HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dos@major.panix.com (Dave O'Shea)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Be
Date: 12 Jan 93 13:22:49 GMT
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department

ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan) writes:

> >> What state do you live in that you can't send your children to the school
> >> of your choice?
> >
> >Almost any. Parents have their assets confiscated, and possibly their
> >children, if they attempt to refuse to pay tribute to the local school
> >board, and use the money to send their kids to a real school.
> 
> There's a profound difference between sending one's children to the school of
> one's choice while simultaneously complying with the laws and regulations of 
> the region one lives in, and trying to send one's children to the school of
> one's choice while simultaneously breaking the laws and regulations of the
> region one lives in.  However, the difference does NOT involve the question
> of whether one is allowed to send one's children to the school of one's
> choice.

It certainly does if one has to pay the several thousand dollars in
school taxes that most homeowners have to come up to, with no allowance
made for private education.

Placing an obstacle in the way of parents (by way of forcing them to
fund one educational system, no matter how horrible it is) is
effectively eliminating the option of non-public education for millions
of parents that can't afford to keep their kids out of public schools.



--
"To call something 'Public' is to define it as filthy, inefficient and
dangerous. The public toilet is the epitome of social spending."
                                                 - P.J. O'Rourke
From: mwalker@novell.com (Mel Walker)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Chelsea's school ...
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Date: 7 Jan 1993 17:56:43 GMT
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: chezmoto.ai.mit.edu

In article <nate.1034@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>,
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) wrote:
> 
> In article <1993Jan7.020331.8836@afit.af.mil> wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick) writes:
[stuff about the soon-to-be First Kid's schooling deleted]
>     IMHO before we start handing out what are essentially tax refunds for 
> disgruntled parents we ought to look at giving those same refunds to people 
> who don't burden the education system at all. At that point maybe it will 
> become obvious that tax money paid for public education is not tagged for 
> the personal use of any individual kids, and that even people who don't 
> have kids using the system enjoy benefits as a result of living in a 
> society which provides its citizens with a basic education.

I couldn't agree more. Here in Utah the income tax is a prime money support
of the school system. Of course, people with larger families get tax
deductions. So, single people w/o kids pay the most for the schools, while
larger families pay less per kid. Doesn't seem quite fair, does it?
However, when I think that my taxes pay to have a society of educated
people, and not just for my OWN kid, it seems a little more reasonable.
It's an investment in society.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Mel Walker                                    mwalker@novell.com
All opinions expressed are of the author.
Novell, Inc. is not responsible for the content of this article.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12987 alt.politics.correct:6073
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: "My Cabinet" by Clinton (was Re: Affirmative action is dead)
Date: 5 Jan 93 00:29:14 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Distribution: usa
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <1993Jan4.181251.4741@westford.ccur.com> frank@westford.ccur.com (Frank Tredeau) writes:
]In article <1993Jan03.033540.2412@microsoft.com> bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:
]>/(ssc)
]>/No, only the politically correct ones.
]>What politically incorrect minorities would you propose?
]
]Well, how about Republicans?
]

Nah, they don't count. How about anime otakus or spaceflight advocates?
Nobody listens to those minorities...

(Note I mention those two because they are rare and I am both of those :) 



-- 
Patrick Chester           |---------------------------------------------------| 
wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to keep|
Politically Incorrect     |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein               |
Future Lunar Colonist     |"The meek can *have* the Earth. The rest of us are |
claypigeon                |  going to the stars." Robert A. Heinlein          |
Many other stupid titles  |---------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas)
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices (was  Re: Sexuality)
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 04:17:25 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.011355.8454@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>In article <1993Jan4.213624.17285@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan4.211232.15876@wam.umd.edu> aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) writes:
>>>
>>>It would be interesting to point out that we can find incest in *every*
>>>mammalian species other than human biengs.
>>>And, also, that there is no age of consent among all
>>>other mammalian species.
>>
>>
>>	Not to mention cannibalism.
>
>Sources please. 8-)  I'm not sure.  Though not a mammalian, I remember
>alligators were long thought to eat their own young, as a mother alligators
>were always observed doing this.  In actuality, the mother carries the first
>few born in her mouth back to the water and releases them.  Other
>hatchlings must fend for themselves in trying to get to the.  A journey
>during which many die.  So, becareful about "observed" animal behavior.
>

I remember that my dog killed one of her "sons" because he was born sick.
In a few days all the other kids were kind of independent, while one was
quite sick. She killed him without much of a problem.
Not cannibalism but....


                             |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
               |\/\/\/|      |    Alberto A. Pinkas (aka AAP)     |
               |      |      |      insultos y comentarios        |  
               |      |      |     a aap@wam.umd.edu              |
               | (o)(o)      |  recomendaciones para medicos      |
               C      _)     |       a ap31@umail.und.edu         |
                | ,___|   <==|____________________________________|
                |   / 
               /____\            " Don't have a cow man. "
              / _____\ 





Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Chelsea's school ...
Keywords: school choice, hypocrisy
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 21:03:06 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.020331.8836@afit.af.mil> wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick) writes:
>
>Well, Miss Chelsea Clinton will avoid going to public school this
>year by virtue of her parents' money and connections.  As Mr. Limbaugh
>pointed out today, Gov. Clinton opposes school choice for middle and
>lower class people, but not members of his own economic class.

One question: where will Chelsea go after her father is impeached?


Simon

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:13039 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11549 alt.politics.clinton:19626 alt.politics.bush:15551
From: popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,a
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Be
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 06:45:59 GMT
Distribution: +add
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX

asparrow@mcs213a.cs.umr.edu (Angelia Sparrow) writes:

> In article <7BoBwB3w165w@unkaphaed.gbdata.com> popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (Wi
> >dlhanson@nap.amoco.com (David L. Hanson) writes:
> >> Astute readers will notice on my previous post that I forgot the all
> >> important NOT.  Be assured that there are no sodomites, socialists, or
> >> any species of liberal in our home. Only fundamental Christian parents
> >> teaching the children to love their enemies and to hate their enemies'
> >> wretched sins.
> >> 
> 
> Excuse please.
> (I may be on the wrong group for this, but...)
> 
> Why ae socialists lumped with sodomites?  I am a fundamentalist
> Christian and a socialist as well.  Socialism need not demand
> atheism.  When it does not, it comes closer to God's command
> to love your neighbor than democracy with its survival of
> the greediest does.
> 
> As for sodomy: God does not care what my husband and I
> do in our bedroom as long as we do it out of love.   
> 
> Homeschooling is fine, if you live in an area that permits
> it and the primary teacher has the temperment for it.
> 
> Angel
> 


Actually, if we are to believe the bible is the word of god, then 
according to the 4th chapter of Acts, Socialism is the economic system 
demanded by God.

Pope Charles   SubGenius Pope Of Houston         "bob" saves.

--
popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 481-3763
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: albrigh@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (thomas g albright)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:28:17 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.155136.18478@asl.dl.nec.com> 
dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:
>
>Apparently you still have not gotten the point. Most of the drug and
>sex ed. programs in use today have been found to increase the use of
>drugs and have increased promiscuity (teen pregnancy, std's). They

This is absolutely false!  Everywhere in the world where there is sex
education, children postpone the onset of sexual behavior, and then
engage in it less often.  STD rates are lowered too.

-Tom Albright
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick)
Subject: Social (in)Security (was: Re: Chelsea's school ...)
Organization: Self-similar
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:54:08 GMT

In article <nate.1041@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
| 
|     I'm a little curious at this point to know whether you think that 
| people should be required to support the Social Security system or if 
| it's ok for anybody who wants to to pull out? Do you have any predictions 
| about what would happen to Social Security if that happened?

Social security (as it is currently constituted) would be funded from
general revenues rather than the social security tax.

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.''

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.  


Regards,

-- 

Will Bralick			          Speaking _only_ for myself.

Standard disclaimers apply.            Void where prohibitted by law.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: Rush Courts the FAAAR Right
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:52:40 GMT

BOB HOOKER (hooker@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu) wrote:
: What  are you talking about?  Through out history some of the grossest acts
: of inhumanity have been carried out in the name of religion.  Did the
: presence of religious faith "stabalize" the Inquisition, the 100 years war,
:  Witch Craze, etc etc etc etc?
: 

Sounds more like the Democratic Party during the last 12 years than religion :)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: kellyb@ccsua.ctstateu.edu
Subject: Re: Does Rush ever post here?
Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science, New Haven, CT
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:41:12 GMT

> The ultimate chicken would never have the balls.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:13171 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11753 alt.politics.clinton:19744 alt.politics.bush:15632 alt.politics.homosexuality:9076
From: owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: 6 Jan 93 22:06:43 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.homosexuality
Distribution: usa

In article <1iehldINNjck@hp-col.col.hp.com>, smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
> cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Howard Black) writes:
> >     1.  Why do they need to be married to have a child?
 
> ? To provide the stability that a child needs.  Being married 
> doesn't guarantee it, and *not* being married doesn't preclude it; 
> but all other things being equal, there is more support for a 
> growing child in a family. 

So.. all other things being equal two individuals in a comitted partnership
provide more support for a child than a single parent, even if the two 
individuals are the same gender, right?
Seems mathematicly sound.

> >     2.  If they used redundant birth control such that the chances of
> > conception were virtually zero (just for the sake of this discussion),
> > would that be OK?
 
> As long as they treated what they were doing, and who they were
> doing it with, with respect, (and didn't treat it all as cavalierly as 
> their golf score) 

These qualifications you have stipulated  are marred by the pre-judgement
of value in the parens. Respect for another is admiration and politeness
arising from that respect. It can also mean showing attention or
consideration. You are further qualifying your judgement by adding
specific intent to those qualitys.

> then I would not make any 'morality' judgements 
> on it without doing so from a 'religion' standpoint.  

uh..
sorta makes it a moot point when you reserve the religion angle!
how about respecting that some of us have different religions
with different moral codes, and keeping our respective religious
taboos to ourselves .. eh?

Gee , I wonder if you'll answer this one, you've been ignoring all my other
ones :-)

LUX ./. owen

--
D. Owen Rowley {uunet,fernwood,sun}!autodesk!owen, owen@autodesk.com
[ EU-PHORIA: A STATE OF WELL BEING ]
Euphoria is my natural state, I do what I enjoy and an abundance 
of all good fortune comes to me for it.
From: laurel.schippers@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Laurel Schippers) 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Rape/Incest and Abortion
Date: 7 Jan 93 15:39:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: HAL 9000 BBS, W-NET HQ, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Reply-To: laurel.schippers@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Laurel Schippers) 


JS>Rush has received some mail on this issue, and he plans on
JS>addressing this at some future point, but he points out that
JS>abortions due to rape and incest are rare. Even the Planned
JS>Parenthood's Alan Guttmacher Institute admits that only 1 to 2%
JS>of the 1.5 million abortions each year are because of rape and
JS>incest. Thus, this is a straw dog of a question.

Hm. 1-2% of 1.5 million is 10-20,000 abortions. So even taking
the low number, we can assume that there are 10,000 pregnant
victims of rape or incest each year who actually have abortions.
Sounds like a lot more human misery when you give the real
numbers instead of percentages, doesn't it?
---
 . 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 |
+------------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
From: laurel.schippers@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Laurel Schippers) 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Biblical prohibitions
Date: 7 Jan 93 09:26:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: HAL 9000 BBS, W-NET HQ, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Reply-To: laurel.schippers@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Laurel Schippers) 

MAM>"The name 'Leviticus' was bestowed on the third book of the Pentateuch by t
MAM>ancient Greek translators because a good part of this book consists of
MAM>sacrificial and other ritual laws prescribed for the priests of the tribe o
MAM>Levi."  From the preface to the Chapter "Leviticus" in _The New American
MAM>Bible_.
MAM>--
MAM>Mike McAngus                    |You are a fluke of the Universe.  You have
MAM>mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org            |right to be here, and whether you can hear
MAM>The Truth is still the Truth    |or not the Universe is laughing behind you
MAM>Even if you choose to ignore it.|back.  -- National Lampoon, Deteriorata

The prohibitions against homosexuality go back to prohibitions against
the religious practices of the other Canaanites. Part of their worship
included ritual sodomy and self-castration and dressing half in
women's clothes, half in men's, and cross-dressing (which, you will
note, is also prohibited). This is also the source of the laws
against temple prostitution.
---
 . 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
From: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Samegender Families))
Reply-To: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:26:44 GMT

In article <1396@blue.cis.pitt.edu> psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek) writes:
>In article <1993Jan4.145822.22420@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com.mrg.uswest.com> greg_bradt@msmgate.mrg.uswest.com (Greg Bradt aka The Lensman) writes:
>>
>>Just as we are coming to the similar realization that our stereotypes about
>>gays are similarly unfounded.
>
>Sure they are.  I just finished reading an article in the latest issue of
>Newsweek, titled "The Young and The Restless" and my first thought was;
>gee just like any typical heterosexual teenager - NOT!
>
>And here in lies the biggest problem that the gay rights crowd faces and
>can't seem to deal with: that despite all the instance the stereotypes are
>false, anyone who's lived in a large urban area knows from experience that
>most are not false.  I was born and raised for the better part of my life
>in NYC and I will tell you that no matter what you say, I saw first hand
>behavior in public places ranging from beaches to street corners, that
>in no way compared to anything I'd ever witnessed in the heterosexual
>community, in public or in private.
>
>Even in smaller cities the problems are becoming all to common.  In the
>last few years Pittsburgh has (because of demands from neighborhood residents)
>had to shut off access roads to public parks and pass anti cruising measures
>to try to stop the day and night sex parades that our gay community seems
>to think are perfectly normal and acceptable forms of public behavior.  
>Again, there are no comparable heterosexual exhibitions and even the seediest
>of their behavior (that which takes place between men and prostitutes for
>example) takes place in isolated parts of downtown, away from residential 
>neighborhoods, and even then in the privacy of a hotel room usually.
>
>Argue 'til you're blue in the face if you'd like, that the stereotypes are
>false, but what do you think most people will use to form opinions; your
>word on the matter or what they see with their own two eyes?
>
>PSG
>

First of all, you demonstrate a profound disrespect for logic.
The only conclusion that can be made is that  THOSE PORTIONS of
the homosexual cummunity with which you have some experience tend
to fit the stereotypes. Do you have any reason to believe that 
This portion is any more than a small minority of the gay community?

Secondly, have you ever considered that these actions you see 
could be the result of extreme discrimination against homosexuals,
and not the cause?

Your arguement is non-existant. Please don't post again until you
have one.

Robert Johnston

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Organization: Anasazi Inc Phx Az USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 02:05:35 GMT

In article <C06pov.M69@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>In article <1992Dec31.214245.11967@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>
>>[My sex education] class didn't talk about oral copulation, sodomy
>>... as it purpose was to prevent pregnancies and diseases,
>>not on how to.  So, for what it was intended, I think it did its job.
>
>Quite obviously, it did not.

Fuck off Tim if you don't have the courtesy to respond with full UNEDITED
attributions.  Anyone reading this wouldn't know that the question I was
responding to was whether the sex education course was of benefit to
gays.  Through Tim's flagrent editorializing it appears that oral
copulation and sodomy should have been part of the class and therefore it
was a failure.  When in actuality I believe for its limited scope it was
successful, and as far as gays, I don't know how appropriate.

Well, since you weren't there and don't know me the only qualifications you
have to comment by are a modem, keyboard and a loud mouth.

>-- 
>____ Tim Pierce                / 
>\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
> \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 


-- 
"The best government of all is that government which governs the least."
	Jefferson
Brian Douglass		briand@anasazi.com 	602-870-3330 X657
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality