HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: aus.religion
Subject: Re: Uniting Church
Date: 1 Oct 1992 07:36:29 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: schutz.ee.uts.edu.au

My email to simon didn't get through, so I'll post it here
------------------------------------------------------------

Hi

I thought your posting to aus.religion was very good. I am a friend of
Anthony Fisher (now a Catholic Priest and Dominican monk studying for his
PhD in Bioethics at Oxford) and he is a good man as well as a thorough 
writer. 

The only comment I would make is that I think its a mistake to fall
into the trap of some feminists by saying there is a group called "women"
who all have the same interest and voice. The same is definitely true
of "homosexuals", the vast majority of whom do not practise after teenage
years, nor think they should.

However, I think the unborn do have in this matter 
the same interest and only our voices.

-ricko

(I think from memory C.S.Lewis' article against women priests was
rubbish: it was based on conservatism (=finally sexism) rather than
a strong historical and theological argument, which I do think exists.
And women ministers is a completely different issue, there are no 
theological problems. From their TV interviews, its clear that many
anglican female priests do not believe in the priesthood as such anyway,
they just want to be ministers: perhaps a partial union with the Uniting C
Church is what they need, or perhaps two offices with equal pay and status.)
Newsgroups: aus.religion
From: markc@hydra.maths.unsw.EDU.AU ()
Subject: Re: Uniting Church
Organization: school of Mathematics UNSW
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 05:51:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.001334.21218@cs.su.oz.au>, jimu@orthanc.cs.su.oz.au
(James Uther) wrote:

> If you make abortion illegal, all you do is send it underground and kill the
> mothers as well. The problem is much deeper, and making the only realistic
> solution some of these women have illegal is not going to solve anything.
> Yes, abortion is sometimes abused. But legislating against it just to stop a 
> few, while the same legislation kills and maims may others is simply not on.

>>Does this mean that heroin and cocaine should be made legal as well? After
>>all, even though there is law prohibiting it's use, people still use,
>>abuse, and are abused by these drugs.

Absolutely. Pure heroin is physically harmelss, and only mildly adictive.
In fact for most of the history of the drug, Heroin was legal in Australia,
it was only banned after the war due to American pressure. Cocaine is more
harmful, but alcohol and tobacco are far more dangerous and they are legal.
hypocrisy abounds in this area.

Mark C.
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: aus.religion
Subject: Re: Uniting Church
Date: 28 Sep 92 12:28:23 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: schutz.ee.uts.edu.au
Keywords: abortion , NSW

dsolly@ecr.mu.oz.au (David_James SOLLY) writes:

>The Synod of the Uniting Church of New South Wales has , according to
>the melbourne AGE , affirmed abortion as a woman`s right - giving no
>restrictions as to what stage the pregnancy was at , basically an open
>season ...

It is also in the Herald today. I am shocked too.

Mother Therasa said she didn't believe a society could crumble any
further than when mothers would freely choose to kill their 
children. I have a friend who is a Doctor, and he says that he
often sees the dilemma in patients who come to him, in making
what is too often a choice between a career (i.e. money & "standard
of living") and a human life. Astounding. 

I hope we can all pray for God's grace on women and men everywhere,
in response to this. 

-ricko
Newsgroups: aus.religion
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: aus.religion
Subject: Re: Uniting Church
Date: 30 Sep 92 07:10:46 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: schutz.ee.uts.edu.au

chrisa@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (C. G. Albone) writes:

>In article <1992Sep29.094056.23054@cs.su.oz.au> jimu@orthanc.cs.su.oz.au (James Uther) writes:
>>In article <ricko.717740438@ee.uts.EDU.AU>, ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe) writes:
>>
>>I really don't think the law knows what it's job is. However, it has decided
>>that abortion is a moral issue for the woman concerned. The law, you will notice,
>>has not legislated against sex before marrige.

No I didn't write that! please edit carefully, otherwise no one knows who
is saying what.

...

> Laws start to become oppressive when people start basing them on moral
>stances. 

Are you kidding? I don't understand what you are proposing: immoral laws,
or arbitrary laws, or democratic laws, or expert consensus laws, or
barrel-of-a-gun laws? It is illegal to murder grannies because murder is wrong,
not because it is poor taste or uneconomic or whatever. Some laws are
just convenience (ie which side of the road to drive on), and somethings
that are bad are not legislated against because of unenforceability
or worse side-effects, but having moral laws is civilization, a good thing.

...

>When it comes to abortion, the wise choise is to leave the law such that a woman
>has a choise, so that women are not driven into backyards and into toilets to
>abort with the aid of a coathanger. 

Who drives them, or what drives them? Abortion is not a natural instict,
so it would be interesting to get some statistics on why women have abortions.

>It is an open philosophical, moral and 
>religious question as to whether a foetus is a person. Indeed it is an open
>question as to what constitutes personhood at all. Not all people are christian,
>not all people are bound to the various belief systems that christians hold. It
>looks to me that the question is primarily a moral one, and one that cannot 
>simply be solved. It is not a question for law to decide.

The Good Samaritan did not walk past the man in need and say "he was robbed
by people with other moral systems, so it would be judgemental and intrusive
of me to force my values on them, when they must have surely had very good 
reason to leave him for dead". No, he saw that this man would die, and
helped him. It was the others who thought him a non-person, or didn't want
their acts to compromise their religious purity. {I`ll certainly
agree that in abortion there are two wounded people, the mother and her
child, both of whom require help.}

-ricko
Newsgroups: aus.religion
From: chrisa@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (C. G. Albone)
Subject: Re: Responsibility & blame (was: Changing nature of God)
Organization: /etc/organization
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 08:05:57 GMT

In article <c9037395.718004897@jupiter.newcastle.edu.au> c9037395@jupiter.newcastle.edu.au (Helen Lee) writes:
>>>Also: * responsibility & blame are 2 different concepts.
>>This is true, but the way things work normally, is that we blame a person
>>who is responsible for a particular act or situation. 
>
>Yes, & that is exactly why I made the point I did.
>There are at least 2 usages of the word 'responsible':
>1) Who's responsible? --> Who's to blame?
>2) Who's responsible? --> Who's in charge?

This may be the case. But when it comes to managerial decisions the entity that
is in charge is also the entity that is held to blame when a particular plan
that he or she has divised does not work. Ok, it is the case that this in itself
can be unfair at times, but God is somewhat different... God does run the joint
as you say, so it naturally collapses that when God's system screws up (that is
when freddy sins), and God knows that it is the case that the system will screw
up (as a consequence of designing the laws by which the systems runs, and, we
hope, knowing what the effects of those laws are.), then responsibility in the
sense of case (1) will fall back on God. Even if God doesnt know the effects of
the laws that God has designed, it would still be valid to hold that God
responsible, as in case(1) for the screwups that happen as a result. 
>
>When we normally think of bad things happening (the famine in Somoa, say),
>we may think (1) about God. ie. God could have stopped this; God's to blame.
>Yes, God has the power to stop it, but he chooses not to AT THIS TIME.
>If God allows us to sin at this time, to let us see how bad sin really is,
>then wouldn't it just defeat the purpose if God were to intervene at times
>of war/famine/etc. to SAVE US FROM THE CONSEQUENCES OF OUR ACTIONS?
And what does Jesus do?
>	Instead, God will wait patiently until the RIGHT TIME for JC to
>return to earth & set things straight.
>
>Yes, God is in charge.
>No, he is not to blame.
I am not sure about this, maybe the way out of all of this is to avoid making
moral claims about God, or better yet recognise that all we can do is try
and predicate of God things that we can understand, and that because God is
so huge, this will necessarily lead to contradictions in the definition, or
a definition that does not describe a wide enough part of God. Effectively,
we should distinguish between the idol of god that we have to form so that
we can get any sort of grasp on Deity, and Deity itself.
>
---
Chris.
Newsgroups: aus.religion
From: c9037395@jupiter.newcastle.edu.au (Helen Lee)
Subject: Definition of sin (was: Changing nature of God)
Organization: Uni of Newcastle, Australia
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 05:24:50 GMT

>Some things that have been concidered sinful in the past are not concidered so
>now. Some things that Protestants concider sinful Catholics don't. Of course
>there are lots of things that Protestants and Catholics concider sinful, but
>I guess I have problems with "God's Laws" when i can see so the marks of 
>humankind so strong in them. Faith, of course, is the response, but in that
>response, it would seem that Christians are on no better ground than Jews,
>Samaritans, Zorastrians, Sihks, Muslims, or any other religion that you would
>care to think of.

