HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Help Preserve Civil Rights in Colorado
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:36:18 GMT
Followup-To: soc.motss
Organization: Dept. of CS Ball State University Muncie IN

This has nothing to do with nudism that I can see.  Followups to soc.motss...

In article <jburton.07qp@sempco.UUCP> jburton@sempco.UUCP (Jerry Burton) writes:

>Sorry Gina No can do. If a person is gay that is there privlage not a right.

Whoa!  Whoa!  Being gay is a privilege, not a right?  Have you even thought
about that remark?  You are saying that a gay lifestyle is a privilege
that someone or something has granted to people?  The implication being
that whoever has granted this privilege can take it away if it is deemed
necessary, thereby forcing the previously gay person to be straight?

What kind of a remark is this?

>A gay person is not a different human than the rest of us.

>I do not beleive in
>gay rights any more than I do in white rights. If I was GAY how could I expect
>anything different than anyone else if i cannot meet the criteria? What gives a
>gay the right to be distingushed from me ? Nothing! they are not a different
>breed of people? they are not from another country. So they deserve no
>different rights than anyone else.

Clearly, you don't understand what the Colorado legislation was all about.

>Next It will be the Brunettes or men with
>beards or blondes that will deserve rights..

Since you seem to equate being gay with being blonde, it is safe for
us to assume that you feel that being blonde is a privilege, not a right.
If I abuse my blondness, that privilege can be taken away from, just like
the privilege of driving a car on public roads....

Joe
From: zerkle@toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: class in bathrobes (Re: nudity at Berkeley)
Date: 9 Nov 92 11:17:26 GMT
Reply-To: zerkle@cs.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle)
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of California, Davis

In article <bobert.720491725@godzilla> bobert@informix.com (Robert Murphy) writes:
>A friend of mine (who is now on the faculty at Missouri - small world) was
>in a freshman English class back in the late '70s,
...
>"How would you react if somebody wore a bathrobe to class?"
>
>So, next class, he showed up with nothing on but a bathrobe.  
...
>He was also very unpopular the rest of the semester.

Shoot, sometimes we make progress.

Last year, a certain professor in one of my (small) graduate computer
science classes rescheduled a session for 8 AM.

Now, for those of you that don't know about us computer science
students: we're almost all nocturnal.  I'm posting this at 3 AM, and
I'm wide awake.  I won't be at 8 AM.  This was tantamount to severe
punishement.

Well, to show his displeasure, one of the students showed up for class
in nothing but a bathrobe and glasses.  Nobody said anything.  In
fact, it didn't even register to me as unusual.  It wasn't until class
was over and one of the other students (there were five, I think)
mentioned it that I realized that people don't usually wear bathrobes
to class.

Of course, at 8 AM, I have difficulty with anything more complicated
than breathing.

--
Dan Zerkle  zerkle@cs.ucdavis.edu  (916) 756-5170
From: tgrupe@watnxt11.ucr.edu (Todd E. Grupe)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: california style
Date: 6 Nov 92 02:23:00 GMT

In article <randy#.130.720111346@shocker.ee.twsu.edu>  
randy#@shocker.ee.twsu.edu (Randy Sessions - Super Acct) writes:
> In article <23361@galaxy.ucr.edu> watnxt06@watnxt06.ucr.edu (guest)  
writes:
> >From: watnxt06@watnxt06.ucr.edu (guest)
> >Subject: california style
> >Date: 26 Oct 92 06:49:43 GMT
> >Hay! What up out there? First let me tell you why I put this message in 

[crap deleted.]

> >                                    University Of Californa,Los Angeles 
> >                                    Wes K. LeoKeath III         

How depressing to run into someone else from UCR and then have to read  
that garbage.  BTW: the guy is not from UCLA, he's from UCR here in  
Riverside.  Time to go check with the monitor and see if there's any way  
to detect who was using the Guest account.

