HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Pro-choice vs. Pro-Li
Date: 6 Sep 92 03:12:00 GMT
Reply-To: david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks)
Organization: The Cutting Edge - Houston, TX - 713-466-1525




FJM> It hardly seems that it is necessary to CRIMINALIZE this in order to
FJM> make sure that someone gets help.  After all, isn't the state allowed
FJM> to determine that someone is a danger to themself or others and put
FJM> them into treatment that way?

FJM> Just out of curiousity, what do these kinds of stupid laws mandate in
FJM> the way of sentencing?


   I highly doubt that suicide is considered "criminal" in any state. In
   California, it is a misdemeanor, and is used strictly to ensure that
   the suicidal party gets some kind of psychiatric attention. The forced
   hospitalization lasts for a maximum of 72 hours, and there is never any
   prosecution involved. It is simply a tool that allows the cops to do
   SOMETHING with suicidal people.

      David

 * Q-Blue v0.7 [NR] *                                                                                              
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5193 alt.politics.clinton:5277
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies (was: Re: Legalized Theft)
Date: 14 Sep 92 03:07:26 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: usa
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <18uog6INNnm0@agate.berkeley.edu> lazarus@ocf.berkeley.edu (Andrew J. Lazarus) writes:
>Mr Haugh has informed me by e-mail that he reads 4000 words per minute.
>Unfortunately (for him) when I analysed the "documentation" for his tax
>fairness argument, I discovered that reading at such a great rate, his
>comprehension suffers terribly.

I wanted to touch on this one, too.  I found that speed-reading helps
me make more money.  I had a chance to take a course from a "Super
Learning" (neurolinguistic programming people) group that promised to
teach one how to read 25,000+ words per minute.  For $600 it would have
been worth it.  It didn't work out, so I asked for a refund.  I'm stuck
reading at Evelyn Wood rates of speed ...

Like I said, I work very hard to get ahead.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | "The US Government has the Midas Muffler
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            |  touch: everything they touch turns to
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  shit."
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |                  -- Jay Maynard
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: cramer@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Cramer)
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston
Organization: Unixland Public Access Unix  (508) 655-3848
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 15:56:14 GMT

jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
: In article <Bu1Apy.CCB@rice.edu> rbutera@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert John Butera) writes:
: >They did have great respect, but DID NOT state that the Bible is our
: >Constitution and everyone believes it.  Jefferson and Franklin were
: >deists.
: 
: The great thing about seeing who someone admires is that you can then
: go find some of those other peoples words and show them what they ACTUALLY
: believed -
: 
:      " ... I therefore beg leave to move-- that henceforth prayers
:    imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our
:    deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before
:    we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of
:    this city be requested to officiate in that service."
: 		-- Benjamin Franklin (in a letter to Geo. Washington)

However, consider the following against the Franklin quote:

"Almighty God hath created the mind free.  All attempts to influence
it by temporal punishments or burthens are a departure from the plan
of the holy author of our religion.  No man shall be compelled to 
frequent or support any religious worship or ministry or shall
otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief,
but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain,
their opinions in matters of religion.  I know but one code of
morality for men whether acting singly or collectively."

  -- Thomas Jefferson (printed on walls of the Jefferson Memorial)

Bill Cramer

251 W. Central St., Ste. 142 | I could wile away the hours, take on the super
Natick, MA 01760 USA         |    powers -- if I only had a gun.  
cramer@unixland.natick.ma.us | I'd be ruthless, I'd be vicious, I'd kill the
CIS: 70322,3412	             |    sons of bitches -- if I only had a gun.
From: wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu (Rick Russell)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: iraq vanquished
Date: 5 Sep 92 22:21:43 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station

In article <1992Sep05.164152.28371@NeoSoft.com> hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen) writes:

>Actually, I just read a report that in many parts of the Gulf they have
>the lowest levels of pollution in years, due to the reduced tanker
>traffic.

Marine pollution or air pollution? It's an interesting statistic, but
all I can say is take a look at the February Nat'l Geographic. God!
The entire area looks like a scene out of Dante's _Inferno_.

With that in mind, here's the 'box score' for Kuwaiti pollution, taken
from 1991 statistics.

Oil consumed: 4.6e+6 barrels/day (approx US total foreign oil
usage/day)

Heat output: 86e+9 watts (approx same as 500-acre forest fire)

Particle count: 12,000 metric tons/day (equal to about 10% of world
daily biomass pollution/day)

CO_2 : 1.9e+6 metric tons/day (approx equal to 2% of _worldwide_ CO_2
emissions!)

SO_2 : 20000 metric tons/day (approx equal to 57% US energy emissions)

>Doug Andersen
>hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com

-- 
# Rick Russell    | TAMU Meteorology   | wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu (Internet) #
# I am sane. I am perfectly and completely sane. I shouldn't be in here     #
# at all. There's been a terrible mistake.                                  #
From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1992 22:44:15 GMT
 <1992Sep1.193624.27022@technology.com>
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <1992Sep1.193624.27022@technology.com>, Judy McMillin writes:

> All right, John.  Just who is this Patrick Henry person whose word we
> are all supposed to accept as "the ultimate truth?"  He sounds like some
> wacko bible thumper to me.  Did he get liberty or did he get dead?  
> It's just like some old bible thumper to go sullying the name of God
> by dragging it into politics!

I guess that your teachers were too busy teaching leftist dogma to teach you any
American history!


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
From: wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu (Rick Russell)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
Subject: Re: Sex Education <fairly long, but good!>
Keywords: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu
Date: 11 Sep 92 02:54:01 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station

In article <exuptr.485.716148873@exu.ericsson.se> exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se) writes:

>Which is why I'd rather do it all myself, instead of having the school give 
>out facts without regard to our morality.
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 

Perhaps you didn't mean like it sounds, but do you really think that
facts could contravene your morality?

Don't take that question as an offense, it's just that when I read
your statement, it struck me as a strange way to word your objection.

Thanks for your extensive comments on the issue, though.

-- 
# Rick Russell    | TAMU Meteorology   | wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu (Internet) #
# I am sane. I am perfectly and completely sane. I shouldn't be in here     #
# at all. There's been a terrible mistake.                                  #
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics,rice.galor
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and the Bible: Refutations (Long)
Summary: Thank "Bob" for the SubGenius...
Date: 6 Sep 92 19:47:49 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: If we knew, we'd do something with it.

In article <RraDr*fX0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
>In article <1685513A1C.JLOCK00@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>, Joseph L. Lockett writes:
>
>several deliberate misinterpretations of the Bible and outright falsehoods.

Mighty nice of you to take them out and prevent folks from deciding for
themselves...

>> I have read ALL of John 8.  I see the story of Jesus and the adulteress,
>
>You obviously didn't understand it.

In other words, he doesn't agree with your opinion, and by default, you're
right...

>[...]
>
>> prick.  Actually, I think a fair-sized group of Biblical scholars figure
>> the man was gay himself, and repressed it in himself and others all his
>> life.  No wonder he's so retentive it's amusing.
>
>The group of warped, so-called scholars who would agree with that statement is
>both small and irrelevant.

How would you know, if you never bother with listening to them?  

>> Elizabethan English of his beloved King James (who was himself gay, by
>> the way, according to many interpretations):
>
>King James was absolutely abominable.  However, he did NOT do the translation,
>it was simply named after him because the translation was commissioned during
>his reign.

Well, I'd suspect James spoke pretty much the same English as the
Elizabethans, seeing as he wasn't that far removed from them -- all of 30
years.  I'd also suspect the translators would have some fairly strong
incentives to *not* come up with translations with which the monarch
disagreed.

>[more misinterpretations and ridicule deleted.]

Like I said, real nice of you to let us judge that for ourselves...

>Since you are deliberately perverting the Scriptures, there is little point in
>specifically rebutting each point of your ridiculous diatribe.

Well, since you seem to feel it necessary to protect us from all of those
horrible things -- for our own good, doubtless -- by deliberately deleting
them, thus making it impossible for the rest of us to form our own
conclusions about what Joseph had to say --- I'd say you're doing a pretty
good job of rebutting your own ridiculous diatribe.  



-- 
Patrick L. Humphrey  (patrick@is.rice.edu)  Rice Networking & Computing Systems
     +1 713 528-3626 at Rice. 776-1541 at home. 667-6554 at Palace Lanes. 
                           I love my country.
                     I *don't* trust my government.
From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton's Economic Pl
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 23:22:51 GMT
 <1992Sep08.235205.12594@watson.ibm.com>
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <1992Sep08.235205.12594@watson.ibm.com>, John Iacoletti writes:

> In article <1992Sep8.181642.18961@technology.com>, richard@technology.com (Richard Murphy) writes:
> 
> |>                                                       I think the main point
> |> is this: although many of the founders believed in God, they choose to
> |> keep government independent of this belief. Hence our constitution makes no
> |> mention of scriptures, Jesus, or specific holy persons. So the motto
> |> "In God We Trust" applies equally to Christians, Jews, and those who follow
> |> the teachings of Mohammed.
> 
> That motto has nothing to do with the founding of this country, as it
> was created during the Civil War, and has been the official U.S. motto
> for less than 40 years.  I take great delight in obliterating it with
> a large black marker on most of the paper money that passes through my
> hands, because that motto is a LIE.

At least for the liberals, John is right (probably for the first time in his
life.)  Liberals don't trust in God, that is why they want to make the government
into a god.  No matter what "crisis" exists, they want government to fix it.  Of
course, the "fix" almost always makes the "crisis" worse, so you need a bigger
government to apply a bigger "fix", etc...