Fallacy: Everyone who calls themselves a Xian is a Xian.
Fallacy: All churches are infallable; they are God on earth.
(or)   : Everthing 'Xian' churches teach is what the Xian God really says.
Fallacy: The most popular one must be the right one.

>i like the .sig :)
Thanx. Here's the picture to go with it:

			+---------------+
			|		|
			|   VAX m/c	|
			|		|
	++		|		|
	++--------------+_______________+------------------c

	^terminal					   ^power point

I saw Michael Palin on the Midday Show 2day too!

Cheers,
Helen
--
My .sig by H. Lee. Brackets Miss, brackets. This .sig goes as follows and
begins now. All VAXes are thin at one end, much much thicker in the middle
and then thin again at the far end. That is my .sig, it is mine, and belongs
to me and I own it, and what it is too.            c9037395@cs.newcastle.edu.au
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: aus.religion
Subject: Re: Uniting Church
Date: 29 Sep 92 04:20:38 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
NNTP-Posting-Host: schutz.ee.uts.edu.au

jimu@orthanc.cs.su.oz.au (James Uther) writes:

>Talk to any doctor who was a student at the time abortion was illegal. Talk to
>them about working in the obstectrics and gynacology (sp?) as an intern.
>They will tell you about waiting around all day untill sometime past 11 pm,
>and then treating a steady stream of young women who had had backyard abortions
>that day, and had managed to ruin their insides. They would come in bleeding,
>hurt and infected. Some of them would die. Few of them would have another child.

A harsher person than I would say that it is not the law's job to make
killing safe and convenient. My GP father (an atheist with no Catholic background) 
worked for many years when abortion was illegal, and I have never heard him 
make these complaints.

>If you make abortion illegal, all you do is send it underground and kill the
>mothers as well. The problem is much deeper, and making the only realistic
>solution some of these women have illegal is not going to solve anything.
>Yes, abortion is sometimes abused. But legislating against it just to stop a 
>few, while the same legislation kills and maims may others is simply not on.

I didn't propose making it illegal. I asked everyone to pray for grace.

-ricko
Newsgroups: aus.religion
From: jimu@orthanc.cs.su.oz.au (James Uther)
Subject: Re: Uniting Church
Reply-To: jimu@orthanc.cs.su.oz.au (James Uther)
Organization: Basser Dept of Computer Science, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 00:13:34 GMT

Talk to any doctor who was a student at the time abortion was illegal. Talk to
them about working in the obstectrics and gynacology (sp?) as an intern.
They will tell you about waiting around all day untill sometime past 11 pm,
and then treating a steady stream of young women who had had backyard abortions
that day, and had managed to ruin their insides. They would come in bleeding,
hurt and infected. Some of them would die. Few of them would have another child.

If you make abortion illegal, all you do is send it underground and kill the
mothers as well. The problem is much deeper, and making the only realistic
solution some of these women have illegal is not going to solve anything.
Yes, abortion is sometimes abused. But legislating against it just to stop a 
few, while the same legislation kills and maims may others is simply not on.

I applaude the uniting church in this decision. This, combined with its
support of women ministers, gay congregations, well thought out social action,
and other areas, confirm its position as the most caring and relevant church
in Australia today. And i'm sure Jesus agrees with me.

	james
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: aus.religion
Subject: Re: Xianity & 'Xianity' (was: Changing nature of God)
Date: 4 Oct 92 04:14:52 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
NNTP-Posting-Host: schutz.ee.uts.edu.au

Could you not use "Xianity" please. It is offensive. 

-ricko
Newsgroups: aus.films
From: ck@iconix.oz.au (Chris Karadaglis)
Subject: Re: Universal Soldier
Organization: Iconix Pty Ltd (World Headquarters)
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 00:17:56 GMT

In <ricko.717764229@ee.uts.EDU.AU> ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe) writes:

>Starring:

>Claude van DammeIwishIwasanactor
>Adolphus Lugren
>A woman
>Other people to get killed.

>Plot:

>These two wacky guys just won't give up!

>Buildings get blown up. Bullets fly. People
>run around are are hoisted through the air.
>Claude eats a big meal. Claude catches a bus. 
>Claude visits his mother. 

I'd see it for Mr Lugren alone. Van DammeIwishIwasanactor is probably the
only thing that'll put me off seeing it. Check out "Red Scorpion" for another
mindless, reasonably plotless and pointless film with Lugren.

Watching mindless films requires one to be in a mindless state. Try it
and see...

Shckwish!

Xref: sparky aus.films:599 soc.singles:26853 soc.couples:3865
From: andrewf@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Andrew Fong)
Newsgroups: aus.films,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Film suggestions welcomed
Keywords: Guy wants suggestion on film
Date: 30 Sep 92 01:28:03 GMT
Followup-To: aus.films
Distribution: aus
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32

dld@cs.monash.edu.au (Film date) writes:


>   Hello, humanity.   I am looking for a film to take a fairly new lady
>friend of mine to.  So far, we've only had a couple of lunches and a phone
>call or 2 or 3.  Something with either some "humanitarian" meaning or comedy
>would be nice.  I am inclined not to opt for an "adventure" film at this
>stage.  We both like to laugh, and seem at this stage to have a similar outlook
>on the world.  "Wayne's World" would be good, but she's already seen it.

You could try House Sitter with Steve Martin and Goldy Hawn. A good comedy
with a tiny bit of drama in it. Lethal Weapon is heavy on the action but has
alot of comedy as the story is quite thin.

Alternately you could try a Night on Earth, the new Jim Jarmush ( I think
thats how you spell it). I haven't seen it yet but he also did Mystery Train,
Down by Law and a few other low budget alternate flicks.

>   Yes, I might be posting this on behalf of a friend :-) .
Yeah, shure !!!!!!


						Andrew
From: s914311@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Mr Some-one)
Newsgroups: aus.films
Subject: Universal Soldier
Keywords: UniSol
Date: 6 Oct 92 06:32:49 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre
NNTP-Posting-Host: minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au

I have seen Universal Soldier.  Don't bother.  It is toooo corney to be taken
seriously.  If you are into second rate films, then take this on.
Although, some (I did say 'some') of the action seens are good, on the whole,
they did not make up for the rest.
See it just to give the makers money so that they can go to movie school!!
-- 
 ----------------------------------------------------------
|John Oliver                   |      Life is just a      |
|s914311@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au  |    temporary state of    |
|+61 3 789-4013                |        confusion.        |
From: s925892@numbat.cs.rmit.OZ.AU (Jason Pouflis)
Newsgroups: aus.films
Subject: Re: Blade Runner '92
Date: 25 Sep 92 08:16:49 GMT
Distribution: cs

Sorry I must have missed some posts,

Is this the Complete version,
            ^^^^^^^^

containing the Scooby Doo scene?

I hear the ending is pretty gruesome and is supposed to
have a rolling shot of electric road kills. poor froggy.
From: dudleyp@anl.oz (Paul Dudley)
Newsgroups: aus.films
Subject: Re: Twin Peaks fans look here!
Summary: Twin Peaks
Date: 2 Oct 92 03:47:30 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: ANL Ltd (The Australian National Line)

In article <9840@kralizec.zeta.org.au>, andrewf@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Andrew Fong) writes:
> schuller@mullauna.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Wayne Schuller) writes:
> 
> Ditto I loved the series but small minded tv execs canned the show without 
> giving it a chance. Bit like how channel 9 handled Star Trek TNG and wondered
> why it didn't rate highly.
> 
> Most video stores have the three series on video tape that you can rent.
> Mind you its pretty intense viewing to get through all the episodes and return
> it. I haven't been to any video sales so I don't know if you can buy it 
> exrental.
> 
> E entertainment covered the Twin Peaks festival which had various actors from
> the series and weird events like log races. It was held at Snowqualmie where
> the exterior shots were done.
> 
> >	One more.   : Does anyone have a complete listing of all the books and  other merchandise available from the show? 
> 
> >	So if you think it is one of the best television series' ever made then why communicate with others who do! (There aren't many of us!)
> 

The only related merchandise I have seen are the soundtracks to the TV series
and the forthcoming movie , and the "Diary of Laura Palmer" book . The movie
soundtrack is interesting , but I will probably enjoy it more after seeing
the movie . The Diary of Laura Palmer is more relevant to the movie also ,
even though it came out at the same time as the TV series .

Hopefully we'll be able to get another movie or TV movie out of David Lynch
to wrap up the series and tie all the loose ends together , as the last
episode asked more questions than it answered . 

The third series on video ends with the arrival of Wyndham Earle in Twin      
Peaks . I haven't seen the fourth series anywhere .

What state in the U.S. is Snowqualmie in ?

If you like Twin Peaks , make sure you watch Wild At Heart . Twice .
The first time to enjoy the movie , the second to take everything in .
That's when you start to notice all the "Twin Peaks" qualities coming
thru .

Paul Dudley

  

-- 
 Paul Dudley   ( Dude )       			Phone:	(03) 869-5303
 Information Technology ( Facilities Management )                                NET:   dudleyp@anl.oz.au
 A.N.L. Limited , 432 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria , Australia . 3004
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: aus.films
Subject: Universal Soldier
Date: 29 Sep 92 10:57:09 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: schutz.ee.uts.edu.au

Starring:

Claude van DammeIwishIwasanactor
Adolphus Lugren
A woman
Other people to get killed.

Plot:

These two wacky guys just won't give up!

Buildings get blown up. Bullets fly. People
run around are are hoisted through the air.
Claude eats a big meal. Claude catches a bus. 
Claude visits his mother. 

Main weakness:

Most of the costume budget seems to have been
spent elsewhere.

Main strength:

Claude's zany onscreen personality.  

The film is enjoyable despite high production values.
Most people don't realise it is based on Paul Cox's
original screenplay: titled "A Woman Sings".

-ricko
From: nikita@cherokee.EBay.Sun.COM (Nikita Motalygo)
Newsgroups: aus.films
Subject: Re: Forthcoming films
Date: 29 Sep 1992 00:57:16 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: nikita@cherokee.EBay.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: cherokee.ebay.sun.com


	I saw singles this weekend. It's basically about several single people
who are looking for relationships. There's no explicit sex. I enjoyed the movie
although it's not one I'll remember 6 months from now (I rate "good" movies
by how memorable they are).

							Nikita 

Newsgroups: aus.films
From: stevea@vast.unsw.edu.au (Steve Avery)
Subject: Re: Universal Soldier
Organization: VaST Lab, CS & E, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 02:57:02 GMT

Chris Karadaglis <ck@iconix.oz.au> sez:

   I'd see it for Mr Lugren alone. Van DammeIwishIwasanactor is probably
   the only thing that'll put me off seeing it. Check out "Red Scorpion"
   for another mindless, reasonably plotless and pointless film with
   Lugren. 

	Actually, I would have thought "The Punisher" would have been
the best mindless/plotless/pointless film with Dolph in it.

	-steve
Xref: sparky aus.films:600 soc.singles:26858 soc.couples:3866
From: andrewf@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Andrew Fong)
Newsgroups: aus.films,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Film suggestions welcomed
Keywords: Guy wants suggestion on film
Date: 30 Sep 92 02:42:06 GMT
Followup-To: aus.films
Distribution: aus
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32


dld@cs.monash.edu.au (Film date) writes:


>   Hello, humanity.   I am looking for a film to take a fairly new lady
>friend of mine to.  So far, we've only had a couple of lunches and a phone
>call or 2 or 3.  Something with either some "humanitarian" meaning or comedy
>would be nice.  I am inclined not to opt for an "adventure" film at this
>stage.  We both like to laugh, and seem at this stage to have a similar outlook
>on the world.  "Wayne's World" would be good, but she's already seen it.

You could try House Sitter with Steve Martin and Goldy Hawn. A good comedy
with a tiny bit of drama in it. Lethal Weapon is heavy on the action but has
alot of comedy as the story is quite thin.

Alternately you could try a Night on Earth, the new Jim Jarmush ( I think
thats how you spell it). I haven't seen it yet but he also did Mystery Train,
Down by Law and a few other low budget alternate flicks.

>   Yes, I might be posting this on behalf of a friend :-) .
Yeah, shure !!!!!!


						Andrew


*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
|                  Andrew Fong -- itinerent student and programmer           |
|                             andrewf@kralizec.zeta.org.au                   |
*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
|     "I got a call and he said to me, " YOUR SONG - GIVE IT TO ME NOW! ".   |
|      I said, ' Yes, sir. '  That's why my body's still working."           |
|                       George Thorogood, on Arnold Shwarzenegger            |
|                          using his song "Bad to the Bone" in               |
|                          'Terminator 2'.                                   |
*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*