HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:52:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Ms. perception

>Maybe it's just friday (linda, where's the countdown?), maybe it's campus

right with ya kerry. maybe our system problems were connected? or maybe it
was a plot! to get what, i dunno, but hell, paranoia has its merits.

>I'm not trying to be critical here (no, really :)) -- I just wanted to
>point out that we have plenty of interesting things to discuss without
>painting ourselves into partisan corners.

i got the same feeling looking through the hundreds of piled up posts.
anyway, it is stuffy in those corners, and the paint fumes are murder on the
sinuses.

>So who's the most likely new AG nominee?  And what exactly was it about Zoe
>Baird that got people so *very* het up?

i can't understand the extent of the flap over this one, but then if my post
in response to anneliese's post about immigration got through, you guys know
how i feel about our borders. anyway, *this* is the aspect of the story i'm
interested in.....
*what happened to the peruvian couple?*
i mean, did they get caught? sent back to live in the andes? go to canada?
get a better position in hollywood working for madonna? or, did zoe help them
attain legal status here?

doesn't *anybody* wonder what happened to the two people who really needed
the job?

>Kerry
>I can almost taste the beer :)

soon dear soon. oh, btw, when can you start work at the beer peddlars stand?
if you want me to cook the felafel (please tell me how to spell it) i will
need your recipe.

-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:08:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Bushwhacking Saddam

>>A question for the 90's:
>>
>>What if they gave a war and nobody would televise it?
>>-other Andy

>        I imagine the generals would love it.
>
>Brett'



And the political-types would hate it; why wage war if the world can't
watch and think you a god?


-T.

oh yeah - for oil....
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Popmail-Charset: English
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:49:13 EDT
From:         Hank Griffeth <hgriffe@MAIL.GAC.PEACHNET.EDU>
Subject:      RE:Uncl: Business Optimism
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

Robert:

Did you ever think that Sears is having its problems based on hat happened
during George (who cares long as I have my money) Bush?  Granted the
economy's problems weren't based totally on Bush administration fiscal
policy, but he was president at the time.  Why don't you give Bill a chance
and not try to determine the outcome of his administration less than three
weeks into it.

Hank Griffeth
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:20:16 -0800
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Uncl: Re: Addiction as Disease

Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Cc:
Bcc:

>Hmmmm....AA and other self-help groups say that you have no choice.
>You must revert to a higher power to make the choice for you.

Actually, they don't say that at all.  SOME say "higher", some say
"God", some even imply "Christian God", while others don't even go to
much more than "outside" or even "greater than your addiction".

-andy didn't understand the AA theory that the addiction could be the
      relevant power, but then talking to 12 step junkies is strange
      anyway
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 11:26:37 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: 12:01 PM
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>
>>Clinton.  I only hope that the nation prospers under his leadership.
>
>Ever hear of the phrase "nowhere to go but up?"
>
>-T.

        Frequently during the 1980 campaign, but not since.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:52:06 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Uncl: Business Optimism
              25 Jan 1993 16:44:37 EST from <bensonda@STUDENT.MSU.EDU>

Whoops!  I read too fast!

Okay, no double-digits by 94, but I don't think 94 is a fair test.

Nothing Clinton can do can have much effect by then, economically
or otherwise.

Remember the legacy problem?  It applies every time, not just when
we want it to.

I'll give you double-digits by *96*; by 94, oh, maybe 8.  (Then again,
is that a *real* 8 or a *government* 8?  Will we distrust the Clinton
figures the way we did the Bush ones?)

--NINAR Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 00:08:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      RE: Abortion, Quayle, and Bush

From KAT:

>Say I am dead against abortion.

"I am dead against abortion."  Sorry, KAT.

>                                 Say I am also very much against
>sex outside of marriage.  My daughter knows my views about
>both of these.  Now say I have this talk with my daughter.
>I tell her that she should not have sex before she gets married.
>I tell her; however, if you do get pregnant, I want you to know
>that you should not be scared of me or worried about your future.
>Don't abort the baby on these accounts.  "I am against having
>sex outside of marriage but will support you if you choose to
>keep the baby should you get pregnant."  (Sounds too familiar,
>eh?)  I will support you emotionally and financially.
>
>Now what I would like to know is whether or not I am a bad parent
>for saying that.  Would my talk ENCOURAGE my daughter to have sex?

No, your example demonstrates a good, thoughtful , responsible, informed
and commendable parent.

No, it would not encourage her to have sex.  It's a great idea.
Talking to your children frankly is the best answer.

>
>Before answering that question, I would like to remind you that
>some of you thought giving condoms to teen-agers encourages them
>to have sex.

I have always believed that  1. It does NOT encourage teens to have sex, and
2. Better protected than dead.

>And what about the parents that tell their underage (yet driving)
>child not to drink but if s/he should get drunk to just call for
>a ride -- no questions asked.  Is that ENCOURAGING the child to
>drink.  Is that irresponsible on the part of the parent?

Again, it is extremely responsible and realistic of the parent.
We send our "warriors" off to war, confident that "god is surely on their
side."  But we still give them armaments, don't we?

>--KAT



-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:38:19 -0500
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: 7-11,Commandments

Hiya, Kerry:

>Where do you draw the line between an opinion and a *religious* opinion?
>The SC ruled that "secular humanism" is a religion (and thus,
>protectable under the first amendment).  However, most modern teaching
>strategies operate under the assumptions of that religion.

I'm not going to try to answer this :)  But maybe you can answer a couple
of questions I asked about this some time ago.  First, I recall reading
bits of the SC decision on SecHum -- but whoever posted it couldn't give me
a definition of exactly what it was that the SC declared a religion.  Is it
anyone who has a belief system consistent with the words "secular" and
"humanist"?  Or is it a more specific belief system with its own
organization (journal? t-shirts? comic books?)?

Second, were there specific components of secular humanism (however it was
defined) that allowed the court to "call" it a religion?  Again, is any
idea that is consistent with "secular" and "humanist" automatically
"religious", or was it something more specific?

These aren't rhetorical questions - honest!  I've been called a secular
humanist too many times -- I'd like to know what I've been called :)

Thanks!
Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:40:55 CST
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      The P.T. Barnum Theory

Heard that Dan Quayle has signed a deal worth seven figures to tell his
life story in politics. Hope he doesn't have a Jay Steven Sultan spell
checker on his word processor. Maybe Brett' will provide a review for
those of us who would rather not purchase the book.

Wasn't Millie the dog on the bestseller list at one time? Not to say
that she has anything in common with rush but maybe the same people
buy all of the best selling books.

fred
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 12:52:25 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Corporate America (was Re: Uncl: class discussion)
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

        As has been pointed out, the early industrial giants were textile
concerns, then railroads and banks, then steel and oil, ...
        Cars and computers are simply the latest dinosaurs to fall by the
wayside.  Service is here to stay, we've achieved the critical mass of
population that makes industries that exist simply to serve people not only
profitable, but necessary.
        The retailers that have adapted to this knew orientation have grown
while the old standbys (Sears) have fallen.

        What have the the most successful companies stressed the past ten
years?  Service for the customer.  Honda, Wal Mart, Lexus, Infiniti, Ben &
Jerry's, ... stealing from real estate: the three most important things are:

the customer
the customer
the customer

Brett'
(Who intends to run a very customer oriented consulting firm :)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 22:13:00 CST
From:         TI0PSR1@NIU.BITNET
Subject:      7-11,Commandments

Joe,

Don't see the comparison ... unless you mean to say, Bibles are pur-
chased with private donations and set in the library and no one says
a word about them being there ... in which case I say "sure" they
should be allowed.

Where materials come from does, or CAN make a tremendous difference!
There are bound to be tax payers who want no part of buying 'reli-
goius materials for their public school students !

Maybe I don't understand your comment.

Sorry if I didn't.
                          P.S.Ruckman,Jr.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Popmail-Charset: English
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 08:22:15 EDT
From:         Hank Griffeth <hgriffe@MAIL.GAC.PEACHNET.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Musical Presidents
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

One of the essential ingredients of a Representative Democracy is
Political competition  This competition is based on peoples personal
identification with a candidate.  Isn't it nice we have someone in the
White House those of us in our 30's, as well as others, can identify with.
He is a great individual, and he is going to be a great President.

By the way, it's probably old news to the board, but Ms. Baird withdrew her
nomination in the wee hours of the morning.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 23:13:04 CST
From:         Titivillus <T9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: A renewal of my argument about "rightism" ...
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> This is for: Caius

Mind if I step in, too?

> The Nazi's were fascist:
>    They were a dictatorship of the extreme right with a belligerent
>    nationalism, with a merging of state and business leadership.

I think I disagree: Not with the statement, but with the proof.
Fascism, as a political movement, not only relied on nationalsm
(add the "i," as my modem program sucks), but on a charasmatic
leader, capable of inspiring the population into doing otherwise
unthinkable acts.

> cheers-
> jim

Dave
t9aa@sdsumus.sdstate.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 13:17:15 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Hillary & Health Care
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>The "AK was 48th in education" is a useless statistic, so sticking

        How so?

>...
>Is it possible that all the fuss over Hillary's appointment is because
>she is <gasp> a woman?
>    toddddddddddd

        Is it possible that you're only saying that because (gasp) we're men?
:)

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 12:02:21 EST
From:         jc-s <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: reply to the return of kerry

>
>I'm sure that the spelling of jezabel would be a major contention in
>determining whether or not it was a negative response. The Omaha World-
>Herald, (affectionally known as the Wierd Harold), from which you often
>cite, went on to explain that by jezabel, Mr. Terry meant "whore", that
>is, the biblical reference of a jezabel is used to refer to a whore.
>Is that a possibly complimentary reference for a christian leader?
>I sincerely doubt it. I wonder why you didn't include this in your
>post?
>
>fredf

Well, just so we don't get into a caiusism here:

jezebel: n. also Jezebel, A scheming, wicked woman [after JEZEBEL,
who was known for her wickedness]

Jezebel: Also in Douay Bible: JEZABEL .  Phoenician princess of the 9th
century bc ; queen of Israel as wife of  Ahab.

just wanted to clear that up before any big hoo-haw started.

jenna
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:18:58 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: states rights and federal funding
              25 Jan 1993 04:35:33 GMT from <UC390136@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU>

Jon Hall:

In brief:

No, it is not a good idea to chuck states' rights out the window, nor
would the Founders have thought so.  The application of the Bill of
Rights to the states was, IMHO, a judicial error, predicated on
the perception that states would not apply something akin to the
14th amendment without being forced.

Forcing an unwilling populace to accept unwanted law creates hostility
within the state toward both letter and spirit of said law, and retards
the natural process toward voluntary acceptance, which would have
otherwise taken place.

--NINAR Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 23 Jan 1993 12:19:43 -0500
From:         MCW001@ACAD.DRAKE.EDU
Subject:      Saint Richard
Comments: To: politics@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

>>In article <MAILQUEUE-101.930121093350.256@suzy.law.ucla.edu>
>>     Stan Jacobs (Jacobs@125LAW1.UCLA.EDU> writes

>>>2.  It depends how you look at Richard Nixon...
        You're right Mr. Jacobs, I'd always thought he'd look better pressed
under heavy stones...
>>>Unlike Clinton, he HAD some clue about foreign policy.
        It's slightly premature to rail on ol' Bubba for this don't ya think?  B
But you
 do have to give it to RMN, foreign policy, secret wire tapping,
burglaries, slush funds for bribery, obstruction of justice... What a well
rounded guy!  We should bring him back as King...
>>>Unlike Clinton, he had the media against him.
        Ohh, poor Richard... You don't think maybe his complete distrust
of the democratic system (as well illustrated by his Watergate actions)
had something to do with his dealings with the media?
>>>Unlike "Slick Willy"Clinton, he did not have a good public image.
        See the above entry...
>>>I honestly believe that in ability alone, Richard Nixon was a great
>>>President that Bill Clinton can never compare to...
        Honestly?  Well, I honestly hope that Clinton, or any other President
that follows, will NEVER be the President that Nixon was...  Our
Constitution doesn't need that kind of beating again..

                                                Travlr
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 12:45:12 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: "On Gay Rights ..."

A point which I believe was well made back in 1963, which is still
incredibly valid, is that as long as some group is censored, repressed,
treated as second-class, etc. then the entire society is in bondage
and no one is truly free. (-This was made by MLK, Jr in his "I have
a dream" speech-)

I think that this is so true.  As long as our society attempts(and succeeds)
at oppressing and blacklisting and hating minority segments, for whatever
reason it may be, then no one in our society is free or safe from threat.

I personally find this incredibly scary, knowing that within my lifetime,
my country could turn against me because I'm a blond white male, or because
I am from Louisiana, or because I went to a private school, . . . .

When will we all learn the values of tolerance and acceptance?

j.b.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:29:03 -0800
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Subject:      Re: Al Gore

>really hopeful that we'll see an end to the "jobs vs. environment" talk,

Are we asserting that there's never a choice, or that when there is,
we know which way it will go?

-andy
--
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 11:15:41 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: 12:01 PM
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>> >    i think that one of these first months, the nation is gonna look at
>> > clinton and wish that george was back in the white house. it should be
>> > about 6 months before everybody realizes that bill is not up to the
>> > job, and then we have another 3 1/2 years before we can put someone
>> > competent in the white house. ethics. haitians. living with saddam.
>
>Assuming a version of Bill that is genetically engineered to run
>the Oval Office (excuse me while I delve into SF), the real problems
>of America are difficult to deal with. It took nearly 12 years of
>our support for Saddam Hussein to become the bad person we all know

        Whoa!  Iraq was on the A list for enemies right up until they invaded
Iran, at which point they went on the "lesserr of two evils" list.  There wasn't
a "tilt" towards favoring Iraq until 1987, when it looked like they would lose
to Iran in the Iran-Iraq war.
        And Iraq was, right up until the failed coup, a client of the USSR.

>and love, and this situation will not go away in 6 months. It is a
>foreign policy disaster of large proportions, and no quick fix will
>make everyone happy. We want a militarist dictator next to Iran to
>keep Iran in check and it just so happens that the one we have chosen
>is Saddam.

        Well, Bush thought he had one in Saddam.  Like he thought he had one in
Noriega.  Hopefully the pattern of dictators turning (or putting the US in a
bad situation, a la the Philippines and Haiti) will discourage future coddling.

>As for Haiti, the US government never wanted Aristide in
>power there. I just hope some people in Foggy Bottom start defining
>democracy by the ballot, not the bullet.
>
>> EXACTLY.  After 12 years of Republican leadership, all of a sudden
>> Reagan and Bush are seen as the tyrants that made our country bad.
>> So, we elect Clinton to make things better?  Shyeah!  Right!  As if!
>
>All of the sudden? I've been posting dire messages of impending doom
>for YEARS now and this is supposed to be sudden? Wake up and smell
>the brocolli!

        Sour grapes. :)

>"foreign policy genius" before that created OPEC, started a long

        ?  Nixon "created" OPEC?  Did he leap tall buildings also? :)

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET>
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 08:46:06 -0500
From:         JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Two religion points
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

     Jamie noted that there was no cases in his memory that treated
religion as a protected class.  VAL in another context noted that
Title VII protects religion as well as sex, race, and national
origin.  All of the last three were in some level found by the SC to
be protected classes.  Several cases have noted that a person's
religion can't be used against them because of their first amendment
rights.  Taken together, I think this shows that religion is a
protected class, and I'm willing to bet in some case the SC used
"class" to describe them in some fashion.

    PS asked about the secular humanism case.  It was a first
amendment case, one written about 1960 by Justice White, but I don't
know if the case itself with about secular humanism.  I think secualr
humanism may have been mentioned in passing, but I'm not sure -- I've
only heard about it second hand by those who use it to show SH is a
religion and so other religions should be given equal time in school.
The problem being that schools don't preach secular humanism as a
religion.  It doesn't say that morality without religion or a God is
better or anything, schools just don't enter or shouldn't of what kind
of diety/supernatural system we have among us.  Schools don't
establish secular humanism in any fashion of the world.  If my economics
professor teaches me economics without mention of God, is he
practicing secular humanism?  If my mom says that it's not nice to
steal without using God, is she saying that there is no God?


   -Joe
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU