HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kathy@oracorp.com (Kathy Knight)
Subject: Spliting the group
Organization: ORA Corporation, Ithaca, New York
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 19:04:06 GMT



Playing Devil's Advocate:


So, the group gets split into any number of smaller groups, each
dedicated to a specific area because people are tired of having to
kill articles in the newsgroup because of the subject matter.  Then
we'll have any number of smaller groups complaining because a
discussion is going on and their particular newsgroup has been added
to a long list of other newsgroups, thus making it necessary to kill
the articles.


The circle could get rather vicious, could it not?



Kathy S. Knight
Fellow Scout
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,chi.general,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: dusek@rtsg.mot.com (James Dusek)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 18:54:04 GMT

philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>immoral and evil.  Because a lot of gay/lesbian/bisexual Americans
>don't want to end up in ovens and concentration camps.

	My, aren't we going overboard.

James
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:35:54 GMT

Carl M. Kadie writes:
> I didn't say that the BSA lied. I said "their reply was apparently so
> vague that B of A thought the answer was no."

jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) writes:

>Sorry, I don't see what difference it makes.  Whether one thinks they
>lied or purposely misled, the outcome is the same, and my ethics
>don't let them off the hook for either.
>
>Of course, neither has been established here.  Nor do we find,
>in a similar situation, untruth, deception, or dissembling.
[...]

I think Bank of America asked the BSA straight out if they excluded gays
and the BSA replied something like: "the Boy Scouts of America is open
to all boys who subscribe to the Scout oath and law" [Quote from the B
of A press release.)

B of A took this to mean that the BSA was "open to all boys" [Quote
from the B of A press release]. According to posting by a person who
spoke to the B of A after the press release was released, the B of A
didn't not release that Scout oath and law precluded gay boys.

Maybe the misunderstanding was just another mutually convenient
mistake. If so, it was a mistake that could have been avoided by a
more explict letter from Chief Scout Love, for example:

===============
Dear Bank of America:

Yes, we exclude gay boys. It is our policy that gay boys can not be
"morally straight" and, thus, cannot subscribe to the Scout oath and
law.

Yours Sincerely,
  Boy Scouts of America

===============

- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Xref: sparky rec.scouting:2884 alt.discrimination:4169 chi.general:1012 alt.atheism:16698 alt.politics.homosexuality:5749
From: anthropo@carina.unm.edu (Dominick V. Zurlo)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 92 17:14:16 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: usa

In article <mccalley.715623076@lead16> mccalley@rtsg.mot.com (Phil McCalley) writes:
>kutem@turtle1.Berkeley.EDU (Jon Kutemeier) writes:
>
>>In article <mccalley.715556935@lead16>, mccalley@rtsg.mot.com (Phil McCalley) writes:
>>|> On the issue of whether or not it is learned, it seems to me that it must
>>|> be.  Surely if it was genetic, it would have deselected itself along time
>>|> ago.  It would be some trick for them to reproduce.  Unfortunately for 
>>|> them, AIDS is deselecting them anyway.  Sad, but true.
>
>>What do you mean, "deselected" itself? Are you saying that gay couples
>>are unable to reproduce? If it is, and at this point I will assume that
>>is what you mean, then you are mistaken. Gay men and women can have children
>>if they wish. There is nothing wrong with their reproductive organs. A gay
>>couple can have a surrogate mother carry a baby for them, just as well as
>>a lesbian couple may have one partner or another carry a baby to term. Also,
>>don't forget the men and women who are "closeted", and maybe married, 
>>can have children as well.
>
>These are good points.  And salmon do somehow swim all the way up stream,
>so I guess there are some amazing feats of reproduction in this ecosystem.
>For salmon, you would think they would choose an easier way, but they do
>not have the ability to think in the same capacity as we do.  I wonder 
>what our excuse is.
>
>>And I hate to tell you, but AIDS doesn't discriminate in this world. It will
>>"deselect" you just as fast as it would someone who is gay. Sad, but true.
>
>While it is true that AIDS can strike anyone, gay males have the highest
>incidence of the disease, and that is very simply because of the way it
>is transmitted.  The risk to a heterosexual male is not very great,
>especially if he is monogomous.  Since you seem to know a great deal about
>this subject, I am sure you would agree.  When you talk about probability,
>gay men get the short end of the stick.  Ooops :)
>-- 
>....................................................... Phil McCalley
True about gay men having the highest incidence of AIDS, but demographically
that is changing.  But aother point to that, Lesbians are at the lowest end
of the risk groups, including lower than heterosexual men.  
When I spoke to a class last year and one woman told me that AIDS was a 
plague sent by god to rid the earth of gay men, I replied that that may be 
true, but that that would then mean lesbians were god's chosen people since 
they have the lowest risk.

