HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cpearson@ducvax.auburn.edu (MISTYEYES)
Subject: Re: the US elections...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Auburn University--Auburn, AL
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 09:24:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.233618.25115@radian.uucp>, markbr%radian@natinst.com (markbr) writes...
>In article <1992Nov9.172802.19739@linus.mitre.org> heimberg@pacific.mitre.org (Jeff Heimberger) writes:
>>In article <gate.woqyTB1w165w@pil.UUCP> alizard@pil.UUCP writes:
>>>[...]
>>>4. Evidence is mounting that they [Republicans] are out to get us. 
>>>(by us, I mean pagans)
>>>[...]
>>
>>Please cite your evidence, and use documented, verifiable sources...
>>not a challenge, just a request.
>>
>>BB.
> 
>"I don't think that you can be an atheist and a patriotic American"
>	- George Bush
>Proposition 9 (WA) & 2 (CO) were both set up by the xian funnymentalists that
>currently run the GOP.
> 
>	is that enough of a start?
> 
>	mark

" I dont think you can be an american if you dont believe
   in God" --  George Bush 

'nuff said :)

Colleen
From: bn566@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ward Chanley)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Pagan Religious Patterns
Date: 8 Nov 1992 17:39:27 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Re: Brianwashed by Starhawk and the 9 million dead...

WHY is this being debated at all?  Even ONE woman, witch, gay man
or whatever burned for Witchcraft is too many...

That's a little like the Aryan Nation saying Hitler only murdered
100,000 jews as opposed to 3 million; even ONE death because of
somebody else's intolerance is not to be tolerated.
-- 
You know life is an impossible scheme,
And love, an imperceptible dream...
     --- Pet Shop Boys
bn566@cleveland.freenet.edu (Ward Chanley)
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: the US elections...
Date: 13 Nov 92 02:27:36 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.guns
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.

altheimm@nextnet.csus.edu (Murray Altheim) writes:
>to these weapons. And this ignores the issue that many semi-automatics
>can be easily modified to become automatics; in fact, there are small
>pamphlets on how to do so.

I once saw a pamphlet that supposedly explained how to synthesize THC
starting with ingredients found in grocery stores and standard kitchen
tools.  Suppose that I'd bought it and found that the author had lied.
What recourse would I have?  Would the local consumer affairs office
take my case?  No?  Yet, Altheim is certain that the existence of a
pamphlet telling him how to do something illegal implies that the
direction provided work as promised.

I've got a standard offer for people who think that conversion of guns
sold as semi-autos in the US is "easy".  I'll pay $3k plus upto $2k
expenses to anyone who can demonstrate such a conversion.

I've been making that challenge publically for several years and have
had no takers.  I've had people offer me smuggled and stolen-from-govt
machine guns, and even "made from scratch" machine guns, but no
conversions.  $3k is way over the street price of illegal machine
guns, so if conversions are easy/common, I'd have found one by now.

>I'm not for an all-out ban, but I sure as hell would like to see it
>harder for people to get a gun without demonstrating responsibility
>and ability, and of course no criminal record or mental problems.

Ability is irelevant because we don't have any problems with
incompetent users; the problems are with INTENTIONAL misuse.  Apart
from hat EVERYONE would like to take guns away from the violent, and
it is dishonest to suggest otherwise.

The problem with gun control is that it can't hit its target.  It is
like looking for one's lost keys under the street light, where the
light is good, even though the keys were lost somewhere else.  Gun
control can't work because violent people in the US aren't buying
through the channels affected, so restricting those channels can't
affect their access.

>This would not stop the problem, but as things stand right now, they
>can't get a whole lot worse, especially in some parts of the country.

If it won't affect the problem, why should we do it?

We have lots of useful things we can do and a shortage of resources to
do them with.  Why should we waste them on gun control?

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: adams@mari.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Brynach ap Adda)
Subject: Re: help for a beginner?
Organization: St. Olaf College; Northfield, MN
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 05:38:43 GMT

In article <Bx584w.GEu@ddsw1.mcs.com> eshin@ddsw1.mcs.com (Eshin-Fun) writes:
>>>IO20393@MAINE.MAINE.EDU () writes:
>: I realize that you all probably get a lot of requests, but here's
>: another to add to the pile.  I have become very interested in
>: pagan religions (especially goddess worship) but have a very hard
>: time finding reading material.<<
>
>Read the "white Goddess" BY obert Graves
>or "The Great Mother" by Erich Neumann [trans Ralph Manheim]
>that should give you a good start

Boo-boo alert, though, in case no one else mentions it.
"The White Goddess" is a work of poetry, not scholarship.
It is not at all a reliable source for really understanding
ancient pagan religion, though many modern pagan groups have
drawn a lot of inspiration from it.

Read "Drawing Down the Moon" by Margot Adler.
Once you find that occult bookshop, try to find "Green Egg" magazine.
It's one of the better widely-circulated pagan magazines.
For Celtic and Arthurian stuff, look for the works of John and
Caitlin Matthews. More scholarly -- and not neo-pagan -- are the
writings of Dr. Anne Ross.

pob hwyl (all luck)

Brynach
From: GC.GGG@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gwyn Gordon)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: raising children
Date: 4 Nov 1992 15:43:05 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <1d7cvkINNdoh@manuel.anu.edu.au>,
Lubosh <Lubosh.Hanuska@anu.edu.au> writes:

>In article <1992Nov2.212844.11226@umr.edu> Angelia Sparrow,
>asparrow@mcs213f.cs.umr.edu writes:
>>Two folks come and say one parent does just as good a
>>job as two.

>I agree - this argument is mostly coming from those who for some reason
>are in the situation of a single parent. I don't blame them for defending
>themselves, but they shouldn't generalize their own situation. If some of
>those unfortunate have to raise their kid (s) alone, and do a good job, I
>honour them. But peole who are brave as single parents would be even
>better as real mums/dads in a traditional complete family (=M+F+kids).

Personally, I think the most important thing about this argument is
that it is utterly MOOT at this point in history.

The "traditional" family is no longer the norm, is no longer the
majority, and is no longer what kids and parents can count on. It's
time to move on, make other arrangements work, and stop talking
about how one is better and the other is worse. It's not productive
and it perpetuates a great myth that REAL families are "M+F+kids."
This is simply not true anymore. Period.

=gwyn
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: corun@access.digex.com (Corun MacAnndra)
Subject: Re: that goddamned Measure 9
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:53:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.185812.10956@radian.uucp> markbr%radian@natinst.com (markbr) writes:
>
>Measure 9 looks dead. Unfortunately, them suckers up in CO voted for measure 2.
>
>	mark

My sister is from Colorado, and I had a long talk with her before the
election about CO 2. She was going to vote yes, and I had her read the
bill to me. It was written in serious Weasel Speak. It was so twisted
that it made people think that voting no would allow MORE than eqaul
rights to gay/bi/lesbians. I was able to translate it for her and make
her see what voting yes would really do, so I managed at least one no
vote out there.

In speaking to a few lawyers I know, they seem to think that it'll get
challenged in court and be kicked out as unconstitutional. One can only
hope. Good luck, Colorado.

Bb,
Corun

-- 
===========================================================================
    Corun MacAnndra    |    My opinions *are* those of my boss, because
  Dark Horde by birth  |   he is me, and I am he, and we are all together.
    Moritu by choice   |                 Coo coo cachoob.
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: hart0037@student.tc.umn.edu ()
Subject: Re: rats
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:19:03 GMT

In article <2eq6TB2w165w@brewich.hou.tx.us> thistle@brewich.hou.tx.us 
(Thistle) writes:

>This is for the person who wrote about friends having problems with welts 
>on the arms.  This is because the claws are **sharp**.  Also, if they bed 
>their rat down in cedar, I believe a tiny amount of cedar oil will remain 
>on the claws, and will get under the skin causing irritation.  We have 
>less of a problem since we changed to pine bedding.  We had to, since it 

     I can't remember what my friends use for bedding, but will pass along
this info.  I've always used pine since 1)If you keep a rat in a dorm room
the smell of cedar gives you away--happily I'm beyond that stage of life
2) I don't know if it's true, but I've heard that rats themselves are
often allergic to cedar oil.
     BTW, have you ever heard of a rat *not* dying from cancer at 2-3
years of age?  Maybe I've just had unusual experiences, but I've known a
lot of rats.  Makes me wonder about the validity of carcinogen
testing--maybe rats are **too** susceptible.
     Thanks, Thistle!  I'm Amy. I'm not trying to be ultra-anonymous--I
just can't get this darn system to allow me to include my name with my
postings.  I'll keep bugging the guys who run the help line....
From: markbr%radian@natinst.com (markbr)
Subject: Re: Samhain & Spiral Dance
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:43:23 GMT
Organization: n.o.y.b

In article <BxB34H.31J@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> shaman@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (David Melton) writes:
>In article <1992Nov3.190143.3336@radian.uucp> markbr%radian@natinst.com (markbr) writes:
>>
>>The one or two group events that I've been to recently have been this way:
>>they didn't want to say, in advance, what was planned. Anyone out there
>>have any good *REASONS* for this? I'd feel more comfortable, and be more
>>able to attune with things if I had an idea of what was coming down the 
>>road, rather than running head-first.
>>
>
>	On Wednesday, I had a discussion with my wife about this.  She felt that
>leaving people clueless was a power-over, domination scheme that limited the
>participants' free will.  I can see her point, even if it was a little over-
>stated. 
>	I feel that letting the participants know everything that's planned
>takes away some of the wonder involved.  There are times, especially in guided
meditation, when the act of discovery is more important than what is discovered.
<munch>
>	I agree with my wife, that the people should be given some indication
>of the agenda.  The decision to participate in a ritual must be made by the
>individual, not forced upon them by the leaders. 
>	There is a fine line between being uninformed and being so informed that
>it ruins the experience.  The way we usually deal with it is to give the par-
>ticipants a general theme at the beginning of the evening. We then give a brief
>explanation of each section before we do it.  For example:  If the theme of the
>evening is personal power, we might tell the group, "Now we're going to do a
>guided meditation where you will discover the source of your inner power. After
>that, we'll be working with some of the symbols you see in the meditation."  
>This gives the group enough information to decide if they want to do the
>exercise. It also lets them know that the next activity builds on the first, so
>if they miss one, they can't do the other.

This would be just fine, and is something I could happily live with.

	mark
From: sj1s+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sherrianne M. Johnson)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: greetings
Date: 7 Nov 92 22:06:04 GMT
	<6689@m1.cs.man.ac.uk>
Organization: Junior, Art, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Chris Lilley writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.044744.2440@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
>dwindsor@nyx.cs.du.edu (David Windsor) writes: 
> 
>>Good news if your seem to be alergic to cats, chances you are only alergic
>>to cat dandruf (yes cats do have dandruf) if the cat is bathed about once
>>a week most alergy sufferers have no problems around the cat.
> 
>Bathe a cat? BATHE a cat? WEEKLY?
> 
>You are obviously talking about a different species from the rest of
>us ;-) 
> 
>That or you wear elbow length thick leather gloves routinely.

Heh...I agree.  The following ruckus would be...momentous.

However, to address the other point, I had been told all during my
treatments, allergy shots, etc, that I was not actually allergic to the
cat's hair and dander, but instead to an oil in the cat's *saliva*. 
That kinda makes the bath idea valid, but as soon as that cat grooms
itself sulkily in the corner, wham!  Allergic again.

Anyway, I'm not sure of my sources either....I should definitely do more
research on the subject.  It's one of decided interest to me.  :)

blessings,

sher
From: shaman@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (David Melton)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Samhain & Spiral Dance
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:55:28 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <1992Nov3.190143.3336@radian.uucp> markbr%radian@natinst.com (markbr) writes:
>
>The one or two group events that I've been to recently have been this way:
>they didn't want to say, in advance, what was planned. Anyone out there
>have any good *REASONS* for this? I'd feel more comfortable, and be more
>able to attune with things if I had an idea of what was coming down the 
>road, rather than running head-first.
>

	On Wednesday, I had a discussion with my wife about this.  She felt that
leaving people clueless was a power-over, domination scheme that limited the
participants' free will.  I can see her point, even if it was a little over-
stated. 
	I feel that letting the participants know everything that's planned
takes away some of the wonder involved.  There are times, especially in guided
meditation, when the act of discovery is more important than what is discovered.
Have you ever gone to the movies with someone who always told you what was going
to happen next?  It takes all the fun out of it.  
	I agree with my wife, that the people should be given some indication
of the agenda.  The decision to participate in a ritual must be made by the
individual, not forced upon them by the leaders. 
	There is a fine line between being uninformed and being so informed that
it ruins the experience.  The way we usually deal with it is to give the par-
ticipants a general theme at the beginning of the evening.  We then give a brief
explanation of each section before we do it.  For example:  If the theme of the
evening is personal power, we might tell the group, "Now we're going to do a
guided meditation where you will discover the source of your inner power.  After
that, we'll be working with some of the symbols you see in the meditation."  
This gives the group enough information to decide if they want to do the
exercise.  It also lets them know that the next activity builds on the first, so
if they miss one, they can't do the other.
	Deciding how much to tell the participants is tricky.  It's something
that comes with experience.  All too often, people tell a group what to do with-
out telling them why.  This is worse than not telling them anything.  Not only
do they have no choice, they have no idea why they are being forced to do some-
thing.

'Nuff said, hope it helps!

========  
 I(  )I     David A. Melton                      
 I \/ I     shaman@mentor.cc.purdue.edu                                        
 I /\ I     Priest, Our Lady of the Hourglass Wiccan Church  
 I(  )I     Blest be thee and thine!
========
-- 
========  
 I(  )I     David A. Melton                      
 I \/ I     shaman@mentor.cc.purdue.edu                                        
 I /\ I     Priest, Our Lady of the Hourglass Wiccan Church  
Newsgroups: alt.pagan,alt.magick
From: grimoire@byron.u.washington.edu (John Greer)
Subject: Magical Herbalism (was: Re: Santeria)
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:47:36 GMT

In article <6T7NTB5w165w@brewich.hou.tx.us> skye@brewich.hou.tx.us (Skye Stryder) writes:
> 
>I just picked up a Llewyn(sp) book on Magical Herbs as it was the only 
>thing I've found (thus far) for my private library that goes into any 
>detail on the magical uses of herbs.  The author, Scott Cunningham, seems 
>to project a Pollyanna-ish, don't threaten the fundie, attitude and 
>downplays (if not censors...I'm too unschooled at this point to know what 
>he's withholding) the darker uses of herbs.
> 
>Is this my imagination?  And if not, I'd be pleased to hear of any better 
>books on magical herbalogy that are out there.
> 
>Skye
>


No, it's not your imagination (IMHO, of course).  Cunningham's books can
be useful primers on some subjects, but (again IMHO) they are *extremely*
basic, as well as suffering from the fluffy-bunny syndrome you mention... 
Like far too much of what passes for magical instruction nowadays, they
display an extraordinarily limited sense of what magic's potential is.

If you're looking for something a little more advanced, Paul Beyerl's
_Master Book of Herbalism_ might be a good choice.  Also interesting is
C. L. Zalewski's _Herbs in Magic and Alchemy_, although this is primarily
useful for people in the Golden Dawn or related traditions.

Any other suggestions out there?  I've only been working with herbs for a 
couple of years, and there are probably a couple of dozen good books out      
there which I haven't come across yet...

-- John Michael Greer
   grimoire@u.washington.edu

Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: How the hell can religion and action not be related?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:00:24 GMT

markbr%radian@natinst.com (markbr) writes:
: >: 
: >: That's right. Christianity teaches that man has dominion over the earth and
: >: non-Christians are doomed to Christian Hell and all other religions are
: >: Christian Devil worship and a good Christian must seek to convert the world
: >: to the "Absolute Truth" of Christianity. When Jesus became blond, Europeans
: >: adopted Christianity as justification that they should rule the earth and
: >: all should be converted to European culture. "Convert or die" is the motto.
: >: Luke 14:26 is the justification. "Fair trade" meaning the right to rape.
: >
: >No, all Christianity does not teach that. The fundamentalist sects certainly
: >do so - many others do not.
: >
: >Bill
: 
: How about the RC's, and their financing toward the anti-choice candidates
: on the west coast? And then, of course, there's the Morons, er, Mormons
: (well, their beliefs *were* revealed by the angel Moroni...(B-)} ). 
: *sigh*

As I stated - some do. Your response has not shown that to be false.

Bill
From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: a prophecy come to pass . . . maybe
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 5 Nov 92 04:15:04 GMT

Maybe it has . . .

I just heard on the news that Perot and his group of hangers-on (I'm not
crazy about the guy, but I like him fine) are pondering perhaps forming
their own party.

Looks like the schism may have come to pass; TMM has been predicting this
along political lines for a while now, and you guys have stated it along
religious lines.  The two appear to have met nicely.  If Perot starts
his own party and it catches on (as all signs appear to indicate), the
Republicans will be left to the fundie-anti-everything crowd, and the
moderate conservatives will go for Perot.  

Religion and politics are rarely if ever separate; if this comes to
pass, it will amount to the religious schism you peepuhlz have been
predicting, I'm sure of it.

Blessings, huh?
Janis
From: bn566@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ward Chanley)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Pagan Religious Patterns
Date: 8 Nov 92 17:49:14 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Re: Starhawk and Dianic Bashing

Starhawk is the one matrifocal author whose work consistently
includes the Horned God/Sun God...her membership in a 
women's coven (in addition to a mixed coven) a decade or so 
ago when she was writing Spiral Dance opens her up to the 
ire of anti-feminist pagans?  I don't buy it.

And, just BTW, among Dianics, the refrain "Because Z says it"
is more common; which is just fine.  Most people are not 
articulate author types capable of waxing poetic about a 
given topic.  This is why books SELL.  The authors we 
buy say the things we believe.

If folk in the Women's Spirituality/Dianic branches of 
the Craft choose allegiance to authors you take issue with,
jumping up and down and screaming how "wrong wrong wrong"
they are surely won't change many minds.
-- 
You know life is an impossible scheme,
And love, an imperceptible dream...
     --- Pet Shop Boys
bn566@cleveland.freenet.edu (Ward Chanley)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: markbr%radian@natinst.com (markbr)
Subject: Re: Pagan Bumper Stickers
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:42:20 GMT
Organization: n.o.y.b

In article <BxC207.Jxr@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> lrfox@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (linda ream fox) writes:
>>I've seen "blessed Be" and "An it Harm None" bumperstickers at Sci-Fi cons...
>
>This does not necessarily mean that the person with the sticker isn't a pagan.
>I'm a pagan and it's cheaper to do SF cons than it is to pay $70 to go camp
>in a primitive campsite at a festival.  I'd venture to say that 98% of the 
>pagan bumperstickers at cons are on vehicles belonging to pagans.
>
>
>LRFOX
>
I agree. There *is* a self-selection criteria to who buys what bumper sticker
(and what button) and puts them on their car. Esp. when you haven't got a
lot to spend at a con, and buttons average $1.50 EACH, and bumper stickers
2-3 times that. Add to that the limited amount of *stuff* you're willing to
put on your bumper (and it's effect on its' resale value), and it tends to
be mostly pagans who buy them. Certainly, just about everyone ->I've<-
spoken to, that was wearing a pagan button *was*. The reole-players tend to
wear more obviously role-playing related buttons.

	mark

Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: swaim@owlnet.rice.edu (Michael Parks Swaim)
Subject: Re: Tipper Gore? (Re: the US elections...)
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 07:41:39 GMT

In article <2B005554.20979@news.service.uci.edu> cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
>As far as Madonna goes -- my jury is still out.  She comes across as a
>complete slut -- the typical casting of any woman with her own
>sexuality, and I'm not sure if that's my socialization of "Any woman
>with her own sex is a slut" talking, or whether or not Madonna is indeed
>working to portray just that slutty image.  I much prefer Mae West
>myself.  She was an older woman in her movies, generously shaped, and
>absolutely *imperturbable*.  I still remember the line she used when
>handing a fur stole (I know, I know) over to a hatcheck girl who
>remarked," Goodness, what big diamonds!"  She replied VERY calmly,
>"Honey, goodness had nothing to do with it."  She was not a Barbie doll
>OR a slut in the same vein as Madonna.
  I think that what you're trying to say is that Mae West was a very sexual
woman, while Madonna uses sex as a means to an end.


>and quite frankly I'd like to see just ONE female singer who has a well-
>developed sexuality who doesn't pose for pornie mags, just ONE who
>doesn't attempt to make money off of the slut stereotype.
  How 'bout Kate Bush?


-- 
Mike Swaim            | Canada will become the next world power
swaim@owlnet.rice.edu | and they will work to ENSLAVE all the nations
Disclamer: I lie      | of your planet. -Ricardo
Hastur Hastur Hastur Hastur Hastur Hastur Hastur Hasdtr yy['u [{}_+