XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion   
   From: ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com   
      
   Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   > --sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   news:<2l79pdF9no19U2@uni-berlin.de>...   
   >   
   >>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>>--sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   news:<2kd318Fslk3U18@uni-berlin.de>...   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>--sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   news:<2k4ju5F1770t5U4@uni-berlin.de>...   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>--sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   news:<2k1rsvF16ngduU16@uni-berlin.de>...   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>--sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   news:<2k0jorF161kviU1@uni-berlin.de>...   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>--sexkitten--  wrote in message   
   news:<2jti7hF15c6rrU8@uni-berlin.de>...   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>"David W. Barnes"  wrote in message   
   news:<220620042140401990%DumpBushInNovember@usa.com>...   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>In article <7943568.0406222030.67ef7715@posting.google.com>,   
   Robert B.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Winn  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>A woman walks into planned parenthood today and   
   proceeds with an   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>abortion. Your contention is that abortion is not   
   legal. Please   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>explain your position that she is now in violation of   
   the law.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>All states had laws in effect to prohibit what you   
   describe.  A   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Supreme Court opinion does not change that.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Actually it does since state law is secondary to federal   
   law and the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Constitution.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The constitution is the highest law in the land, and the   
   basic   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>framework of   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>all laws.  A state agrees to this by the act of ratifying   
   the U.S.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Constitution upon admission into the union.  This is basic   
   civics.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, you seem to have forgotten the preamble.  The   
   Constitution has a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>purpose other than to be something lawyers can poke holes   
   in.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's something states can't poke holes in either, since it   
   supercedes   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>state law. Whether you like that or not is irrelevant.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>How about that?  So providing for the common defense of all   
   human   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>beings would be Constitutional,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Which was accomplished with the creation of a military.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>while killing children in compliance   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>with a Supreme Court ruling would not be.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>When the USSC hands down such a ruling, let me know and I'll   
   answer you.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Roe v. Wade 1973   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>That wasn't it.  Strange how you are indignant when your rights   
   are   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>infringed, but when others rights are infringed you don't care.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>So why were all of these 50,000,000 American children killed by   
   abortion?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>To avoid infringing upon the rights of pregnant women not to be   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>tortured. Is it OK with you to allow women to be infringed upon,   
   as long   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>as you and only you are granted rights?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>I have the same rights as the next child scheduled to be killed by   
   >>>>>>>>>>>abortion.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>No children are killed by abortion. Does that mean you are imaginary   
   too?   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>No person has rights in a pro-abortion police state.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>Good thing we only have half of one.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>Children have the right to be called what they are.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>You're right.   
   >>>>>>>>	   
   >>>>>>>>Definition   
   >>>>>>>>child   [Show phonetics]   
   >>>>>>>>noun [C] plural children   
   >>>>>>>>1 a boy or girl from the time of birth until he or she is an adult, or   
   a   
   >>>>>>>>son or daughter of any age:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Rights cannot be   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>taken away.  They exist even if they are denied.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Does that mean women too?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Women too.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>Glad to hear you support abortion rights.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> No woman has a right to kill a child.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>No one has had that right, and child killers go to jail.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Not the ones who kill children by abortion.   
   >>>>>Robert B. Winn   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Nonexistent people don't usually go to jail, true.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>Well, Dr. Brian Finkel existed, and he went to jail, but it was   
   >>>because he had offended women, not because he had been killing   
   >>>children.   
   >>   
   >>Exactly. Because he wasn't killing children.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>>Robert B. winn   
   >   
   >   
   > No, you are wrong.  He killed children for a living.  He was an abortion   
   doctor.   
      
   Did he take contracts on children in his spare time then? That doesn't   
   seem like a profitable practice.   
   (they're still not children)   
      
   > Robert B. winn   
      
      
      
   --   
   --sexkitten--Want a taste of religion? Bite a minister.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)