Dominick V. Zurlo
Eagle Scout
Gay human who does not feel a need to reproduce as i have seven siblings,
but will someday adopt children.
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Date: 4 Sep 92 23:30:19 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Sep4.155942.4322@wam.umd.edu>, aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) writes:
> If all humans, just for being humans, would have the same rights as all 
> other humans, there would not be any sense in talking about rights,
> Rights are based on the fact that not all humans have rights just because they
> are humans, but based on the fact that humans are different from each other.

What a load of manure.  All humans have the same rights.  "Human rights."
Catchy phrase.  Ever heard it before?  Anything else is a privilege.

> So, because we are not equal,

"All men are created equal."  Another catchy phrase; sound familiar?
No matter how your subsequent station in life makes you superior or
inferior to another in terms of money, status, wisdom, or happiness, 
you have the same rights as everybody else.

> some people have to be protected from other people
> and then, we have rights. So, not all humans have the same rights as other
> humans.,

Your logic escapes me, and your conclusion is anathema to me.

To use your example, all people have the right to their own lives.  
That some can protect themselves, and that some need the help of 
others to protect themselves doesn't change the presence or quality 
of that right in either case.

The people who have to be protected from other people are often the
ones who are exercising their rights, having to be protected from 
others who don't want them to.  The whole purpose of rights is to 
protect your ability to do things that others may find unpopular
or controversial.  As the man said, if rights protected only 
inoffensive words and actions, why would you need them?

> So, erasing the distinction between human beings does not help the cause 
> for equality, but actually, hurts it a lot. Because we need to understand 
> where are we different in order to act on that.
> Men are no women, and women are not men, that is why we have to have 
> rights that concern women and not men, like the right to choose about their
> bodies. An so on.

You don't have the right to choose about your body?  Glad to know you.
My cousin needs a heart transplant.  Lie down right here.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,chi.general,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: kutem@grouper6.Berkeley.EDU (Jon Kutemeier)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Reply-To: kutem@motcid.rtsg.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 21:27:40 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.204432.5451@wam.umd.edu>, aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) writes:
|> This thing about having or not a choice is not so simple.
|> Some people might feel that they have no choice but to take their children
|> out from the troop. 
|> Then, neither ine will have a choice.
|> This is the same in a lot of other cases: I have a choice of buying or not
|> a house, however, I do not have the money. Ergo: I don't really have a choice.
|> The same here: If some parent doees not want hie/her children to be near
|> an homosexual leader (being this a good or bad thing to do), he or she
|> will not have a choice but to take his/her children from the troop.

Actually, this thing about choice is simple, people just try to compound it
and make it seem difficult. You are right, some people might *feel* that
they have no choice but to take their children out from the troop, but in
the end, they do have a choice, and they can make the decision themselves.
There isn't someone standing there saying "You must take your children out
of our troop". This is not true for the gay scouts or scout leaders. They
are being *told* "You cannot be a scout leader". In the first case, the
appearance of not having a choice is there, but the ability to choose what
to do is really there. In the second case, the ability to choos is not there.

|> 
|> The only real choice here is: Do I want my children under the leadership of 
|> an homosexual?
|> 
|> If the answer is yes or I do not care, there is a choice.
|> If the answer is no, there is no choice.

