From: Paul Duca 

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" 
wrote in message
> news:KQUOh.21943$nV1.6029{at}bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> In news:8FUOh.87764$DN.8411{at}pd7urf2no,
>> CafeWriter  typed:
>>> "John D.Wentzky"
 wrote in message
>>> news:ssROh.21875$nV1.17948{at}bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>> In news:SuHOh.85093$DN.81609{at}pd7urf2no,
>>>> CafeWriter  typed:
>>>>> "John D.Wentzky"
 wrote in message
>>>>> news:ipEOh.21628$nV1.20189{at}bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>> In
news:1175091728.446228.99600{at}n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
>>>>>> J Young  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

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag