XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion, us.issues.abortion   
   From: fnord2k@yahoo.com   
      
   In article <7943568.0402201633.1f3efd36@posting.google.com>, Robert B.   
   Winn  wrote:   
      
   > William Klee  wrote in message   
   > news:<200220041400578839%fnord2k@yahoo.com>...   
   > > In article <7943568.0402200544.2b73e786@posting.google.com>, Robert B.   
   > > Winn  wrote:   
   > >   
   > > > William Klee  wrote in message   
   > > > news:<190220041941019847%fnord2k@yahoo.com>...   
   > > > > In article <7943568.0402182112.23ff9c8@posting.google.com>, Robert B.   
   > > > > Winn  wrote:   
   > > > >   
   > > > > > William Klee  wrote in message   
   > > > > > news:<0e604e7cfeecfb60646d75b65f6b5e71@news.teranews.com>...   
   > > > > > > In article <7943568.0402170647.6b3d8071@posting.google.com>, Robert   
   > > > > > > B.   
   > > > > > > Winn  wrote:   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > William Klee  wrote in message   
   > > > > > > > news:<150220041533545900%fnord2k@yahoo.com>...   
   > > > > > > > > In article <7943568.0402150536.471e4c4@posting.google.com>,   
   > Robert   
   > > > > > > > > B.   
   > > > > > > > > Winn  wrote:   
   > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see why a fictional woman couldn't have   
   > a   
   > > > >  fictional   
   > > > >  child,   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > until it's born, it's a fictional fetus.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What a surprise.  Why don't you go   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pretend that you are feeble minded to someone   
   > >  else.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't need to. You're doing a bang-up job all   
   > by   
   > > > >  yourself.   
   > > > >  *If*   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you're pretending, which is doubtful.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, as I predicted, you continue to claim that   
   > you   
   > >  do   
   > > > >  not   
   > > > >  know   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a child is.  Let's see how blue in the face you   
   > can   
   > >  get.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's see where I claimed I didn't know what a   
   > child is.   
   > >  Oops, I   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *didn't* claim that. If there is a jesus, he's not   
   > happy   
   > > > >  about   
   > > > >  all   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lying, boobie.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right here.  Remember this scripture?  Luke 2:5  To   
   be   
   > >  taxed   
   > >  with   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mary   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > his espoused wife, being great with child.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > Non-sequitor, boobie. If you can't back up your wild   
   > >  claims, be   
   > >  a   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > man   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > and admit it. Or be a christian and lie about it; your   
   > >  choice.   
   > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > Well, was Jesus Christ a child when he was in his   
   mother's   
   > >  womb?   
   > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > Who cares?   
   > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > The   
   > > > > > > > > > > > scripture says he was.   
   > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > The scripture also says slavery is just fine and that women   
   > and   
   > > > > > > > > > > children are property. Your point?   
   > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > Well, obviously you do not want to discuss this scripture.   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > What's to discuss? Your bible says slavery is just fine and   
   that   
   > > > > > > > > women   
   > > > > > > > > are children are property. Your point?   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > We will try again later.   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > No, you will post non-sequitors, and I will try to nail your   
   > > > > > > > > jelly-like   
   > > > > > > > > "position" into something solid.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > Yes, you have stated before that you cannot tell what a child is.   
   > > > > > > > I   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > More lies, boobie. You can *not* show that I have said that,   
   > > > > > > because I   
   > > > > > > have *never* said that.   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > do not believe you.   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > I do not believe you can read.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > Thank you for sharing, Bob.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > My name's not Bob, boobie, it's William. It's at the top of the post   
   > > > > you non-sequitored to. You *really* need to get yourself enrolled in   
   > > > > that Adult Literacy program, pronto.   
   > > >   
   > > > Are you sure it is not Bob?   
   > >   
   > > Quite sure, Captain Non-Sequitor, although I'm sure you *need* it to be   
   > > for some obscure psychological reason. Probably stemming from your   
   > > absolute refusal to admit the possibility that you're wrong on any   
   > > topic.   
   >   
   > Well, if you cannot tell what a child is, it just seemed to me that   
   > you might also have trouble knowing what your name is.   
      
   Thanks for proving my point about your absolute refusal to admit the   
   possibility you're wrong. Keep up the good work, Captain Non-Sequitor.   
   You're doing more to cripple your position than we ever could.   
   Congrats!   
      
   --   
   ...and in elder days there were wars in the Heavens between the Ibemmeraphim   
   and the Angels of the Apple of Knowledge...   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)