HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Hate Speech Okay, says the Supreme Court
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:26:58 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.181147.2728@Princeton.EDU>
egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:
>In article <BtLHzB.B9H@NCoast.ORG> cmort@ncoast.org (Christopher Morton) writes:

(Ed Nilges wrote the >>> stuff.)

>>> rationalizations; prime among them is the comfortable view of a benign
>>> market mechanism which (surprise) rewards white males.
>>
>>It seems to reward Alice Walker and Andrea Dworkin pretty well too.  An 
>>inconvenient fact I thought I throw in your face....
>
>Out comes the ill-concealed and ill-managed rage, which views Walker and
>Dworkin as nothing more than economic players.

What are you talking about?  You claimed that the system "rewards
white males".  Christopher Morton pointed out that the system also
rewards people who aren't white males.  Where did he object to this
fact?  Actually, he seems to approve of the idea, in part because it
refutes your statement.

>  I am not privy, as you
>seem to be, to Walker's and Dworkin's tax returns and it is perfectly
>likely that in spite of their fame both may be on the edge of poverty
>like the rest of us.

Of course, the trade press publishes the amounts that various authors
are paid for their books.

>  Or do you have a problem with authors like Walker
>and speakers/authors like Dworkin being paid for their labor?  If so, is
>this because they are women, and women should labor unpaid?  Just
>thought I'd ask...

No, he has a problem with you claiming that the system rewards white
males when in fact it rewards all people who produce something that
lots of other people want to read.

>The fact that you are even less successful than Walker or Dworkin

Did he say that?  You claimed that they might be poverty-stricken; now
you're claiming that they are more successful than Christopher Morton?
Have you seen his tax return?

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Xref: sparky misc.legal:16435 alt.politics.correct:5131 alt.censorship:7143
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: State Universities & First Amendment
Keywords: _McCollum v. Board of Education_, 333 U.S. 203 (1948).
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:00:14 GMT

matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) writes:

[...]
>I dunno.  But in the '40's, Mrs. Vashti McCollum, the mother of
>a school boy in Champaign, Illinois, challenged the constitutionality
>of the "released time" program as a violation of the Ist Amendment
>and XIVth Amendment.
[...]

I think that school boy is now the (quite converative) mayor of
Champaign.

>  Under that program, the Board of Education,
>responding to a request from something called the "Champaign Council
>on Religious education" (a voluntary association made up of members 
>of the Jewish, Roman Catholic, and some Protestant denominations)
>had set up a "released time" program to allow public school pupils 
>in grades four to nine inclusive to be permitted to attend weekly
>religious instruction, on a voluntary basis, without having to leave 
>the public school premises.  

In fact, Protestant students didn't even have to leave their
classrooms. Catholic and Jewish childrent went to other classrooms, as
did nonparticipating students and the regular teachers.

>The _McCollum_ case dealt with elementary schools, not public
>colleges.  When it comes to colleges, as Justice Stanley Reed
>pointed out in his dissent, 
>
>     "In the United States Naval Academy and the United States
>      Military Academy, schools wholly supported and completely
>      controlled by the federal government, there are a number
>      of religious activities.  Chaplains are attached to both
>      schools.  Attendance at church services on Sunday is
>      compulsory at both the Military and Naval Academies.  At
>      West Point the Protestant services are held in the Cadet
>      Chapel, the Catholic in the Catholic Chapel, and the Jewish
>      in the Old Cadet Chapel; at Annapolis only Protestant 
>      Services are held on the reservation, midshipmen of other
>      religious persuasions attend the churches of the city of
>      Annapolis."  Ibid., at 254-55, Reed, J., dissenting.

The military academies are treated differently from other state-owned
schools because they are military.

In any case, around 1972, the Supreme Court "let stand a lower-court
ruling that had struck down the Defense Department's policy of
requring cadets in government military academies to attend chapel.
Whatever the special powers of the military might be, the court ruled,
they did not include compelling religious belief and practice."
[_Visions of Liberty_ by Ira Glasser, p. 82]

- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr)
Subject: Tort Reform (was: Number of Lawyers)
Organization: Northeastern Law, Class of '93
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 15:42:30 GMT


In article <1992Aug25.230134.1@acad3.alaska.edu>, 
fsars@acad3.alaska.edu (Allen R Sparks) said:

> I summarized an article by _The Economist_ that also disagreed with
> Quayle, but it said that the U.S. had about a third of the world's
> laywers.  Though Dapper Dan got his facts wrong, I do agree with a
> lot of his conclusions.  We certainly need tort reform in this
> country.

No hostility intended, Allen, but I'll lay before you roughly the same
challenge that the ABA gave Dan Quayle (and to which he has yet to
respond): if you think that the tort system should be reformed, what
do you think the new, reformed system should look like?

-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>

Xref: sparky misc.legal:16653 alt.politics.correct:5191 rec.arts.movies:26134
From: perez@mgr.hjf.org (Charles Perez)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.politics.correct,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: The return of vaudeville. (was: Re: Nilges)
Date: 29 Aug 92 08:35:09 GMT
Organization: HJF AIDS Research Project, Washington DC

In article <1992Aug28.233006.15783@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Aug28.223601.13313@Princeton.EDU> egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:
>>>> In article <1992Aug28.153236.24131@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>> >
>>>> >In fact, Shean was Jewish, a pretty close relative of the Marx Brothers
>>>> >(that's Julius, not Karl, though Karl was sometimes funnier.)
>>
>>Hey Ted!  Who was Julius Marx?  Oh well, White Men Can't Proofread, huh?
>>Did ya mean to say Groucho?  Wanna post some C code for my collection?
>
>Given that Julius was "Groucho," I fail to see the proofreading error.
>However, I feel all Italians on the net should be offended by your use
>of the Marx Brothers' nicknames, which were given to them by someone
>making fun of Italians.  My use of Julius, Arthur/Adolph, Leonard,
>Herbert or Milton in reference to the brothers is perfectly acceptable.

See, Ed, what happens to you when you mix hubris and intellectual
laziness? Now all of those times you tried to pin racist labels on
those who disagreed with you with your pseudologic have come home to
roost.

Think hard and be honest! Hard thinking and honesty beat intellectual
laziness and dishonesty every time!


-- 
==========================================================================
That which is necessary is never evil. If an evil seems necessary, look
to your context; that's where its root lies.  - Charles Perez
==========================================================================
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: cfaks@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Alice Sanders)
Subject: Help - might have to sue an orthodontist.
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 03:46:27 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

Organization: Eastern Illinois University
Keywords: 

Has anyone reading this ever sued an orthodontist?  I was not warned of
risks of orthodontics.  Plus my upper jaw has been elongated, requiring
surgery to correct it.  The orthodontist did not monitor my progress or
heed my complaints that my 'overbite was getting worse' and that I was
developing a speech impediment.  His office keeps billing me and has not
acknowledged my complaints to one of their office personnel.  The
orthodontist has never called to discuss any of this with me.  

I'd be interested to hear other similar experiences and how people have
been able to handle it.  Has it been something a suit can be won with?

Thanks.

Alice

Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: nihong@oregon.uoregon.edu (Hong Ni)
Subject: Pls help me understand a section of the Welfare and Institutions Code in California's ballot pamphlet
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Oregon
Date: 30 Aug 1992 02:39 PDT  

Greetings!

Could someone out there help me understand a section of the Welfare and
Institutions Code in California's ballot pamphlet?  It goes like this:

>As a condition of eligibility for aid paid under this chapter, each applicant
>or recipient shall:
>(1) [Assign to the county any rights to support from any other person such 
>applicant may have in their own behalf or in behalf of any other family 
>member for whom the applicant is applying or receiving aid, and which have 
>accrued at the time such assignment is made.]  ...

Should "such applicant" be "such applicants" to correspond to "their own 
behalf", and "such assignment" be "such an assignment"?

The previous section in the pamphlet talks about group home programs. 
Please help me analyze the part in [ ].  Break it down and paraphrase it,
if you could.  I will appreciate you help.

E-mail directly to nihong@oregon.uoregon.edu

Regards,

Hong Ni
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.politics.correct,soc.culture.jewish
From: matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: The return of vaudeville. (was: Re: Nilges)
Keywords: Envy; Resentment
Date: 1 Sep 92 18:38:29 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab, APG MD.

In article <1992Aug31.212919.1145@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> dsc@gemini.tmc.edu 
(Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892) writes:

>In article <19120@smoke.brl.mil> matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) 
>writes:

>>President Lyndon Baines Johnson was the son of Sam Ealy Johnson,
>>the man who ran the Klan out of East Texas.  LBJ's administration
>             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>[Matt Rosenblatt]

>Excuse me, but your sytax in unclear.  Did he direct the Klan 
>within East Texas, or did he banish the Klan from East Texas?
>[Doug Caprette]

It was the latter -- Sam Ealy Johnson made things so tough for the
Klan that they could no longer operate in East Texas.  My apologies
for repeating the expression, "ran the Klan out of East Texas," just
the way I first heard it.  The ambiguity never registered with me.

					-- Matt Rosenblatt
                                        (matt@amsaa.brl.mil)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TRUTH     JUSTICE     FREEDOM     YIDDISHKEIT     IVY     THE AMERICAN WAY
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.politics.correct,alt.censorship
From: hasn@midway.uchicago.edu (Sheheryar Hasnain)
Subject: Re: The return of vaudeville. (was: Re: Nilges)
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:10:55 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.170120.28442@samba.oit.unc.edu>, Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi) writes:
> 
> >> I suggest that discussants in this thread follow the lead of Israel and
> >> inject some sense in the discussion.  The defense of Kuwait and the
> >> abandonment of Bosnia-Herzegovina means that international politics is
> >> under the control of a dollar elite, not the Elders of Zion.
> >> Sherheryar, do you mean to say that Jews set our media's agenda, or an
> >> amoral elite comprised of scum of all persuasions?
> >> 
> >Absolutely the latter!   I was not even going to reply to
> >such a stupidly drawn conclusion.  Thanks for clearing my name.
> 	
Chuck.Lavazzi enlightens our discussion:
So I ask you, are these guys the Gallagher and Shean of the Politically
> Correct, or what?  Who says vaudeville is dead?  It LIVES!
> "Absolutely, Mr. Gallagher?"
> "Positively Mr. Shean!"
> 
Sheheryar:  Yes I agree with Mr.Nilges, positively!  And you're equating
not being anti-semetic with being politically correct!  tsk tsk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
>    The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
>      North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
>         Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
>            internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
> 
>
From: egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges)
Subject: Re: The return of vaudeville. (was: Re: Nilges)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:36:59 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.144939.19461@samba.oit.unc.edu> Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi) writes:
>	BTW, your ignorance is showing.  Mr Shean spoke with a noticeable

I happily plead guilty to ignorance of racist humor, Chuck.

>Germanic accent. I've got some of the recordings.  Gallagher had no accent to

Gallagher is an Irish name.  And Germans were funny during the same
historic period in which Irish were funny: from the 1830s to about the
1920s.  A thriving, self-conscious and highly democratic German American
community was destroyed during World War I because the amusement at the
ways of the Germans (their funny accents, their funny pedantry, their
funny love of beer) turned into rage because yahoos were convinced that
we were fifth columnists for the Kaiser (a neat about-face, since almost
to a man we left because of disgust with the old country.)

I'm ignorant of racist trivia (do you also have the full set of Amos 'n
Andy videos to add to your yuks?)  You, however, need education in the
history of your country and its sad record of abusing immigrants.
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Hate Speech Okay, says the Supreme Court
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:10:31 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <23058@hacgate.SCG.HAC.COM>, tucker@shiva.edsg.hac.com (George Tucker) writes:
> In article <1992Aug26.182942.4893@Princeton.EDU> egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:
> >In article <1992Aug26.174235.12399@fid.morgan.com> sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
# #Of course, rights and separation of powers are a check upon democracy.
# #My point is that you can emphasize bogus rights to the destruction of
# #democracy.  This is what the National Rifle Association does, in a
# #country in which the majority would prefer to see some form of gun
# 
# Whether the majority is right is a matter of personal opinion, whichever 
# side the majority is on.  I find it hard to believe that the right to
# own a gun threatens the destruction of democracy.

Mr. Tucker fails to understand Nilgesspeak.  In Nilgesspeak, "democracy"
is a word that means, "All power is vested in the government and its
authorized agents, the police and military."  In that sense of 
"democracy," Nilges is right: as long as the population retains the 
power to resist oppression, it threatens "the destruction of 
democracy."

# #control.  And the Supreme Court's care for the rights of Viktora
# #directly thwarted the democratic will of St Paul, NOT to safeguard a
# #minority, but to protect a sick white racist.  
# 
# Sick white racists are (hopefully) a minority.
# 
# 	 George Tucker        tucker@tcville.hac.com

Clearly a tiny minority, or we wouldn't have the laws prohibiting
racial discrimination by the government.  What isn't a tiny 
minority are liberals like Ed Nilges, who think that democracy
is the highest goal, and free speech and other individual rights
are dangerous.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
From: "hilary miller" <hilary.miller@execnet.com>
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: endorsing checks for
Date: 1 Sep 92 07:49:18 EST
Reply-To: "hilary miller" <hilary.miller@execnet.com>
Distribution: misc
Organization: Executive Networks Information


Rich Wales, in a message to All on 08-31-92 at 9:27am, said:

RW>|Is it permissible for an individual to endorse checks for deposit via
   |an ink stamp with his name, bank name and account number, and the words
   |"FOR DEPOSIT ONLY"?
   |Businesses seem to do this all the time; but what about individuals?
   |If individuals are in fact permitted to do this, why is it that banks
   |always tell customers to =sign= checks when depositing them?
   |_______________________________________________________________________

          Yes, it is absolutely permitted.  Under the Uniform Commer-
          cial Code, which governs such matters, a "signature" can be
          stamped, typed, computer-generated, printed, engraved,
          etched, stained-glass-embedded or affixed in any other manner
          designed to authenticate the instrument.  In fact, if you
          deposit the check by mail *without* indorsing it at all, the
          bank will credit your account and stamp the check "Credited
          to account of within named payee; absence of indorsement
          guaranteed," which allows the check to be negotiated by the
          depository bank even though it was never indorsed by you!

          Most banks do *not*, in fact, request that you "sign" a check
          that is deposited to your own account, although they will ask
          you to indorse it (which can be printed, stamped, etched,
          etc.).  Many banks will, however, ask that you indorse by
          signing a check that is payable to you that you cash, rather
          than depositing to your account.


   L A
 I    R        Hilary B. Miller of Greenwich, Connecticut
  H/\Y         CIS: 76040,1743
    
---
  DeLuxe 1.25 #11645  "Floggings will continue until morale improves!"
--
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host
Newsgroups: misc.legal,rec.travel,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.canada,soc.culture.british
From: wb8foz@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (David Lesher)
Subject: Re: US dual citizenship info -- updated version available via FTP
Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 02:11:43 GMT


# 	If you are out of the country for 330 out of a consequetive 365
# 	day period, and you do not maintain a primary residence in the
# 	US, EVEN IF YOU ARE PAID BY AN AMERICAN COMPANY, WITH AMERICAN
# 	DOLLARS, you do not have to pay US income taxes.  YOU MUST FILE
# 	FOR THIS EXEMPTION.

Exemption-Exception

If you are a USG employee, i. e. paid a salary by the guy with the
hat & suspenders, then you do not get the exemption.

--
A host is a host from coast to coast..wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
From: IO20456@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (Ryan R Robbins)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: State Universities & First Amendment
Date: 29 Aug 92 04:30:36 GMT
Organization: University of Maine System

I have a question on an issue that I am surprised has never been
picked up.

Concerning the first amendment barring Congress from making laws
respecting establishments of religion, isn't it a violation by a
state when a state-run university provides a room in its student
union for mass? What about when a state rents or leases university
land to religious groups on its college campuses? Doesn't this
conflict with the First Amendment? Has anyone sued a state to bar
religious institutions from holding mass on public property?

+===============================================================+
||   RYAN ROBBINS                    INTERNET:                 ||
||   UNIVERSITY OF MAINE             IO20456@MAINE.MAINE.EDU   ||
+===============================================================+
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.politics.correct,alt.censorship
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: KNOW YOUR RIGHTS (was: Re; Nilges)
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:40:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.125505.27373@Princeton.EDU> egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:

>Gimme real freedom, hedged about with commonsense restrictions such as
>Justive Brandeis' "no freedom to shout "fire" in a crowded theater" over
>freedoms that are so formally overbroad that they are in practice
>unattainable.

You're thinking of Justice Holmes, not Justice Brandeis.



--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact 
mnemonic@eff.org| of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, 
(617) 864-0665  | both are transformed."
EFF, Cambridge  |                           --Carl Jung 
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Advice for first year law student?
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 03:09:59 GMT

In article <1730bhINNq4h@gw.home.vix.com> shedevil@vix.com (Anne P. Mitchell JD) writes:

>Many reasonable people, I dare say with far more knowledge than either
>of us about computer architecture, are able to disagree about which is
>the better machine (IBM or Mac).

I'm sure this is true. But it should be noted that my recommendations were
not grounded in computer architecture, and that, in any case, only a small
subset of those very knowledgeable people have the experience of also
having been a law student.

>  Personally I find them both
>deficient, and prefer a UNIX platform.

Okay, but I've not found any UNIX software that is particularly useful for
law students and lawyers. (A good operating system does not guarantee that
people have developed good applications for your purposes, sad to say.)

>I am aware of Macs being able to read/write DOS disks, but at least in
>the last two firms in which I worked, folks with Macs were unable to
>fully integrate their work functions (outlining/writing is not the
>only thing one needs to be able to do on a computer as an attorney).

It is very likely that they didn't have access to a person with the
knowledge to solve their problem. 

>I truly do not know this, so I ask:  are the current generation of
>Macs able to fully emulate a DOS machine?  Or only to read/write to a
>DOS disk?

Not only the current generation of Macs, but even some older models can be
made to emulate DOS machines just fine. As I said earlier, one should
check out the Insignia Solutions line of PC emulators for the Mac if 
you genuinely need to run DOS software at home on your Mac.


--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact 
mnemonic@eff.org| of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, 
(617) 864-0665  | both are transformed."
EFF, Cambridge  |                           --Carl Jung 
Newsgroups: misc.legal