HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
Subject: Re: Dictionaries
Date: 10 Oct 92 01:28:34 GMT
Reply-To: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Followup-To: alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
Organization: Amdahl Corporation

In article <1992Oct7.073648.1873@u.washington.edu>, 
tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:
> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
> >I heard that "gullible" wasn't in the dictionary.
> 
> It's in Black's Telelegal Word Service, accessed by
> calling 1-800-ESQUIRE.

I got a long period of no answer (10-12 rings!) followed by a clicking (no, 
not a modem of fax tone).  Are you sure this is still the right number?

(I'm taking the liberty of removing talk.abortion & alt.sex from the follow-
ups).

Terry Carroll - tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com - 408/992-2152
The opinions presented above are not necessarily those of a sound mind.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: Is it Christian values or chavinism?
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 06:31:19 GMT

From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
>>... Apparently the only answer is that Jesus was sometimes a 
>>man, when that was convenient and sometimes a God when that was 
>>convenient and sometimes a Son of God when that was convenient. 
>>Few Christians care to discuss this problem because there is no 
>>valid solution. 

In article <Ds1JsB5w165w@bluemoon.rn.com> 
darist@bluemoon.rn.com (david stroop) writes:
>Apparently, light is sometimes a particle when that is convenient 
>and sometimes it is a wave when that is convenient. 
>Is there "no valid solution" and light therefore does not exist? 
>No.  It is just hard to understand. 

I'll buy that. Of course this view differs from the common view of
Christianity being easy to understand and having all the answers. And it
remains for someone to explain the Christian dilema as the question of
the dual nature of light has been already explained by science.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: More GooseSteppingForJesus
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:29:21 GMT

sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
]
] And no, I'm not talking about "police" of any kind.
] 
] Simon


Hum....

Isn't this the same Gentleman who's vision of America
is that in the Future the Police will be trencheoning
down Pro_Choicers?????


So How do you plan to 'enforce' your AntiAbortion laws?

ciao
drieux




-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Don't Just Rock the Vote
Kick OUT THE JAMS!
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran)
Subject: Re: suzanne on pigmentation and fetuses
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on...
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 23:07:09 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.213342.19154@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
><1992Oct11.154305.4095@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) said:
>><Bvt53o.KC4.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
>>><1992Oct8.003210.3373@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>>>## In article <1992Oct2.004310.953@noao.edu> 
>...
>>>#Perhaps our resident African-American, Steve Chaney, could
>>>#contribute to this discussion.
>>>
>>>Your assumptions are telling, Suzanne.
>>>
>>>(Do you imagine that Dennis has given birth?)
>>
>>No, but the fact that I'm gay automatically means that I'm "Politically
>>Correct".  Suxanne told me so.  It also means I'm automatically aware of
>>everything that NAMBLA does, and instantly aware (via telepathy?) of every
>>statement made by ACT UP!
>
>Oh, don't forget that you also hate all women because they won't have sex
>with you.

Damm!  I *KNEW* I was forgetting something.  Thanks for reminding me, Gordon.
--
=kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu | B(0-4) c- d- e++ f- g++ k(+) m r(-) s++(+) t | TSAKC=
=My thoughts, my posts, my ideas, my responsibility, my beer, my pizza.  OK???=
=So tell me something, Kevin.  When are you planning on sending Lefty a "bill"=
=for your archiving services?  Myself and several other people want to know!!!=
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Biblical Authority for Law
Date: 7 Oct 92 18:26:22 GMT
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com
Organization: SGI TechPubs
NNTP-Posting-Host: eno.wpd.sgi.com


dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu writes: 
|gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
||And Jesus said:
|And here's yet another data point to support the observation
|that the pro-aborts are usually the first ones to raise the
|issue of religion.

I take it you missed "Rink"'s article which included biblical
arguments for abortion.  If it hasn't arrived at your site, I
could mail it to you.  And you've missed a bunch of stuff from
Steve Adams, too.  (I certainly hope you don't get into hissy
fits when Christians like Steve make biblical arguments.)

BTW, I don't think Galen is "pro-abort".  Last time I checked,
he was pro-choice.  You should ask Gordon Storga if you're
interested in the opinion of someone who's pro-abortion.

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"Not only are you obviously a boring conservative twit with sexual 
dysfunctions beyond the dreams of analysis, but also the proud possessor 
of a one track mind that just keeps going and going..." --Rebecca Ching,
on David Rasmussen
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.war.vietnam
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Making the History Safe Again...
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:17:57 GMT


1964: LBJ runs as the 'Peace Candidate' to save us from the
threat of Barry Goldwater starting WWIII over vietnam.

