XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion   
   From: prochoice@here.now   
      
   On 18 May 2004 00:01:47 -0700, rbwinn47@mybluelight.com (Robert B.   
   Winn) in alt.abortion with message-id   
   <7943568.0405172301.1b4a2116@posting.google.com> wrote:   
      
      
   >> >> Which is it?  Yes, you can prove your assertions, or no you cannot   
   >> >> prove your assertions.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> If yes, the prove them.   Any other answer will be taken as a no.   
   >> >   
   >> > I would never try to prove anything to any person who claims to be   
   >> > unable to tell what a child is.   
   >>   
   >> So the answer is no, you cannot prove them.  I can tell quite well what a   
   >> child is, I gave you a reference from a peer reviewed medical/law source.   
   >> You are the one that pretends no to know what a child is.   
   >   
   >child  n.  1.  an unborn or recently born person   
   >                      Merriam-Webster dictionary   
   >Now we will show how the word has been used for thousands of years.   
   >   
   >Luke 2:5  To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.   
   >Robert B. winn   
      
   I was not aware the English language was thousands of years old,   
   especially in it's current form.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)