On 04-16-14, BILL MCGARRITY said to TIM RICHARDSON:


BM> Roy, you need to go back and take a refresher course on reading
BM> comprehension. IF you got your head out of your ass you'd have seen I
BM> referenced a doctor on the very site that Tim plagerized,


TR> *Tim* didn't "...plagiarize..." anything! I was ``quoting'' an
TR> authority on the subject. *You* are no such authority, on ANY subject!


BM>Then post a link you used.


I am not your research assistant! Go get it yourself! Its out there. *You*
just don't want to see it. You aren't the first one who's pretended the truth
isn't there to see.


TR> Thats exactly what it is. Its an abortion mill. And one day I fully
TR> expect that horror stories that rival or surpass what was revealed
TR> about Gosnell's death camp, will surface about Planned Parenthood,
TR> which the democrat leftists have been financing with taxpayers money!


BM>Gosnell again... is that all you got?


*Gosnell* is the result of your oft-stated favorite subject: abortion on
demand! Much like all liberal leftist democrats, you will try to make
`Gosnell' disappear! The leftist media have already pretty much done so. All
the horror photos, and even the aftermath of the case has disappeared from
headline news! As soon as his sentence was handed down, all photos of his
deeds quickly hit the `buried' pile! The left and their cadre in the
mainstream media cannot have the Gosnell case reminding the nation what
`abortion on demand' turned into!


I will never let you or any other supporter of abortion, forget the Gosnell
case. I wish there was a way for me to get hold of the photos of Gosnell's
handiwork and post them in Fido for all to see! I'd rub the photos of murdered
babies in your faces every time you brought the abortion subject up!


BM>I told you 4 days ago no one doubts
BM>Gosnell was an animal.


BM> And trust me, if the GOP gets it's way and repeals
BM>Roe v Wade, you think Gosnell was an animal?  Wait till you see al those
BM>botched back alley ones. You should know better than anyone what went on
BM>before Roe v Wade.


BM> Tim should have, according to Tim's own beliefs, recused himself due
BM> to morality grounds according to the 1st Amendment he tosses so
BM> freely around.


TR> *You* have not the slightest notion what *Tim's own beliefs* are. I
TR> have never discussed any of my `beliefs' with you, or anyone else in
TR> Fido.

BM>LOL... you've only been preaching them over and over... good Lord man.
BM>Are you senile now?


You have tried again and again to assign a `religious' position to me I do not
hold! *I* do not `preach' anything. You might look to your OWN problem with
being "...senile..."!


TR> This is a silly attempt on your part to play a `gotcha' on me over
TR> abortion.


TR> You've dragged it over about three Fido echoes now, and you have no
TR> more validity in the matter here than you had in the other two echoes.
TR> You didn't `gotcha' anybody over it. You're just continuing to make
TR> yourself look sillier and sillier. You tried to hit me over it using
TR> religion, which you thought I would be a strong adherent to. You were
TR> proven wrong! Fact is...if it were up to me, no religion would exist!
TR> Or are you so blind that you do not see that we are being treated to
TR> the modern-day version of the `Spanish Inquisition'?


BM>The post I made in Fido Sysops was a mistake, I apologized and being you
BM>don't have access to there told Roy to forward it to you. Roy then posted
BM>it in DEBATE.... not me.


See...you got a couple of problems with dragging this into this echo.


Firstly...you know for a fact that Klahn has me on permanent ban from this
echo. So you brought my name up in here *thinking* you'd blab your little tale
and I wouldn't be able to respond. You're wrong! I made an agreement with
Klahn that, for me to stay out of this echo...neither my name NOR any sly
little references to anything I'm involved in elsewhere, gets brought up in
here.


Right now I imagine Klahn's rethinking the wisdom of allowing you to be a
poster in here, `cause you're dragging your `flame war' from other echoes into
this one. And Klahn isn't gonna like that (forget that this is probably the
most message traffic this echo's had in over a year!).


By the way...you brought this into the wrong echo if you think Klahn's gonna
be on *your* side in these two controversies.


See....he CAN'T take your side on either issue! The reasons being...Klahn, not
all that long in the past, has made the claim that he's a *practicing*
Catholic! Which means he CAN'T be one of your supporters on EITHER issue;
abortion OR homosexual marriage!


The Church teachings are strictly against abortion...and in the view of the
Catholic Church, marriage between two people of the same sexual gender is an
abomination! A mortal sin! And `sodomites' aren't looked upon with any more
favor in the Catholic Church, than it is by me.


So....you brought this into the wrong echo seeking an ally! Sorry!


TR> Only the religion involved now is not radical Catholicism...its radical
TR> Islam?


BM>Radical being the key word.

TR> There's no getting around the fact that there are over 50 million
TR> VICTIMS of abortion.


TR> The best of all birth controls is `abstinance'!


BM>Agreed. Now understand, by that simple statement you agree that while a
BM>woman is on birth control there is a possibility an egg can get
BM>fertilized.


Are you and Klahn brothers or something? You both seem to make the same
errors: twisting meanings and nuances into YOUR position, when no such thing
has occured!


I `agree' to no such thing!


TR> The SECOND best birth control is the use of the MANY
BM> methods, both pill form and contraceptive device, available to prevent
TR> a pregnancy!


BM>Correct, and one of the ways is to make the lining of the
BM>uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg.


TR> You and your fellow cadre who are so supportive of `a woman's right to
TR> abortion', have not answered the one question I've asked over and over
TR> again for many years on this subject:


TR> If a woman is so weak-minded...so scatter-brained...so wrapped up in
TR> her `emotions' that she can't take a single, in-expensive pill each
TR> day, AS directed on the freekin' package, or make sure her sex partner
TR> uses a condom.. ...what makes anybody think she's smart enough to make
TR> a life-or-death decision for a human baby?


BM>That's not what we were discussing.


That is `certainly' part of the discussion!



BM>The discussion was YOU administered birth control pills thus going against
BM>your morals when it comes to terminating a life,


NO! It wasn't! *You* tried to MAKE it that. But THAT wasn't the discussion at
all.


And here you come again with your weak attempt to equate following a doctors'
prescribed medication orders, with what you *think* are my `morals'.


Once again, you've lost this discussion in your fantasy-attempt to pull a
`gotcha' by trying to make me out an `abortionist'!


You lose!


Your continued pursuit of a `gotcha' where none is to be had, only
demonstrates once again your complete lack of any facts or evidence to back up
your stated position.


You've failed to hold any lucid, defensible position in either subject
(abortion OR sodomite marriage between two same-sex couples), have resorted to
nothing but false accusations, twisted words and meanings; and when all else
failed, to curses and insults.


You've had your chin wiped in both areas of discussion, and you are now
reduced to making wild, unfounded assertions, that are made sillier and
sillier everytime to try to toss them at me.


A good piece of advice to you would be...you've come close to burying yourself
in your own hole! You better stop digging!


As for me....I've enjoyed leading you around by the nose in several echoes,
watching you fall back on curses and insults in lieu of any facts or `content'
to bring to the discussion of two topics; one of which you know very little or
nothing...and the other in which I suspect you have first-hand experience
...albeit badly skewed! In any case...for my part...


This discussion is now over! Any further material you post on either the
subject of `abortion', or sodomite same-sex activity (marriage or otherwise),
will go un-noticed by me from this point onward.






---
*Durango b301 #PE* 
 * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140)