Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
US Circuit Court allows enforcement of Texas informed consent law
4 views
Skip to first unread message
pnyikos
Jan 12, 2012, 12:12:49 PM1/12/12
to nyi...@math.sc.edu
On January 10, The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit today
vacated an August 30 preliminary injunction issued by a lower court
thereby now permitting the enforcement of those provisions of Texas’
informed consent law (H.B. 15) that require the abortionist before
performing an elective abortion to show the mother a sonogram image of
her child, provide a medical description of what that sonogram is
depicting, including the fetal heartbeat and an opportunity to hear
it, and the requirement the mother certify her receipt of such
information before the abortion can be commenced.
A pdf file of the Opinion of the Court can be accessed here:
http://www.lawoflifeproject.org/sites/default/files/pdf/TX_HB15/Abortion_Providers_etc_v_Lakey_Decision_and_Order_Vacating_PI_and_Remanding_Case_5th_Cir_01_10_12.pdf
The above description is subject to to the following qualification,
from page 2 of the Opinion of the Court:
"A woman may decline to view the images or hear the heartbeat,
§ 171.0122(b), (c), but she may decline to receive an explanation of
the sonogram
images only on certification that her pregnancy falls into one of
three statutory
exceptions. Id. at § 171.0122(d).
"Any woman seeking an abortion must also complete a form indicating
that
she has received the required materials, understands her right to view
the
requisite images and hear the heart auscultation, and chooses to
receive an
abortion. § 171.012(a)(5). The physician who is to perform the
abortion must
maintain a copy of this form, generally for seven years. Id. at §
171.0121(b)(1)-
(2)."
The next paragraph is relevant to the almost-extinct newsgroup
alt.abortion.inequity, which is why I am including it in the newgroups
line.
"If a woman ultimately chooses not to receive an abortion, the
physician
must provide her with a publication discussing how to establish
paternity and
secure child support. § 171.0123."
Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
University of South Carolina
http://www.math.sc.edu/~nyikos/
nyikos @ math.sc.edu
vacated an August 30 preliminary injunction issued by a lower court
thereby now permitting the enforcement of those provisions of Texas’
informed consent law (H.B. 15) that require the abortionist before
performing an elective abortion to show the mother a sonogram image of
her child, provide a medical description of what that sonogram is
depicting, including the fetal heartbeat and an opportunity to hear
it, and the requirement the mother certify her receipt of such
information before the abortion can be commenced.
A pdf file of the Opinion of the Court can be accessed here:
http://www.lawoflifeproject.org/sites/default/files/pdf/TX_HB15/Abortion_Providers_etc_v_Lakey_Decision_and_Order_Vacating_PI_and_Remanding_Case_5th_Cir_01_10_12.pdf
The above description is subject to to the following qualification,
from page 2 of the Opinion of the Court:
"A woman may decline to view the images or hear the heartbeat,
§ 171.0122(b), (c), but she may decline to receive an explanation of
the sonogram
images only on certification that her pregnancy falls into one of
three statutory
exceptions. Id. at § 171.0122(d).
"Any woman seeking an abortion must also complete a form indicating
that
she has received the required materials, understands her right to view
the
requisite images and hear the heart auscultation, and chooses to
receive an
abortion. § 171.012(a)(5). The physician who is to perform the
abortion must
maintain a copy of this form, generally for seven years. Id. at §
171.0121(b)(1)-
(2)."
The next paragraph is relevant to the almost-extinct newsgroup
alt.abortion.inequity, which is why I am including it in the newgroups
line.
"If a woman ultimately chooses not to receive an abortion, the
physician
must provide her with a publication discussing how to establish
paternity and
secure child support. § 171.0123."
Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
University of South Carolina
http://www.math.sc.edu/~nyikos/
nyikos @ math.sc.edu
pnyikos
Jan 12, 2012, 12:22:43 PM1/12/12
to nyi...@bellsouth.net
I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
development in government-mandated "sex education" classes. A sizable
fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category, as explained by
a legal foundation that is fighting for the law to be upheld:
___________ begin excerpt___________________
Washington, DC (January 10, 2011) Today the Jubilee Campaign’s Law of
Life Project, along with two other public interest legal
organizations, the Justice Foundation and the United States Justice
Foundation, who jointly represent 317 Texas Women Harmed by Abortion
due to a lack of informed consent before their abortions, applauded
the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal’s 26-page Opinion and Order that
vacated a lower court’s preliminary injunction obtained last August by
Texas’ abortion industry.
The now vacated injunction (pending trial) had blocked on “vagueness”
and unconstitutional “compelled speech” grounds the Texas law’s
requirement that an abortion provider perform and display a sonogram
of the fetus, make audible the heart auscultation of the fetus for the
woman to hear, and explain to her the results of each procedure and to
wait 24 hours, in most cases, between these disclosures and performing
the abortion.
The Appeals Court, primarily relying upon the Supreme Court’s *Casey*
and *Gonzales* opinions, as well as the Eighth Circuit’s *Planned
Parenthood v. Rounds* decisions, concluded that the challenged
provisions of the law were not vague and that the “provisions…
requiring [these] disclosures and written consent are sustainable”
under applicable Supreme Court precedents, “are within the State’s
power to regulate the practice of medicine, and therefore do not
violate the First Amendment.”
As “friends of the court”, the 317 Texas Woman Harmed By Abortion,
along with a number of other “friends of the court, ” filed amicus
briefs providing the Appeals Court with the legal, humanitarian and
common sense reasons the Court would be correct in reversing the court
below and upholding the Texas law requiring every woman be given the
opportunity to have all the information she needs, including a viewing
and medical description of the real-time ultrasound images of her
unborn child, before giving her truly voluntary and informed consent
to abortion.
As Mayela Banks, one of the 317 Texas Women Hurt By Abortion, stated,
“A picture is worth a thousand words, and the abortionists wanted to
silence the voice of my baby.”
