Re: Planned Parenthood director quits after ultrasound, talks about PP emphasis on abortions
pnyikos
> On Nov 24, 7:12 pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 24, 5:13 pm, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:33:08 -0800 (PST), pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > On Nov 24, 11:30 am, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > >> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > >> > Near the end of the latest 40 Days for Life campaign, the director of
> > > >> > the Bryan, TexasPlannedParenthood abortion clinic quit after seeing
> > > >> > an ultrasound of an abortion for the first time.
>
> > > > Now comes a Lyman-clone piece of muckraking by "Spartakus":
>
> > > Jesus Christ on Quaaludes, Phony...is that the best you can do?
>
> > No, I can do a lot better. Here's some more juicy excerpts from the
> > two websites.
>
> > O'REILLY: Now, do you believe that, based upon what you saw in Bryan,
> > Texas, do you believe thatPlannedParenthood is an abortion mill
> > trying to profit off that?
>
> > JOHNSON: Yes. I mean, I absolutely believe that. I mean, I saw them
> > trying to increase their abortion numbers. I saw them increase their
> > abortion numbers.
>
> > O'REILLY: Well, how do they do that? How do you increase an abortion
> > number?
>
> > JOHNSON: Well, they increase their accessibility to abortion for
> > women. So, for instance, the clinic that I worked at, usually we only
> > did abortions every other Saturday. And they said, "You know what?
> > That's not really enough. We really need to be able to open this up to
> > allowing women to have abortions almost every day during the week.”
>
> If that's true, and sadly, I rather doubt that it is, given the
> source, I applaud them. The more abortions, the better for the planet
> and for society.
That is highly debatable.
>The more access to abortion, the more freedom for
> women,
Only for some women--the ones who either want abortions or can resist
pressure--sometimes intense pressure--to do them. Are you familiar
with _Real Choices_, by Frederica Mathewes-Greene? I suspect not.
>and for men who don't want to be fathers, too. Who could object
> to that?
Women who want to be mothers, but whose significant others are
pressuring them to have abortions; men who want to be fathers, and
have no say-so in whether their gestating offspring gets aborted.
There were at least two men posting to talk.abortion in 1992 who
related personal experiences. They offered to adopt their children
and raise them, absolving the mother of all obligations, but the
mothers went through with the abortion anyway. Will Steeves was one,
and I can look up the name of the other if you are interested.
Interestingly, both were pro-choice but had hoped that they could sway
the choice of their partners.
Peter Nyikos
Spartakus
> Lefty <leftydr...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >The more access to abortion, the more freedom for
> > women,
> Only for some women--the ones who either want abortions or can
> resist pressure--sometimes intense pressure--to do them. Are you
> familiar with _Real Choices_, by Frederica Mathewes-Greene?
> I suspect not.
Shorter "Real Choices": "Be reasonable. Do it my way."
You sure can pick 'em, whoever you are. Mathewes-Greene authored
possibly the most misogynistic statement ever to come from an anti-
abortion writer:
"No woman wants an abortion like she wants a Porsche
or an ice cream; rather, she wants it like an animal caught
in a trap wants to gnaw off its own leg."
Let's deconstruct that. An amputation is a controlled maiming of a
patient's body for the sake of the patient's survival. An abortion
restores a woman's body to her previous un-pregnant condition, AND
LEAVES HER BODY WHOLE. Assuming all goes well (a safe assumption,
since abortion is the safest outpatient surgery extant), it does not
maim her.
However, Mathewes-Greene did not talk about amputation, did she? She
equated a women wanting an abortion with a wild animal gnawing its leg
off.
A wild animal. I've seen a lot of misogyny from anti-choicers, but
this one just might take the cake.
Ray Fischer
>On Nov 25, 8:44 am, Lefty <leftydr...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> If that's true, and sadly, I rather doubt that it is, given the
>> source, I applaud them. The more abortions, the better for the planet
>> and for society.
>
>That is highly debatable.
A billion people do not get enough to eat each day.
>>The more access to abortion, the more freedom for
>> women,
>
>Only for some women--the ones who either want abortions or can resist
>pressure-
No duh? Being able to do what you want kind of is the whole idea of
freedom.
But I can understand why you might not understand that idea.
>--sometimes intense pressure--to do them.
For a pro-liar like you to complain about pressure is the height of
hypocrisy give that you demand that women be pressured to give birth.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Spartakus
> There were at least two men posting to talk.abortion in 1992 who
> related personal experiences. They offered to adopt their children
> and raise them, absolving the mother of all obligations, but the
> mothers went through with the abortion anyway. Will Steeves
> was one, and I can look up the name of the other if you are
> interested.
This Will Steeves?
"And with God or Allah (whomever) as my witness, I will say
that in my own situation, if the woman had *not* been so
respecting as to tell me before, but in fact had not only told
me right afterwards, but had waited a year (!) or more, I
probably would have snapped right there and killed her
where she stood."
-- Message-ID: <1992Sep3.0...@zooid.guild.org>
Christ on a bike, FauxNy!
Lefty
Then feel free to debate it.
> >The more access to abortion, the more freedom for
> > women,
>
> Only for some women--the ones who either want abortions or can resist
> pressure--sometimes intense pressure--to do them. Are you familiar
> with _Real Choices_, by Frederica Mathewes-Greene? I suspect not.
All women benefit from reproductive freedom, even if it's an indirect
benefit, such as the ability to relax during sex because they don't
have to worry as much about pregnancy. Even if a woman never wants to
abort, she knows the option is available. It frees her, whether she's
conscious of it or not.
No, I'm not familiar with the publication you mention. How is it
relevant?
> >and for men who don't want to be fathers, too. Who could object
> > to that?
>
> Women who want to be mothers, but whose significant others are
> pressuring them to have abortions; men who want to be fathers, and
> have no say-so in whether their gestating offspring gets aborted.
So you're saying the answer to men supposedly pressuring their
partners to abort is to give women no choices? How hypocritical can
you possibly be? If you really gave a damn about women being
pressured, you sure as hell wouldn't want them to be forced.
Why would women who want to be mothers object to other women having
choices? It doesn't after their ability to have a child.
Regarding fathers who have no say, they are more than compensated by
the fact that they will never have to endure pregnancy and birth. It
is not reasonable for men to expect to be able to force women to
gestate just so they can have to option of raising the child. If they
want it that badly, they should find a willing partner and have a
baby.
The objections of unreasonable people do not concern me.
> There were at least two men posting to talk.abortion in 1992 who
> related personal experiences. They offered to adopt their children
> and raise them, absolving the mother of all obligations, but the
> mothers went through with the abortion anyway. Will Steeves was one,
> and I can look up the name of the other if you are interested.
Don't bother. I know such men exist. What you don't seem to understand
is that pregnancy and birth themselves are obligations that some women
don't want. There is a risk to both health and life inherent in every
pregnancy, and it always disrupts a woman's life and changes her body
permanently. Therefore, it is not at all unreasonable to abort even if
one has no obligation to raise the child.
> Interestingly, both were pro-choice but had hoped that they could sway
> the choice of their partners.
It would appear that you admit you have no problem with men pressuring
their partners ~against~ aborting, where you previously decried
pressure ~to~ abort. Once again, your hypocrisy is showing.
Lefty
>
> Christ on a bike, FauxNy!
Predictable. Naturally, any man who would want to force a woman into
giving birth for him is an abusive asshole.
elizabeth
>
> - Show quoted text -
Women who want to breed with men who don't want to be daddies are
stupid cunts who should be spayed for the good of the gene pool. Men
who don't want to breed should simply get vasectomies, with a tax cut
if they haven't bred. You can store sperm, of course. Women who
"oops" men should be spayed and sold into slavery, because using a
child to "get" a man or to get social benefits (including welfare) is
as selfish and abusive as a breeder can get.
elizabeth
What a fucking tool you are, fauxcuNt.
> A wild animal. I've seen a lot of misogyny from anti-choicers, but
> this one just might take the cake.
Actually, we treat wild animals more kindly than we do women, in
general. Using women as breeding animals is more like cattle, though,
or maybe you'd prefer sheep .. . . since you can't get pregnant, you
have no idea how horrible it is to be trapped by an unwanted
pregnancy. May you be reincarnated as the last woman infibulated and
die in prolonged, agonizing labor.
elizabeth
>
> - Show quoted text -
No, they are the worst sort of rapist.
SkyEyes
> Let's deconstruct that. An amputation is a controlled maiming of a
> patient's body for the sake of the patient's survival. An abortion
> restores a woman's body to her previous un-pregnant condition, AND
> LEAVES HER BODY WHOLE. Assuming all goes well (a safe assumption,
> since abortion is the safest outpatient surgery extant), it does not
> maim her.
>
> However, Mathewes-Greene did not talk about amputation, did she? She
> equated a women wanting an abortion with a wild animal gnawing its leg
> off.
>
> A wild animal. I've seen a lot of misogyny from anti-choicers, but
> this one just might take the cake.
I'm not so sure about that. I remember being pregnant: I was in a
blind, black, choking panic to *get rid of the foreign thing inside
me*. If I had not had the chance to go to the U.K. for a safe TAB
soon after I was diagnosed, I might have carved the embryo out of
myself with a rusty grapefruit spoon. You can't *believe* the degree
of relief I felt when the thing was over. I would have *swam* to
England, if necessary, to get my TAB. Or, if chained up, I would
indeed have chewed my own leg off.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
elizabeth
>
> - Show quoted text -
Prove that only some women benefit from access to abortion. As for
your claim that there were men in a ng who claimed that in the past
they were willing to take care of their offspring . . .. well, that
sort of claim is very easy to make. No way to prove it. One would
think that a real math prof would care about being able to make
provable claims!
elizabeth
> On Nov 30, 8:39 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > Let's deconstruct that. An amputation is a controlled maiming of a
> > patient's body for the sake of the patient's survival. An abortion
> > restores a woman's body to her previous un-pregnant condition, AND
> > LEAVES HER BODY WHOLE. Assuming all goes well (a safe assumption,
> > since abortion is the safest outpatient surgery extant), it does not
> > maim her.
>
> > However, Mathewes-Greene did not talk about amputation, did she? She
> > equated a women wanting an abortion with a wild animal gnawing its leg
> > off.
>
> > A wild animal. I've seen a lot of misogyny from anti-choicers, but
> > this one just might take the cake.
Don't you just love the male concept that they know what it's like for
women . .. esp when it comes to sexual abuse and pregnancy . ..
> I'm not so sure about that. I remember being pregnant: I was in a
> blind, black, choking panic to *get rid of the foreign thing inside
> me*.
Testify! That's exactly how I felt!
> If I had not had the chance to go to the U.K. for a safe TAB
> soon after I was diagnosed, I might have carved the embryo out of
> myself with a rusty grapefruit spoon. You can't *believe* the degree
> of relief I felt when the thing was over. I would have *swam* to
> England, if necessary, to get my TAB. Or, if chained up, I would
> indeed have chewed my own leg off.
I'd've been swilling down all sorts of herbs and taking pennyroyal NOT
THE EXTRACT in all its forms . ...
pnyikos
> > There were at least two men posting to talk.abortion in 1992 who
> > related personal experiences. They offered to adopt their children
> > and raise them, absolving the mother of all obligations, but the
> > mothers went through with the abortion anyway. Will Steeves
> > was one, and I can look up the name of the other if you are
> > interested.
>
> This Will Steeves?
No, the Will Steeves who repented of having once been so mixed up and
off his rocker that he could easily have done the following things:
> "And with God or Allah (whomever) as my witness, I will say
> that in my own situation, if the woman had *not* been so
> respecting as to tell me before, but in fact had not only told
> me right afterwards, but had waited a year (!) or more, I
> probably would have snapped right there and killed her
> where she stood."
> -- Message-ID: <1992Sep3.025255.4...@zooid.guild.org>
That was Will describing what a terrible state his mind had been in
back then. He passed through this hell on earth and came out a much
better man than any of the Seven Musketeers, especially you, are.
Peter Nyikos
elizabeth
> On Nov 30, 11:59 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > There were at least two men posting to talk.abortion in 1992 who
> > > related personal experiences. They offered to adopt their children
> > > and raise them, absolving the mother of all obligations, but the
> > > mothers went through with the abortion anyway. Will Steeves
> > > was one, and I can look up the name of the other if you are
> > > interested.
>
> > This Will Steeves?
>
> No, the Will Steeves who repented of having once been so mixed up and
> off his rocker that he could easily have done the following things:
>
> > "And with God or Allah (whomever) as my witness, I will say
>
> > that in my own situation, if the woman had *not* been so
> > respecting as to tell me before, but in fact had not only told
> > me right afterwards, but had waited a year (!) or more, I
> > probably would have snapped right there and killed her
> > where she stood."
> > -- Message-ID: <1992Sep3.025255.4...@zooid.guild.org>
Oopsey, Oopsey, Oopsey . ...
> That was Will describing what a terrible state his mind had been in
> back then.
Yes, we are aware that you think you are telepathic and clairvoyant.
> He passed through this hell on earth and came out a much
> better man than any of the Seven Musketeers, especially you, are.
Well, I'm sure I'm a much better *woman* than he'll ever be . . .
> Peter Nyikos
Spartakus
> Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > There were at least two men posting to talk.abortion in 1992 who
> > > related personal experiences. They offered to adopt their children
> > > and raise them, absolving the mother of all obligations, but the
> > > mothers went through with the abortion anyway. Will Steeves
> > > was one, and I can look up the name of the other if you are
> > > interested.
> > This Will Steeves?
> >
> > "And with God or Allah (whomever) as my witness, I will say
> > that in my own situation, if the woman had *not* been so
> > respecting as to tell me before, but in fact had not only told
> > me right afterwards, but had waited a year (!) or more, I
> > probably would have snapped right there and killed her
> > where she stood."
> > -- Message-ID: <1992Sep3.025255.4...@zooid.guild.org>
> That was Will describing what a terrible state his mind had been in
> back then. He passed through this hell on earth and came out a much
> better man than any of the Seven Musketeers, especially you, are.
You're just making that up. Pathetic, just pathetic.
james g. keegan jr.
<2bf85f8e-e758-421b...@d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
Spartakus <spar...@my-deja.com> wrote:
it would appear that the person posting as peter nyikos, or one of them
anyway, has become insane.
Dr. Michael Mancini
james g. keegan jr. <jgke...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:jgkeegan-9BC7DB...@news.individual.net...
Just like the person posting as James G. Keegan, Jr.?
--Dr. Michael Mancini
elizabeth
wrote:
> james g. keegan jr. <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:jgkeegan-9BC7DB...@news.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <2bf85f8e-e758-421b-97bb-664842232...@d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> - Show quoted text -
Po' widdle fattycakes Oopsey . ... just kill yourself already!
The Chief Instigator
> On Dec 29, 7:35?am, "Dr. Michael Mancini" <don...@windstream.net>
> wrote:
>> james g. keegan jr. <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:jgkeegan-9BC7DB...@news.individual.net...
>>
>> > In article
>> > <2bf85f8e-e758-421b-97bb-664842232...@d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> > > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> > > > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> > > > > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > There were at least two men posting to talk.abortion in 1992 who
>> > > > > > related personal experiences. They offered to adopt their children
>> > > > > > and raise them, absolving the mother of all obligations, but the
>> > > > > > mothers went through with the abortion anyway. Will Steeves
>> > > > > > was one, and I can look up the name of the other if you are
>> > > > > > interested.
>>
>> > > > > This Will Steeves?
>>
>> > > > > that in my own situation, if the woman had *not* been so
>> > > > > respecting as to tell me before, but in fact had not only told
>> > > > > me right afterwards, but had waited a year (!) or more, I
>> > > > > probably would have snapped right there and killed her
>> > > > > where she stood."
>> > > > > -- Message-ID: <1992Sep3.025255.4...@zooid.guild.org>
>>
>> > > > That was Will describing what a terrible state his mind had been in
>> > > > back then. He passed through this hell on earth and came out a much
>> > > > better man than any of the Seven Musketeers, especially you, are.
>>
>>
>> > it would appear that the person posting as peter nyikos, or one of them
>> > anyway, has become insane.
>>
>> Just like the person posting as James G. Keegan, Jr.?
>>
>> --Dr. Michael Mancini- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Po' widdle fattycakes Oopsey . ... just kill yourself already!
Not likely he's "Mancini", considering Heishman's been a lifelong
borderline illiterate.
--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2009-10 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Houston 5, Syracuse 4 (OT, December 28)
NEXT GAME: Wednesday, December 30 at Chicago, 7:05
Dr. Michael Mancini
The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> wrote in message
news:slrnhjks72....@eris.io.com...
Just like a member of the Houston Aeros. After all, you don't need to read
to play hockey, especially for a non-NHL team.
--Dr. Michael Mancini
elizabeth
> www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2009-10 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
> LAST GAME: Houston 5, Syracuse 4 (OT, December 28)
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think he's getting 'help' from others. Wonder how much he has to
pay for it?
The Chief Instigator
Well, Bobby, I'm not a member of said Aeros, as I never played hockey at
all, much less at the pro level. I'm in my 16th season of season tickets,
and that includes the original Aeros in the WHA, who were here from 1972-73
through 1977-78. I got to see four seasons of Gordie Howe and his two sons,
one of whom (Mark) was born eight days after me. You'll manage to muck that
up into another illustration of your attitude.
The Chief Instigator
>> ? ? ?www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php?(TCI's 2009-10 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? LAST GAME: Houston 5, Syracuse 4 (OT, December 28)
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? NEXT GAME: Wednesday, December 30 at Chicago, 7:05- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I think he's getting 'help' from others. Wonder how much he has to
> pay for it?
I won't complain if it's large enough to rival the national debt. '-)
--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
Dr. Michael Mancini
But the current incarnation of the Houston Aeros still aren't a professional
NHL team.