TG
--
tgrupe@watserv.ucr.edu

generic .sig
generic .sig
generic .sig

What are you reading this for?
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: v024971@plato.lsvl8.stortek.com (Robert J. Waddell)
Subject: Re: Berkeley's Naked Guy
Organization: StorageTek
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:32:21 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.075235.14541@netcom.com>, valentin@netcom.com (Valentin Pepelea) writes:
> In article <1992Nov10.113741.1@skcla.monsanto.com>
> petersonk@skcla.monsanto.com writes:
>>> 
> There is no law in California barring nudity. Lewd behavior, yes, but not
> nudity. Neither the city of San Francisco nor Berkeley have added any
> bylaws prohibiting nudity.
> 
> But Chairman Mao, oops, Chairman Tien of the People's Republic of Bezerkley
> decided to ban nudity on his campus. After his adventures with Rosebud Mary
                                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> you'd think he learned not to take reactionary measures against the will of
> the people.
> 

Who is _Rosebud Mary_? I would be interested in hearing the story.
-- 


            ***   It's never to late to have a happy childhood!

********************************************************************************
V024971@PLATO.LSVL8.STORTEK.COM / Opinions expressed are usually my own but
Robert_Waddell@Stortek.com     / perhaps shared (though not by my employer).
********************************************************************************

Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: Art Modelling
Keywords: nude art modelling photography drawing
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Distribution: ca
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 06:20:56 GMT

ddvorak@zeus.calpoly.edu (David M. Dvorak) writes:
>Nude modelling sounds interesting, but I would be embarassed to do it.
>One stray thought might cause a hard on or at least soft on.  Has any
>man had this problem before, in front of a class?

No. No man has ever had this 'problem' before.


By the way, append as many :)s after the above as necessary.

p.s. I wonder whether or not imotent men consider an erection
a 'problem'. My guess is that he would jump for joy if
it happened. And the art class would have something else
to draw, I imagine.

Problems, problems, problems, all these problems!

-- 
bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
This week's usenet malapropism: lose, loose
lose(verb)=to misplace, to cease to have or retain
loose(adj)=unrestrained, not bound together or combined
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: Newest Nudist ;-) ;-)
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon Univ, Nectar Project
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:16:17 GMT

millman@indigo.bear.com writes:
   BTW have you ever tried to be coherent after spending many nights without
   sleep?? ;-)

Um...  This is your first child, yes?

:-),
--karl
From: williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Chrisitan nudes
Date: 6 Nov 1992 16:28:15 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
Distribution: na
Reply-To: williamt@athena.Eng.sun.com (Dances with Drums)
NNTP-Posting-Host: athena

In article <1dclpcINN3pk@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> gchatham@cats.ucsc.edu (Gregory Chatham) writes:
>Addressing those who call themselves Christian,
>   Consider the following from Jesus' famous Sermon on Mount
>   "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after
>   her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
---
	So?

	You obviously don't know alot about nudism.  Many (most?) of the nudists
will tell you that nudism is separate from sex and the idea of being
there is to enjoy your natural state -- not to lust after the
hot <babes>|<dudes>.  

	So relevant to nudism as practiced by many nudists, your statement
has as much relevance as "red paint can be mixed with blue paint to
yield purple."

-wat-
--
 --- "If women really earned fifty-nine cents to the dollar for the same
 work as men, what business could compete effectively by hiring men at
 any level?"    -- Dr. Warren Farrell
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Help Preserve Civil Rights in Colorado
From: abel@vax.sonoma.edu
Date: 12 Nov 92 09:37:08 -0800
Organization: Sonoma State University

In article <jburton.07qp@sempco.UUCP>, jburton@sempco.UUCP (Jerry Burton) writes:
> In article <1992Nov7.065556.26635@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>,
> gina@rintintin.colorado.edu (Gina Cherry) writes:
>>As many of you probably know, on Tuesday, Colorado voted in an
>>amendment to their state constitution which revokes any existing
[lots of stuff deleted which fails to define "gay rights"]
> 
> 
> Sorry Gina No can do. If a person is gay that is there privlage not a right.
> A gay person is not a different human than the rest of us. I do not beleive in
> gay rights any more than I do in white rights. If I was GAY how could I expect
> anything different than anyone else if i cannot meet the criteria? What gives a
> gay the right to be distingushed from me ? Nothing! they are not a different
> breed of people? they are not from another country. So they deserve no
> different rights than anyone else. Next It will be the Brunettes or men with
> beards or blondes that will deserve rights..
>  
> Jerry Burton

I suspect that I disagree with you, but there is nothing in the stuff 
deleted above, that allows us to agree on what we are disagreeing 
about.  I agree that gays should be treated exactly the same as 
straights.  Unfortunately, they are *not* treated the same, even by 
the US government.  Could someone familiar with the Colorado 
amendment (like maybe Gina) explain to us what's up?
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: arms@cs.UAlberta.CA (Bill Armstrong)
Subject: Re: handicap access at resorts?
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Distribution: rec
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 06:04:40 GMT

brian@ganglion.Canada.Sun.COM (Brian Onn - OpCom Staff) writes:


>I've been lurking for some time now (on and off for a couple of
>years), and one topic I've never seen discussed in this group is that
>of handicap access at nude resorts.

>In my particular case I'm in a wheelchair, yet very independant.  
>I'd like to know what kind of barriers I might come across if I were
>to vacation at one of the many resorts discussed here.  Has anyone
>ever thought about this?  Have you seen other wheelchair bound naturists
>in your travels?

>The kinds of things that would make it difficult: narrow hallways,
>narrow doors, high steps up into buildings, stairs, rocks, woodchips, 
>sand (dirt and grass is OK), inadequate washroom facilities.

>Before I had my disabling accident, I was seriously considering visiting
>a resort.  I still haven't lost that desire, I just don't know if it is
>still a feasible endeavor.

Hi Brian,

I once saw a "wheelchair bound" person sunbathing nude in the English
garden in the centre of Munich.  Both his legs were amputated above
the knee.  Though alone, he somehow managed to get out of the chair
and undress on the grass, then reverse the process.  Pretty cool, I
thought!

Good luck.

Bill


--
***************************************************
Prof. William W. Armstrong, Computing Science Dept.
University of Alberta; Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2H1
arms@cs.ualberta.ca Tel(403)492 2374 FAX 492 1071
From: brian@ganglion.Canada.Sun.COM (Brian Onn - OpCom Staff)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: handicap access at resorts?
Date: 5 Nov 92 23:59:27 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: /home/brian/.organization


I've been lurking for some time now (on and off for a couple of
years), and one topic I've never seen discussed in this group is that
of handicap access at nude resorts.

In my particular case I'm in a wheelchair, yet very independant.  
I'd like to know what kind of barriers I might come across if I were
to vacation at one of the many resorts discussed here.  Has anyone
ever thought about this?  Have you seen other wheelchair bound naturists
in your travels?

The kinds of things that would make it difficult: narrow hallways,
narrow doors, high steps up into buildings, stairs, rocks, woodchips, 
sand (dirt and grass is OK), inadequate washroom facilities.

Before I had my disabling accident, I was seriously considering visiting
a resort.  I still haven't lost that desire, I just don't know if it is
still a feasible endeavor.

Thanks for any of your comments.
	Brian.

--
_____________________________________________________________________
Brian Onn.                  Internet : Brian.Onn@Canada.Sun.Com
Operation Commitment,	        Uucp : uunet!sun!suncan!brian
Product Support Specialist.    Voice : (416) 477-6745.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: v024971@plato.lsvl8.stortek.com (Robert J. Waddell)
Subject: Re: Chrisitan nudes
Organization: StorageTek
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:51:19 GMT

In article <1dclpcINN3pk@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, gchatham@cats.ucsc.edu (Gregory Chatham) writes:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just visiting here in rec.nude, but I'm curious to see the thread
> on Christian nudes.  I can appreciate the feeling of freedom associated
> with going nude.  As someone pointed out on this thread, God made us nude,
> obviously intending for us to live that way.  Unfortunately, we tend
> to hide things from each other and from God.  Hence the need for both 
> clothes and also emotional barriers.  To those who keep quoting Genesis,
> please remember that this story addresses a man and his wife, not the 
> general public.
> 
> Addressing those who call themselves Christian,
>    Consider the following from Jesus' famous Sermon on Mount
> 
>    "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after
>    her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
> 
> please reply directly to gchatham@cats.ucsc.edu.

I know you would like replys directly but everyone else might like to see this.
 Romans 14:14 says "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is
nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean,
to him it is unclean."

Remember that "If your eye offends thee, pluck it out". 

I hope this doesn't start another religeon vs. nude thread but there are plenty
of us out here that have reconciled ourselves with nudism and Christianity. If
we are indeed created in Gods image, to think of ourselves as unclean or lewd
would be to consider God as unclean or lewd. Let's not be ashamed of His
greatest creation. Feel the sun, feel the breeze, enjoy your body and the
freedom He has given us. If a person feels tempted upon viewing your nude body,
then the problem is his to deal with.
-- 






            ***   It's never to late to have a happy childhood!

********************************************************************************
V024971@PLATO.LSVL8.STORTEK.COM / Opinions expressed are usually my own but
Robert_Waddell@Stortek.com     / perhaps shared (though not by my employer).
********************************************************************************

Newsgroups: rec.nude
id <m0mprx1-0000pMC@crash.cts.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 92 19: 44 PST
	id <kc56502@pro-harold.cts.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 92 15: 41 PST
From: leed@pro-harold.cts.com (Lee Dronick)
Subject: Re: Chrisitan nudes
Organization: The Harold Network -- An Alliance For Creative Communication
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 15:39:46 PST

>Oh, ferpetesake kiddies, if you KNOW that you DON'T KNOW something,
why inflict your self-acknowledged lack of information on the rest of
us all?z<

I asked a question. And is open to interpretation since some one has
translated the orginal text from Aramaic to Greek to Latin to English or
something similar.

-----
Lee Dronick
ProLine: leed@pro-harold
Internet: leed@pro-harold.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pro-harold!leed
Newsgroups: rec.nude,alt.sex.motss,alt.sex.bondage,alt.sex
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: Help Preserve Civil Rights in Colorado
Followups-To: alt.sex.motss,alt.sex.bondage,alt.sex
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Followup-To: alt.sex.motss,alt.sex.bondage,alt.sex
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:02:21 GMT

jburton@sempco.UUCP (Jerry Burton) writes:

|Sorry Gina No can do. If a person is gay that is there privlage not a right.
|A gay person is not a different human than the rest of us. I do not beleive in
|gay rights any more than I do in white rights. If I was GAY how could I expect
|anything different than anyone else if i cannot meet the criteria? What gives a
|gay the right to be distingushed from me ? Nothing! they are not a different
|breed of people? they are not from another country. So they deserve no
|different rights than anyone else. Next It will be the Brunettes or men with
|beards or blondes that will deserve rights..

The problem is that lesbigay folks are being denied the rights/privileges
that heterosexual people take for granted.  Homosexual and bisexual people
are not asking for special rights, they just want the same rights that
most other people take for granted.

That is (at least theoretically) the intent of all civil rights legislation.
--
Bigotry is not a family value.  Boycott Colorado and Tampa.

Michael Adams (StarOwl@uiuc.edu, wi.4962@n7kbt.rain.com)
From: philb@cats.ucsc.edu (Philip Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Going Topless/Nude in a Convertable
Date: 6 Nov 1992 01:04:07 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu
Keywords: topless nude convertable


Mark.Cornick@launchpad.unc.edu (Mark Cornick) writes:

>If you're going to do a survey, have the respondents email their replies
>to you, rather than posting them here... posting the results of the survey
>is fine,  but having all the individual surveys posted wastes time and
>bandwidth.

Not at all. the replies are interesting, sometimes informative, and MUCH more
interesting to read than a lot of the political garbage threads on here.

-- 
  --------------------------------------------------
"How do I love sea? Let me count the waves.." |philb@cats.ucsc.edu
P.Anthony, "The Colo(u)r of her panties"      |philb@soda.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
Subject: CNN (that's Campus Naturist Network)
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 10:50:23 GMT

Mark.Cornick@launchpad.unc.edu (Mark Cornick) writes:
>Totally spontaneous, and from non-nudist/naturists. Inspired by the new
>administration.
>
>Looks like I might finally have some people to get my campus nude group
>together! (Could this be a new dawn? :)

Yeah, what the hell is the delay anyway :)

I thought there were at least half a dozen collegians on
here who wanted to start campus naturist groups.
Don't say nothin, jest do it...if ya'll jes wanna 
talk, then I'm notcher man!

Wul, where are ya?! (Does this election mean that we
have ta start talkin Arkansese?

-- 
bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
This week's usenet malapropism: lose, loose
lose(verb)=to misplace, to cease to have or retain
loose(adj)=unrestrained, not bound together or combined
From: galster@plains.NoDak.edu (Dwight Galster)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Christian nudists
Date: 13 Nov 92 02:57:42 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

>Lola says:
>
>But what does it say in Greek?  Or Hebrew?  The words you are looking at are a
>*translation*, and therefore an intrepretation.  Perhaps you should take a good
>Biblical studies course at a non-fundamentalist school, or better yet, take
>five years each and learn the languages before you bitch at someone else about
>what they don't know.  
>
>Boy, are we off topic.
>
>Lola

Yeah, it seems a lot of people like to talk about what they don't know.
There's a tremendous difference in meaning between interpretation and
translation.  They are not synonyms.  You can bitch about fundamentalists,
but what is your background in biblical studies?  It's a simple matter for
me to look up the Greek or Hebrew words and find complete discriptions of
their usage and meanings in various contexts.  Five years of study is not
required.  Furthermore, the vast majority of words and phrases in the
Bible are not difficult to translate exactly.  Certainly "the man and his
wife" is an example where there is no ambiguity.  

Now let's clear up this confusion.  Adam and Eve were not married in a civil
ceremony and they did not have a marriage license.  Is that what we mean
by marriage?  Not in the Christian context.  The phrase from the wedding
ceremony "what God hath joined together let no man put asunder" reveals the
true meaning of marriage.  It is a union or mating, intended to be lifelong,
which is blessed and sealed by God.  Eve was made for Adam specifically
to be his mate.  That's a marriage in the purest sense.

In any case, the marriage accurred while they were both naked and holy.
Clothing was not used until sin entered the world.  Whether Adam and
Eve saw each other naked is irrelevant since had there been more people
before sin entered the world, they would *ALL* have been naked and seen
each other.

I think clothing was introduced to hide from God and not necessarily from
each other. (This is an *interpretation*!)  As such it didn't work very
well.

I know some people (as above) are complaining that this discussion doesn't
belong here.  However, I am very interested in examining the subject of
whether Christians may be nudists.  I don't think we have gotten to the
heart of the issue yet.  Perhaps we should look at all the references
which seem to *require* clothing and see if we can determine the underlying
reasons.  Or are we afraid we may not like the results?

Dwight Galster
galster@plains.nodak.edu             Salvation by Grace Through Faith
Superior Christian Education, Inc.
From: bthoms@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Chrisitan nudes
Date: 13 Nov 92 12:55:55 +1300
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1drankINNfn8@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, an725@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Paul L. Fortman, Jr.) writes:
> 
> In a previous article, leed@pro-harold.cts.com (Lee Dronick) says:
>>
>>How do we know Adam and Eve were married. I can't find my bible so can't
>>check out the text. Or course it's all open to interpetation.
> 
> Technically or perhaps legally speaking, Adam and Eve could not have 
> been married since you need a priest/rabbi/minister/justice-of-the-
> peace/etc. to be married.  


Different societies have different concepts of marriage: ours tends to
be overshadowed by the Christian concept. Certainly, though the Romans
had official marriage ceremonies, the most prevalent form in that 
culture was known as "usus", namely living together. If you had
usus for more than a year, you were married, if that included children
then you were very married. BTW Genesis is from an oral tradition that
took centuries to make it onto paper (papyrus, vellum, stone etc). In 
oral traditions, you tend to get minor variations in stories which are
either amalgamated when written down or simply told as alternatives.
Christians or Jews might argue that the theology remains the same.

Brent Thomson, Waikato NZ
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:46:01 EST
From: <DEY101@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: class in bathrobes (Re: nudity at Berkeley)

 [stuff deleted]

>Now, for those of you that don't know about us computer science
>students: we're almost all nocturnal.  I'm posting this at 3 AM, and
>I'm wide awake.  I won't be at 8 AM.  This was tantamount to severe
>punishement.

 [more stuff deleted]

>of course, at 8 AM, I have difficulty with anything more complicated
>than breathing.

 [even more stuff deleted]

DITTO !!!!!    (it's 04:00 local)

Besides there's nothing like being in the middle of a response and the
f__king bastards up at the CAC break in and tell you to log off so they
can "purge" the system.

  Doug -> DEY101@psuvm