HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:11:54 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: capital punishment/abortion

From: "Robert sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
> Capital punishment has been dredged up in an effort to discredit the position
> of those claiming to be pro-life.  While many, of the pro-life persuasion,
> will undoubtedly be against capital punishment, that in itself does not
> uphold the case of the implied contradiction.  I, for one, see no conflict in
> the two positions.
>
> Capital punishment is the result of an arduous process, brought about by the
> recipient.  Extensive measures are taken to ensure the "accused" has a fair
> trial, not to mention years of appeals if convicted.  The "accused" has better
> than 50/50 odds to survive the process.
>
> Abortion is the result of many things, *NONE* of which are brought about by
> the VICTIM.  In this case, VICTIM is the correct term.  There is no trial,
> no appeal, no parole, no counsel for the defense and no plea bargaining.  If
> there is any such thing as *innocence*, surely an unborn child would be its
> purest manifestation.  Rather than running the *risk* of complicating our
> selfish existence we simply destroy our young.
>
> The attempt to present these two positions as somehow contradictory is an
> exercise in futility.  While Christians are to forgive, this does not
> automatically remove the civil or criminal liability of the perpetrator.
> Although I may forgive you for stealing my car, the police will still try
> for an arrest and prosecution.  My forgiveness does not indicate that I
> feel this subsequent arrest and punishment would in any way be wrong.
>
> I believe the Bible is perfectly clear in its presentation of abortion as
> wrong and capital punishment as appropriate.  If "G"od wanted us to know
> that capital punishment was not to be used, then why was it required of
> Jesus?

While I agree completely with you stance on abortion and the
fact that being pro-life doesn't require that one also be
anti-death penalty or else face internal inconsistency.

I only want to ask:  are you in favor of capital punishment? and if
so why?  I ask because I don't believe that the Bible doesn't require
that one exist--it merely allows that God doesn't deem it sin to
have one.

I believe nonetheless that human life is too valuable to waste,
except when defending and protecting the State.  I do not consider
killing people who have behavioral problems to be protecting the State.
People with behaviroal/societal/whatever problems can be rehabilitated
and helped to return to a normal position society.  I believe that
this is possible in a number of ways, one of which is through
religious counseling.

-j.b.

>
> ---Robert
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 13:01:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: electronic town meeting with the N Tickets

E ticket? coool, but i'm not inclined to run for anything....unless of course
the people can get me on the ballot....and if i can get cher to give up her
life for my campaign, in which case, i won't give up unless i decide to do
something else.
-linda saboE  (desperately seeking a running mate or any kinda mate who can
speak on any non-issue whether relevent or not)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:29:07 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Erratum

For "pretensious" read "pretentious."
That'll learn me.
Jamie
will try to avoid pretension futurewise
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 22:46:19 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Flying in the face of logic, and history

Abortion is NOT legal in all states throughout pregnancy.
I thought Kerry said that it was.
Roe v. Wade permits state restrictions on abortions.
No doubt I misunderstood her.




                      Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 25 Jul 1992 16:17:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject: Re: N-tickets

On Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:00:00 EST "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.BITNET> said:
> If my supporters will get me on the ballot in all 50 states, I
> hereby solemnly promise to run for President.  Okay, 45 states
> and Guam will do :-).
Guam ne vote pas pour president.

And BTW, let me clarify myself in saying that the FOCA would not be
unconstitutional in PR, AS, VI, and Guam.

> Best,
> Peter SchledorN
>
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:00:15 CDT
From:         Sue Clark <SACLARK@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: A Good Tactical Move?

Hello Kerry:

I will finally, finally, finally answer your two questions on this.

Question #1:

>So here's my 2 cents worth.  First, what hurt the demo (when they declined
>to let Casey speak)  was that they weren't allowing dissention *within* the
>party to be heard.  For the repos to counter that, an appropriate move
>would be to let a spokefold (hi, Missy) from the Republicans for Choice
>group speak.  That would allow the Republicans to demonstrate what the
>Democrats did not -- that there's room for more than one viewpoint within
>the party and the *all* viewpoints merit a hearing.

