>
> > >It doesn't matter whether you think it is logical or not. What
matters,
> is
> > >what the congress, various state legislatures, and the supreme courts
> have
> > >to say about it. And "definitions", which you seem not to like,
perhaps
> > >because you can't provide one, are the stuff out of which laws are
made.
> >
> > I can provide any number of 'definitions' all as arbitrary and
> > capricious as those which apparently anchor your morality.
> >
> > That was my point, Earle, anybody can make a definition, but they
> > can't make it real. How about your lawn, Earle? That's just folks
> > defining things for you. You think the definition it correct?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com
>
>
Earle).
Dave
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:klG2g.57912$wl.34015@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> I think what Earle means is "Is it a child that matters ? ".
> The answer being in this country "no" if it is less than 18 weeks after
> conception.
>
> I'm all in favour of abortion ; probably better to kill it rather than
have
> yet another addition to our 6 billion population that you probably aren't
> prepared to look after properly as you didn't want it in the first place.
> However there is no point in arguing if the basis for not aborting is
based
> on religion as the "God Told Me So" argument is almost by definition
> irrefutable.
>
> Dave
>
> <Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> news:ljil4296l3995b62iss519e82obv753oi9@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:49:35 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> > >news:j2ok42drnu4f1fj5atglb9g2fa8f7ucgf3@4ax.com.. .
> > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:09:00 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > >> <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >The whole thing hinges on
> > >> >how you define a "child".
> > >>
> > >> Absolute, illogical nonsense. A child (any life, actually) is what
it
> > >> is regardless of any definition. Definitions are conceptual not
> > >> actual.
> > >>
> > >> Worse, such logical contortions never improve civilization, quite to
> > >> the contrary they reduce life to whatever we want it to be. Does
> > >> gulag ring any bells? How about killing fields? Holocausts?
> > >>
> > >It doesn't matter whether you think it is logical or not. What
matters,
> is
> > >what the congress, various state legislatures, and the supreme courts
> have
> > >to say about it. And "definitions", which you seem not to like,
perhaps
> > >because you can't provide one, are the stuff out of which laws are
made.
> >
> > I can provide any number of 'definitions' all as arbitrary and
> > capricious as those which apparently anchor your morality.
> >
> > That was my point, Earle, anybody can make a definition, but they
> > can't make it real. How about your lawn, Earle? That's just folks
> > defining things for you. You think the definition it correct?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com
>
>
#743
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: the reported bear attack
No, I was wrong. Earle meant "What is the current legal definition". (Sorry
Earle).
Dave
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:klG2g.57912$wl.34015@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> I think what Earle means is "Is it a child that matters ? ".
> The answer being in this country "no" if it is less than 18 weeks after
> conception.
>
> I'm all in favour of abortion ; probably better to kill it rather than
have
> yet another addition to our 6 billion population that you probably aren't
> prepared to look after properly as you didn't want it in the first place.
> However there is no point in arguing if the basis for not aborting is
based
> on religion as the "God Told Me So" argument is almost by definition
> irrefutable.
>
> Dave
>
> <Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> news:ljil4296l3995b62iss519e82obv753oi9@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:49:35 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> > >news:j2ok42drnu4f1fj5atglb9g2fa8f7ucgf3@4ax.com.. .
> > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:09:00 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > >> <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >The whole thing hinges on
> > >> >how you define a "child".
> > >>
> > >> Absolute, illogical nonsense. A child (any life, actually) is what
it
> > >> is regardless of any definition. Definitions are conceptual not
> > >> actual.
> > >>
> > >> Worse, such logical contortions never improve civilization, quite to
> > >> the contrary they reduce life to whatever we want it to be. Does
> > >> gulag ring any bells? How about killing fields? Holocausts?
> > >>
> > >It doesn't matter whether you think it is logical or not. What
matters,
> is
> > >what the congress, various state legislatures, and the supreme courts
> have
> > >to say about it. And "definitions", which you seem not to like,
perhaps
> > >because you can't provide one, are the stuff out of which laws are
made.
> >
> > I can provide any number of 'definitions' all as arbitrary and
> > capricious as those which apparently anchor your morality.
> >
> > That was my point, Earle, anybody can make a definition, but they
> > can't make it real. How about your lawn, Earle? That's just folks
> > defining things for you. You think the definition it correct?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com
>
>
Earle).
Dave
"Dave Milne" <whoneeds@toknow.com> wrote in message
news:klG2g.57912$wl.34015@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
> I think what Earle means is "Is it a child that matters ? ".
> The answer being in this country "no" if it is less than 18 weeks after
> conception.
>
> I'm all in favour of abortion ; probably better to kill it rather than
have
> yet another addition to our 6 billion population that you probably aren't
> prepared to look after properly as you didn't want it in the first place.
> However there is no point in arguing if the basis for not aborting is
based
> on religion as the "God Told Me So" argument is almost by definition
> irrefutable.
