HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu (Art Johnson)
Subject: Re: Children of the Rainbow books
Organization: Physical Sciences Lab, UW-Madison
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 21:42:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan18.152135.28090@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com>  
max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com (Max Webb) writes:
> In article <1993Jan15.191410.5060@memstvx1.memst.edu>  
kebarnes@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
> >...Also, as
> >Rush has correctly observed, the existence of homosexuals is
> 
> Ahhh, Rush. I just figured out why you are so clueless.
> 
> >ultimately dependent on heterosexuals (or at least until recently).
> >Were there a sexual orientation-linked genetic marker test
> >available, no doubt some (perhaps most) heterosexual couples would
> >use it as a basis for aborting potentially homosexual fetuses. 
> 
> Surely the ultimate in discrimination.
> 
     Unfortunately, I think that if the Human Genome Project conclusively  
proves that homosexuality is genetic in origin, then a sexual  
orientation-linked genetic marker test will become available, and a  
majority of couples will choose to abort a potentially homosexual fetus.  
Recently, I attended a lecture by Charles Cantor, who is one of the big  
Human Genome Project honchoes. In the lecture, he said that the use of  
abortion by couples for the purpose of sex selection (the sex of the fetus  
being determined either by ultrasound or by genetic screening) is now a  
fairly common and routine procedure, something that he found very  
disturbing (but not disturbing enough to advocate any government  
restriction on sex-determination tests). If so many couples have no moral  
qualms about abortion for the purpose of sex selection, they aren't going  
to have any moral qualms about abortion for the purpose of selection  
against homosexuality, either. 
  
> >Standard disclaimers apply.
> >
> >-- 
> >*.x,*dna**************************************************************
> >*(==) Ken Barnes, LifeSci Bldg.      * Conservative libertarians     *
> >* \'  KEBARNES@memstvx1.memst.edu    *      for Pro-Balance!         *
> >*(-)**Memphis,TN********75320,711@compuserve.com**********************
> >"When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President;
> >I'm beginning to believe it."--Clarence Darrow
> 
> Max G. Webb


Arthur Johnson
johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: cobb@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Mike Cobb)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Buddhism and the Absolute God
Date: 27 Jan 93 23:05:39 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

Can you make liquid water that is not wet?
Can you exist and not exist at the same time?
Can you make a square circle?
Can you make 2+2=5
Can you make it rain and not rain in the same place at the same time?

Aren't these logical impossibilities, and therefor not a limitation of power?

P.S. If this is used against God, see the book of Titus where it also gives a 
limitation of God.  In it Paul says that God cannot lie.

MAC
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,talk.politics.misc
From: snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass)
Subject: Re: Small Historical Question here
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:34:32 GMT

In article <C1F1IB.G7F@boi.hp.com> jburrill@boi.hp.com (Jim Burrill) writes:
>drieux, just drieux (drieux@wetware.com) wrote:
>: jburrill@boi.hp.com (Jim Burrill) writes:
>: ] 
>: ]       The United States was founded by Christians, as a Christian Nation
>: ]                                Jim Burrill                       
>: ] 				10/23/92
>: ] 
>: ]     History shows us that Pilgrims were in search of Religious Freedom when
>: ] they came to the new world. King James was king of England.
>: 
>: ok, 
>: 


Actuall what I read was that the Pilgrims were causing so much
trouble in England, by shoving their Puritanical ideas, which differed 
greatly from those of the Church of England!  Then they left
for the Netherlands where their, the Pilgram's intolerance was so great, that
there was a public outcry for them to leave.  So they headed over to
North America.  They were so restrictive, as far as people practicing
freedom of Religion, that Roger Williams was forced to leave.....

World Book Encyclopedia.......

"In 1636, Roger Williams established Rhode Island's first permanent
white settlement, at Providence.  Williams, a minister, had been driven out
of Massachusetts because he called for increased RELIGIOUS and POLITICAL 
FREEDOM.......He established a policy of religious and political FREEDOM.

In 1638, William Coddington, John Clarke, Anne Hutchinson, and others left
Massachusetts in search of religious freedom."

How dare you bring the Pilgrims in to the picture, because they
were a oppresive people!  It is historically there for all the world
to see!

Of coures the group that moved to Rhode Island for religous freedoms 
themselves had to split up because of their own religious intolerance.

Bil Snodgrass III

>: So which were the RealChristians[tm]????
>: 
>: The Puritans? The Pilgrims? The COE????
>:
>    A study of the the history of this time period shows that the Puritans
>were also in search of religious freedom and freedom from repression from the
>corrupt Church of England and King James at this time. I chose to discuss the
>Pilgrims on the basis of references I had available from William Bradford's
>"History of Plymouth Plantation". If you would like a discussion on the
>Puritans, I will refer you to the book I mentioned in the basenote.
>
>Jim Burrill
From: ucakrvb@ucl.ac.uk (Vijay Bhuchar)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re:JESUS IS GOD
Date: 25 Jan 93 12:40:42 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium

In article <765363d8093260t280@witsend.uucp> dcs@witsend.tnet.com (D. C.
Sessions) writes
>
>In <1993Jan19.115544.23973@ucl.ac.uk>, ucakrvb@ucl.ac.uk (Vijay Bhuchar) 
wrote:
># In article <1993Jan14.023336.21784@newsroom.utas.edu.au> Tim O' Neill
writes
># > The guys who put the Septuagint certainly did know what they were doing,
># >but most Hebrew scholars disagree with them on this point.
># 
># Well of course they do!!!
># Any Hebrew *scholar* who admits that this line says 'They have pierced my
># hands and feet' is then confronted with the challenge that Jesus is the
># Messiah. Just as any Jewish *scholar* who admits that Isa 53 is about a
># man and not the nation, Israel, is confronted with the same challenge.
>
>  OK, Vijay: put up or shut up.  YOU translate 22:16, word for
>  word, and then show us the (we're sure) entirely reasonable
>  transformations which get you to your favorite translation.
>
>  We're waiting to be enlightened.
>
>--- D. C. Sessions                            Speaking for myself ---
>--- Note new network address:                dcs@witsend.tnet.com ---
>--- Author (and everything else!) of TMail  (DOS mail/news shell) ---
>

<=== One day, as he was teaching the people in the Temple and preaching
the Gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up
and said to him, "Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who
it is that gave you this authority."  

He answered them "I also will ask you a question; now tell me, Was the
baptism of John from heaven or from men? " 

And they discussed it with one another, saying "If we say 'From
heaven,' he will say, 'Why did you not believe him?' But if we say,
'From men,' all the people will stone us; for they are convinced that
John was a prophet."  

So they answered that they did not know whence it was. And Jesus said
to them "Then, neither will I tell you by what authority I do these
things." ===> (Luke 20:1-8)

Actually, Mr Sessions, I am just halfway through my own research on
finding out how the variant readings come about.  Before I type up and
post my research I have a question for you:

Just what exactly does 'Like a lion, my hands and feet' mean?
What does it mean in any language of your choice - Hebrew, Aramaic,
English, Hindustani or Serbo-Croat?

If your answer is that it means anything other than the description of
a man whose hands and feet have been disfigured by crucifixion then I
will meet your original challenge and post my research.  But please
justify your choice of verbs.

On the other hand if you give me the JPS Tanakh reading 'Like a lion
[ they maul ] my hand and feet' or Rashi's 'My hands and feet [ as if
they had been mangled in the mouth of a ] lion' then your
interpretation is similar to mine and I have no need to answer you.

Vijay (ucakrvb@uk.ac.ucl)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.all-worlds
Subject: Re: EVIDENCES OF THE EXISTENCE OF ALLAH (THE GOD)
Date: 21 Jan 1993 23:00:54 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, irfan@maxwell.ece.wisc.edu (Irfan Alan) says:

>A HEAVY BLOW ON THE HEAD OF ATHEISTS, 
>NATURALISTS AND MATERIALISTS

	Yeah, right, but yet you did not have the guts to post to alt.atheism.
But hey, since you hay not have heard of us I might as well post this for you 
=-)

>
>A TRANSLATION from the COLLECTION OF RISALE-I NUR
>"RISALAT-UT TABI'AT" (A TREATISE ON NATURE),
>AUTHORIZED by Bediuzzaman Said Nursi.
>
>NARRATOR: IRFAN ALAN
>
>A DROPLET FROM THE VAST OCEAN OF MIRACULOUS QUR'AN
>----------------------------------------------------
>                   PART 1 
>                

	Respose forthcoming.

-- 
A. TRENT PHILLIPS |" A mirror is a negative space with a frame and a place for
  also known as   | your face, it reveals what the rest of us see. It conceals
   WHITE  ROOK    | what you'd like you to be."--Blue Oyster Cult
--------------------------bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu--------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: ailsa@wonky.UUCP (Ailsa N.T. Murphy)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Peace Symbol
Date: 27 Jan 93 01:54:54 GMT

In article <1k466iINN4ed@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, cspot@cats.ucsc.edu (Christopher Edward Hilker) writes:
>
> u0d05@keele.ac.uk (PG Herzberg) writes:
>
>>theory three: Apparently it is semaphore. If you split it up into
>>three component parts you get 0,| and Y(inverted) the O stands for
>>whole and the other two are semaphore for  N and D (ie total Nuclear
>>Disarmament). (This sounds very silly I know but it wasn't me who
>>dreamed it up).
>
> This is the theory I have heard. The corrolary to this theory is that
> an inverted peace symbol represents unilateral disarmament (U-D).
>
NOT that i am claiming that this is a correct theory or anything, but
when i was taking german, my professor (an elderly german gentleman)
said that the peace symbol was designed from the germanic rune for
peace, but that the designers were ignorant of runes and used a rune
that was the barrow, or the peace of the grave.  if they had been
knowlegeable, he said, they would have reversed the symbol and had a
tree, or peace that is alive and grows.  i've read a littel about runes
since then, and none of that sounds familiar, but it was interesting
anyway...

                                                -ailsa

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
                           ailsa@wonky.uucp
 LIfe moves so mysterious with its cute little spins        ________
 And it's everyone's koan and door to get in        Silence \      / Action
 It's old human nature, it's cold or it's hot          =     \    /    =
 I think of you often, I like you a lot              Death    \  /    Life
 But if it's snowin' in Brooklyn                               \/
 I'd say snow is what we got.           -Ferron
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Freedom of Religion
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:41:06 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

creps@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Stephen A. Creps) writes:

>In article <adams.727986896@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>>Again, most catholics don't taste the wine more than about three or four
>>>times; I add to my two only because I've seen married couples who get
>>>hitched in a mass drink the wine.  Generally, the priest drains the
>>>whole chalice. 
>>One of Luther's list of complaints about the Roman Church...and something he
>>changed...
>
>   This is mainly for practical reasons.  Much of the reason that the
>cup is not often available to the laity is concern over spilling it.
Oh come on.  Church doctrine did not permit the laity to receive the wine,
and they were never permitted to touch the host.  Luther distributed the
host into the laity's hands, and gave the wine to them, too.

As for 'spilling,' it is no different than dropping a host, which happened
any number of times when I was an Alter Boy.  The laity were not
considered 'holy enough' to recieve the wine or touch the host.

>   Regardless of that, one receives Communion just as fully whether
>one receives only the Body, only the Blood, or both the Body and the
>Blood.
If the laity do not receive the wine, they are not fully partaking in the
Lord's Supper.  The Bible and the Eucharistic prayer say (aprox) 'when supper 
was ended, He took the cup, gave it to the disciples and said, take this,
all of you and drink...this is the new coveneant in my blood, shed for you
and for all so that sins may be forgiven...do this in memory of Me.'
Clearly, if the bread is to be distributed to all, so is the wine....

>   The only advantage to receiving both is that the symbolism is
>fuller.
Fuller?  Sure.  But also complete.

 -Steve
--
  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                         -------------------
   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: jburrill@boi.hp.com (Jim Burrill)
Subject: Re: The Founding of a Great Nation ...
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:09:38 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]

In article <C19qH2.5ny@boi.hp.com>, I wrote:
      
>       The United States was founded by Christians, as a Christian Nation

> I submit to you, based on these quotes, and the history of the Pilgrims, that
> the United States indeed was founded as a Christian Nation. I know many popular
> beliefs and authorities give the picture of many of our forefathers either 
> suscribing to the atheist or deist philosophies. As a reference, one could use
> the book by John Eidsmoe, "CHRISTIANITY AND THE CONSTITUTION"  which presents
> these beliefs as unfounded and unwarranted. I submit to you by this then, 
> that something has changed the course of this nation to be something other
> than what the founding fathers' had in mind. This is something to ponder at 
> election time. Do we as a nation, desire to return to the blessing that we
> experienced before the time that we chose to ignore Christian Principles?

Kent responds:

|Sigh, there's a *difference* between something founded by Christians,
|and founding a Christian nation. I hope the writer would understand this
|difference, and it does not hurt to read the constitution, bill of rights
|and similar papers to figure out how many times the word "Christian"
|and "Christianity" is mentioned in these papers. 

|Kent

Allow me to respond by lifting a section from another posting which recently
appeared on the subject:

Myth # 3:  The silence of the Constitution regarding Christianity.

      It is assumed that the United States was never Christian in its basic
ideals and values because the Constitution does not specifically mention
Christianity. The myth is shattered when one realizes that it was never the
purpose of the Constitution to give religious content to the nation. Rather,
the Constitution was an instrument whereby already existing religious values
of the nation could be protected and perpetuated. The Constitution is not
devoid of Christian references, however. It is interesting to note that the
Constitution acknowledges Sunday as a day of rest: "If any bill shall not be
returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall
have been presented to him, the same shall be a law. . ." (Article I, section
7). Moreover, there is a direct reference to the Lord Jesus Christ in the
Constitution: "DONE in convention by the unanimous consent of the States
present, the seventeenth of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand
seven hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the United States of
America the twelfth. In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our
Names."

From: REXLEX@linac.fnal.gov

This is lifted from a paper posted to soc.religion.christian newsgroup on the
subject. If anyone is interested, drop me an E-mail and I will forward it.

Jim Burrill
jburrill@hpbs2646.boi.hp.com
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:27477 alt.slack:3902 alt.discordia:770 alt.pagan:15808
From: roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.slack,alt.discordia,alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Birthing men...
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 16:45:55 CST
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN

gseidman@math14.math.umbc.edu (gseidman@math14.math.umbc.edu) writes:

> There is an essay written by Larry Niven and published, among other
> places, in his anthology _All the Myriad Ways_. The essay is entitled
> "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" and deals with, in an extremely funny
> manner, the problems facing Superman in reproducing. One of the
> suggestions was planting a human egg fertilized by a single Kryptonian
> sperm into his bowels.... I recommend this essay, by the way, to ANYONE
> and EVERYONE.

I liked the description of Supe's probable orgasm.  "...from crotch to
sternum, gutting her like a trout."

(he's feeling really sicko today, isn't he?)
--
Roy M. Silvernail --  roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu - OR-  cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu
                   "I'm a family man, model citizen."
                                      -- Warren Zevon
From: sandvik@newton.apple.com (Kent Sandvik)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: The Founding of a Great Nation ...
Date: 24 Jan 93 00:05:45 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: The Language Game Inc.

In article <C19qH2.5ny@boi.hp.com>, jburrill@boi.hp.com (Jim Burrill)
wrote:
>       The United States was founded by Christians, as a Christian Nation

> I submit to you, based on these quotes, and the history of the Pilgrims, that
> the United States indeed was founded as a Christian Nation. I know many popular
> beliefs and authorities give the picture of many of our forefathers either 
> suscribing to the atheist or deist philosophies. As a reference, one could use
> the book by John Eidsmoe, "CHRISTIANITY AND THE CONSTITUTION"  which presents
> these beliefs as unfounded and unwarranted. I submit to you by this then, 
> that something has changed the course of this nation to be something other
> than what the founding fathers' had in mind. This is something to ponder at 
> election time. Do we as a nation, desire to return to the blessing that we
> experienced before the time that we chose to ignore Christian Principles?

Sigh, there's a *difference* between something founded by Christians,
and founding a Christian nation. I hope the writer would understand this
difference, and it does not hurt to read the constitution, bill of rights
and similar papers to figure out how many times the word "Christian"
and "Christianity" is mentioned in these papers. 

Kent
who has lived in a *real* Christian nation.
---
sandvik@newton.apple.com. ALink: KSAND
Private activities on the Net, opinions are not Apple's, they are mine.
From: prasanth@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Ravi K. Prasanth)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Buddhism and the Absolute God
Date: 28 Jan 93 08:53:48 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network


In article <C1JC5F.4qB@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, cobb@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Mike Cobb) writes:
> Can you make liquid water that is not wet?
> Can you exist and not exist at the same time?
> Can you make a square circle?
> Can you make 2+2=5
> Can you make it rain and not rain in the same place at the same time?
> 
> Aren't these logical impossibilities, and therefor not a limitation of
> power?

Why should I assume that God is capable of something ? 

> 
> P.S. If this is used against God, see the book of Titus where it also
> gives a limitation of God.  In it Paul says that God cannot lie.
> 
> MAC

RKP
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:27386 alt.pagan:15766
From: IO10184@MAINE.MAINE.EDU
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Peace Symbol
Date: 23 Jan 93 19:33:23 GMT
 <1ja4d1INNgcs@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> <1jjq3hINN4ck@mirror.digex.com>
 <1993Jan21.171942.10237@infonode.ingr.com>
Organization: University of Maine System

in article: <1993Jan21.171942.10237@infonode.ingr.com>
haefner@infonode.ingr.com (Mark W. Haefner)writes:


>Recently several articles have been on the ankh and I thought I would
>ask if anyone has information on where the "peace symbol" is derived
>from. I have heard that its origins are occultic and was used by some
>ancient pagan societies. Is this true? If so, who? Anyone care to
>offer some reliable info?

    What a neat coincedance! I just snatched a book from a local
bookstore that sheds light on this subject. The book is Satanism
The Seduction of America's Youth by Bob Larson (rest assured
I got it merely for the humor content there-in). His definition
of the peace symbol is this :

            Cross of Nero: This symbol represented peace in
      the early 60's. Among today's heavy metal and occult
      groups, it signifies the CROSS OF NERO (author's silly
      bold type). It shows an inverted cross with a cross
      anchor broken downward, signifying the defeat of
      Christianity.

    There ya go, the peace symbol and it's hoary past defined!
And to think I never knew that....wow....I guess I'll have to
put a peace sign on my door now. :)
    Anyway, there you go. Info. Whether it is reliable or not,
your guess is as good as mine.

                       Pat

            ********************************************
            *    J    S     By using double coupons    *
            *    E    A     and shopping wisely.       *
            *    S    V                                *
            *    U    E             Pat is             *
            *    S    S     IO10184@Maine.Maine.edu    *
            ********************************************
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: joakimr@ifi.uio.no (Joakim Ruud)
Subject: Re: Praise Melkor, Lord of the Void!
Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:50:30 GMT
Originator: joakimr@hymir.ifi.uio.no


In article <1993Jan26.234619.67247@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu>, pv02@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PETER VOROBIEFF) writes:
> Any co-worshippers? Or just Christians and vulgar Atheists?
> 
> -- 
> ---
> Thus spake Kalmoth the Dreaded, Bane of the Forests of Gnoy.

Well, I'd like to quote Manowar (a rock group):

	I know the one who waits
	Satan is his name....
	Across the bridge of Death
	There he stands in flame....
	
	(something that I don't remember...)

	Satan, I await thee
	I wait for thee to take me
	Grant me wings, and as your messenger I'll fly...
	
	(someting else that I dont't remember...)

	AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!!!!!
	Lucifer is KING
	Praise SATAN !!!!!!!!!!!!

	Then there is something that sounds like a church chorus in the
background...
	
And so on, and so forth...
Jokke