“Now the woman can hear the sounds of her own baby’s heartbeat and see
the picture of her own child, not a picture from a textbook or
something else. This decision will result in a reduction in the
number of abortions in Texas. The reason for this is that women will
actually see what is in their womb at the time when most abortions
occur – a child with arms, feet, and legs which must be described to
the woman and a beating heart which she must be allowed to hear,” says
Allan Parker, President of The Justice Foundation. “This scientific
evidence will refute the lies of abortionists which they have told to
thousands of Texas women over the years that the contents of the
uterus are “just a mass of tissue, just a blob, or not yet a baby.”
_________________ end of excerpt ___________
from http://usjf.net/2012/01/317-texas-women-harmed-by-abortion-applaud-appeals-court/
Peter Nyikos
plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
development in government-mandated "sex education" classes. A sizable
fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category, as explained by
a legal foundation that is fighting for the law to be upheld:
___________ begin excerpt___________________
Washington, DC (January 10, 2011) Today the Jubilee Campaign’s Law of
Life Project, along with two other public interest legal
organizations, the Justice Foundation and the United States Justice
Foundation, who jointly represent 317 Texas Women Harmed by Abortion
due to a lack of informed consent before their abortions, applauded
the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal’s 26-page Opinion and Order that
vacated a lower court’s preliminary injunction obtained last August by
Texas’ abortion industry.
The now vacated injunction (pending trial) had blocked on “vagueness”
and unconstitutional “compelled speech” grounds the Texas law’s
requirement that an abortion provider perform and display a sonogram
of the fetus, make audible the heart auscultation of the fetus for the
woman to hear, and explain to her the results of each procedure and to
wait 24 hours, in most cases, between these disclosures and performing
the abortion.
The Appeals Court, primarily relying upon the Supreme Court’s *Casey*
and *Gonzales* opinions, as well as the Eighth Circuit’s *Planned
Parenthood v. Rounds* decisions, concluded that the challenged
provisions of the law were not vague and that the “provisions…
requiring [these] disclosures and written consent are sustainable”
under applicable Supreme Court precedents, “are within the State’s
power to regulate the practice of medicine, and therefore do not
violate the First Amendment.”
As “friends of the court”, the 317 Texas Woman Harmed By Abortion,
along with a number of other “friends of the court, ” filed amicus
briefs providing the Appeals Court with the legal, humanitarian and
common sense reasons the Court would be correct in reversing the court
below and upholding the Texas law requiring every woman be given the
opportunity to have all the information she needs, including a viewing
and medical description of the real-time ultrasound images of her
unborn child, before giving her truly voluntary and informed consent
to abortion.
As Mayela Banks, one of the 317 Texas Women Hurt By Abortion, stated,
“A picture is worth a thousand words, and the abortionists wanted to
silence the voice of my baby.”
“Now the woman can hear the sounds of her own baby’s heartbeat and see
the picture of her own child, not a picture from a textbook or
something else. This decision will result in a reduction in the
number of abortions in Texas. The reason for this is that women will
actually see what is in their womb at the time when most abortions
occur – a child with arms, feet, and legs which must be described to
the woman and a beating heart which she must be allowed to hear,” says
Allan Parker, President of The Justice Foundation. “This scientific
evidence will refute the lies of abortionists which they have told to
thousands of Texas women over the years that the contents of the
uterus are “just a mass of tissue, just a blob, or not yet a baby.”
_________________ end of excerpt ___________
from http://usjf.net/2012/01/317-texas-women-harmed-by-abortion-applaud-appeals-court/
Peter Nyikos
Spartakus
Jan 12, 2012, 9:50:02 PM1/12/12
to
pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> to be upheld:
Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion" are
> I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> to be upheld:
saying: "We're too dumb to understand big words like 'abortion'".
What a chickenshit avoidance of their own responsibility!
That's about it, isn't it? The person posting as Peter Nyikos, in his
own inimitable patronizing way, is saying that women need the guiding
hand of someone like Mark Crutcher to guide them through the really
hard math in figuring out whether or not to bear a (nother) child.
Spartakus
Jan 12, 2012, 9:39:54 PM1/12/12
to
pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> On January 10, The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit today
> vacated an August 30 preliminary injunction issued by a lower court
> thereby now permitting the enforcement of those provisions of Texas’
> informed consent law (H.B. 15) that require the abortionist before
> performing an elective abortion to show the mother a sonogram image
> of her child, provide a medical description of what that sonogram is
> depicting, including the fetal heartbeat and an opportunity to hear
> it, and the requirement the mother certify her receipt of such
> information before the abortion can be commenced.
Does Texas law mandate medically unnecessary procedures in any other
> On January 10, The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit today
> vacated an August 30 preliminary injunction issued by a lower court
> thereby now permitting the enforcement of those provisions of Texas’
> informed consent law (H.B. 15) that require the abortionist before
> performing an elective abortion to show the mother a sonogram image
> of her child, provide a medical description of what that sonogram is
> depicting, including the fetal heartbeat and an opportunity to hear
> it, and the requirement the mother certify her receipt of such
> information before the abortion can be commenced.
context but abortion?
Dino
Jan 13, 2012, 1:34:58 AM1/13/12
to
On Jan 12, 9:50 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> > plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> > tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> > the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> > development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> > A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> > as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> > to be upheld:
>
> Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion" are
> saying: ...
> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> > plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> > tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> > the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> > development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> > A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> > as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> > to be upheld:
>
> Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion" are
Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
whats wrong with you liberals,
you think you can just speak for everyone else.
They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
ignorant as you to speak for them.
You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
learn something if you listened.
Ray Fischer
Jan 13, 2012, 3:51:31 AM1/13/12
to
pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
>plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
>tooth and nail for it to be reversed.
And we know how you hate defenders of liberty. You want to create a
>I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
>plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
>tooth and nail for it to be reversed.
police state were everybody is forced to obey your evil cult.
--
Ray Fischer | None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
rfis...@sonic.net | Goethe
Spartakus
Jan 13, 2012, 10:58:23 AM1/13/12
to
"Why don't you just let *all* women speak for themselves?
That's whats wrong with you anti-choicers; you think you
can just speak for everyone else. They have minds of
their own and certainly don't need someone as ignorant
as you to speak for them. You just need to shut up and
mind your own business. Maybe you could learn
something if you listened."
That's what I've been saying to anti-choicers since I don't know when
their own and certainly don't need someone as ignorant
as you to speak for them. You just need to shut up and
mind your own business. Maybe you could learn
something if you listened."
- shut up and mind your own business.
Dino
Jan 13, 2012, 4:44:18 PM1/13/12
to
On Jan 13, 10:58 am, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> > > > plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> > > > tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> > > > the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> > > > development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> > > > A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> > > > as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> > > > to be upheld:
> > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion" are
> > > saying: ...
> > Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
> > whats wrong with you liberals,
> > you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> > They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> > ignorant as you to speak for them.
> > You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> > learn something if you listened.
>
> Almost right.
No, 100% right. Mind your own business and let women speak for
> Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> > > > plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> > > > tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> > > > the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> > > > development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> > > > A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> > > > as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> > > > to be upheld:
> > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion" are
> > > saying: ...
> > Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
> > whats wrong with you liberals,
> > you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> > They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> > ignorant as you to speak for them.
> > You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> > learn something if you listened.
>
> Almost right.
themselves.
They don't need you to talk for them. Especially since you are a
idiot.
so practice what you preach, hypocrite.
It's sad, you think only women who want to get an abortion have the
right to speak freely and you tell others to not speak for them.
But for women who speak out against abortion, you don't think they
have the right to speak freely and you feel you should speak for them.
W.T.S.
Jan 13, 2012, 5:07:19 PM1/13/12
to
In article <de5f32dd-ce8e-4a8c-bf99-799884703a24
@u20g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com says...
Women who speak against the decency of wholesome abortion have no place
in public debate. Their mouths should be shut until their minds have
been cleansed of their impure thoughts! Some debates have only one
side. In the abortion debate, abortion on demand, federally funded,
without any notification is the only side there is.
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/print/14481
>
http://www.jennyjerrome.org/
>
http://tinyurl.com/3j3fkch
>
http://www.egalitarian.biz/Plan-B--Remedy-of-a-Lifetime.html
>
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm
>
Breed like rabbits, live like pigs!
>
Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out from
complaining about "welfare mothers popping out babies we
have to feed" to complain about welfare mothers getting
abortions that PREVENT more babies to be raised at public
expense.
@u20g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com says...
in public debate. Their mouths should be shut until their minds have
been cleansed of their impure thoughts! Some debates have only one
side. In the abortion debate, abortion on demand, federally funded,
without any notification is the only side there is.
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/print/14481
>
http://www.jennyjerrome.org/
>
http://tinyurl.com/3j3fkch
>
http://www.egalitarian.biz/Plan-B--Remedy-of-a-Lifetime.html
>
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm
>
Breed like rabbits, live like pigs!
>
Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out from
complaining about "welfare mothers popping out babies we
have to feed" to complain about welfare mothers getting
abortions that PREVENT more babies to be raised at public
expense.
elizabeth
Jan 13, 2012, 5:44:53 PM1/13/12
to
On Jan 12, 10:34 pm, Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 12, 9:50 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> > > plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> > > tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> > > the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> > > development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> > > A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> > > as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> > > to be upheld:
>
> > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion" are
> > saying: ...
Oh, the irony . . ..
> On Jan 12, 9:50 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> > > plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> > > tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> > > the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> > > development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> > > A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> > > as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> > > to be upheld:
>
> > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion" are
> > saying: ...
> Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves.
any woman, alive or dead, or to be born, fine . .. but the fact is,
those of us who HAVE considered the issue and HAVE done the research
seem to come up with some really bad science behind the studies.
And keep in mind that many women regret NOT aborting, which do YOU
think is the greater harm to society?
To regret NOT having a child, or to regret HAVING a child?
Ask Andrea Yates, Susan Smith, etc ....
> That's
> whats wrong with you liberals,
> you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> ignorant as you to speak for them.
> You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> learn something if you listened.
temperature.
Maybe since you don't seem to want to take the words of women who have
aborted and have no regrets, maybe your selective consideration for
what women want is the real problem.
Dino
Jan 13, 2012, 6:57:02 PM1/13/12
to
On Jan 13, 5:07 pm, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> In article <de5f32dd-ce8e-4a8c-bf99-799884703a24
> @u20g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, whate...@homemail.com says...
> In article <de5f32dd-ce8e-4a8c-bf99-799884703a24
When you become one, let me know.
william mosco
Jan 13, 2012, 8:21:24 PM1/13/12
to
On Jan 12, 9:50 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
pay for abortions? i mean, doesn't it follow that those people
believe women are too stupid to educate themselves about birth
control?
Spartakus
Jan 13, 2012, 9:19:17 PM1/13/12
to
Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> > > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > > > are saying: ...
> > > Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
> > > whats wrong with you liberals,
> > > you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> > > They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> > > ignorant as you to speak for them.
> > > You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> > > learn something if you listened.
> > Almost right.
> No, 100% right. Mind your own business and let women speak for
> themselves.
What an exquisite display of hypocrisy on the part of not-Bobby!
> Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> > > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > > > are saying: ...
> > > Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
> > > whats wrong with you liberals,
> > > you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> > > They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> > > ignorant as you to speak for them.
> > > You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> > > learn something if you listened.
> > Almost right.
> No, 100% right. Mind your own business and let women speak for
> themselves.
Spartakus
Jan 13, 2012, 9:21:20 PM1/13/12
to
william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > are saying: "We're too dumb to understand big words like 'abortion'".
> > What a chickenshit avoidance of their own responsibility!
> >
> > That's about it, isn't it? The person posting as Peter Nyikos, in his
> > own inimitable patronizing way, is saying that women need the guiding
> > hand of someone like Mark Crutcher to guide them through the really
> > hard math in figuring out whether or not to bear a (nother) child.
> excuse me, but isn't that sorta like those who want the taxpayer to
> pay for abortions? i mean, doesn't it follow that those people
> believe women are too stupid to educate themselves about birth
> control?
Having fun with your strawmen, Billy?
> > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > are saying: "We're too dumb to understand big words like 'abortion'".
> > What a chickenshit avoidance of their own responsibility!
> >
> > That's about it, isn't it? The person posting as Peter Nyikos, in his
> > own inimitable patronizing way, is saying that women need the guiding
> > hand of someone like Mark Crutcher to guide them through the really
> > hard math in figuring out whether or not to bear a (nother) child.
> excuse me, but isn't that sorta like those who want the taxpayer to
> pay for abortions? i mean, doesn't it follow that those people
> believe women are too stupid to educate themselves about birth
> control?
Dino
Jan 13, 2012, 9:49:11 PM1/13/12
to
william mosco
Jan 13, 2012, 9:59:04 PM1/13/12
to
trusted to understand words like "contraception"...
UnviableTissueMass
Jan 13, 2012, 10:10:45 PM1/13/12
to
“Abortion foes never want
To admit the fact they won’t confront:
Those unviable tissues that they treasure
Are not babies by any measure.”
-- Baroness Ishimoto (Kato)
To admit the fact they won’t confront:
Those unviable tissues that they treasure
Are not babies by any measure.”
-- Baroness Ishimoto (Kato)
W.T.S.
Jan 14, 2012, 12:44:13 AM1/14/12
to
In article <943af58f-706b-4ffa-aae0-
c0a004...@q17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
We want both, comprehensive sex education coupled with abortion and
sterilization on demand.
c0a004...@q17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
sterilization on demand.
william mosco
Jan 14, 2012, 12:56:22 AM1/14/12
to
On Jan 14, 12:44 am, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> In article <943af58f-706b-4ffa-aae0-
> c0a004d59...@q17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
did you click it down a notch from forced abortions..., kook?
> In article <943af58f-706b-4ffa-aae0-
> c0a004d59...@q17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
W.T.S.
Jan 14, 2012, 1:56:56 AM1/14/12
to
In article <0005c9a8-eebf-4d62-8487-
829a5c...@a17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
In time, when the population growth reaches the right point, and mass
starvation is the rule rather than the exception, the public will be
only too happy to have forced abortion, like in China.
By the way, forced abortion in China works! Progress is being made.
Too bad humans are to stupid to work to prevent the need for forced
abortion to begin with.
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
829a5c...@a17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
starvation is the rule rather than the exception, the public will be
only too happy to have forced abortion, like in China.
By the way, forced abortion in China works! Progress is being made.
Too bad humans are to stupid to work to prevent the need for forced
abortion to begin with.
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
william mosco
Jan 14, 2012, 7:06:31 AM1/14/12
to
On Jan 14, 1:56 am, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> In article <0005c9a8-eebf-4d62-8487-
> 829a5ce4d...@a17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
...or people like you could simply kill themselves.
> In article <0005c9a8-eebf-4d62-8487-
> 829a5ce4d...@a17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
W.T.S.
Jan 14, 2012, 8:11:03 AM1/14/12
to
In article <288a93f2-a308-43bd-bbbf-995561de7d83
@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
When the day comes, and it will come, there will be a great concern
throughout the entire world, are the lamp posts of sufficient strength
to hold the weight of the entire forced-birther movement?
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
throughout the entire world, are the lamp posts of sufficient strength
to hold the weight of the entire forced-birther movement?
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
william mosco
Jan 14, 2012, 8:57:18 AM1/14/12
to
themselves?
W.T.S.
Jan 14, 2012, 9:23:03 AM1/14/12
to
In article <dcc992ee-b1d7-494c-9b54-37aa19b8a3e2
@g41g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
> > > ...or people like me could simply kill themselves.
> >
> > When the day comes, and it will come, would you be decent enough to
> > kill yourself?
>
> I'm telling you people concerned like me will kill
> themselves!
That's very generous of you!
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
@g41g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
> >
> > When the day comes, and it will come, would you be decent enough to
> > kill yourself?
>
> I'm telling you people concerned like me will kill
> themselves!
That's very generous of you!
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
william mosco
Jan 14, 2012, 9:39:43 AM1/14/12
to
william mosco
Jan 14, 2012, 9:38:06 AM1/14/12
to
Ray Fischer
Jan 14, 2012, 2:38:06 PM1/14/12
to
>They don't need you to talk for them.
> Especially since you are a
>idiot.
W.T.S.
Jan 14, 2012, 2:39:25 PM1/14/12
to
In article <46f95ad6-f407-4276-97a6-
d638e8...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
Forgery????? You should thank me!!!!! I merely corrected your response
to show what you actually meant to say.
d638e8...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, wm5...@gmail.com says...
to show what you actually meant to say.
> >
> > That's very generous of you!
> > That's very generous of you!
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
women and men alike!
>
Dino
Jan 14, 2012, 6:49:11 PM1/14/12
to
On Jan 14, 2:38 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
..
That's right. But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
So now you suddenly start caring??
That's right. But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
So now you suddenly start caring??
elizabeth
Jan 14, 2012, 6:56:58 PM1/14/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Then why force anyone to pay for pregnancy, childbirth, and infant
care?
Dino
Jan 14, 2012, 7:33:36 PM1/14/12
to
Ray Fischer
Jan 14, 2012, 10:48:12 PM1/14/12
to
> But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
Jews.
Dino
Jan 14, 2012, 11:14:55 PM1/14/12
to
that women tend to their husbands at home.
>
> > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
>
more than you do.
Ray Fischer
Jan 14, 2012, 11:22:28 PM1/14/12
to
>> > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
>>
W.T.S.
Jan 14, 2012, 11:32:51 PM1/14/12
to
In article <9cd031ed-8fcd-421b-bb19-1130c6fe8254
@m4g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com says...
> That's right. But I've already said you don't give a shit about women.
>
> So now I should suddenly start caring??
At least you finally have admitted it.
@m4g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com says...
>
> So now I should suddenly start caring??
At least you finally have admitted it.
W.T.S.
Jan 14, 2012, 11:34:22 PM1/14/12
to
In article <d45e3556-7dc4-40e9-afa7-9fe2bf688020
@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com says...
Sure! Just abandon the damned thing and let the tax payer pay for the
filthy bastard until it's ready for prison, and then they tax payer can
pay some more.
@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com says...
filthy bastard until it's ready for prison, and then they tax payer can
pay some more.
W.T.S.
Jan 14, 2012, 11:49:15 PM1/14/12
to
In article <ad951ea8-0a2d-498e-accd-
8c59e5...@dp8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com
says...
--
8c59e5...@dp8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com
says...
> > >That's right.
> >
> > And not just the ones who obey you.
>
> I have never had a need for that. Maybe you do, with your demands
> that women tend to their husbands at home.
> >
> > > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
> >
> > You care about women .
>
> No, I don't.
> >
> > And not just the ones who obey you.
>
> I have never had a need for that. Maybe you do, with your demands
> that women tend to their husbands at home.
> >
> > > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
> >
> > You care about women .
>
--
Dino
Jan 15, 2012, 7:48:22 AM1/15/12
to
>
> >> > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
>
> >> You care about women the same way that nazis care about Jews.
Didn't you say you don't give a shit about women?
W.T.S.
Jan 15, 2012, 1:09:39 PM1/15/12
to
In article <5ac3cb36-4927-4078-a529-44ed4ed7ce47
@cf6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com says...
> I know, you've proven your case several times over..
> I don't give a shit about women, they need to do as they're told.
@cf6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, what...@homemail.com says...
>
> > >> > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
> >
> > >> You care about women the same way that nazis care about Jews.
>
> I care way less than you do.
> > >> > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
> >
> > >> You care about women the same way that nazis care about Jews.
>
> I don't give a shit about women, they need to do as they're told.
elizabeth
Jan 15, 2012, 6:46:10 PM1/15/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
So you are claiming that taxpayers don't pay for pregnancy, childbirth
> - Show quoted text -
and infant care?
william mosco
Jan 16, 2012, 7:16:09 AM1/16/12
to
On Jan 14, 6:56 pm, elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:
james g. keegan jr.
Jan 16, 2012, 9:42:03 AM1/16/12
to
In article
<288a93f2-a308-43bd...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
your ardent supporter bobby heishman posting as dino and several other
socks has regularly criticized elizabeth for posting remarks like you
just posted. do you think he'll give you a free ride?
<288a93f2-a308-43bd...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
socks has regularly criticized elizabeth for posting remarks like you
just posted. do you think he'll give you a free ride?
james g. keegan jr.
Jan 16, 2012, 9:44:07 AM1/16/12
to
In article
<8e04c95e-da67-4026...@lr19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
but he doesn't understand the concept so your remark is meaningless.
<8e04c95e-da67-4026...@lr19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
Spartakus <spar...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> > > > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> > > > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > > > > are saying: ...
>
> > > > Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
> > > > whats wrong with you liberals,
> > > > you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> > > > They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> > > > ignorant as you to speak for them.
> > > > You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> > > > learn something if you listened.
>
> > > Almost right.
>
> > No, 100% right. Mind your own business and let women speak for
> > themselves.
>
> What an exquisite display of hypocrisy on the part of not-Bobby!
>
> > > > Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
> > > > whats wrong with you liberals,
> > > > you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> > > > They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> > > > ignorant as you to speak for them.
> > > > You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> > > > learn something if you listened.
>
> > > Almost right.
>
> > No, 100% right. Mind your own business and let women speak for
> > themselves.
>
but he doesn't understand the concept so your remark is meaningless.
william mosco
Jan 16, 2012, 12:34:39 PM1/16/12
to
On Jan 16, 9:42 am, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article
> <288a93f2-a308-43bd-bbbf-995561de7...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
are you crazy?
> In article
> <288a93f2-a308-43bd-bbbf-995561de7...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
james g. keegan jr.
Jan 17, 2012, 2:21:02 AM1/17/12
to
In article
<7f484f29-8745-4030...@l19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
him discomfort.
<7f484f29-8745-4030...@l19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 16, 9:42 am, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <288a93f2-a308-43bd-bbbf-995561de7...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> > william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jan 14, 1:56 am, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > In time, when the population growth reaches the right point, and mass
> > > > starvation is the rule rather than the exception, the public will be
> > > > only too happy to have forced abortion, like in China.
> >
> > > ...or people like you could simply kill themselves.
> >
> > your ardent supporter bobby heishman posting as dino and several other
> > socks has regularly criticized elizabeth for posting remarks like you
> > just posted. do you think he'll give you a free ride?
>
> are you crazy?
as usual, silly billy runs from a question the answer to which causes
> On Jan 16, 9:42 am, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <288a93f2-a308-43bd-bbbf-995561de7...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> > william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jan 14, 1:56 am, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > In time, when the population growth reaches the right point, and mass
> > > > starvation is the rule rather than the exception, the public will be
> > > > only too happy to have forced abortion, like in China.
> >
> > > ...or people like you could simply kill themselves.
> >
> > your ardent supporter bobby heishman posting as dino and several other
> > socks has regularly criticized elizabeth for posting remarks like you
> > just posted. do you think he'll give you a free ride?
>
> are you crazy?
him discomfort.
william mosco
Jan 18, 2012, 2:59:36 PM1/18/12
to
> <7f484f29-8745-4030-814a-326480e1d...@l19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
i don't answer questions from crazy people who ask me what another
person might choose to do.
person might choose to do.
elizabeth
Jan 18, 2012, 7:59:15 PM1/18/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
So you aren't aware that by law, pregnancy and childbirth costs for
> - Show quoted text -
all pregnant women MUST be covered?
james g. keegan jr.
Jan 18, 2012, 11:30:58 PM1/18/12
to
In article
<ede7282f-fc05-4a87...@c1g2000pbf.googlegroups.com>,
<ede7282f-fc05-4a87...@c1g2000pbf.googlegroups.com>,
william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 17, 2:21 am, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <7f484f29-8745-4030-814a-326480e1d...@l19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
> > william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jan 16, 9:42 am, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <288a93f2-a308-43bd-bbbf-995561de7...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Jan 14, 1:56 am, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > > > In time, when the population growth reaches the right point, and
> > > > > > mass
> > > > > > starvation is the rule rather than the exception, the public will
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > only too happy to have forced abortion, like in China.
> >
> > > > > ...or people like you could simply kill themselves.
> >
> > > > your ardent supporter bobby heishman posting as dino and several other
> > > > socks has regularly criticized elizabeth for posting remarks like you
> > > > just posted. do you think he'll give you a free ride?
> >
> > > are you crazy?
> >
> > as usual, silly billy runs from a question the answer to which causes
> > him discomfort.
>
> i don't answer questions
we know, coward.
> On Jan 17, 2:21 am, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <7f484f29-8745-4030-814a-326480e1d...@l19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
> > william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jan 16, 9:42 am, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <288a93f2-a308-43bd-bbbf-995561de7...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Jan 14, 1:56 am, "W.T.S." <m...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > > > In time, when the population growth reaches the right point, and
> > > > > > mass
> > > > > > starvation is the rule rather than the exception, the public will
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > only too happy to have forced abortion, like in China.
> >
> > > > > ...or people like you could simply kill themselves.
> >
> > > > your ardent supporter bobby heishman posting as dino and several other
> > > > socks has regularly criticized elizabeth for posting remarks like you
> > > > just posted. do you think he'll give you a free ride?
> >
> > > are you crazy?
> >
> > as usual, silly billy runs from a question the answer to which causes
> > him discomfort.
>
> i don't answer questions
william mosco
Jan 19, 2012, 7:50:28 AM1/19/12
to
> <ede7282f-fc05-4a87-8377-2833321bf...@c1g2000pbf.googlegroups.com>,
after making a fool of himself, thinking i can predict the actions of
others, jimmy calls me names.
others, jimmy calls me names.
james g. keegan jr.
Jan 20, 2012, 11:30:17 PM1/20/12
to
In article
<8f9b1b40-7432-4956...@kj5g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
as usual, silly billy continues to run from a question the answer to
which causes him discomfort.
<8f9b1b40-7432-4956...@kj5g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
which causes him discomfort.
pnyikos
Feb 1, 2012, 7:54:55 PM2/1/12
to nyi...@bellsouth.net
On Jan 13, 9:21 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
of cells" behind them [abortion clinic worker terminology] that they
are kept in the dark about by shameless liars like Spartakus's allies
in these newsgroups. That includes everyone who repeats the mantra,
"There is no baby killed in abortion."
And when did YOU last post on fetal development, "Spartakus"? Back in
the 1990's, as "Chris Lyman," perhaps?
> > > What a chickenshit avoidance of their own responsibility!
So posts the ONLY abortion rights regular in the abortion newsgroups
who seems to have any smarts left. All the others come across as even
less intelligent than most of the women "Spartakus" is dissing.
Let's boil down what HE is saying: women who don't research the facts
about pregnancy in the teeth of all the pro-abortion propaganda
surrounding them are "irresponsible". That is, unless they have
abortions.
> > > That's about it, isn't it? The person posting as Peter Nyikos, in his
> > > own inimitable patronizing way, is saying that women need the guiding
> > > hand of someone like Mark Crutcher
A Google search of "Crutcher" shows NO posts by me where I mentionin
him, either in the 1990's or since I resumed posting in 2008, but it
does show "Spartakus" having 41 hits for posts mentioning him.
Also, Chris Lyman gets 7 hits under his own name, and perhaps there
will be others when various e-mail addresses under which he posted but
which did not have his name in parentheses, are googled.
Yet more straws in the "Spartakus" = Chris Lyman wind. I doubt that
many abortion newsgroup regulars even have a clue as to who Mark
Crutcher is.
> > > to guide them through the really
> > > hard math in figuring out whether or not to bear a (nother) child.
Yet another manifestation of the essential amorality of Spartakus/
Lyman. No mention of the child's side of the equation.
That is EXACTLY where ultrasound upsets the applecart. Even a Planned
Parenthood director, Abby Johnson, quit at the horror of what she saw
in ultrasound during an abortion.
That is EXACTLY why "Spartakus" hates the Texas law -- he is not pro-
choice, he is pro-abortion. He is the only person I've ever labeled
"pro-abortion" who didn't accept the designation himself: "W.T.S.",
Michael Loomis, and Gordon Storga all proudly wore it.
Spartakus showed his true colors when he LIED that she did it for the
money. He tried to cover up his lie by saying the "lecture circuit"
could be "quite lucrative" but could not even name a single pro-lifer
who manages to make so much as a living wage from honoraria for
speeches.
Of course the lecture circuit can be lucrative -- for leftists.
> > excuse me, but isn't that sorta like those who want the taxpayer to
> > pay for abortions? i mean, doesn't it follow that those people
> > believe women are too stupid to educate themselves about birth
> > control?
>
> Having fun with your strawmen, Billy?
Lyman and "Spartakus" both loved to zing in the word "stawman"--even
though it didn't always make sense the way they used it.
"perfesser" and "red herring" are two other trademarks of these two --
or should I say "this one"?
Peter Nyikos
> william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > > are saying: "We're too dumb to understand big words like 'abortion'".
What a grotesque piece of crap! It isn't the words, it's the "clump
> > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > > are saying: "We're too dumb to understand big words like 'abortion'".
of cells" behind them [abortion clinic worker terminology] that they
are kept in the dark about by shameless liars like Spartakus's allies
in these newsgroups. That includes everyone who repeats the mantra,
"There is no baby killed in abortion."
And when did YOU last post on fetal development, "Spartakus"? Back in
the 1990's, as "Chris Lyman," perhaps?
> > > What a chickenshit avoidance of their own responsibility!
who seems to have any smarts left. All the others come across as even
less intelligent than most of the women "Spartakus" is dissing.
Let's boil down what HE is saying: women who don't research the facts
about pregnancy in the teeth of all the pro-abortion propaganda
surrounding them are "irresponsible". That is, unless they have
abortions.
> > > That's about it, isn't it? The person posting as Peter Nyikos, in his
> > > own inimitable patronizing way, is saying that women need the guiding
> > > hand of someone like Mark Crutcher
him, either in the 1990's or since I resumed posting in 2008, but it
does show "Spartakus" having 41 hits for posts mentioning him.