By default, if the parents choose "no", then there was a choice made.

-- 
Jon Kutemeier_________________________________________________________________
----------------Software Engineer               /XX\/XX\  phone:(708) 632-3033
Motorola Inc.   Radio Telephone Systems Group  ///\XX/\\\ fax:  (708) 632-4430
1501 W. Shure Drive, Arlington Heights, IL 60004    uucp: !uunet!motcid!kutemj
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 16:47:59 GMT

   Why does this bullshit keep cluttering the alt.atheism net? The subject has
been homosexuality exclusively for well over a week. If I wanted to read 
alt.homo I'd log into it. 

Jeff Achenbach

Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: germain%munich.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (H. James de St. Germain)
Subject: Re: What is an Eagle Scout?
In-reply-to: poli2031@waikato.ac.nz's message of 9 Sep 92 12:23:56 +1200
Organization: U of Utah
Date: 10 Sep 92 10:38:59


> From what I have learned is that the Eagle Scout is the equivalent of the
> Queen Scout in Australia, New Zealand and UK.

The rank of Eagle Scout is certainly a high accomplishment, but I think
you would have to compare on an individual basis the individuals who
obtain Eagle Scout and those who obtain Queen Scout.  My only knowledge
of a Queen Scout was a personal friend who served with me at a summer
camp two years ago.  It was his opinion (he is a British Queen Scout) that a
person would have to be somewhere around 17 years old (and mature and
intelligent for that age) to have the skills and knowledge necessary to 
obtain Queens Scout.  With the Current BSA progam it is possible for boys
of 12 to obtain eagle (it used to be 13, but I've been told its even
younger now.)  Of ALL the bsa Eagles that I have met who were under 15,
perhaps one showed the leadership, knowledge, understanding, and devotion
to (IMHO) warrant the rank of Eagle.  While the rank of Eagle is still
prestigious, it alone no longer guarantees that a young man will have
all the skills and abilities that used to be taken for granted when evaluating
an Eagle Scout.  On the other hand,  I know many Eagles who have risen above
the requirments, both in ability and service to their fellow scouts, who
make me proud to call myself an Eagle.  I wish the BSA would realize that
making a boy firstclass in a year and Eagle in two, will perhaps keep them
interested longer, thus (hopefully) helping them learn more of what scouting
has to teach, but it will nolonger produce as many top (read highly skilled,
motivated, etc) "graduates" as it once did.

I would greatly appreciate hearing other opinions of the current BSA
advancement system, and also opinions of the top ranks in scouting through
out the world.

Yours in Scouting.
  Jim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. James de St. Germain       	Department of Computer Science
germain@asylum.utah.edu		University of Utah
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: macman@bernina.ethz.ch (Danny Schwendener)
Subject: Re: Help with Fire Safety quiz wanted
Organization: Peppermint Software Inc.
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 23:21:15 GMT

I attended a leader training at the child burn center, a special
division of our children hospital in Zurich.  It was impressive
(I couldn't eat anything for the rest of the week). One of the things
I took with me was that the two most common reasons for bad burn
injuries (degree 3+) among kids in the cub scout age are liquid
firelighters or other flamable liquids and fireworks. Firecrackers are
particularly nasty because they tend to self-ignition. I know a kid from
my visits in the children hospital, who had a full packet of the small
firecrackers in his pocket when they went off, most probably because of
an accumulation of static electricity. all 500 crackers exploded,
burned his flesh down to the bone, and left deep burns all way down his
leg (this boy won't be able to walk correctly anymore, his hips will
hurt with every change of temperature and he won't be able to have
children).

So please, include a line or two on firelighters and fireworks.

As a side note, you cannot prevent children from playing with fire --
whatever you say, they will be tempted anyway. What you can do though is
minimize the risks that the game turns into a disaster by teaching them
to manipulate fire correctly. For example, never carry fireworks or
firelighters in your pocket of your belt bag; instead, use a bag or a
box which you can throw away quickly if something happens.


-- Danny Schwendener         macman@bernina.ethz.ch
   Wolfsmeute Nidau/Glockenhof, Sihlstr. 33, CH-8001 Zurich, Switzerland
   m.h.c. Troop 14, San Francisco
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: mike@spss.com (mike cornwall)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Organization: SPSS Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 17:47:32 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.164759.14652@spdc.ti.com> achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach) writes:
>   Why does this bullshit keep cluttering the alt.atheism net? The subject has
>been homosexuality exclusively for well over a week. If I wanted to read 
>alt.homo I'd log into it. 
>
>Jeff Achenbach
>
And what does it have to do with chi.general???
If you append please alter your newgroup header.


Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: johnw@psychnet.psychol.utas.edu.au (John Wanless)
Subject: What is an Eagle Scout?
Organization: Psychology Department, University of Tasmania
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:47:25 GMT

To Fellow Scouters,
		Would someone explain your training schemes over there in 
the USA. Reading this group and someone says that they are an Eagle Scout 
doesn't mean anything to me in Tasmania(Australian state) unless I can 
relate it to our own training requirements.In each section here, giving 
Scout Leaders as an example, they have to do an orientation or 3A as some 
call it which consists of a weekend camp with probably 4-6 instructors 
taking 1/2 hour sessions on all aspects of what a leader is required to 
do with his Troop. The next phase is called 3B and consists of two 
weekends with the instructors going in to greater detail on what was 
taught the first weekend. This also includes a practical component of a 
hike and overnight camp with bushcraft needed to construct the campsite, 
ie, "table & chairs" and prepare a 3 course meal, judged by an 
instructor. After this weekend if all goes well you are issued with  
a "Warrant", which indicates that you have completed all the training 
required. The "Warrant" is not owned by you and can be withdrawn at any 
time if you leave the service or "conduct" is not at the high standard 
required.     
Further stage 4 training is available and once this is completed after two 
weekends with more practical and a project about some fundamentals of 
Scouting and completed over a three month period and taking more than 10 
hours (more like 30 hours it took me). Once this is passed into your 
supervisor and assessed then the District Commissioner is informed and you 
are recommended for a Wood Badge only after he has assessed you for a 
further 3 months and is "happy" with the way you run the Troop. The Wood 
Badge consists of a couple of  wooden beads modelled of the beads given by 
the Chief in Kiplings book of the Jungle Boy, I think thats how the story 
goes.Anyway that a very brief description of our training perhaps we can get 
others to give us their descriptions?Yours in Scouting,
John Wanless
Venturer Leader (ex Scout Leader)  
Xref: sparky rec.scouting:2845 alt.discrimination:4136 chi.general:980 alt.atheism:16617 alt.politics.homosexuality:5707
From: max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com (Max Webb)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,chi.general,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Date: 6 Sep 92 02:34:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: hilbert.1992Sep6.023441.22581
Distribution: usa
Organization: Cypress Semiconductor Northwest, Beaverton Oregon

In article <mccalley.715646775@topaz1> mccalley@rtsg.mot.com (Phil McCalley) writes:
>Or say... A man and his dog?  Or maybe a man and a young boy of say... 
>six to twelve years old who is in the Boy Scouts of America.
>...  So maybe a homosexual and a petafile (sp?) 
>are two different things, but HOW different?  I certainly don't know.

Then why make the rhetorical link? Say - I've got a GREAT idea: you
could actually go and find out how to spell pedophile, and THEN you
could go and find out whether most pedophiles are homosexuals, or
heterosexuals. Get ready for a shock.

>They
>seem like the same league to me (non-reproductive sexual behavior).
>But... I digress.  My original argument was on deselection, not "why people
>do not want homosexuals to be scout leaders."

Is it wrong for a man to marry an infertile woman? A woman, to marry a
sterile man? No? Then you are a hypocrite.

> Personally, I never liked
>the Boy Scouts.  There were no girls to go camping with.