I do agree with you totally.  In fact, yesterday on one of the Three Stooges
networks was a member of the Republicans for Choice stated that they are not
out to change the party or platform for that matter, but all they wished to
to was to speak their say.  Even though the platform might retain their anti-
abortion stance, to allow an opposition voice in the same party might remind
the people what the Democratic party used to be before 1968.

>Second, recall that the demos brought in some of those Republicans for
>Choice to speak --  the idea being that here were a group of Republicans
>that would vote for Clinton because of one issue.  To make an analogous
>move, the Republicans should try to bring in a group of Democrats who'll
>vote for Bush because of one issue (it could be pro-life Democrats, or it
>could be folks switching because of some other issue).  That would
>precisely counter the demo move:  "See, even *Republicans* won't back this
>guy".

I good answer! To allow 'groups of Democrats who'll vote for Bush because
of one issue' would be a perfect checkmate for the Demos, or for other
issues also.  Other than Casey, and if you were one of the Republican organ-
izers for just such an event, who would you like to see on the platform that
is a member of the 'loyal' opposition?

Ta for now,

Sue Clark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:31:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: personal liberties and high resolution broadcasting

the ghost of Abbie Hoffman said:

>I want to see how high resolution technology comes out in terms of cost
>accessibility to you and me before opposing or favoring it.

it seems that the dead-N is lacking in resolve on this issue.

>                                                               Personal
>liberties should be as we discussed thirty years ago - do to others what
>you want for yourself. Hurt is the absolute taboo.

this is the problem dead-N's have with the issues that we face today.
although the E-ticket agrees that personal liberties are of utmost importance
we want to discuss it in the present not the past. this is the party of
change and substance, true E-quality, libErty in all our EndEavors.

>                                                   Beyond that, the goal
is to raise the quality of evryone's life without imposing a dictatorship
>or police state to accomplish such a goal. "Free"

yes, this is what we all want...but how can you expect to do that for the
people living today? you're just a ghost of your former self. what kind of
life can you offer the AmErican PEoplE if you haven't one of your own.

PEoplE of this great nation, can you truly put your trust in the dead-N
platform? What can we expect when only half the ticket has a vested interest
in the living? What happens, if Duncan kicks the bucket w/out her shoes on?
What then?
Granted, the guy can spell, but will he ensure shoes for all when he doesn't
even need them?

Vote the E-ticket where you can expect to be the life of the party!

-linda suE saboE
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 20:26:41 EDT
From:         Mike Fessler <MIKEF@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: How to defeat AIDS

There was also a report several months ago of a vaginal sponge-like insert
that was meant to protect against disease rather than pregnancy. It was
a porous substance permeated with monoclonal antibodies directed against
HIV, syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia. In animal trials this device was
found to be lethal to the above pathogens in the reproductive tract.
I believe that the device is under development for commercial production.

Now how they did those animal trials, I'm not sure I want to know...

--Mike
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:01:05 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      How Iraq was armed

Seems like an appropriate time to raise (again) the question of how Iraq
was armed in the first place.

Rep. Henry Gonzalez has found evidence that the $ billion in credits for
Iraq approved by the Bush administration in late 1989 were even at the
time expected to go for weapons rather than "humanitarian" purposes (as
though Bush actually believed the Iraqi government had some expensive
humanitarian goals in mind). Gonzalez uncovered a CIA report showing
that Iraq's nuclear weapons procurement was financed by Banca Nazionale
del Lavoro in Atlanta, a known conduit of US credits to Iraq. A separate
document shows that an aide of Boyden Gray (White House counsel) called
the US Attorney's office in Atlanta and told them to stop prosecuting
BNL for fraud because the White House was worried about the
"embarassment level" of the case.

In a hearing last April, Richard Fuisz testified that he had visited a
Terex plant in Scotland in 1987, and witnessed the production of missile
launchers which, he was told, were bound for Iraq. The owner said that
he was working for the U.S. government but could not give details. Fuisz
says he reported his observations to the U.S. Commerce Dept., to the
excitement of an official, who later called back telling Fuisz that he
couldn't do anything about it and that Fuisz should go to the press. The
official was transferred to China.

Finally, some new information on "Coalition for America at Risk," a
group that ran ads encouraging Americans to support Bush's military
exploits in Iraq. The group had claimed that its money came from
conservatives in the U.S., but it turns out (according to the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Denver) that it was a front for some Kuwaitis. The
three chairmen of the Coalition have been indicted for failing to
register as lobbyist agents of a foreign government, and also for tax
evasion and other charges.

These and other stories from David Corn's August 3/10 column in _The
Nation_.

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:46:54 EDT
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: personal liberties and high resolution broadcasting

What do you mean that Abbie has no interest in the living now that he's
dead?  The dead vote; at least in Chicago they do.  As for the live
member of this team, I plan to die with my boots on.

Evelyn Duncan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 14:54:54 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Entrepreneurship Chinese Style

It does have sounds of Coma, but there was a sci-fi book
that I either read or read about, where all people convicted
of crime were sentenced to death in order to use their
body parts for non-criminals.

All crimes were punishable by death, no matter how light it
may have been because the demand for body parts was so high
that they supply had to be kept up.

I also think that all medical treatments including these
transplants were state-funded.

-j.b.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%UCF1VM.BITNET@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU"
X-VMS-Cc: JULIE
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:09:00 -0400
From:         Song Weaver <JULIE%DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU@CARNEGIE.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Obfuscation Elimination

>>>...when C.S. Lewis attempted
>>>to prove the non-existence of God, he actually proved his
>>>existence...
>>
>>When?  How?  Where?
>>
>>In what manner was the existence of God proven?  To whom?  Using what
>>reasoning?  With what criteria of proof and validation was this proof
>>performed?
>
>        I will try to find the book in which it was done and
>        give you the title, etc.
>
>        I will only reiterate that Lewis was a die-hard atheist
>        prior to his attempt to disprove God.  As to the manner
>        in which he did it, I'm not sure.  I never read the book
>        myself, since I have never needed God's existence proven
>        to me.


What you are saying doesn't necessarily hold water.  The fact that CS
Lewis converted to Christianity while attempting to disprove the
existence of God does not mean that he proved the existence of God.
Instead it means that during the course of his attempts to disprove
the existence of God something occurred which led him to instead
believe in God, whether or not it had anything to do with his attempts
to disprove the existence of God or not.  Since you never read the
book involved then you have no manner of knowing whether or not it
really happened, so you seem (to me anyway) to have made a statement
without validation or evidence, which I think is improper.

Oh well.  Down the hatch.

--Julie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 13:36:16 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: Financing the gov't...

andy:
>For example, it can be hard to stop married people (or others who can
>easily share expenses) from arranging their income split so as to
>minimize their tax burden.  Therefore, "fairness" argues for taxing
>such people on their total income; why should one's membership, or
>lack thereof, in such an arrangement affect one's tax burden?
>
>However, if we have progressive (or even regressive) marginal rates,
>we can't do that.  (This is an arithmetic result, not one that depends
>on how one sets up the progressive marginal rate system.)

Could you expand on this, please?  How does the type of tax rate (
progressive, marginal, flat) affect the ability of folks "who can easily
share expenses" to arrange their income splits so as to minimize taxes?
For the record, I'm asking out of total ignorance -- so keep the words
short :)

Thanks
Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:05:02 -0400
From:         Andrew Allen <E7L8ALL@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Announcing Yet another ticket... The "Y-Ticket"

This is to announce the candidacy of yet another ticket, the "Y" ticket,

other andY/ steve raffertY for president!

Just say "Y"?!?

(We're just a bunch of Y's guys B))

We know how to pun and we're not afraid to do it...

We will, of course have our platform together for y'all shortly, however
here are some highlights as it were:

1. The government owes you a living! See steve's recent posts on the topic.

2. The abolishment of personal income taxation - the balancing of the budget
(all in one swell foop!)

        From now on all ventures entered into which: a) are entered into with
        the intent to profit, and b) utilize the resources of the USA and/or
        the labor of its citizens (hereafter considered a national resource)
        shall be taxed in such manner as to provide for the common welfare.

        (There will be a top figure on the amount of salary that can be
        *deducted* for tax purposes as a write-off, the venture may still
        pay a higher salary, but may not deduct it.)


3. The abolition of the Shadow Government. All intelligence agencies will
be brought under one umbrella and reorganized, no covert actions will be
sponsored, covert *surveillance* will continue to be sponsored. The newly
appointed History Czar will lead a crack team of historical researchers,
archivists, journalists, hackers and other assorted fact finders on a
mission to discover America's recent past. Reports will follow, apologies
will be issued as necessary, certain recent presidents will have some
serious questions to answer, and Bill Casey will be exhumed and interviewed
by Bob Woodward and leading psychics.


4. The relegalization of marijauna. In fact it will become a crime (felonious
herbicide) to willfully prevent marijuana plants from growth, except to process
it for use.

        Plans will be formulated and implemented to convert from petroleum
        based fuels to marijuana based fuels immediately upon the election
        of the "Y-Ticket" to office. (With appropriate ceremony steve will
        plant some seeds in the Rose Garden of the White House, hopefully
        precisely upon the spot where Nixxon gave his resignation speech)

5. Shoes, everybody should have some. The "Y-Ticket" prefers loose
comfortable shoes for themselves, but recognizes that many people
prefer other sorts of shoes for many reasons. We support the right
of people to wear any sort of footwear that they like.

More to follow in the days to come...

-other andY (on behalf of himself and steve raffertY)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:52:16 -0400
From:         Andrew Allen <E7L8ALL@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Dan Quayle & Masturbation

>> I wonder if people who think AIDS education should consist only of a flat-out
>> "abstain or get married" ("just say 'no!'"), because those practices are safe
   r
>> than practicing the other forms of "safe sex," would also recommend
>> masturbation
>> for that reason.

>I would.  Masturbation is totally harmless, and on its face does not
>entail unfaithfulness nor promiscuity.

It's biblical too!

Let not one hand know what the other is doing... B)

>-Travis

-other Andy

PS- I'm back, I deleted a few hundred messages just so that I could get
caught up, if anybody had anything that they intended for me to reply to
just send it along.

I see that I am running for President with andy freeman on the basis that
we both have "n's" in our names (and that we share a first name)?!? I suppose
that after I get through a few of those posts I'll toss my hat in the ring.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 10:33:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: ratings for tv

one note abt. the warning labels tipper managed to get stuck on recordings.

my son worked part time at s.goody's. all the recordings w/the warning labels
were held under a counter or in back. customers had to request them, and store
personnel had to check age on i.d.

ALL the recordings w/these labels were by black artist.

i'm w/macphil on this...that on/off knob is a mighty tool.

-linda  (when clinton announced gore for vp, my son exclaimed, "oh no, tipper's
         husband".  :))
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 10:28:49 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Is Quayle pro-choice?
              31 Jul 1992 09:45:20 GMT from <pmoloney@MATHS.TCD.IE>

Paul:

You say that Quayle doesn't know what he's talking about.  What you have
apparently forgotten is that he is talking about what his *opinion* is.
I would venture to say that, whether he is able to articulate it to the
point that others understand it or not, Quayle knows better than anyone
else what his *opinion* is.  We, whether we agree or disagree with
what we think he said, or what we think he meant, are not so privileged
as to be better acquainted with his opinions than he is.

                                      --Missy Prez 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 12:57:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Clarifications on position Y

>PS - since the EE team is faltering so badly, I would like to assure
>     linda that I am well aware of the fact that the Librarian of
>     Congress has never been a librarian - or a woman.  <hint>


hey man, it could happen.

-linda (but only if we lose)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU