HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 10:02:23 EDT
From:         todd pukanecz <CCCS@VTVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Youthful punks

>mandatory military service for every young person?  you ARE a sick pup.

I would like to point out here that a year or two of compulsory military
service after high school is standard in many countries.  The problem
I see with such a plan is that the military is not ready to handle the
volume of recruits this would create.  Also, all these kids would be
"on the dole" for that time (being paid for their military service)
and the money isn't there.

Although I'm not real keen on the "bootcamp" idea for troubled young-
sters, it is at least more selective in using a similar means toward
a similar end.
   toddddddddddd
>
>brni

=========== Wake up John Doe.  You're the hope of the world! ===========
--------     /^^\    ---- Todd Pukanecz ----   ----  CCCS@VTVM1  ----
-----      /      >   --- Ag. Econ. DPL --- "I'm in a nuclear submarine
---  /\_ / @       \   -- Virginia Tech --   under the polar ice cap and
-  /________________>   - Blacksburg VA -    I need a Kleenex." - ZIPPY
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:28:09 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: the war on personal liberties
              31 Aug 1992 21:10:45 GMT from <jwales@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU>

Jimbo:

If you are really going to start picking on spelling and grammar,
I am going to start correcting every mistake I can find.  We will
all feel quite smug about how smart we are when we do nothing
wrong and feel persecuted when we make a mistake.  In addition, most
people on the list will be bored to tears by the whole thing.

Do you really want to start this kind of thing?

--Missy P 2 B (former professional editor)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
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:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:51:14 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      what I really want to know is . . .

Why do Robert and Travis respond to everyone's posts but mine (pout, pout)?

Kerry
(if educators make lousy students, then someone fudged my grades :))
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:46:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject: Re: my last word on this EVER

On Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:11:38 EDT Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET> said:
> >From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
>
> >Me:
> >>>I merely
> >>>wanted to show that what one believes should not be a basis for law.
> >Jamie:
> >> So, for example, the fact that you believe that abortion is murder
> >> is no basis for laws restricting abortion. I get it.
> >Right.  That's why I oppose a constitutional amendment outlawing
> >abortion.  It should be up to the states.
>
> Uh, right. Because after all, states don't make laws.
Whuh???

> >1) Do you think that prohibition of abortion is an interference in
> >   a woman's day-to-day life?  I don't think *any* women are that
> >   promiscuous...
>
> Do you think ANY women are pregnant?
> Yes, I do think that prohibition of abortion is an interference
> in a woman's day-to-day life. In fact, I think it OBVIOUSLY is.
>
> (Wait, hold on. Did Travis mean, he doesn't think ANY women have
> sex every day? Hm. Very interesting.)
Yeah, I thought about that even as I was posting this.  Yes, I know
there are at least some women who have sex every day, even in America.
But they are not going to get pregnant every day no matter how pro-
miscuous they are.

> Consider the following, which is more closely analogous to what
> you wrote:
>
> If you believe that eating pickles is not murder, and that you
> should be allowed to eat pickles, then if I believe that matricide
> is not violation, then I should be allowed to choose matricide.
Exactly.  I don't refute this at all.  My being allowed to eat pickles
is not based on whether *I* feel that eating pickles is murder, but
rather on whether *society* feels that eating pickles is murder.
Society in Louisaiana believes that abortion is murder, however they
are not being allowed to put their beliefs into practice because of
FIVE people (O'Connor, Souter, Kennedy, Blackmun, and Stevens).

> There is no moderately sensible inference contained in that
> conditional, but it is schematically the same as the one you used.
I believe you are OBVIOUSLY wrong.

> Jamie
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:57:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Rape; violation, sex or whatever...

On Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:52:44 -0500 "VALENTINE M. SMITH" <CDELL@UMKCVAX1.BITNET>
said:
> Nope. Apples aren't oranges, and rape, and the violation it IS (not what I
> feel it is!) is NOT the same as abortion, the two issues are not equatable.
> That kind of over-simplification belittles all those who have made the tough
> decision to abort and all those people who have been VIOLATED, for that IS a
> reality, which cannot be blithely explained away, and attempts to twist facts
> to fit what YOU want to believe. THe two are separate category events, and
> cannot be analyzed the same. VMS

You may be a victim of rape, but you are not a victim of abortion.
You don't know.
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 10:11:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Wrongness revisited

just a question to logic czar abt. aversions, etc.
jamie,
don't you think that to talk about aversions, desires you need to look first
at biological imperetives: ie: desire for foods, based on nutritional needs
to ensure survival of individual? from that basic biological need we progress
(depending on environment, availability of certain foods in certain areas, etc)
to social/cultural traditions and taboos regarding certain foods and their
preparation. (ie: many cultures ban pork for religious reasons, but those
reasons are grounded in the fact that trichinosis is a threat when pork is
prepared improperly-of course ancient people didn't know why-just that it was
"unclean".
sexual taboo of incest can be looked at the same way. societies restricted and
made aversive the practice of mating w/close relatives, or even those w/in the
tribe, preferring outside alliances for cultural reasons grounded in biological
fact. this is seen in other animal behaviors-ie: female chimps often travel to
other groups to mate.
murder, infanticide, matricide, patricide are all taboo in most cultures, the
practice usually heavily punished-creating an aversion-because the unit, tribe,
culture whatever would be undermined if these things were not considered "bad".
monogomous relationships for humans in most agriculture based societies is
desirable because our children take so long to mature, smaller units (families)
living apart from other units need to rely on each other to be around to get the
crops in, etc.
i think most of what we consider good (desirable) and bad (aversive) behaviors
could be looked at from this viewpoint to cut through the "moral lore" built up
by different cultures.
what do you think? could this perspective unmuddy the waters a little bit?

-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:25:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: double standards in the twin cities

>I have an idea - why don't we use this list as a forum
>for flirting and inane conversation for all of us who
>don't have lives or friends - how 'bout that?  Politics
>schmolitics.  Let the subscriber beware.

now that's an idea worth pursuing! flirting and inane conversation -I LIKE IT.
i have a life, but its a small one. i have friends, but need more.

oh yeah, as to the stupidest person on the list...
well, i think everyone is absolutely brilliant (ploy to keep flirting options
open).

love and kisses,

-linda  (now giving sultry look and tossing my hair in suggestive manner)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:46:53 BST
From:         Dunstan_Vavasour <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Changing topic?!?
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

Gilbert:
>Hi guys,
>        I think that the Rape topic should by now be largely covered,
>I have a suggestion for another talk,(may be a long one mind you).
>Could anyone help me understanding the difference between what is
>happenning in Bosnia and what was and is happenning in Irak?
>I mean, in both cases, we are talking about some more equipped majority
>trying to impose its will on a less equipped majority with no legal ground
>for their actions.
>Why then does the world stands against Irak, sends troops, navy, aircraft,
>etc.. etc.. while no such prompt and swift action is taken in Bosnia?
>
>I've asked this question around several times, and the same answer keeps
>repeating itself.
>                                O I L
>Is that right? Any other suggestions?? Any opinions??
>Specially waiting to see what Richard has to say for this one.
>                                                Gilbert

Because it is the fall out from a single state disintegrating, whereas
Iraq/Kuwait was a simple case of invasion.

Dunstan.

BTW, Outside the London do last week someone was, apparently, carrying a
placard which said "Go on Major, threaten them with another conference".
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
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:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 08:55:38 -0500
From:         ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Subject:      sinistra, sinistra!

dunstan, i think that gm is intending to make the cars they sell in
*japan* with the steering wheel on the right, so that they'll be like all
the other cars over there.  not too many americans get into that peculiar
right-hand-drive vertigo...except for mailmen (postpersons?) and wealthy
people who want to show off the landrovers they bought whilst on safari
in kenya.
                                  * * * anneliese "not to be confused with
                                        'sinatra, sinatra!'" l.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 11:31:00 CDT
From:         Pam Leader <SYSPL@UOKMVSA.BITNET>
Subject:      pregnancy and childbirth

And now for something completely different.....
One issue I have not seen anyone in the abortion debate consider is
the fact that pregnancy and childbirth are NOT particularly healthy
for many, if not most, women. There are an enormous number of
complications that affect the health of the pregnant woman. Any
woman who decides to have a baby is taking a fair amount of risk with
her life. Pregnancy is NOT just an inconvenience. It has only been
within the last century that medical research and techniques have
advanced to the point of reducing childbirth-related deaths to a
"comfortable" level. (example: look at the number of Cesarean births
performed to save mother and child) This risk is notably higher among
poor women, who can't afford healthcare.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:31:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Rape as violence or sex.

On Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:17:50 EDT Tim Johnson <PH408014@BROWNVM.BITNET> said:
> >I don't mean to meddle in your private life, and, of course, you don't
> >have to answer, but have you been raped?  Or someone you are close to?
> >Just wanting to know from whom these comments are coming.
> >-Travis
>
>   Oh, yes.  And if I were Missy, the first person I'd
> open up to would be someone who has the experience,
> sensitivity, perspective, and understanding about things
> sexual that Travis obviously does.
>
>                                   -Tim

Oh God, do we really have to put personal flames on every post a less-PC
member of the list might make??  I suppose I can stand the insult, al-
though I don't like it, but really, can't people post something a bit
more substantive than something along the lines of "Travis is a total
jerk!"?
-Travis

P.S.  Besides, I said she didn't have to answer.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:06:23 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Bias and discrimination
              31 Aug 1992 12:23:25 EST from <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>

From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>

> But how is playing the odds of a profile discrimination? (seriously)

> I know one can show bias via statistics and make a case, but philosophically
> speaking (let's put legalities aside for a moment), is it bias /s intent?

> If a business has an overwhelming majourity of some demographic group
> are they racist regardless of what decisions are used to create that
> group?

It is one thing to say "we did our best to hire the most
qualified people, but most happen to be white," it is another
thing to say "statistically blacks are criminals 10 times
than whites, therefore we decided to hire whites only."

--KAT

> MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 12:41:58 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>

From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>

> Well, in 1965, Planned Parenthood said that abortion and birth control
> are most definitely not the same.

> --Missy P 2 B

And.......

Do YOU agree with them?  If yes, since when did you start agreeing
with Planned Parenthood ?

And if abortion is not birth control, then what is it controlling,
damage?

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 09:52:00 CDT
From:         Pam Leader <SYSPL@UOKMVSA.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Gore on the Environment

> >It is difficult if not impossible to fight a clean political battle.
                    I should have said  "win"
>
> No it isn't.  It's easy.  All you have to do is respect the electorate
> EVEN though they might not go along with your plan when honestly
> presented.  That's easy for a "good" person....
  an electorate that elected Reagan twice....you must be kidding!!!!!
>
> >The GOP folks have made it clear that they will use any tripe they
> >can get their hands on to justify inaction on domestic or
> >environmental problems.
>
> Not so fast.  The GOP folks claim that certain measures don't make any
> sense.  Maybe they do, and maybe they don't, but their ACTUAL claim
> doesn't justify Leader's misrepresentation.  If you can't make your
> argument without misrepresenting your opponent's position....
   so, I exaggerated a little......
   but NOT MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> >At this point(early a.m.) I can't imagine
> >what sort of "news" could in any way offset the realities of
> >environmental degradation that we have been bombarded with over the
> >past 15+ years.
>
> You mean like the reduction in air pollution, the reduced leakage from
> landfills, and other cleanups?  We really should have a national
> legislature and state and local govts.  What?  We did?  And they had
                                        huh?
> democrats controlled some of them?
   The primary reason why these minimal(and I do mean MINIMAL)
   improvements have been made is because the public was convinced
   that the environmental situation was extremely critical and
   corrective action could not be postponed any longer. How were they
   convinced? By a bombardment of media reports for over 10 years
   which painted a black picture of self-annihilation. If people
   start getting the idea that things are getting better, disaster
   has been avoided, and Mother Earth loves us again, I firmly believe
   that they will want to go back to driving Diesels. And they sure
   as H___ won't be interested in PAYING ($$$$$) the enormous debt
   that they owe to Mother Earth that it is going to take to ensure
   our descendants survival on this planet!!!
>
> Sure, things aren't perfect, but if you have to distort the direction....
  Speaking of distorting direction: Remember Reagan: "trees cause
  polution" ?  People loved Reagan because he assured them that
  everything was fine, don't worry, be happy.  Those same people
  don't like Gore and other environmentalists because they tell them
  the truth: things are not fine, we're in serious trouble, and it's
  going to cost alot of money.  (and a side note: what about Bush
  and his cohorts claiming that Bush was responsible for the breakup
  of the Soviet Union and the rise of democracy in Europe? distortion?)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:23:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Order restored

poor jimbo.
when's visiting day?
who wants to bake the cake?
who wants to donate the file for the cake?
who wants to place their vanity license plate orders?
maybe jimbo will write a book about this.
(better spell my name right)
-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organizatoin
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 11:57:29 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: demo platform revisited

>>I don't have a Republican Platform, but wish I did.  From the few exerpts
>>(excerpts?  sp??) I've seen, it's lots more fun than this one.  But longer.

>platform, most of the so-called "mainstream" candidates feel the need to
>distance themselves from it.

EVERY major party candidate ignores their parties platform.  As both
Ron Brown and Rich Bond have explained repeatedly, they're the only
two people in the US who "believe" their party's platform.

Presidential candidates typically give some lip service to the
platform they ran on, but that's confusing cause with effect, and even
they change with circumstances.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:07:26 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: some responses to Clinton
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>
              26 Aug 1992 09:04:23 -0400 from <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WV NET.EDU>

On Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:04:23 -0400 <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU> said:
>Hi, y'all:
>Did anyone catch Clinton's call-in gig last night?  I only saw the last few
>minutes, and was pretty impressed with what little I saw.

I was bored silly.  The few minutes I managed to struggle to stay awake
through looked like such a setup.  Were the people asking the questions
screened in advance?  "Governor Clinton, the issue of {fill in the blank}
is important and affects me deeply.  How do you feel about it?" (knowing
full well & good what his position was on the issue)

>MacPhil: Clinton said that his tax hike on the wealthiest 2% will amount to
>$11 billion per year.  That squares with what Reich said (that the hike
>will be less than a quarter of the windfall. . .).  Thought you might like
>to know :)

Okay.  $11 billion more than was had before that 2% increase.  That doesn't
do much for the programs he's endorsed.  Even abolishing the entire
Defense Department budget (or severely slashing it) as many have advocated
won't do it as many of those people would then be unemployed and
taking rather than giving revenue to the Feds.

Short of massive redistribution of assets (read into that what you will),
most of what is proposed (both in terms of taking and giving) sounds nice
but probably won't work.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:08:13 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Boing
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

On Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:21:27 EDT Jamie said:

>But we know what people think NOW, from the polls.
                         =========

I just can't resist, no matter how hard I try.

Isn't <think NOW> an oxymoron?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
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:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 11:13:02 -0400
From:         Andrew Allen <E7L8ALL@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Rape; violation, sex or whatever...

> This society has lost all semblance of decency, morality and compassion.  The
> sooner someone flushes this toilet the better!
> ---Robert

For five points of extra credit, explain how one can decently, morally and
compassionately "flush this toilet," taking as a given that one believes
"strongly" in the value of human life.

Or is it just the unborn that have value?

-other Andy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:23:52 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: pot and the kettle
              31 Aug 1992 18:09:00 EDT from <Richard_A_FYFE@UMAIL.UMD.EDU>

Richard:

Since when does the Catholic church not prohibit divorce?

--Missy P 2 B
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Re: meaningless phrases
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 16:30:06 GMT


Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET> writes:
>Since we're talking about education (sort of):
>
>Can you list 3 specific things your learned in college (in the classes,
>not in the "atmosphere") that had a real value to you later in real life?

1.  Sociology and American Studies aren't REAL majors.
2.  
                                 
            lim      (1+r/t)**t = e**r  
	   t-->0               

3.  "Don't write like Ayn Rand."  -- Tibor Machan, philosophy professor,
                                          Auburn University

>Second question:  Is your current job or area of study closely connected
>to your undergraduate degree?

Yes.

--Jimbo