Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 00:15:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: questions for tkidd

On Sun, 26 Jul 1992 14:32:00 EST the anti-elvis <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET> said
:
> From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
> Subject:      Re: questions for tkidd
>
> On Thu, 23 Jul 1992 08:41:11 CDT fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET> said:
> Did your wife have a FUCKING good reason for a divorce?  If not then
>                      ^^^^^^^such LANGUAGE! and from a good christian
>         boy, too.  this country's going down the tubes.
Huh??  Did I ever mention Christian in any of my posts??  I believe in
morality.  I said nothing about Christianity.  For the record, I be-
lieve in Christianity, but I would hardly go so far as to say I am the
most devout Cristian that ever was.

> the divorce should never happen.  Assuming you were at fault and she had
> good reason for a divorce, then an appropriate jail term for each con-
> viction would be 30 days, I suppose.  But our society and our children
> simply can't afford to pay the price for the 1/2 of marriages that end
> in divorce.  Adultery should be a jailable offense, and in a civil di-
> vorce suit, there should be STRONG preponderance of the evidence point-
> ing to adultery or another good cause for divorce.
>
>         what constitutes a good reason?  how about "we simply don't love
>         each other anymore.  we tried to make it work, but it didn't."?
>         or would one of them have to beat the other or cheat on the other
>         and accept the jail term so that they could get divorced?
Well, I won't go into the technicalities of what is a good reason and
what is not.  But I will say that your reason is not a good one.  Hey--
you made the vows "for better or for worse"--now you must live by them.

>         making alcohol illegal didn't keep people from drinking it.  making
>         pot illegal hasn't kept people from smoking it.  making the speed
>         limit 55mph hasn't kept people from driving faster.  making the
>         drinking age 21 hasn't kept 18 year olds from drinking.  do you
>         think that this will really affect people's behavior?  or just lead
>         to more corruption?
Making murder illegal hasn't kept people from killing.

> > 2. What was anita hill's motive for lying?
> Doesn't she get tens of thousands of dollars for speaking engagements???
>
>         you seem to have a skewed concept of causality.
Someone asked for a motive, I gave one.

> > 3. Are you willing to live in a society where the thought police follow
> > you around to be sure that you are not thinking unclean thoughts?
> No.  Everyone has a right to their thoughts.  Actions are another
> matter.
>
>         thats like saying that everyone has a right to think about
>         voting independant, as long as they actually vote republican
>         or democrat.
What I meant was, people don't NECESSARILY have a right to their ac-
tions.  They may in some instatances.

> > 4. How would you handle sex in advertising?
> Hmmmmmm....well first of all, there is really no "sex" in advertising.
> But I do think it is wrong for a beer commercial (or any other type of
> commercial--beer is most prominent) to suggest that you will get girls
> if you drink Bud Light.  Why can't they tout their product's good
> qualities???  Perhaps because it has none.
>
>         so you don't like bud lite.
I have yet to taste an alcoholic drink that tastes good.  And no play-
ing mix-and-match--I can do that with Kool-aid.

> > You seem to be missing a very basic point: The child's accusation must
> > have a basis in law or it will be thrown out of court. I assume that you
> > are pro-life and want a judge to make sure that the baby is born but then
> > the parent's can do whatever they want. I'm afraid that sane, normal,
> > educated parents are probably a minority. The number of children living
> > in poverty is pushing 20%.
> And probably children of single parents who had sex outside of marriage.
>
>         often.  now who gets to take care of the kids while mom is
>         in jail?
Adoptive parents, foster parents, or the state.

> > Do you happen to remember a little incident involving the poisoning of
> > hundreds of children by their parents because they thought some guy
> > was showing them the path to enlightenment in jonestown?
> Well, that was in another country.  I will let Guyana make its own laws,
> in the hopes that they would agree with me.
>
>         from what i remember, tho, they weren't native guyanans...
But they were in Guyana, and subject to the laws and jurisdiction
thereof.

>         brni
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU