| Grex > Agora47 > #52: House passes ban on "partial birth" abortions |
| response 125 of 142: | 
Oct 12 19:24 UTC 2003 |
(I heard that slynne soaks her false teeth in beer overnight.)
| response 126 of 142: |
Oct 12 19:31 UTC 2003 |
(only when she sleeps nekkid on the front porch)
| response 127 of 142: |
Oct 12 20:25 UTC 2003 |
Oooh Ooh. Grex is sooooo tantalizing and exciting all of a sudden.
| response 128 of 142: |
Oct 12 22:51 UTC 2003 |
Somehow, it seemed rude not to let klg know I was ignoring he/she/it/them. :) (man, the things you miss not living in Ypsi...) :)
| response 129 of 142: |
Oct 13 01:18 UTC 2003 |
We are crushed!
| response 130 of 142: |
Oct 13 01:21 UTC 2003 |
If I were filtering I wouldn't tell the filteree, but that's because I'm paranoid enough to worry about what they would say about me behind my back.
| response 131 of 142: |
Oct 13 01:22 UTC 2003 |
We are crushed, too!
| response 132 of 142: |
Oct 22 17:08 UTC 2003 |
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:56:05 -0400 From: CNN Breaking News <BreakingNews@MAIL.CNN.COM> Senate passes legislation to ban what critics call "partial-birth" abortion. President Bush has said he will sign bill.
| response 133 of 142: |
Oct 22 17:10 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 134 of 142: |
Oct 23 16:24 UTC 2003 |
This was inevitable.
| response 135 of 142: |
Oct 23 16:27 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 136 of 142: |
Oct 23 18:56 UTC 2003 |
The Kurds probably think that the Jeb Bush situation is more disgusting...
| response 137 of 142: |
Oct 23 20:07 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 138 of 142: |
Oct 23 20:10 UTC 2003 |
Odd question I had: Does Jeb Bush's order effectively also force the husband to keep paying for her care?
| response 139 of 142: |
Oct 23 20:16 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 140 of 142: |
Oct 23 20:31 UTC 2003 |
Re#138 I think there is some money ($1.7 million) she was awarded as part of a law suit that is designated for her care. I dont know how much of that money is left but I imagine that enough is that her husband wont be financially burdened by her continued care. But that does bring up an interesting issue. I mean, what if there wasnt a law suit. Who *would* be responsible for paying for on going care?
| response 141 of 142: |
Oct 23 20:33 UTC 2003 |
I think she was removed to a different facility. If I remember correctly, it gives the courts the opportunity to also appoint a different gaurdian. The hopice is supposedly caring for her for free currently.
| response 142 of 142: |
Nov 27 07:55 UTC 2003 |
maudlin whores.