>
> Dave
>
> <Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> news:ljil4296l3995b62iss519e82obv753oi9@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:49:35 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><Matt Osborn> wrote in message
> > >news:j2ok42drnu4f1fj5atglb9g2fa8f7ucgf3@4ax.com.. .
> > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:09:00 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> > >> <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >The whole thing hinges on
> > >> >how you define a "child".
> > >>
> > >> Absolute, illogical nonsense. A child (any life, actually) is what
it
> > >> is regardless of any definition. Definitions are conceptual not
> > >> actual.
> > >>
> > >> Worse, such logical contortions never improve civilization, quite to
> > >> the contrary they reduce life to whatever we want it to be. Does
> > >> gulag ring any bells? How about killing fields? Holocausts?
> > >>
> > >It doesn't matter whether you think it is logical or not. What
matters,
> is
> > >what the congress, various state legislatures, and the supreme courts
> have
> > >to say about it. And "definitions", which you seem not to like,
perhaps
> > >because you can't provide one, are the stuff out of which laws are
made.
> >
> > I can provide any number of 'definitions' all as arbitrary and
> > capricious as those which apparently anchor your morality.
> >
> > That was my point, Earle, anybody can make a definition, but they
> > can't make it real. How about your lawn, Earle? That's just folks
> > defining things for you. You think the definition it correct?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com
>
>
#744
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Off Topic: the reported bear attack
I went to the Ross Perot independence rallies, they're loser too.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> That's why you should elect a Libertarian president. Give us a chance to
> prove, that we mean what we say.
>
> Earle
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> That's why you should elect a Libertarian president. Give us a chance to
> prove, that we mean what we say.
>
> Earle
#745
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Off Topic: the reported bear attack
I went to the Ross Perot independence rallies, they're loser too.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> That's why you should elect a Libertarian president. Give us a chance to
> prove, that we mean what we say.
>
> Earle
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> That's why you should elect a Libertarian president. Give us a chance to
> prove, that we mean what we say.
>
> Earle
#746
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Off Topic: the reported bear attack
I went to the Ross Perot independence rallies, they're loser too.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> That's why you should elect a Libertarian president. Give us a chance to
> prove, that we mean what we say.
>
> Earle
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> That's why you should elect a Libertarian president. Give us a chance to
> prove, that we mean what we say.
>
> Earle
#747
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: the reported bear attack
"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:wAD2g.104$b26.15851@news.uswest.net...
> its last minute birth control, and it happens every day. i might be
> "uncommon" if you look at this city or that.....but nationally it happens
> regularly.
On a per capita basis, it's extremely rare... Hell, even as a percentage of
total abortions, it's rather rare... It's considerably more expensive than
the shop vac approach that they utilize during the early stages, so just
from an economic standpoint, it would stand that it is less common... It's
less than 2%, if I remember correctly... Hell, even if it was banned, there
are other methods (like D&E) that would be used, so banning it doesn't do a
damn thing... I suspect that the ----in' right-to-lifers are just like the
----in' gun-banners... They want to keep nibbling away until all rights are
lost...
You complain about the illegal immigrants having so many kids... Would you
rather that there be 25% more of the kids? That's what would happen since
about 25% of all pregnancies are terminated... Hell, I think there should be
*more* abortions... Actually, more women should just get their tubes tied
since in the long run, that's probably a more economical proposition...
Abortion should be a last ditch means of birth control, not a first
choice... Not from a moral standpoint, just from an economic standpoint...
news:wAD2g.104$b26.15851@news.uswest.net...
> its last minute birth control, and it happens every day. i might be
> "uncommon" if you look at this city or that.....but nationally it happens
> regularly.
On a per capita basis, it's extremely rare... Hell, even as a percentage of
total abortions, it's rather rare... It's considerably more expensive than
the shop vac approach that they utilize during the early stages, so just
from an economic standpoint, it would stand that it is less common... It's
less than 2%, if I remember correctly... Hell, even if it was banned, there
are other methods (like D&E) that would be used, so banning it doesn't do a
damn thing... I suspect that the ----in' right-to-lifers are just like the
----in' gun-banners... They want to keep nibbling away until all rights are
lost...
You complain about the illegal immigrants having so many kids... Would you
rather that there be 25% more of the kids? That's what would happen since
about 25% of all pregnancies are terminated... Hell, I think there should be
*more* abortions... Actually, more women should just get their tubes tied
since in the long run, that's probably a more economical proposition...
Abortion should be a last ditch means of birth control, not a first
choice... Not from a moral standpoint, just from an economic standpoint...
#748
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: the reported bear attack
"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:wAD2g.104$b26.15851@news.uswest.net...
> its last minute birth control, and it happens every day. i might be
> "uncommon" if you look at this city or that.....but nationally it happens
> regularly.
On a per capita basis, it's extremely rare... Hell, even as a percentage of
total abortions, it's rather rare... It's considerably more expensive than
the shop vac approach that they utilize during the early stages, so just
from an economic standpoint, it would stand that it is less common... It's
less than 2%, if I remember correctly... Hell, even if it was banned, there
are other methods (like D&E) that would be used, so banning it doesn't do a
damn thing... I suspect that the ----in' right-to-lifers are just like the
----in' gun-banners... They want to keep nibbling away until all rights are
lost...
You complain about the illegal immigrants having so many kids... Would you
rather that there be 25% more of the kids? That's what would happen since
about 25% of all pregnancies are terminated... Hell, I think there should be
*more* abortions... Actually, more women should just get their tubes tied
since in the long run, that's probably a more economical proposition...
Abortion should be a last ditch means of birth control, not a first
choice... Not from a moral standpoint, just from an economic standpoint...
news:wAD2g.104$b26.15851@news.uswest.net...
> its last minute birth control, and it happens every day. i might be
> "uncommon" if you look at this city or that.....but nationally it happens
> regularly.
On a per capita basis, it's extremely rare... Hell, even as a percentage of
total abortions, it's rather rare... It's considerably more expensive than
the shop vac approach that they utilize during the early stages, so just
from an economic standpoint, it would stand that it is less common... It's
less than 2%, if I remember correctly... Hell, even if it was banned, there
are other methods (like D&E) that would be used, so banning it doesn't do a
damn thing... I suspect that the ----in' right-to-lifers are just like the
----in' gun-banners... They want to keep nibbling away until all rights are
lost...
You complain about the illegal immigrants having so many kids... Would you
rather that there be 25% more of the kids? That's what would happen since
about 25% of all pregnancies are terminated... Hell, I think there should be
*more* abortions... Actually, more women should just get their tubes tied
since in the long run, that's probably a more economical proposition...
Abortion should be a last ditch means of birth control, not a first
choice... Not from a moral standpoint, just from an economic standpoint...
#749
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: the reported bear attack
"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:wAD2g.104$b26.15851@news.uswest.net...
> its last minute birth control, and it happens every day. i might be
> "uncommon" if you look at this city or that.....but nationally it happens
> regularly.
On a per capita basis, it's extremely rare... Hell, even as a percentage of
total abortions, it's rather rare... It's considerably more expensive than
the shop vac approach that they utilize during the early stages, so just
from an economic standpoint, it would stand that it is less common... It's
less than 2%, if I remember correctly... Hell, even if it was banned, there
are other methods (like D&E) that would be used, so banning it doesn't do a
damn thing... I suspect that the ----in' right-to-lifers are just like the
----in' gun-banners... They want to keep nibbling away until all rights are
lost...
You complain about the illegal immigrants having so many kids... Would you
rather that there be 25% more of the kids? That's what would happen since
about 25% of all pregnancies are terminated... Hell, I think there should be
*more* abortions... Actually, more women should just get their tubes tied
since in the long run, that's probably a more economical proposition...
Abortion should be a last ditch means of birth control, not a first
choice... Not from a moral standpoint, just from an economic standpoint...
news:wAD2g.104$b26.15851@news.uswest.net...
> its last minute birth control, and it happens every day. i might be
> "uncommon" if you look at this city or that.....but nationally it happens
> regularly.
On a per capita basis, it's extremely rare... Hell, even as a percentage of
total abortions, it's rather rare... It's considerably more expensive than
the shop vac approach that they utilize during the early stages, so just
from an economic standpoint, it would stand that it is less common... It's
less than 2%, if I remember correctly... Hell, even if it was banned, there
are other methods (like D&E) that would be used, so banning it doesn't do a
damn thing... I suspect that the ----in' right-to-lifers are just like the
----in' gun-banners... They want to keep nibbling away until all rights are
lost...
You complain about the illegal immigrants having so many kids... Would you
rather that there be 25% more of the kids? That's what would happen since
about 25% of all pregnancies are terminated... Hell, I think there should be
*more* abortions... Actually, more women should just get their tubes tied
since in the long run, that's probably a more economical proposition...
Abortion should be a last ditch means of birth control, not a first
choice... Not from a moral standpoint, just from an economic standpoint...
#750
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: the reported bear attack
"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:MRD2g.111$b26.16137@news.uswest.net...
> i dont believe in fairy tales, or santa clause, and i dont look at it from
a
> religious standpoint. with me its a simple matter of right and wrong.
Thus it's a moral judgement on your part... For that, I would definitely say
that *you* should probably not get an abortion... It would definitely mess
up your psyche...
news:MRD2g.111$b26.16137@news.uswest.net...
> i dont believe in fairy tales, or santa clause, and i dont look at it from
a
> religious standpoint. with me its a simple matter of right and wrong.
Thus it's a moral judgement on your part... For that, I would definitely say
that *you* should probably not get an abortion... It would definitely mess
up your psyche...