Definitely a hypocrite.

>It wouldn't.  But now you still have the problem of reproducing.  We look
>for success in our mates.  Whether it be good looks, good social skills,
>intelligence, or whatever.  That is what attracts us.  That is what will
>be carried into the next generation.  Homosexuals do not get this.

You are as ignorant of evolutionary theory as you are of human sexual
variation. Go and look up *kin selection* in any text book. It's the
same reason why non-reproducing insects persist in hives.

>You all have fun fighting over this one.

You have fun showing off your ignorance on a world-wide computer
network, eh?

>....................................................... Phil McCalley

	Max G. Webb
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: mrayle@eng.clemson.edu (michael rayle)
Subject: Re: WHERE IS THE FUN
Reply-To: mrayle@eng.clemson.edu
Organization: College of Engineering, Clemson Univ.
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 18:13:04 GMT


Hello.  After reading the referenced article, I couldn't help but agree but also 
disagree.
I am also an Eagle Scout (class of 88).  In 1986, I went with my council to 
Philmont Scout Ranch.  It was an optional trip that nobody required me to go on.
When a kid is 16 or 17, coming up with around $1000 is not a easy thing.
Especially for me.  My parents made a deal with me that if I could come up with 
half of the total, they would match it.  I am very thankful for this.  Otherwise
I wouldn't have been able to go.  I'm not saying that every family has to do this,
but it worked in my case.  
 
One of these days, I hope to be able to send (or take) my son to Philmont.  I 
believe that there are some experiences that I had there that I will treasure
for life.  The scouting experience is MORE than going to meetings and earning
merit badges. 
 
I consider myself very fortunate.  In 1987 my troop took a contingent to 
Charles L. Sommers Wilderness Canoe Base in Ely, Minnesota.  This again was
an optional trip with no pressure to go.  I personally enjoyed CLS about two
orders of magnitude better than Philmont.
 
These trips were the highlight of my scouting experience.  I wouldn't want to
deprive anybody from being able to have the same experiences.

One of the things I didn't do while a boy scout was go with a contingent to 
a National Jamboree.  (My family did visit for a few days to the 75th Anniv. Jambo
in 1985.)  We felt that the council was being wasteful of the money they required 
us to spend to go.  But that didn't deter a handful from my troop to go anyway.
(The council was buying brand new equipment when the stuff they bought hadn't
been used since the last Jamboree and was rotting in storage.)
 
I know that not everybody can afford to go on these trips.  But I do have to say
that when I was at Philmont, there didn't seem to be a shortage of people who
were there during the two weeks I was there.  In fact, it seemed that there were
*too many* people there.

Anyway, it isn't cheap to go across the country for a trip to a High Adventure Base.
Just transportation isn't cheap.  I don't know of any way to make it
more available to those who are unfortunate enough to not be able to afford it.
But the solution is NOT to close the bases to everybody because of this.
 
.Mike..
Eagle Class 1988
Assistant SM, Troop 245
Blue Ridge Council
South Carolina

Xref: sparky rec.scouting:2898 alt.discrimination:4180 chi.general:1021 alt.atheism:16714 alt.politics.homosexuality:5761
From: awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Sep4.182434.21206@cs.yale.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:33:15 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.182434.21206@cs.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:

- In article <1992Sep4.033027.12445@auto-trol.com> katbea@auto-trol.com (Kathy Beatty) writes:
- >Karen Hill, you are an immoral, ignorant bigot. Your immoral, ignorant
- >bigotry hurts children.
- Hmm...
- It strikes me that the claim that bigotry is "immoral" is every bit
- as tenuous as the claim that homosexuality is "immoral". While
- I agree that there is no support for the latter, neither do I
- see support for the former.
 
Well, when bigotry hurts children, I'd call it immoral.

--
Andrew Werling   awerling@nmsu.edu   yip@rever.nmsu.edu
"Jesus is coming, look busy."
          --from a button I bought in an Albuquerque bookstore.
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,chi.general,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality