FidoNet Echomail Archive
r_catholic

<<< Previous Index Next >>>

From: Robert
To: CafeWriter
Date: 2007-03-30 10:16:12
Subject: Re: Court keeps pro-life literature distribution at Michiganschool

From: Robert <robpar{at}netportusa.com>

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:37:32 GMT, "CafeWriter"
<cafewriter{at}shawRemoveThis.ca> wrote:

>
>"Paul Duca" <p.duca{at}comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:C231DBE4.10802%p.duca{at}comcast.net...
>> in article 3VWOh.88359$zU1.68740{at}pd7urf1no, CafeWriter at
>> cafewriter{at}shawRemoveThis.ca wrote on 3/29/07 6:16 PM:
>>
>>>
>>> "John D.Wentzky"
<johndwentzky{at}alumni.furman.edu> wrote in message
>>> news:KQUOh.21943$nV1.6029{at}bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>> In news:8FUOh.87764$DN.8411{at}pd7urf2no,
>>>> CafeWriter <cafewriter{at}shawRemoveThis.ca> typed:
>>>>> "John D.Wentzky"
<johndwentzky{at}alumni.furman.edu> wrote in message
>>>>> news:ssROh.21875$nV1.17948{at}bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>> In news:SuHOh.85093$DN.81609{at}pd7urf2no,
>>>>>> CafeWriter <cafewriter{at}shawRemoveThis.ca> typed:
>>>>>>> "John D.Wentzky"
<johndwentzky{at}alumni.furman.edu> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:ipEOh.21628$nV1.20189{at}bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>>>> In
news:1175091728.446228.99600{at}n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
>>>>>>>> J Young <youngopinions{at}aol.com> typed:
>>>>>>>>> How dare anyone or any institution try
to suppress this young
>>>>>>>>> man's First Amendment rights! Thank
God that this judge was such
>>>>>>>>> a wise and insightful man; who knows
how many lives are being
>>>>>>>>> saved by his ruling?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think the Honorable Victoria Roberts is
a woman, there, JY.
>>>>>>>> A very nice decision indeed.
>>>>>>>> I am sure the public would be pleased to
read this ruling in their
>>>>>>>> newspapers.
>>>>>>>> And, I am sure that any opposing
viewpoints would be viewed with
>>>>>>>> much consternation and suspicion into why
would anyone want to
>>>>>>>> oppose such a ruling?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would welcome any suspicions and etc...
because I do oppose her
>>>>>>> ruling.
>>>>>>> Oh why would I want to oppose such a ruling?
Well because it
>>>>>>> basically takes away a woman's right to decide
whatever or not to be
>>>>>>> a mother and change the status, making the
fetus to be more
>>>>>>> important than women.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It does not regard the fetus as being more
important than the woman,
>>>>>> you hypocrite.
>>>>>> Your stance is what regards women as more
important than other
>>>>>> members of humanity.
>>>>>> You must submit or be dominated.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I am not going to be a mother and I am going to
stick to that
>>>>> decision. Oh and to be ordered to submit to the other members of
>>>>> humanity or be dominated... no thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Oops.
>>>> You mean to say you are content with pro-choice dominators
telling you
>>>> what to do?
>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather be a single woman.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Guess what, if a fetus cannot live without a
woman, what does that
>>>>>>> makes it exactly?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dependent and worthy of love.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Then I am so happy that I got myself fixed because I do not want
>>>>> children!!!
>>>>
>>>> So, why are you against living in utero humanity if you can not get
>>>> pregnant?
>>>>
>>>>> Just for once get it in your tiny head that not every
woman wants to
>>>>> be a mother nor go through the horrifying labour.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't even say "labour of love" because of
course, it involves blood
>>>>> loss, etc...
>>>>>
>>>>> So get over it!!!
>>>>
>>>> Get over it when it is unconstitutional roevwadedom?
>>>> How?
>>>>
>>> No, I just think that it's time to stop treating women like
baby machines
>>> because women can do much much more than just have children.
>>> Unfortunately,
>>> some of you cannot believe that could be true so that's why I have my
>>> tubes
>>> snipped.  I'm a woman, I have no plans to be a mother, and I do have
>>> plans
>>> for a better future, something I cannot do if I have a child or worse,
>>> children.
>>>
>>> I'm just a supporter of women's right to choice and some people look at
>>> it
>>> like women's right to kill a fetus.  Unfortunately, I don't see it this
>>> way
>>> because hey, if women keep on giving birth every single day, then we are
>>> in
>>> big trouble.  No, I don't mean crimes, abuses, etc...  I mean the famous
>>> case of the overpopulating the world.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>        You're fairly new here...you may not know John Wentzky claims a
>> woman's perjury cost him his job. And his religiosity has only compounded
>> his miscogeny.
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul
>>
>
>Now that is something new to me.  Thanks for letting me know.
>
  J.W. is atypical big mouthed, small brained, self righteous,
libeling bigot. He totally ignores what you write, only looking for some
thing that he can twist and call you a liar, if your story changes in the
least he will claim proof of your lie. Ignore the stupid bastard. BTW J.W.
is never wrong, just the victim of liars. He really likes being the victim.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
 * Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 5030/786
@PATH: 261/38 123/500 379/1 633/267


<<< Previous Index Next >>>