HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: 3 Jan 1993 19:54:35 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita17.cs.itc.hp.com

cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Howard Black) writes:
> In article <1i003kINNf0j@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
> >I have sex with my neighbor's wife; we've both consented to it with 
> >each other, no one's twisting my arm or hers; immoral? 
> 
>     No, according to the morals of the involved people.  In fact, I'd be
> interested in a logical argument that it is immoral, without resort to the
> biblebook or other religious dicta.

Because they have committed themselves to their spouses.  (I didn't spell that 
out in the original statement, I should have) 

> >Hmmmm...that's what I thought it still was; enjoyed responsibly between 
> >married people. 
> 
>     Why do they need to be married?  Again, please no religion-based
> arguments, just a logical assertion of what harm is done to the consenting
> adults or others.

Because if their birth control fails, (assuming they use it) they could 
end up with a baby, that they are not prepared for.  

>     I don't agree that typical people don't think sex is inherently
> something negative.  Why don't people discuss their sex lives as casually
> as their golf games?  "It's no one else's business?"  Please... neither is
> your golf score, and humans' sex lives are far more important to them than
> golf (except for Quayle, of course ;-) ).

Because it *is* no one else's buisiness, unless you're *real* close to the 
person you're talking to.  You don't see where your sex life is more private 
than your golf score?   One of the things said by those who are against 
homosexaulity (and 'excessive' sexuality in general) is that people show 
a lack of respect for sex; and here you are putting people's sex lives on 
the same level as their golf score.  If sex were as 'casual' as you make it 
out to be, people wouldn't have such a drastically-worse reaction to rape 
as they do to being robbed.  Sex is a deeply personal thing, and not just 
to those who have "religion". 

Walter
From: greg_bradt@msmgate.mrg.uswest.com (Greg Bradt)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Secular Humanism a Religion? (was:JESUS IS THE REASON FOR THE
     SEASON)
Date: 29 Dec 92 20:44:03 GMT
Organization: US West Marketing Resources
XUserAgent: Nuntius v1.1b3
NntpPostingHost: greg_bradt.mrg.uswest.com

In article <1hq0boINNgqm@cronkite.Central.Sun.COM> Dave Bernard,
dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM writes:
>Note that Secular Humanism has been recognized as a religion
>by the US Supreme Court.

What an absurd idea!   Just how did this "recognition" come about?

Greg Bradt aka ()The Lensman()

greg_bradt@msmgate.mrg.uswest.com | "Freedom means sometimes
Genie: G.BRADT                    |   having to put up with
Compuserve: 70206,172             |   things that really
BBS: (303)290 9243                |   piss you off".
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: bwood@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (William Wood)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:48:00 GMT

> 
>My children are a precious gift that God has given my wife and I.  We have 
>been entrusted with the responsibility of raising our children in a manner
>consistent with the teachings of our faith.  Jesus Christ is as real to us 
>as the keyboard that I am using at this moment.  When the school teaches that
>homosexuality as a valid lifestyle, it operates in direct conflict with the 
>values I attempt to instill within my children.  
> 
>These are my beliefs.  I don't expect you to adopt them, nor do I expect you to
>accept them.  All I ask in return is that you give me the same respect in
>return.  In my view, teaching my children views which are in direct conflict
>with our (my wife and I) values is a violation of this respect. 


>You know bub, Jesus may be real to you (as he is to me), but HE IS 
NOT TO THE JEWS!!  AND MILLIONS OF OTHER RELIGIONS!  SO GET OFF YOU
DAMN SOAPBOX!! 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: greg.mable@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Greg Mable) 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: RUSH=FAG!
Date: 28 Dec 92 17:39:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: HAL 9000, W-NET HQ, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Reply-To: greg.mable@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Greg Mable) 

Does the big guy ever get on this conference or is he too fat
and stupid to use a computer?  I heard he's gay and his lover
is a black man (and a democrat)!  Hope he uses a condom!
---
 . Cam-Mail . WNET:The 4th Dimension (517)546-3948  Howell, Mi
        
----
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| HAL 9000 BBS +1 313 663 4173 or 663 3959 | Four 14.4k v.32bis dial-ins |
| Public Access QWK-to-Usenet gateway running PCBoard 14.5a/E10/MULTITASK|
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12266 alt.politics.clinton:19100 alt.politics.bush:14916 alt.politics.homosexuality:8447 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10691
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Date: 25 Dec 1992 00:09:29 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
> You are asking me to comment on your loose paraphrase of a unquoted
> report from un-named sources.
> I'll wait until I hear authoritative figures on reported incidents.

Oh, I made the (incorrect) assumption that you would have heard the 
reports in the newspapers or on USENET; I've seen them in both places 
several times.  my mistake.  A gay rights group in Denver claims that 
incidents against gays have gone up 400%+ since the pass of #2. 
That figure is being used to show that Colorado really is a 'hate state' 
and that #2's passage has lead directly to increased violence and 
discrimination against gays.  But these numbers don't have any 
police records to back them up; do you think they should be used, 
or is the group using them being irresponsible in your eyes? 

> In the meantime, I note that Navy officials reported last Monday 14th
> that a Chicago Heights 22-year old sailor may have been killed by
> shipmates because he was gay.

Ugly, very ugly.  No argument on that one..

Walter

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Bisexuality (was Re: [a long list of subjects])
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 17:39:11 GMT

In article <1ht9o8INN7iv@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:

>ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>
>> It is a source of constant amazement to me that men who are attracted
>> to both blondes and brunettes have such difficulty with the concept that
>> bisexuals can be monogamous.
>
>That is why I used the wording "active", saying that the person 
>currently practiced bisexuality.  

I practice bisexuality while I debug newsreaders.  While I wash the
dishes.  While I chop celery.

In other words, I don't think you've got much of a grasp on the
subject.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12049 alt.politics.clinton:18978 alt.politics.bush:14817 alt.politics.homosexuality:8272 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10541
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about:)
Date: 19 Dec 92 22:20:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec17.162102.22240@seq.uncwil.edu> session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions) writes:
>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>
>>No need for flames.  You simply know very little about the military.
>
>Apparently, neither do you.

Zack, Screw you!  I am so tired of responding to you, I wonder why I continue 
to do so.  I stated in the post you responded to (if you had cared to read 
the entire thing) and several other posts, that I was in the Air Force, not 
on a ship.  I also stated in more than one post that for the first four years 
I was in the service, I lived in a dormitory with a community bathroom with 
a large, open-bay shower.  I was stationed at several bases, and all of the 
people I remember discussing the subject with relayed similar experiences. 

>>In addition, you imply that a large percentage of military live off base.  
>>You might be surprised to learn that the overwhelming, vast majority of 
>>single people in the military live in barracks (or in dorm situations on 
>>ships, etc.)
>
>I don't know what ship you served on, but most of the people on my ship,
>married and single lived off-base (or "on the beach" as we called it).

Again, let me repeat what I posted, IN THE AIR FORCE, NO ONE UNDER THE 
RANK OF E-4, WHO WAS UNMARRIED, LIVED OUTSIDE THE DORM!  For a very simple 
reason:  E-4's and above could get quarters allowance to help pay for their 
quarters; married people likewise received quarters.  Lower ranking airmen 
would have had to pay for their rent out of their own pocket, so they lived 
in the dorm.  Jeez!  Do you get it now? 
>
(By the way, Zack, sorry about the screw you.  I was frustrated when I read 
the post and my editor doesn't allow for editing.  Not much of an editor, Huh?

Ted


-- 
So the Maples formed a union, and demanded equal rights, "The Oaks are just 
too greedy.  We will make them give us light!"  Now there's no more Oak 
oppression, for they passed a noble law.  And the trees are all kept equal, 
by hatchet, axe and saw.     -  Rush, The Trees
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 00:36:59 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.001921.11011@Princeton.EDU> elliott@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Jr. Frank W. Elliott) writes:
>In article <1hqmklINN24o@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:


>>> Fine....then I shouldn't be paying taxes for something that says I 
>>> am wrong.  
>>
>>If the folks who submitted the school voucher amendment get their way, 
>>you might not have to...then again, the public school system may go 
>>furthur in the toilet...
>
>Do you seriously think that the voucher system will allow people
>without children to stop paying taxes to support public schools?
>
>
>>Walter
>>
>
>


Very true!!!  It is so funny how these people will not give those
of us who are gay a tax credit....since we aren't eligable as 
whole citizens to get our fair share....

What, maybe they should make us 3/4 human and cut our taxes by 
at least 3/4.....

Bil
From: cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Hillary, the new Dan Quayle
Date: 31 Dec 1992 02:38:36 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


I recently watched a network news 'magazine' program in which Wal-Mart
was racked pretty hard about claiming to buy American products whenever
possible when acctualy they were buying clothes made by children in
Bangladesh. Up until May Hillary was on the Board of Directors for
Wal-Mart. 

The way I see it Hillary either knew who Wal-Mart's suppliers were and
didn't give a hoot, or she had no idea what was going on. I will give
her the benefit of the doubt here, her feelings toward children seem
genuine. But the fact remains that she was on the board of directors and
apparently didn't know who some of the companies largest suppliers were.

Without going into why I think she was appointed to the board or why she
accepted, I'll just leave it as it is...
-- 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   /   / __  /  /     |         Wally Blume         | Earth:
  /   / _ / /  / /_/  |      Internet address:      |    Mostly harmless.     
 /_/_/ /_/ /  / __/   | cd651@cleveland.freenet.edu |-HH Guide to the Galaxy
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12258 alt.politics.clinton:19094 alt.politics.bush:14911 alt.politics.homosexuality:8441 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10685
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Date: 24 Dec 1992 22:23:24 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
> Why would I be suspicious of *reported* incidents?    If such incidents
> have been reported to the police, then they are on the same footing as
> other crime statistics.

Yes, continue...

> If someone claims increased attacks on Gays, but adds that no-one ever 
> reported them, then I would be just as sceptical as when someone claims
> Gay sexual harrassment in the military, but says it was never reported.

One would hope...

> I don't know about Mr Smith, but I would say "Put up or shut up".
> Either give us the facts and try the accused, or stop using unreported
> incidents as a way of victimizing a minority.

Ok, so what do you make of the report that there has been something on 
the order of a 4-fold increase of assaults on homosexuals in Colorado 
since amendment #2 passed? 


Walter Smith
smithw@cs.itc.hp.com

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12690 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11104 alt.politics.clinton:19391 alt.politics.bush:15262 alt.politics.homosexuality:8721
From: glen@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Glen Sonnenberg)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: 30 Dec 92 20:44:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec30.194703.3067@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> fogarty@sir-c.jpl.nasa.gov (Tim Fogarty) writes:
>
>In article <1992Dec30.162502.6756@asl.dl.nec.com>, 
>dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:
>|>
>|>Unlike heterosexuality, which is dictated by nature, homosexuality
>|>is a lifestyle choice and should not be presented as such to school
>|>
>
>What evidence do you have of this ?  And how do you dismiss the scientific
>evidence that suggests otherwise ?  I would really like to know.
>

I have posted here requesting to see the "evidence" that suggests that 
homosexuality is a trait rather than a choice.  Would someone cite this
or post it so I can check it out.  One study I have heard about was with
rats that suggested that homosexuality in a given rat population was 
directly related to the stress that the population was subjected to.  This
would tend to show that homosexuality is a reaction to one's environment
rather than a genetic trait.  Also, if all that is out there is corellational
data (ie this was found in homosexuals more often that in heterosexuals) then
I don't understand how homosexuals can state undeniably that homosexuality is
a trait.  Even the arguement "X % of people are homosexual" doesn't prove
anything because there are "X % of people with mental disorders".  This
doesn't mean that it is an inescapable phenomenon.  Please understand that
although I admit I have a bias I would like to see the info that homosexuals
are using to support their case.  Hasta.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: JESUS IS THE REASON FOR THE SEASON
Date: 26 Dec 92 15:28:19 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard) writes:
: Lost Boy writes:
: 
: >Hey, we all *know* what the reason for the season is. It's YULE! It just
: >happened that when Christianity came in, the Church decided to make Yule a
: >Chritian holiday by saying that Jesus was born then. Rumor has it that
: J>esus was actually born during the spring. 
: 
: Actually, no one knows exactly when Jesus was born, but most scholars favor
: the springtime.  Since in the days when the celebration was set no one knew
: the actual birthday, they appropriated some handy holiday season- Yule, Saturnalia,
: Winter Solstice.  Note that the Church did not decide to make Yule a Christian
: holiday at all; merely the actual day was appropriated to celebrate a Christian,
: not a pagan, feast.
: 
: 	Dave       

In a way, they did decide just that- many Christian holidays and 
feast days overlap with pagan festivals, and this was done 
deliberately in a lot of cases.  The idea was to sort of ease
the newly converted into the thing.

Bill  
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:00:38 GMT

[crossposts to alt.politics.clinton and alt.politics.bush deleted]

Jr. Frank W. Elliott (elliott@phoenix.Princeton.EDU) wrote:
: In article <1hqmklINN24o@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
writes:
: >> Fine....then I shouldn't be paying taxes for something that says I
: >> am wrong.
: >
: >If the folks who submitted the school voucher amendment get their way,
: >you might not have to...then again, the public school system may go
: >furthur in the toilet...
:
: Do you seriously think that the voucher system will allow people
: without children to stop paying taxes to support public schools?

Sure it well.  We will be paying for private schools and religious schools 
instead.
-- 
Mike McAngus 			 | You are a fluke of the Universe.  You have no 
(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org)		 | right to be here, and whether you can hear it
The Truth is still the Truth	 | or not the Universe is laughing behind your 
Even if you choose to ignore it. | back.  -- National Lampoon, Deteriorata
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: 1 Jan 93 03:52:29 GMT
Followup-To: misc.test
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

Sorry - I'll add a warning to all future posts pointing out that
the obsessed Reverend Holtsinger will immediately make an inane
reply.  I had no idea he was this far gone.

Susan
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 14:13:01 GMT

In article <1hq1c7INNnba@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:

>fritzs@microsoft.com (Fritz Sands) writes:
>
>> It is, IMO, imperative, however, that
>> the second concept -- that gays, moral or not, live together, can be quite
>> happy and "normal" and can be good parents raising "normal" children --
>> be taught.  
>
>3) Should it also be taught that bisexuals do those things?  How would 
>   you do it? 

I don't think it's necessary to make that addition.  In my experience,
few straight people make a serious distinction between bisexuals and
homosexuals.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: bryant@neural.Kodak.COM (Steve Bryant)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Organization: Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 18:28:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.144540.16605@news.columbia.edu>, rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston) writes:
>Part of living in a civilized community is compromise. I give up my 
>rights to perform acts harmful to the community, and in return I am 
>free of such acts by others. (theoretically speaking, of course) It is,
>IMNSHO, harmfull to our comminty not to teach general tolerance of all
>people, to all people. I feel that EVERY school, public or private, should
>have to teach such things. No one has the right to keep his children
>from becoming tolerant, productive members of society.

So schools HAVE to teach morality. Who's morality? Yours or mine?
Once you have given away your control to the school to teach  
morality what's to prevent them from teaching your children intolerance?
Which they do in the extreme. By the way, I am absolutely in favor of
tolerance, I just don't believe that my children are being tought
tolerance nor is it the schools job to do this. It is ultimately my
resposability to teach my children morality. Obviously, this does not
happen in a vacuum. Every social interchange my child has impacts
his/her code of ethics. But, should it be the stated job function
of the public school system to teach my children their sense of
morality? And I say no to this. Let the schools teach the basics,
science, math, reading, and I will teach my children morality.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Howard Black)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 01:37:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

In article <1992Dec30.211645.10640@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> wgb3@pyuxf.uucp (25336-buoni) writes:

>  What is relevant to this discussion is whether or
>not the school system should be teaching social values traditionally dealt
>with in the home.  I say NO!

    And I say, again, that describing a fact != teaching a social value.
Homosexuals exist..always have, always will..this can be taught without
passing judgement.  You, unfortunately, want to make sure that kids know
that while it may exist, it's *wrong*.  

>I was responding to your comment about suicide.  I regard suicide as a selfish
>act perpetrated by an individual who doesn't have the courage to deal with
>life on life's terms.

    This is a surprising attitude, even for a Xian.  I suspect you are
either (not) dealing with someone close to you who killed themselves, or
are passing yet another moral judgement.
    BTW, be sure and display this benevolence to the parent(s) of a gay
teenager who has just killed themselves.  "I think your 16-year-old just
didn't have the guts to deal with life". Incredible.

-- 
   ******************************************************************
     Howard Black                             cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu
     Department of Chemistry                  Eastern Illinois Univ. 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality