HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: Clarence Thomas
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 14:56:19 GMT

Laurel Schippers (laurel.schippers@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us) wrote:
: MMS>|Why is he NOT qualified to sit on the Supreme Court?  You made the stateme
: MMS>|now back it up.  I'll point to years' worth of experience at EEOC and one
: MMS>|or two as a judge as experience.  I'll also point to the ABA, which did in
: MMS>|review his qualifications and found him to be in the top 20% of all SC
: MMS>|justices in terms of qualification...
: 
: MMS>|:     - Dave Borden
: MMS>|:       borden@m5.harvard.edu
: 
: Um, "one or two" years as a judge does not a Justice make. There were
: plenty of qualified jurists (such as Edith Jones) who were passed
: over, mysteriously, for Thomas. A position as a political appointee
: at a regulatory agency, which deals with ONE AREA of the law,
: doesn't provide much background.  A qualified Justice ought to
: have a good deal of real legal experience.
: 
: Oh, and the ABA barely found Thomas qualified. He didn't get a very
: high rating at all.

BULLSHIT.

: ---
:  . SLMR 2.0 . "God created Michigan to train the faithful."
:  * KMail 2.94e W-NET HQ, hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us, 313-663-4173 or 3959
:           
: ----
: +------------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
: | HAL 9000 BBS +1 313 663 4173 or 663 3959 | Four 14.4k v.32bis dial-ins |
: | Public Access QWK-to-Usenet gateway      | With PCBoard 14.5aM & uuPCB |
: +------------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: fritzs@microsoft.com (Fritz Sands)
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Date: 04 Jan 93 19:25:59 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Dec31.154120.6295@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
| Keywords: 
| 
| In article <1992Dec30.193757.7675@microsoft.com> fritzs@microsoft.com (Fritz Sands) writes:
| ]
| ]Putting people who do not like and respect each other in a position
| ]in which they need to work together to survive tends to focus the mind.
| 
| It tends to create resentment, and often attempts to get rid of the
| person who is "different".

So, you are in favor of ethnically-pure military units?

| 
| Not in the same way, except in extreme cases. If you have an extreme
| bible thumper in the military, who refuses to quit harrassing people,
| that person would also be a threat to discipline and would himself
| get disciplined or kicked out.

Good.  And a person, het, gay, or bi, who refuses to stop making sexual
advances should get kicked out.  This has nothing to do with orientation.

| ]
| ]| ]Purportedly, the military trains young men and women to be responsible
| ]| ]enough to fight, kill, and die together; to use weapons of awesome power;
| ]| ]to survive brutality and torture if captured.  I think that, in all of
| ]| ]this character-building, the military could sort of figure out how to
| ]| ]drill in a little tolerance.
| ]| 
| ]| Oh my, another social engineer.
| ]
| ]Nah -- electrical.
| 
| Me too, but I know which fields my engineering training works in.

And the military has lots of engineering at persuading people to work
together.  If a young recruit can't figure out how to work with people 
of other races, religions, *or sexual orintation* -- then that young
recruit should go elsewhere.

| ]Please tell me the behavioral differences between gays, bis, and straights,
| ]and how those differences are more important than the differences between
| ]blacks and whites.
| ]
| Well, gays are attracted to, and have sex with, others of the same
| sex. Gays do not normally participate in sexual adventures with
| others of the opposite sex. Since many in the military are of the
| age and attitude where sex and sexual orientation is VERY important, this
| is a significant area.

I have known very few Kinsey-6's.  The Colonel who got kicked out last 
year for being a lesbian had been married and has four children.

| ]Could you articulate this a bit more -- I am quite confused at this
| ]assertion.  And... is the het's privacy more violated it sie knows that
| ]a specific person is gay than if sie knows that, statistically, someone
| ]else in the shower is gay, but doesn;t know who?
| 
| Yes.
  
Sounds too much like quantum mechanics to me.

    Fritz
From: rww@mugwump.cl.msu.edu (Richard W. Wiggins)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Chelsea's school ...
Date: 8 Jan 93 20:44:08 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: mugwump.cl.msu.edu


> >If you want to attack Clinton's positions on education, get
> >yourself some better arguments.  For instance, read today's
> >New York Times op ed page, where someone from the American
> 
> I wouldn't read the Times if I got it for free, this is the same
> paper that referred to the current economic growth as the "Clinton"
> recovery, yeah, no liberal bias in the media, give it to me later...
> 
> >Enterprise Institute makes some cogent points questioning the
> >assumptions underlying Clinton's education policy.  It's possible
> >to offer a principled alternative view on education policy but
> >this sophomoric attack on a very understandable personal choice
> >doesn't cut the mustard.

Rush Limbaugh is an appropriate model for you.  This fatuous 
"if it's in the Times I won't read it" reply is enough to 
persuade me to abandon trying to reason with you.  The American
Enterprise Institute is a conservative think tank, for your
information.  You'd rather attack the medium and your perception
of the the speaker's ideology than think things through.  Enjoy.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: jmfuchs@unix.amherst.edu (jesse fuchs)
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices (was  Re: Sexuality)
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 09:57:50 GMT

Alberto Adolfo Pinkas (aap@wam.umd.edu) wrote:
> In article <1993Jan4.194233.8290@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
> >In article <1992Dec30.210630.19156@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
> >>
> >>>Since homosexuality is found in *every* mammalian species, 
> >>
> >>Source please.
> >>
> >>Ted
> >
> >When I was in junior high school debating class I found that trick to be
> >very useful, especially when I didn't have a good rational arguement
> >with which to respond.
> 
> 
> It would be interesting to point out that we can find incest in *every*
> mammalian species other than human biengs.
	What do you mean, except human beings? Didn't Cleopatra, as well as 
God knows how many other royal figures, marry her sibling? In fact, there was
a time in thwe middle ages when incest among the royalty was thought of so 
highly that mental disorders caused by this were seen as a mark of prestige. 
	Of course, I am no advocate of incest - but, as I sit here, I realize
I can't think of any reason to oppose non-reproductive incest excepting the
incredible societal taboos placed against it. Also, we can get into the 
question of "what is incest?" considering that there are certain states in the
U.S. where you are allowed to marry your first cousin.
	The fact that the incest taboo is just a societal paradigm becomes 
obvious when I think about my instinctive disgust at having sex with any of my
step-siblings, despite the fact that they bear absolutely no relation to me
whatsoever.
> And, also, that there is no age of consent among all
> other mammalian species.
> 
> aap
> 

--

"Where imagination is sucked out of children by a cathode ray nipple
 T.V. is the only wet nurse that would create a cripple
 On television, the drug of a nation
 Breeding ignorance and feeding radiation."
				-Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy
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: using the bible to advance bigotry
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:27:28 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.183800.662@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> wgb3@pyuxf.uucp (25336-buoni) writes:

>What hatred?  I don't hate gays.  I just don't accept that lifestyle as being
>valid for my family.  I also dislike pornography, beastiality and jumping from
>partner to partner, and believe none of these should be presented to my 
>children while they are at school.  

If you refuse to consider that "lifestyle" to be "valid," you're going
to have a hell of a lot of explaining to do if your family decides to
accept it as valid, since there's not a thing you can do to prevent
it.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: bob@hobbes.dtcc.edu (Bob Rahe)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Chelsea's school ...
Date: 7 Jan 93 18:00:29 GMT
Organization: Delaware Technical & Community College
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobbes.dtcc.edu

In article <tinkess.726424634@cambridge> tinkess@cambridge (Randall Tinkess) writes:

>Get realistic! There is very little comparison between the public and
>private school environment. School populations are usually smaller as are
>class sizes in private schools. Also, the general environment is much more
>controlled. I doubt that crack dealers are hiding in the fire escapes of 
>Chelsea's new school. All of these factors and many more will definitely
>lessen the level of disruption caused by a studuent such as Chelsea. 

  Well, we certainly wouldn't want to disrupt the crack dealers now, would
we?   ;-))
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Bob Rahe, Delaware Tech&Comm College | AIDS, Drugs, Abortion: -        |
|Internet: bob@hobbes.dtcc.edu        |  - Don't liberals just kill you?|
|CI$: 72406,525 Genie:BOB.RAHE        |Save whales; and kill babies?    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:13396 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11987 alt.politics.clinton:19910 alt.politics.bush:15721 alt.politics.homosexuality:9216
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: Why the "argument from Nature" matters
Date: 8 Jan 1993 21:00:30 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
> In article <1ihlbiINNcq1@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
> > I didn't think of it as "unnatural" because "animals don't do it".  
> > Animals do lots of things that would be 'inappropriate' for people; 
> 
> Read what Gene said.  People are *still* posting here that "you never see
> homosexuality in animals," so that *is* what they mean.

Some people who think homosexuality is wrong may use that logic, doesn't 
mean I agree with it.  For that matter, some gay posters here use the 
same logic to say that homosexuality *is* natural: "What can be objectionable about 
accepting the simple concept that what occurs in nature is natural?" 

Walter

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper)
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices (was  Re: Sexuality)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 14:26:45 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.204741.11263@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
> In article <C03vn5.77K@NeoSoft.com> jpsb@NeoSoft.com (Jim Shirreffs) writes:
> > >Since homosexuality is found in *every* mammalian species, the
> > 
> >I don't know who wrote this but a lot of folks are taking it at face
> >value, I would like to this statement supported. I for one do not
> >believe it.  *every*  I think not.
> 
> Yeah, like how about whales, especially Blues, Sperm Whales, Dolphins,
> Porpoises, etc.  I do know that lesbian activity has been observed in many
> apes (Bonobos), and monkeys (Rhesuss), what about male homosexual activity?
> I don't ever remember hearing about that.  

As I said in another response, Susan Michelmore's SEXUAL REPRODUCTION
IN HUMANS, ANIMALS, AND PLANTS (1965) specifically cites homosexual
behavior in dolphins.  Regarding male homosexuality in primates, I
refer you to work by H. C. Bingham, C. R. Carpenter, G. V. Hamilton, A.
J. Kempf, A. H. Maslow, Robert M. Yerkes, and S. Zuckerman.

Evelyn C. Leeper  |  +1 908 957 2070  |  att!mtgzy!ecl or  ecl@mtgzy.att.com
--
"To make the point [that homosexuals hamper military effectiveness] I'd
say that you would have to sift through your military history till you
find an instance in which failure has been attributed to the presence
of homosexuals on the losing side.  I'm not aware of any such case in
the past 2500 years, but I'd be interested to hear what you find."
-Nathan Engle
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices and Secular Reasoning
Date: 6 Jan 93 19:50:10 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1993Jan4.031518.8457@netcom.com> teddybur@netcom.com (John Sanger) writes:
>In article <C0B0Cu.Eu7@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l) writes:
>>harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp) writes:
>>
>>>"SLK>" is "kellmeyer steven l"
>>>"LCF>" is "Lawrence C. Foard"
>>
>>>SLK>Why is *secular* reasoning superior to religious reasoning? 
>>
>>>LCF>I'm sitting 10 feet from a machine that can produce 3d images of your
>>>LCF>internal organs, it was designed by secular reasoning.
>>
>>>SLK>And it was designed in a country founded upon a belief in God.  The 
>>>SLK>country founded upon atheism and a belief in man no longer exists.
>>
>>>REALLY?  Since when?  
>>
>>>The USA was founded mainly by atheists, and laws were put in its
>>>charters to keep it that way.  Since then, we've moved farther away
>>>from religious influence, not closer.  Take a look at the number of
>>>judgements in the last few decades restricting things like prayer in
>>>schools, etc.
>>
>>Greg, I have no idea where they attempted to teach you history, but
>>I don't think those NoDoze worked.  Not by *ANY* stretch of overblown
>>historical imagination were the founders of our country atheists.  
>>That's simply wrong.  The judgments given in the last few decades prove
>>not one thing about the founding fathers of this country - who would
>>undoubtedly be appalled at the incredible way their ideals were twisted.
>>
>
>Excuse me, but to my recallection Thomas Jefferson was an ATHEIST.

Another example of revisionist teaching in public schools.  Thomas 
Jefferson was a DEIST.  He believed in a God quite like the Christian 
God, but somewhat different. 

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: drudetb@infonode.ingr.com (Ted B. Drude)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 16:48:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.183945.17807@balrog.dseg.ti.com> keith@balrog.dseg.ti.com (Keith A. Schauer) writes:
>In article <1993Jan5.181215.3488@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> wgb3@pyuxf.uucp (25336-buoni) writes:
>>
>>Better yet, SCHOOL CHOICE.  This way we can choose the school which best 
>>reflects our children's needs.  Note, BTW, that I (rather than the state)
>>have decided what those needs are.  I call this "parenting".
>
>	I don't understand.  What state do you live in that you can't
>	send your children to the school of your choice?  

There are several states that have restrictive attitudes toward parental
choice in education.  These attitudes are expressed in different ways. 

For example:

- Compulsory attendance laws that force parents to send their children
to either public schools or overly expensive private schools and do not
allow for private tutoring or home schooling.

- Highly restrictive regulation of private schools that force their
costs to be higher.

- Excessive taxation that takes economic power away from parents who
want to send their kids to a private school but can't afford it.

>Maybe you should move.

Maybe there should be some check on the strong lobbying efforts by the public
educational establishment in local and state governments. It certainly helps
keep their privileged monopolistic status intact without any serious
competition from the private sector.
From: glen@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Glen Sonnenberg)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Social (in)Security (was: Re: Chelsea's school ...)
Date: 8 Jan 93 22:29:12 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1993Jan8.185408.5547@afit.af.mil> wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick) writes:
>
>I would phase in a replacement for social security that would be a true
>annuity and would represent real property for the future social security 
>recipient.  I guess that I would maintain mandatory participation in the
>program, otherwise those who pull out today might well be back in 40
>years with their palms up and a demand for their ``fair share.''

I am against this type of program.  Mandating participation in this
government program is a mistake.  The government is incapable of 
efficiently investing money.  I have seen studies which show that SS
doesn't even earn ANY interest on money put in for certain people.
Also, SS was not meant to be a retirement program when it was first
created.  People need to stop relying on the government to take care
of them.  If they have some problem then maybe it will be there to help
but the first plan for retirement should be there own investments. 

>
>One advantage to this sort of program (and I am sure that others have
>thought of the same thing) is that the real property can be transferred
>along with the rest of one's estate upon one's premature demise.  Thus
>the beneficiaries (e.g. children) would have a head start on a retirement 
>annuity of their own.  

SCREW THAT!  I want to be able to give my estate to my children so they
can enjoy life (given my PREMATURE demise), not give them a head start
on retirement. 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Subject: Re: Congressinal Treatments
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 19:31:12 GMT

In article <1993Jan10.032628.9932@mixcom.com> Jeffrey.Thorson <Jeffrey.Thorson@mixcom.mixcom.com> writes:
>So far, why hasn't Clinton's nominees received 
>   (chose one:
>       a Borking -or-

Because none of them are as crazed as Bork?

Just a though,
Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner    Phone: 512/346-8380    MHS: bboerner@novell
Internet: bboerner@novell.com     \  Please use either if replying
   or  Brendan_Boerner@novell.com /  by mail exterior to Novell.

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: Clarence Thomas
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 07:46:43 GMT

Bill Anderson (libwca@emory.edu) wrote:
: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:
: : Laurel Schippers (laurel.schippers@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us) wrote:
: : : 
: : : Um, "one or two" years as a judge does not a Justice make. There were
: : : plenty of qualified jurists (such as Edith Jones) who were passed
: : : over, mysteriously, for Thomas. A position as a political appointee
: : : at a regulatory agency, which deals with ONE AREA of the law,
: : : doesn't provide much background.  A qualified Justice ought to
: : : have a good deal of real legal experience.
: : : 
: : : Oh, and the ABA barely found Thomas qualified. He didn't get a very
: : : high rating at all.
: : 
: : BULLSHIT.
: : 
: : : ---
: : : ---
: Well, you're entitled to say Bullshit all you want- it's in the
: constitution- but the fact is, Thomas received a much lower 
: ABA rating than any sitting justice; almost all nominees receive
: the ABA's "Well Qualified" endorsement, as well they should, since
: we're talking about the highest judicial position in the land;
: Thomas was reported as "Qualified"; no sitting justice has failed
: to earn a "Well Qualified" rating since at least 1970.  Further,
: Thomas received two "Not Qualified" votes from the ABA's fifteen
: member board, a very rare occurence indeed.
: My source is _Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report_, v.49, July-
: Sept. 1991, pg. 2360.  What's yours?
: 

Where was Thurgood Marshall a judge?  Or Earl Warren?  

Have a nice day.


: Bill   
: -
: : : +------------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
: : : | HAL 9000 BBS +1 313 663 4173 or 663 3959 | Four 14.4k v.32bis dial-ins |
: : : | Public Access QWK-to-Usenet gateway      | With PCBoard 14.5aM & uuPCB |
: : : +------------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality