home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:54329 alt.dads-rights:3166 alt.feminism:6858
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.dads-rights,alt.feminism
- Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!psuvax1!castor.cs.psu.edu!beaver
- From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
- Subject: Re: Affirmative Action
- Message-ID: <C0FtDD.1oE@cs.psu.edu>
- Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: castor.cs.psu.edu
- References: <1icftuINNopf@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> <C0EHs2.169@cs.psu.edu> <1idavcINN5dp@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 14:53:37 GMT
- Lines: 48
-
- <1idavcINN5dp@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
- ><C0EHs2.169@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
- >><1icftuINNopf@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
- >
- >I'll repeat, in this particular instance of your...hmm...original editing, Don.
- >
- >>>Are you looking for an answer, or just a brangle?
- >
- >>>>1. Presumption in favor of the father, until such time as fathers
- >>>>receive 49% of sole/primary custody awords.
- >>>
- >>>No. ...
- >
- >Of course, you DELETED the the part where I said that I was in favor of 50%
- >of all future awards being made in favor of fathers.
-
- Yes, I deleted your discussion of 'equitable standards,'
- which was beside the point. Are you in favor of AFFIRMATIVE ACTION,
- or were you just trying to flame Karl using misleading statements?
-
- >But that wouldn't be *dishonest* editing, now would it?
-
- No, it saves bandwidth wasted on irrelevant topics.
- Put it back in, if you like. I've got nothing to fear --
- it's only you who seems to "misplace" archived comments.
-
-
- >I also note that you deleted your own "AND/OR"s that appeared between
- >the three questions which would seem to imply that one or all could be
- >answered and would thus satisfy your query. I wonder why you did that?
- >Hmmmm.
-
- Hmmmm. Perhaps they're not crucial, and the bandwidth can be saved?
-
- The AND/OR's were to give you the opportunity to come up
- with a *positive* response that defines AA in *your* feminist view.
- You seem to be in favor of "equal rights" of some sort, but not AA.
-
- Perhaps you could come up with your *own* definition of AA,
- as I requested, since it was YOU who implied you're a feminist
- in favor of AA (in order to flame Karl as much as you could).
-
- (By the way, I'm not sure why this should be posted to talk.abortion,
- especially since it was you who objected to multi-groups.)
-
- Don
- --
- beaver@cs.psu.edu Opinions from the PC-challenged
-