1968: LBJ decides to not run, as he has become tainted with
'Johnson's Dirty Little War' and his VP HHH tries to convince people
he will be able to bring Peace Better than Dick Nixon's "Peace with Honor."

1972: Dick Nixon runs as the President who almost Got us Peace
with honor, in spite of widening the war into Cambodia, and
other little 'sideshows.'

HUM.....


Everyone was campaigning for PEACE....

There was NO DECLARATION OF WAR, or anything
close enough to count.... { Yes, Let us look
at that 'Gulf of Tonkien' Resolution and what
IT SAID and DID ALLOW! }

HUM.....

Anyone want to address why the 'Church Ammendment' was Drafted?

Anyone Want to talk about the Userption of Constitutional Authority....


Ok George... We KNOW you were OUT OF THE LOOP....

But let us DO try to remember that those who were in opposition
to the Vietnam Conflict were FOLLOWING THE LEAD of the Presidential
Candidates in POWER!!!!

{want to talk about why GEORGE's IRS will NOT allow Tax Credit
for the Unborn.... In Spite of George's Commitment to the UnBorn?}


Loop? What Loop?

ciao
drieux

10:goto 100
100:goto 10
1000:exit


-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Don't Just Rock the Vote
Kick OUT THE JAMS!
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:41605 alt.fan.dan-quayle:5176 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6560
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Gay Pride .sig of Steve Chaney
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:03:18 GMT
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


That's okay, Pete.  Dennis gave up on this one.  Oddly enough,
Dennis has given up on most of his claims lately.  He made
a fool of himself by requesting evidence that he'd misread
attribution lines (he dropped that thread when the evidence
was posted), he made the utterly laughable statement that
Jesse Jackson called "the Jews of New York" "Hymietown"
(he dropped that thread), he recently claimed that most
Americans support rape and incest (!), and, among his
other inanities, he's claimed that Rush Limbaugh's book
has outsold the Bible.  I doubt that he'll reply on the
last two threads, either.  

POC seems to have given up on trying to explain away
his idiocy.  He must hope that people forget what they
read immediately.  I wish he hadn't quit - his explantions
were often funnier than his initial errors.

Susan



Xref: sparky talk.abortion:43092 talk.politics.misc:52522 alt.sex:33224 alt.rush-limbaugh:7661 alt.politics.elections:17369 alt.politics.clinton:11046 alt.politics.bush:9533
From: rstevew@deeptht.armory.com (Richard Steven Walz)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: 14 Oct 92 16:43:13 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Armory

In article <1992Oct7.192733.20554@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> rogers@ial1.jsc.nasa.gov (mister rogers) writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.163134.17826@nwnexus.WA.COM>, jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle) writes:
>> 
>> 
>> Hey Bruce...I don't give a damn about what's in any dictionary except a law]
>> dictionary.  When you're talking about taking away people's rights, you're
>> talking about a legal issue and the only thing I care about is legalities.
>> Murder is a legal term, and no matter what YOU choose to call it, when
>> you decide to leglislate away women's rights, you HAVE to use legal terms.
>> A fetus is NOT a person, check up on the law.  A child is a BORNED person,
>> check up on the law.  You will have to change all of these to have it 
>> your way.  Until you do, the legal definition--the only one I care about--
>> stands.
>> 
>> Jennifer
>
>this argument rings of "it's the law, so you have to (not) do it anyway".
>perfect for the unthinking clone brain betas and epsilon morons.
>
>do you ever exercise any of your own free thought, jennifer, or do you rely 
>on whatever authority presides to guide you? do you know what a thought is?
---------------------
I think that what she might have been delicately hinting at, asshole,
is that neither she nor I give a flying fuck what you think unless you
can make it legal,    and then you better fuckin' hide! In other
words, we deem you irrational and insignificant.
- Steve

>-------------
>mister rogers

-- 
* Richard STEVEn Walz   rstevew@deeptht.armory.com   (408) 429-1200  *
* 515 Maple Street #1   * Without safe and free abortion women are   *
* Santa Cruz, CA 95060    organ-surrogates to unwanted parasites.*   *
* Real Men would never accept organ-slavery and will protect Women.  *
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Biblical Authority for Law
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:24:14 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Distribution: na
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:

>the anti-homosexual agenda (saw a protest on the telly the
>other day where one of the placards read "God Hates Fags;"
>the one thing that surprised me was that the words were
>spelled correctly and the thing that didn't surprise me was
>the impression that the supposed god of love was being used
>to broadcast hatred).

Gee Dean, didn't notice they were all one-syllable words? That and you
could hardly expect them to mis-spell "god" and "hates" since it is
so prevelant throughout their favorite piece of writing.

As for the rest, they've been lying about the "god of love" when they
discovered that the "god of death and destruction" was going the same
route as all other pagan religions. Time for a change. Have a god of
love that will kill you and condemn you to eternal pain if you don't
love him. Neat trick, witness how successfully it has worked.

Ron                          Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
			     The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
			     Make a U-turn to God.
The irony is priceless.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: wdo@TEFS1.acd.com (Bill Overpeck)
Subject: Re: Yet more unsubstantiated stuff from Nyikos
Organization: Applied Computing Devices, Inc., Terre Haute IN
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 13:53:48 GMT

From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)

In article <1992Oct5.190140.19923@acd4.acd.com>, 
   wdo@TEFS1.acd.com writes: 
   (Susan Garvin) writes: >
>>> What purpose is served by repeating vile, unsubstantiated rumor 
>>> about a dead young woman?  
> 
>> Perhaps it has something to do with her parents malicious anti-RTL 
>> crusade.  
>
> Malicious?  You're despicable.  

Malicious.  I had the opportunity to see them first hand at ISU
last year.  Malicious.  Waging a campaign of hostility and bit-
terness against pro-lifers because of existing parental consent
laws is sadly misguided.  And these people were malicious.

> This family lost their daughter because of a parental consent 
> law.  

Right.  And when my son was nearly killed by an automobile at 
age 7, it was those awful traffic laws that did it.  It had
nothing to do with the fact that we should have been watching
him more closely.

> They were devastated, and they don't want other parents to 
> suffer the way they did.  They campaign against the law that 
> killed their daughter, and you call them malicious.  You dis-
> agree, so you dismiss their work as "political expediency".  

Sorry, CJ.  I was there.  I heard them.  There were (perhaps)
five pro-lifers in a room of ~200, sitting quietly in the back.  
We made no noise, we made no rude gestures, we made no faces.  
We just sat there listening.  But someone apparently identified 
us to Karen Bell who, for at least five minutes, treated us to 
a hateful discourse that blamed *us* for her daughter's death.

> You know no compassion.

And apparently you know no Bells.  But I know malice when I 
see it.

> Fuck off & die, Overpeck.

Hmm.  I guess your objections to needless deaths don't extend
to men, huh?

Bill
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R SULAIMAN)
Subject: Re: An Invitation
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 19:58:18 GMT

In article <3924@ra.nrl.navy.mil> lebow@psl.nrl.navy.mil writes:
>In article <BvtH7o.Cw1@nic.umass.edu> csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R
>SULAIMAN) writes:
>>In article <3919@ra.nrl.navy.mil> lebow@psl.nrl.navy.mil writes:
>>>In article <BvrnD0.3n3@nic.umass.edu> csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R
>>>SULAIMAN) writes:
>>>>
>>>>I would like to take this opportunity to invite all Pro-"Lifers"
>>>>to go to their nearest universities offering Womens Studies courses.
>>>
>>>I've seen the way establishment feminist sometimes treat pro-life feminists. 
>>>Doesn't sound like "fun" by my definition.
>>>
>>>Paul
>
>Cynthia-
>
>I deplore people being disrespectful to eachother no matter what there
>position.

So, do I..that's why I try never to directly insult a person or use
vulgar language.  I wrote it in such a way as to provoke a response, as
several of my postings, that have wonderful arguments, have had no
response from pro-life people.

I also think that getting "them" into these classes would promote a
better exchange-- maybe even change minds on either side.
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^

or we might even, God Forbid, find somewhere in the middle where we
can both agree.

>I don't doubt that a Womens Studies course would be beneficial for anyone.  I
>was referring to you comment as to the "fun" part of it.  I thought you were
>saying that it would be fun to watch an individual who is anti-abortion sqirm
>in their seats as they see the error of their ways.  I know see that you mean
>that it would be intellectually stimualting for all.   Right?

>I'm curious why you think "pro-lifers" don't already attend Women Studies
>courses.
>

I've only enjoyed watching a few people "squirm", and those have only
been people I have directly known.  I don't think pro-life people attend
these classes much because I've never heard them -- not in their
presentations, nor inter-class discussions,  and in these class you hear
from everyone.

Have you ever taken a Womens Studies course?



Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Pro-aborts raising the issue of religion AGAIN (was Re: Authority 
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 06:10:20 GMT

<1992Oct8.005151.27590@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger):
>In article <1992Oct7.224031.18671@netcom.com> 
>gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>>dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger):
>
>>> So once again, it is the pro-aborts who are the first to raise the issue
>>> of religion. 
>
>> First, shmurst.  See my repost of Suzanne's article where she states that
>> she believes that *SATAN* causes miscarriages.  If that's not "raising the
>> issue of religion" I don't know what is.
>
>Ms. Forgach did not raise the issue of religion in that post. 
>She was responding to Ms. Kathi Mills, who argued that "[if] god 
>kills babies by causing miscarriages...", and Ms. Forgach responded
>to that statement.  

The fact is, most pro-lifers see anti-abortion in their bibles.  It's not
there, but they see it there anyway.

BTW, do you ever see the newbies who post once or twice on the net how
"murdering babies is against GODS will", and then disappear?  And, I don't
believe Ms. Mills is pro-abortion so your argument fails again.


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel, 
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), Diana (Sorceress), and
Beth and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it.
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
From: <tonyp@cnvxla.COM> (good, Conan - good!)
Subject: Re: Is it Christian values or chavinism?
Reply-To: tonyp@convex.COM 
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992 00:37:38 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <1992Oct8.001541.3046@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
}From article by iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski):
}> 
}> I'm told that Jesus was a very unusual kind of human being, as testified
}> by a lot of stories about him, and therefore I try not to assume that
}> he shared much with the rest of mankind.
}
Maybe he was really a Martian!      

				    Klaatu Borada Nickto



--
    Tony J. Podrasky             BIBLE : 
     San Diego , Ca                       BUY BULL ? 
    tonyp@convex.com                                  ( NO ) 
QSL? QRU? QRZ? QLZ? QFA?                                      BYE, BULL !
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:41616 alt.rush-limbaugh:6964 alt.activism.d:3687 alt.politics.elections:15844 alt.politics.bush:8409 alt.politics.clinton:9389 talk.politics.misc:50554
From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 9 Oct 92 16:45:57 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems

In <Bvu0yr.6s8@news.cso.uiuc.edu> StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl) writes:

>William.A.Hall.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (William A. Hall Jr.) writes:

>: That's the biggest reason why abortion should be banned. People are
>: *resources*, not "parasites" or "endless stomachs," as some of you on
>: the net have claimed. If you don't agree with that statement, throw
>: yourself off a roof right now -- human life is, in your opinion,
>: worthless.

>Actually, I thought it had been demonstrated a few years back that human
>beings are really only worth $5 or $6...in raw materials.  :-)

Oh dear, it was $1.98 when I first heard it, shows what inflation can
do. But then it has been a few years since my formal education took
place :-)


>--
>Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
>Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
>Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
>Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
>UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

REB
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: reddeg@VAX309.NOSC.MIL
Subject: Re: Let's Play StipUlations..
Reply-To: reddeg@VAX309.NOSC.MIL
Organization: Naval Health Research Center, San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:11:40 GMT


Dear Adrienne:

I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciate that you put messages
on this service.  I am also an intelligent, thinking, pro-choice, individual.
There are too few positive messages....so here is one; I'M GLAD YOU ARE OUT
THERE!
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Article to read
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:07:01 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman) writes:

>This topic is important to me, because I teach special education
>students.  I want to know how some of the rest of you feel
>about this issue, and an important related one: that of
>sterilization.  Should the parent of a mentally retarded child
>have the right to sterilize their child, without his/her consent?

Here come de flames. de flame, boss, de flame!

Yes, they should.

(deciding whether to toss out the asbestos suit, as it probably will
be fairly useless/unecessary for the impending attempts at flames.)

Ron                          Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
			     The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
			     Make a U-turn to God.
The irony is priceless.
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:42568 alt.abortion.inequity:4427
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: Re: Rich Lee is an idiot
Date: 14 Oct 92 05:23:13 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Organization: The Village Waterbed
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

In  <nyikos.719012467@milo.math.scarolina.edu>  nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>
> Am I having problems with reading comprehension

I think the answer to that has been clear to most of us for a while.  :-)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion