Nancy's lousy writing and lousy thoughts
Dick Jones dr_dick_jones@yahoo.com
Sun, 17 May 1998 09:42:57 -0700 (PDT) (00895444977, 19980517164257.24370.rocketmail@send1a.yahoomail.com)
At 11:56 AM 5/17/98 -0400, Greg, Nancy, and James Todd wrote:
>NANCY
>Terry still hasn't explained what he meant when he said that I must be
>Helen's herald. Please, Terry, explain it to me.
He obviously meant you were an apologist for the Fool
Helen. Have you read Shakespeare, Fool Nancy? He says
anyone who proclaims anything is a herald, Fool Nancy.
>Her"ald (?), n. [OE. herald, heraud, OF. heralt, heraut, herault, F.
>héraut, LL. heraldus, haraldus, fr. (assumed) OHG. heriwalto,
>hariwaldo, a (civil) officer who serves the army; hari, heri, army +
>waltan to manage, govern, G. walten; akin to E. wield. See Harry,
>Wield.]
>1. (Antiq.) An officer whose business was to denounce or proclaim
>war, to challenge to battle, to proclaim peace, and to bear messages
>from the commander of an army. He was invested with a sacred and
>inviolable character. [687]
>2. In the Middle Ages, the officer charged with the above duties, and
>also with the care of genealogies, of the rights and privileges of
>noble families, and especially of armorial bearings. In modern times,
>some vestiges of this office remain, especially in England. See
>Heralds' College (below), and King-at-Arms.
>3. A proclaimer; one who, or that which, publishes or announces; as,
>the herald of another's fame. Shak.
>4. A forerunner; a a precursor; a harbinger.
>It was the lark, the herald of the morn. Shak.
>5. Any messenger. My herald is returned." Shak. Heralds' College, in
>England, an ancient corporation, dependent upon the crown,
>instituted or perhaps recognized by Richard III. in 1483, consisting
>of the three Kings-at-Arms and the Chester, Lancaster, Richmond,
>Somerset, Windsor, and York Heralds, together with the Earl
>Marshal. This retains from the Middle Ages the charge of the
>armorial bearings of persons privileged to bear them, as well as of
>genealogies and kindred subjects; -- called also College of Arms.
>NANCY
>But, Terry, if they were not of the same opinion as you, if they did
not
>wish to give birth to a baby conceived via rape, would you force them
to?
>Would you force your opinion that abortion is wrong under all
circumstances
>on everyone else by denying women the right to choose to have a legal
abortion?
Two if's, Fool Nancy. Meaningless, illogical speculation.
Would, would. Meaningless, illogical speculation. And Terry
has not suggested any denying of imaginary rights, Fool
Nancy, your logical FALLACY OF STRAWMAN. You make the
elementary mistake of confusing laws with morality, since
you have no idea what morality is.
>NANCY
>Do you "valuable" the life of a zygote more than the life of a living,
>breathing, thinking, feeling child who is dependent on others to take
of it?
>Does dependency make a life more valuable? Is the life of a
fertilized ovum
>really more valuable to you than the life and well-being of your
daughter or
>sister or wife?
They are of equal value, Fool Nancy. This is your logical
FALLACY OF FALSE DILEMMA. The fertilized ovum, his grandchild,
is closer than his wife, not a blood relative.
>NANCY
>Terry, I am glad to hear that you would not force your opinion on
others.
>obviously you are not trying to have abortion outlawed. Bless your
>pro-choice little heart!
But you, Fool Nancy, are trying to force your silly,
arbitary, irrational, illogical opinions on everyone
else. The whims of the majority determine rights in
the United States and you wish to tell the majority
what they should do. Heil Fool Nancy!
==
Dick Jones, JD, MD
Physician-Attorney (retired)
Founder, Philosophy of Universalism
http://www.iland.net/~box191/phil2.htm
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com