Also, Chris Lyman gets 7 hits under his own name, and perhaps there
will be others when various e-mail addresses under which he posted but
which did not have his name in parentheses, are googled.
Yet more straws in the "Spartakus" = Chris Lyman wind. I doubt that
many abortion newsgroup regulars even have a clue as to who Mark
Crutcher is.
> > > to guide them through the really
> > > hard math in figuring out whether or not to bear a (nother) child.
Lyman. No mention of the child's side of the equation.
That is EXACTLY where ultrasound upsets the applecart. Even a Planned
Parenthood director, Abby Johnson, quit at the horror of what she saw
in ultrasound during an abortion.
That is EXACTLY why "Spartakus" hates the Texas law -- he is not pro-
choice, he is pro-abortion. He is the only person I've ever labeled
"pro-abortion" who didn't accept the designation himself: "W.T.S.",
Michael Loomis, and Gordon Storga all proudly wore it.
Spartakus showed his true colors when he LIED that she did it for the
money. He tried to cover up his lie by saying the "lecture circuit"
could be "quite lucrative" but could not even name a single pro-lifer
who manages to make so much as a living wage from honoraria for
speeches.
Of course the lecture circuit can be lucrative -- for leftists.
> > excuse me, but isn't that sorta like those who want the taxpayer to
> > pay for abortions? i mean, doesn't it follow that those people
> > believe women are too stupid to educate themselves about birth
> > control?
>
Lyman and "Spartakus" both loved to zing in the word "stawman"--even
though it didn't always make sense the way they used it.
"perfesser" and "red herring" are two other trademarks of these two --
or should I say "this one"?
Peter Nyikos
W.T.S.
Feb 1, 2012, 8:14:53 PM2/1/12
to
In article <eb96750c-fa6e-418f-9b58-fa0d0558fa27
@l1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, nyi...@bellsouth.net says...
that there's no life until birth. Anything else is just pro-liar
propaganda and disinformation. Women fully understand the normal,
decent procedure of abortion. They simply don't need pro-liars getting
in between a woman and her Doctor. Pro-liars are not wanted in women's
lives and health!
@l1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, nyi...@bellsouth.net says...
>
> On Jan 13, 9:21 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > > > are saying: "We're too dumb to understand big words like 'abortion'".
>
Good point. Women fully understand that it's just a clump of cells, and
> On Jan 13, 9:21 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > william mosco <wm5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion"
> > > > are saying: "We're too dumb to understand big words like 'abortion'".
>
that there's no life until birth. Anything else is just pro-liar
propaganda and disinformation. Women fully understand the normal,
decent procedure of abortion. They simply don't need pro-liars getting
in between a woman and her Doctor. Pro-liars are not wanted in women's
lives and health!
pnyikos
Feb 1, 2012, 11:52:58 PM2/1/12
to nyi...@bellsouth.net, wm5...@gmail.com
On Jan 14, 2:38 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 13, 10:58 am, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >> Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> >> Dino <whate...@homemail.com> wrote:
> >> > Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >> > > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> > > > I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> >> > > > plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> >> > > > tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> >> > > > the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> >> > > > development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> >> > > > A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> >> > > > as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> >> > > > to be upheld:
> >> > > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> > > > I expect this decision to be appealed to the Supreme Court by the
> >> > > > plaintiffs, with the usual suspects (ACLU, PP, NARAL) etc. fighting
> >> > > > tooth and nail for it to be reversed. They will, of course, ignore
> >> > > > the needs of the women who have not been taught about fetal
> >> > > > development in government-mandated "sex education" classes.
> >> > > > A sizable fraction of 317 women seem to fall into that category,
> >> > > > as explained by a legal foundation that is fighting for the law
> >> > > > to be upheld:
> >> > > Let's boil down what these 317 women who were "harmed by abortion" are
> >> > > saying: ...
> >> > Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
> >> > whats wrong with you liberals,
> >> > you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> >> > They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> >> > ignorant as you to speak for them.
> >> > You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> >> > learn something if you listened.
>
> >> Almost right.
>
> >No, 100% right. Mind your own business and let women speak for
> >themselves.
>
> All of them.
> >> > Why don't you just let those 317 women speak for themselves. That's
> >> > whats wrong with you liberals,
> >> > you think you can just speak for everyone else.
> >> > They have minds of their own and certainly don't need someone as
> >> > ignorant as you to speak for them.
> >> > You just need to shut up and mind your own business. Maybe you could
> >> > learn something if you listened.
>
> >> Almost right.
>
> >No, 100% right. Mind your own business and let women speak for
> >themselves.
>
>
> >They don't need you to talk for them.
>
> They don't need you pro-liars telling them what they must do.
Pro-liar:
1. One who aids a liar by deflecting criticism of the liar's lies or
actively promoting the lies as though they were true.
2. Pro-lifer [term used by abortion rights fanatics to suggest
Definition 1.]
relevant:
Remark 1. Fischer, who is the most prolific user of the term pro-liar
in sense 2, is also one of the biggest pro-liars in sense 1.
Remark 2. Bill Mosco is a pro-lifer only in the sense of being morally
opposed to abortion; and he is more pro-choice than Ray Fischer, who
would JAIL women for most third-trimester abortions.
Remark 3. For more about that JAIL bit, see the reference I will give
in my next reply to Fischer.
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
Feb 2, 2012, 12:07:59 AM2/2/12
to nyi...@bellsouth.net
Here, as promsed, is the url for the post in the thread, "Third
trimester abortion in the nation's Capital and elsewhere" where I give
some details about Fischer and his proposed jail sentences for lots of
women who indulge in third trimester abortions:
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.abortion/msg/40faa2ea93a3ba69
Fischer is conspicuously absent from the thread, because he would be
cramping the style of his loyal allies "Spartakus" and "W.T.S." who
are quite happy about promoting third trimester abortions for any
reason or no reason.
I wonder how many women Fischer has gotten pregnant and then gotten to
obey him when he told them to get abortions.
> > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
>
> You care about women in exactly the same way that Nazis care about
> Jews.
Everybody who follows his posts long enough knows Fischer is a
pathological liar, and that he hasn't a leg to stand on when he makes
Pee Wee Hermanisms like the one he made just now.
Peter Nyikos
trimester abortion in the nation's Capital and elsewhere" where I give
some details about Fischer and his proposed jail sentences for lots of
women who indulge in third trimester abortions:
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.abortion/msg/40faa2ea93a3ba69
Fischer is conspicuously absent from the thread, because he would be
cramping the style of his loyal allies "Spartakus" and "W.T.S." who
are quite happy about promoting third trimester abortions for any
reason or no reason.
obey him when he told them to get abortions.
> > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
>
> You care about women in exactly the same way that Nazis care about
> Jews.
pathological liar, and that he hasn't a leg to stand on when he makes
Pee Wee Hermanisms like the one he made just now.
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
Feb 2, 2012, 12:12:58 AM2/2/12
to nyi...@bellsouth.net, ospr...@hotmail.com
a different challenge in my reply to him of a few minutes ago.
>
>
> > > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
>
> > You care about women .
>
> more than you do.
where Fischer said he didn't give a shit about women.
His Pee Wee Hermanism in response to this last comment of yours is
typical of him. He loves to talk the talk about Nazis, but is rather
feeble in his attacks on real Nazis like "Topaz".
Speaking of Pee Wee Hermanisms, here is a little exchange between him
and Bill Mosco on this thread:
> > [Mosco] Especially since you are a
> >idiot.
>
> Especially since you're a lying asshole.
Fischer is here indulging in the dirty debating trick known as the Pre-
Emptive Peremptory Ploy.
The Pre-emptive Peremptory Ploy can be a one-shot thing or it can be
frequently employed for a long time until the payoff comes.
The preliminary step(s) consist[s] of making a carefully chosen,
unsupported (and usually unsupportable) accusation about a person--
call him/her X-- of which the accuser (or someone the accused is in
good with) is (or is expected to be) grossly guilty.
The payoff comes when the grossly guilty party earns the accusation,
Person X points it out, and then the accuser claims that Person X is
indulging in a Pee Wee Hermanism, or projecting, or hitting some high
score on "the irony meter". [Back in the 90's it was more commonly
called the "the irony-o-meter".]
In this case, the grossly guilty party is Ray Fischer, and he has
described himself to a "t" while pretending he is describing Bill
Mosco.
Naturally, he makes no effort to support his accusations--because he
can't.
Ray is perhaps the leading exemplar of the Pre-emptive Peremptory
Ploy. I used an example by him in 2009 to formally introduce the
concept.
Peter Nyikos
W.T.S.
Feb 2, 2012, 3:09:50 AM2/2/12
to
In article <a7b4aa93-8aca-4b50-9e6f-6afa9d069b84
@o13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, nyi...@bellsouth.net says...
Pro-Liar: Anyone who opposes or obstructs abortion in the slightest
way, including the imposing of undue burdens, such as ultrasounds,
waiting periods, or "counseling", or favors such undue burdens. Also,
anyone who opposes federal funding of abortions, or opposes abortion on
demand without argument, debate or notification.
@o13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, nyi...@bellsouth.net says...
way, including the imposing of undue burdens, such as ultrasounds,
waiting periods, or "counseling", or favors such undue burdens. Also,
anyone who opposes federal funding of abortions, or opposes abortion on
demand without argument, debate or notification.
W.T.S.
Feb 2, 2012, 3:12:10 AM2/2/12
to
In article <35912c49-907a-4e3a-a847-
299962...@y10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>, nyi...@bellsouth.net
says...
as good and decent a way as any to rid us of fetus filth. They even
save the womans life on many an occasion, and prevent the birth of
defective fetuses.
299962...@y10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>, nyi...@bellsouth.net
says...
> Here, as promsed, is the url for the post in the thread, "Third
> trimester abortion in the nation's Capital and elsewhere" where I give
> some details about Fischer and his proposed jail sentences for lots of
> women who indulge in third trimester abortions:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/talk.abortion/msg/40faa2ea93a3ba69
>
> Fischer is conspicuously absent from the thread, because he would be
> cramping the style of his loyal allies "Spartakus" and "W.T.S." who
> are quite happy about promoting third trimester abortions for any
> reason or no reason.
Is there something wrong with third trimester abortions? They seem just
> trimester abortion in the nation's Capital and elsewhere" where I give
> some details about Fischer and his proposed jail sentences for lots of
> women who indulge in third trimester abortions:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/talk.abortion/msg/40faa2ea93a3ba69
>
> Fischer is conspicuously absent from the thread, because he would be
> cramping the style of his loyal allies "Spartakus" and "W.T.S." who
> are quite happy about promoting third trimester abortions for any
> reason or no reason.
as good and decent a way as any to rid us of fetus filth. They even
save the womans life on many an occasion, and prevent the birth of
defective fetuses.
> > >That's right.
> >
> > And not just the ones who obey you.
>
> I wonder how many women Fischer has gotten pregnant and then gotten to
> obey him when he told them to get abortions.
>
> > > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
> >
> > You care about women in exactly the same way that Nazis care about
> > Jews.
>
> Everybody who follows his posts long enough knows Fischer is a
> pathological liar, and that he hasn't a leg to stand on when he makes
> Pee Wee Hermanisms like the one he made just now.
>
> Peter Nyikos
> >
> > And not just the ones who obey you.
>
> I wonder how many women Fischer has gotten pregnant and then gotten to
> obey him when he told them to get abortions.
>
> > > But you already said you don't give a shit about women.
> >
> > You care about women in exactly the same way that Nazis care about
> > Jews.
>
> Everybody who follows his posts long enough knows Fischer is a
> pathological liar, and that he hasn't a leg to stand on when he makes
> Pee Wee Hermanisms like the one he made just now.
>
> Peter Nyikos
james g. keegan jr.
Feb 3, 2012, 3:21:59 AM2/3/12
to
In article
<35912c49-907a-4e3a...@y10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
this from the plagiarist who regularly disappears from threads for
months.
<35912c49-907a-4e3a...@y10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
this from the plagiarist who regularly disappears from threads for
months.
0 new messages