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: cramer@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Cramer)
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies (was: Re: Legalized Theft)
Organization: Unixland Public Access Unix  (508) 655-3848
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:03:11 GMT

jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
: Under Carter the poverty rate exceeded 20%.  Under Reagan the poverty
: rate fell to 18%.  So far as I know, it has yet to reach that upper 
: level again.

For what it's worth...

Poverty rates:
	1975: 12.3%
	1978: 11.4%
	1979: 11.7%
	1980: 13.0% 
	1982: 15.0%
	1983: 15.2%
	1985: 14.0%
	1986: 13.6%
	1988: 13.0%
	1989: 12.8%

1982 poverty levels:
	1 person household <65: $5019
	1 person household 65+: $4626

1989 poverty levels:
	1 person household <65: $6452
	1 person household 65+: $5947

In 1989, the number of households with incomes less than $5000:
	<65: 3,513,000
	65+: 1,431,000

(sources: The World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1986 and 1992
editions, The Universal Almanac, 1992 edition):

Bill Cramer

251 West Central Street, Suite 142	| "The greed of the few outweighs
Natick, MA 01760 USA			|    the need of the many."
Internet: cramer@unixland.natick.ma.us	|       -- popular American theme 
CIS: 70322,3412				|
From: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Brainwaves & John Hau
Date: 11 Sep 92 21:19:49 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.

In article <3509.91.uupcb@cutting.hou.tx.us> david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks) writes:

>   So? I have an amoeba that can do the same thing...are you going to
>   argue that it is human too?

>   Again, given a needle small enough not to kill it, an amoeba will
>   squirm too. You can see it for yourself with a drop of pond water and a
>   microscope. Last time I checked having a rudimentary nervous system was
>   not enough to qualify as human.

>   Being human is not a requirement for brain function at all...does this
>   lead somewhere?  All you have proven is that a foetus is alive. I don't
>   think that was ever in dispute.

>   Um...again, a fish generates brainwaves, so do lots of "lower" animals.
>   They can also alternate between sleep and flopping about. This dosn't
>   make them human.

>   I believe the discussion here was HUMAN brainwaves...this would require
>   a well developed cerebrum. Otherwise all you are demonstrating that a
>   foetus is alive. (I'm starting to feel like a broken record here!)

>   Brine shrimp also react to light. They aren't human either!

>   Kittens do the same thing.....(ho hum)

Just what species do you propose a fetus to be?  I thought the life issue
was the thing.  I didn't think anyone was actually going to try and say a 
fetus was a different species until developed.

I say a fetus is alive and human.  What do you say it is?  I'm not 
interested in you telling me what it is not.
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "This must be Thursday.  I never could get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                       - Douglas Adams
  - Patrick Taylor                                       (Arthur Dent)
    Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                       "Don't let the .se fool you"
    or exuptr@ZGNews.Lonestar.Org, exu.exuptr@memo.ericsson.se
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5152 alt.politics.clinton:5100
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton's Health Ideas.
Date: 13 Sep 92 01:51:13 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: usa
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <18qf74INNsmo@agate.berkeley.edu> lazarus@ocf.berkeley.edu (Andrew J. Lazarus) writes:
>This week's "In These Times", a left-wing magazine, starts off with yet
>another anecdote about a working poor person whose sick daughter could
>not see a doctor for her earache (no medical insurance at Mom's
>low-wage job) until it was bad enough to have to go to the ER. By then
>strep had turned into rheumatic fever, result: permanent heart damage.
>We already have rationing of health care in the US: we ration by price.

If you insist on reading left-wing propaganda, you will continue to
have problems understanding the free market.

There was an anecdote in a magazine I'm thinking about starting.  It
explained how we already ration sports cars.  You see, we ration then
by price.

If you want the nicer things in life, you have to work VERY HARD.  I
busted my ass getting where I am today, and I resent people like you
who want to take the fruits of MY labors and give them to people who
don't.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | "The US Government has the Midas Muffler
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            |  touch: everything they touch turns to
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  shit."
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |                  -- Jay Maynard
From: rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: JFH and Fred's Ridiculous Flaming
Date: 15 Sep 92 00:11:53 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900

In article <21508@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>In article <exuptr.521.716245956@exu.ericsson.se>, exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se) writes:
>> Hmm...  looking pretty grim.
>
>Yes, it was a stupid thing to say.  I was pretty sure I hadn't said anything
>like that since Joe wasn't in my KILL file at the time.  The reason Joe
>thinks he is in there is because, well, I don't reply to his postings.  I
>could get a June backup file of my KILL file (that is the oldest backup I
>have) and post my KILL file as of June.  I added that comment because Joe
>needs to think he is in the KILL file.

	Well, experience teaches you nothing, then. Haven't I always
replied to you, whether or not I _thought_ I was in your kill file?
And, further review of this claim results in dismissal of your claims
to morality. As with morality, I claimed you misuse (and/or abuse) kill
files by proclaiming the content of yours. Now, you admit you lied,
n'est pas(French students, pardon any irregularity)? Which brings me
to my question: Do you proclaim moral stances that you don't actually
follow? Do you do so because there is a "good" reason (Joe needs to
think I'm in his kill file/Kids need to think pre-marital sex is
"bad")? 
	Fred, are you out there? If so, I'd like to make a statement.
John puts me in his kill file, or ignores my posts and claims I'm in his
kill file, for good reason. I scare him. I _do_ post references,
I _don't_ knee-jerk, I _do_ save old news, I _don't_ mimic unnaceptable
answers. He does play with you. You're easily discounted. And it's not
because you're not making valid claims, it's because you simply refuse
to back yourself up. I'm usually in agreement with you, but _if_
you were on my team in a debate, I'd tell you to do some work, or
quit making us look like fools! Now, I know you won't accept that we're
on some sort of team,because you are (IMHO)the sort who wants to go to a 
cocktail party and be the "authority" on everything, w/o question. Well,
here in this group, we question. Here in this group, we have folks that'll
take advantage of your laziness, or lack of time, whichever way you prefer
to define it. Join the JFH "ignore/maybe you're in my kill file" group.
Post references. Save news that disturbs you, posts you know you'll be
referring back to. Or, as would be any child's reflex, don't, since 
(Ghod forbid) someone besides you thought of and suggested it.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Mullally (rocky@sugar.neosoft.com) PH:713-681-2495
"They say 'David, what shall I do? They wait for me in the hallway'.
I say 'Don't ask me- I don't know any hallways."- David Bowie, "Scary Monsters"
From: patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston Defending Choice Coalition needs you)
Summary: I defended clinics -- and I'm proud of it.
Date: 6 Sep 92 19:56:57 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Rice University

In article <hZ7Dr*7X0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
>In article <1992Sep01.051252.24415@NeoSoft.com>, Doug Andersen writes:
>
>> In article <16854ECA5.TROTH@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>, troth@ricevm1.rice.edu (Rick Troth) writes:
>> >         I'm not Jewish,  so I feel perhaps more objective in seconding
>> > that.   My understanding of the pro-life stance  (being an advocate and
>> > having been previously involved)  is that it agrees:  if the mother's
>> > health  (life at least)  is endangered,  abortion is in order.
>>  
>> Wrong.  The Constitutional Ammendment proposed by the pro-lifers would
>> give no such provision for abortion to save the mother.  It's possible
>> that some courts could interpret it that way, but it clearly on the
>> face would seem to say that all abortions, for whatever reason, are
>> illegal.
>
>No, you are wrong.  The pro-life movement definitely does not favor prohibiting
>abortions when the life of the mother is endangered. In fact,you probably can't
>find many who would agree to that.Of course,the pro-death folks like to make up
>these lies to try to discredit the pro-life movement.  This is just another red
>herring like the accusations about alledged agendas to ban birth control, sex, etc.

Jim, have a clue:  read the paper once in a while.  Did you notice the
little platform plank rammed through at the RNC?  No exceptions -- not to
save the mother's life, or in cases of incest or rape, *period*.  It's funny
how *you* can't seem to find any of your fellow travelers who feel that way,
but all I have to do is go over to talk.abortion and I can find them without
any effort at all.  Maybe you'd better ask some of your pro-force friends
about what they're after -- because you're not exactly parroting the party
line...:-)



-- 
Patrick L. Humphrey  (patrick@is.rice.edu)  Rice Networking & Computing Systems
     +1 713 528-3626 at Rice. 776-1541 at home. 667-6554 at Palace Lanes. 
                           I love my country.
                     I *don't* trust my government.
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5192 alt.politics.clinton:5276
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies (was: Re: Legalized Theft)
Date: 14 Sep 92 03:03:54 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: usa
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <18vpb7INNq56@agate.berkeley.edu> lazarus@ocf.berkeley.edu (Andrew J. Lazarus) writes:
>This 5K is another number Haugh repeats but which he probably does not
>understand. (It isn't cash payments. Maybe it's figuring the value of
>FBI protection or something.)

No, it is straight out off an article which stated that the government
provides virtually identical assistance to poor and rich households
alike.  It included Social Security as well as AFDC.  Of course, the
article forgets that some of us put in several thousand dollars a year
to Social Security.  Getting our money back in 30 years is NOT a handout.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | "The US Government has the Midas Muffler
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            |  touch: everything they touch turns to
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  shit."
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |                  -- Jay Maynard
Xref: sparky tx.politics:4894 alt.politics.clinton:4288