HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ogg@physics.carleton.ca
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Wording of Colorado Amenment #2
Date: 18 Nov 92 13:30:39 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Physics/CRPP Carleton University

I probably missed it cos I only started looking at this newsgroup to find out
what I could about Colorado's amendment #2, so...
Does anyone have the precise wording of the amendment as it appeared on the
ballot?
post or e-mail.

Thanks,
	Mike

  +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
  |  Michael Ogg           |  e-mail:    ogg@physics.carleton.ca      |
  |     currently at:      |      or:    ogg@lns62.tn.cornell.edu     |
  |  Wilson Lab            |                                          |
  |  Cornell University    |  voice:     (607) 255-4882               |
  |  Ithaca, NY 14853      |  fax:       (607) 255-8062               |
  +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: gsmith@clio.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality is normal?
Keywords: homosexuality
Organization: IWR, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 19:27:28 GMT

In article <BxsErx.239@cmptrc.lonestar.org>
jspence@cmptrc.lonestar.org (John Spence) writes:

 Homosexuality has always struck me as a perfectly normal
>capacity of the human animal, something anybody could no and many people
>have done, as adolescents know. Because of the very real horrors of
>homophobic persecution, there has been a frantic search for some
>biological explanation fro this normal activity.

Translation:  I am neither a Kinsey 0 or 6, and for ideological
reasons I prefer to ignore the evidence that other people are.

>However flimsy the evidence, biological theories make heterosexual
>males feel safely "normal" and certifiably different from homosexual
>men, who can in turn feel safely "not at fault" for doing what feels
>normal.

Translation:  let's hope this ad hominem argument will keep me from
having to argue using actual facts.  If I am really lucky, nobody
will notice the huge proportion of homosexuals who hate the idea
of biological determination.

>    Theories of biological determinism may be P.C. and may relieve
>adults who have already declared their sexual preference for life, but
>these either/or theories create therapeutic problems for young people
>who discover their normal and universal homosexual capacity before they
>have gotten comfortable with their normal and universal heterosexual
>capacity.

Translation: maybe if I call it PC people will not notice that it
*isn't* especially PC, and swallow all this ad hominem.

I would have discussed his actual arguments, but he didn't give any.

-- 
     Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/IWR/Ruprecht-Karls University 
               gsmith@kalliope.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de
From: tmike@cmptrc.lonestar.org (T. Mike Howeth)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Don't Promote it as a lifestyle
Date: 20 Nov 92 02:50:09 GMT
Organization: CompuTrac Inc., Richardson TX

In article <BxxAvH.4tF@acsu.buffalo.edu> v115r4q5@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Perry M Jowsey) writes:
|
|   I understand that homosexuals in today's society face widespread discrimina-
|tion and abuse, but instead of taking a hint, it seems to make the gay commun-
|ity want to be in limelight even more.  America does not wish to see gay pro-
|testors fighting for gay rights and preaching their platform to those who give
|them the time.  While physically assaulting a homosexual may be wrong, these 
|acts are only encouraged by the homosexuals themselves.  If they would take the
|time to realize that their way of living is wrong and more importantly that 
|society doesn't want to hear it falsely declared a lifestyle, they would realize
|the way to combat this discrimination is to adopt a normal kind of lifestyle and
|stop corrupting others.  
| See Old Testament, Leviticus 20:13

Fuck off, pussybreath.  You don't seem to understand :  

	We do not give a fuck what you think!

	We are HERE

	We have ALWAYS been here

	We will CONTINUE to be here

	We will continue to be IN YOUR FACE

And most important:

	WE will continue to laugh at YOUR kind's bad taste in clothes

:)

--
tmike@cmptrc.lonestar.org                                               __
"Whoever said 'getting there is half the fun'                           \/
    has never ridden in a class 8 probe!" - K'Ehleyr
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Letter from OCA post-election: real or hoax?
Reply-To: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:00:34 GMT

twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:

>In article <1992Nov13.011456.16201@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> ric@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Graffiti 404-972-4999) writes:

>>Based on the generalized advice in the last paragraph instead of an
>>acctual address or phone number, I feel this may be a hoax letter sent
>>out to look as if it came from the OCA, in order to further escalate
>>the fight... but with these folks, you never know. How stupid is stupid?

>That's what I suspect too, and I think it escalates this war to
>frightening and dangerous levels.  I do not look forward to waking up
>tomorrow morning and discovering that a Claymerish character has
>elected to distribute baby-rape pamphlets under the name of GLAAD.

>If this can't be won on the basis that the OCA's arguments are clearly
>mosquito shit, then perhaps we can't win in Oregon.

"Black propoganda" like this has been going around for *quite* some time.
Shortly after Eric Dahmer hit the news, there was a poster up all over
Portland that was in the same style as OCA posters, and had the correct
contact numbers and addreses on it. It *praised* Dahmer for killing homosexuals.

No one on *any* side ever admitted to it. Or to the followup offering
$10,000 for the person responsible for the first poster "dead or alive".

And I've seen a couple of other things recently. One was almost certainly
a hoax. The other may or may not have been. 

And some of the folk who support the OCA *are* that scary. I called the
voicemail numberr of the local "Populist Party" presidential candidate.
It was also the voicemail number for the local KKK! And the message was
at least as outrageous as any of the hoaxes, only *these* folks *are* 
serious!

-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/51	 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)
Xref: sparky alt.politics.homosexuality:7478 soc.motss:48700
From: buckmr@rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality,soc.motss
Subject: new ROTC policy includes threat of refund
Date: 20 Nov 92 16:36:13 GMT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA25387; Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:36:48 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA06718; Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:36:40 -0800
X-Received: from localhost (marcus.its.rpi.edu) by rpi.edu (4.1/SMHUB39);
	id AA17797; Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:36:29 EST for soc.motss.usenet@decwrl.dec.com
X-Received: by localhost (AIX 3.1/UCB 5.61/AIXV3-SUB16) via SMTP;
	id AA80341; Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:36:23 -0500 for gaynet@gallifrey.kent.edu
X-To: soc.motss.usenet, alt.politics.homosexuality.usenet
X-Cc: gaynet@gallifrey.kent.edu


From USA TODAY:


NAVY DEFENDS ROTC POLICY:
   Navy officials defend a new policy of requiring ROTC cadets to
sign a sworn statement that says they could be dicharged and
forced to refund scholarship money if they are found to be
homosexual. Reports on the policy came Thursday as President-elect
Clinton stands by his pledge to lift the military ban on gays. The
policy is required of 7,000 cadets at 66 colleges and
universities.                                                     

---
RON BUCKMIRE, 11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180-3735. ``D.C. in 93!''
vox:(518)-276-8910 fax:(518)-276-6920 buckmr@rpi.edu buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet
``The first thing you do is forget that I'm Black. Second, you must never forget
that I'm Black.'' -Pat Parker, "For the white person who wants to be my friend"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: lyle_sweeney@mentorg.com
Subject: The OCA cannot be ignored
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 01:04:36 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics Corporation

 Springfield Boycott in Oregon

Despite the failure of Ballot Measure Nine, Oregon still has the nation's first
anti-gay ordinance, which passed earlier in the year in the logging town of
Springfield.  Measure 20-08 bans laws that protect gays and lesbians from
discrimination, as well as prevents the city of Springfield from "facilitating"
homosexuality.

Loretta Neet, local sponsor of the measure for the Oregon Citizen's Alliance
(OCA), claims that the ban has had no adverse effects to Springfield.  Scott
Lively, OCA Spokesperson, claims that Springfield has experienced a growth
spurt since passage of Measure 20-08.  Springfield's Mayor Bill Morrisette
claims that the initial outrage over the measure has subsided, and that they
receive only letters of praise for their pioneering work in discrimination. Lon
Mabon, Executive Director of the OCA, has pledged to export their anti-gay
legislation to neighboring states, including Washington and California.

Both Loretta and Mayor Bill have stated that they just want their little city
to be left alone, so they can administer their hate laws away from the glare of
the media.  Please join the rest of Oregon in continuing to remind Springfield
that legislated hatred will not be tolerated.  If you have the opportunity to
visit Springfield, it lies at the southern end of the Willamette valley, 2
hours south of Portland and just across the freeway from the far more tolerate
city of Eugene.  Stores that honor diversity will have signs in their windows.
If you can't visit but would like to write, their addresses are:
Mayor Bill Morrisette
City of Springfield
225 5th Avenue
Springfield, Oregon  97477

Loretta Neet, New Membership Director
Scott Lively, Spokesperson
Lon Mabon, Executive Director
c/o The Oregon Citizen's Alliance
9150 SW Pioneer Ct.
Wilsonville, Oregon  97070
503/682-0653


Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: markw@meaddata.com (Mark Wasson)
Subject: Re: What about OUR rights
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 19:08:30 GMT
Distribution: na

In article <By6Iqo.Czn@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v115r4q5@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Perry M Jowsey) writes:
|> 
|>   There has been alot of talk recently about the rights of homosexuals, and this
|> debate has included the consideration of allowing homosexuals in the military.  
|> With all this talk, however, people are ignoring what is really important- the 
|> rights of American men who choose a normal and decent type of lifestyle.  If 
|> America gives in to the voice of the minority and grants homosexuals equal 
|> rights and even allows them to enlist in the service, then America will have 
|> ignored the rights of the majority.  Just think of the man in the Navy who now 
|> is forced to shower with a man who is homosexual.

Gays and straights have been showering together probably as long as
there have been showers.  Gym class, health clubs, college dorms,
campgrounds and military showers.  People are often thown into
situations where they shower with others who may have other sexual
orientations.  It goes on every day all across the country and
generally without incident.

Sexual harrassment and misconduct between gays and straights, between
men and women (the Tailhook scandal), should be appropriately punished
no matter the sex or sexual orientation of the perpetrators.

Letting gays stay in the military will not deprive American men of
their rights to "choose a normal and decent type of lifestyle."  No
one will try to convert straight men away from their lifestyle.  It
probably wouldn't be possible anyway.

|> issue.  It is evident in a recent Newsweek poll in which less than half of those
|> polled think gays should be allowed in the military.

Polls used to support keeping blacks and whites separate.  Majority
does not equal morality.

|>   Assuming that the homosexual lifestyle is normal, the men and women of this 
|> country realize that we do not live in a nation that caters to special interests
|> or alternative preferences.  We must protect the rights of the majority of citi-
|> zens and hold what is morally right and just.  The  message is finally loud and
|> clear.

No one is asking to be catered to.  The goal is equal rights, not
special rights.  And that to me would be creating what is morally
right and just.

Mark
From: v115r4q5@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Perry M Jowsey)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: What about OUR rights
Date: 23 Nov 92 17:18:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


  There has been alot of talk recently about the rights of homosexuals, and this
debate has included the consideration of allowing homosexuals in the military.  
With all this talk, however, people are ignoring what is really important- the 
rights of American men who choose a normal and decent type of lifestyle.  If 
America gives in to the voice of the minority and grants homosexuals equal 
rights and even allows them to enlist in the service, then America will have 
ignored the rights of the majority.  Just think of the man in the Navy who now 
is forced to shower with a man who is homosexual.
  With  this in mind, America has realized that thehomosexual lifestyle is not to 
homosexual lifestyle is not to be condoned.  Even with a president who had pro-
claimed he was in favor of homosexual rights, America is sending a message loud 
and clear which is causing Bill Clinton to be a little less outspoken on this 
issue.  It is evident in a recent Newsweek poll in which less than half of those
polled think gays should be allowed in the military.
  Assuming that the homosexual lifestyle is normal, the men and women of this 
country realize that we do not live in a nation that caters to special interests
or alternative preferences.  We must protect the rights of the majority of citi-
zens and hold what is morally right and just.  The  message is finally loud and
clear.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: buckmr@rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire)
Subject: POLL: Newsweek shows support for lifting gay military ban drops
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:54:35 EST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA22943; Mon, 23 Nov 92 13:55:18 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA10673; Mon, 23 Nov 92 13:55:13 -0800
X-Received: from client.its.rpi.edu (vccsouth14.its.rpi.edu) by rpi.edu (4.1/SMHUB39);
	id AA09311; Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:54:39 EST for alt.politics.homosexuality.usenet@decwrl.dec.com
X-Received: by client.its.rpi.edu (4.1/SUB16);
	id AA07621; Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:54:38 EST for activ-l@umcvmb.bitnet
X-To: noglstp@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov
X-Cc: alt.politics.homosexuality.usenet, qn@queernet.org, activ-l@umcvmb.bitnet



   WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sixty-one percent of Americans surveyed say
President-elect Clinton should delay his promise to lift
restrictions on gays in the military, Newsweek reported Saturday. 

   Support for the proposal to permit homosexuals in the armed
forces dropped from 59 percent in August to 48 percent currently,
said the magazine's Nov. 30 issue, which goes on sale Monday.  
   That's the first time since 1977 that support to end the ban on
homosexuals in the military has dropped below 50 percent, Newsweek
said.  
   More than half of those surveyed, 56 percent, did say gays
should be permitted to serve in a presidential cabinet. 
   The Gallup Organization interviewed 764 adults Nov. 19-20 for
the Newsweek poll, which has a sampling error of plus or minus four
percent.

---
RON BUCKMIRE
The Lyrics Transcription Project: Cocteau Twins Division, section 319
11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180-3735
vox:(518)-276-8910 fax:(518)-276-6920 buckmr@rpi.edu buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: kraig@athena.cs.uga.edu (Kraig Count)
Subject: Re: What about OUR rights
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 04:59:04 GMT

In article <By6Iqo.Czn@acsu.buffalo.edu> v115r4q5@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Perry M Jowsey) writes:
>With all this talk, however, people are ignoring what is really important- the 
>rights of American men who choose a normal and decent type of lifestyle.  If 
>America gives in to the voice of the minority and grants homosexuals equal 
>rights and even allows them to enlist in the service, then America will have 
>ignored the rights of the majority.  Just think of the man in the Navy who now 
>is forced to shower with a man who is homosexual.

Huh?!  Well, at least he is honest in his bigoty (sp).
How can anybosy stand up and claim to be suporting anybodys right, while
at the same time be advocating the removal of anothers rights?

BTW, what is wrong with having a homosexual and a heterosexual
taking a shower at the same time?  I suspect that this person has been 
listening to the very false sterotypes again. *sigh*

I supose that I should be more upset by this message. But it is just
such a stupid arguement that I am left spechless. *sigh*

I just can't comprehend of anybody being so narrowminded and
stupid.  Granted I am probebly hopelessly naive, but I just
can't understand it.

Kraig
From: jspence@cmptrc.lonestar.org (John Spence)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Homosexuality is normal?
Keywords: homosexuality
Date: 16 Nov 92 02:26:21 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: CompuTrac Inc., Richardson TX

I was reading an article by Frank Pittman, M.D, in the Jan/Feb 1992 _The
Family Therapy Networker_ entitled "It's not my Fault" and I thought
that it might be interesting to all the readers of this newsgroup.

    "There are efforts afoot to blame all of human behavior on some
biological factor outside our control, even one's choice of sexual
partners. Homosexuality has always struck me as a perfectly normal
capacity of the human animal, something anybody could no and many people
have done, as adolescents know. Because of the very real horrors of
homophobic persecution, there has been a frantic search for some
biological explanation fro this normal activity. From time to time a
researcher will come up with a finding that might hint that homosexual
males are biologically different from heterosexual males. The latest
discovery is that some gay men lack some cells straight men have in
their hypothalamus, an area that is connected with sexual
aggressiveness. However flimsy the evidence, biological theories make
heterosexual males feel safely "normal" and certifiably different from
homosexual men, who can in turn feel safely "not at fault" for doing
what feels normal.
    Theories of biological determinism may be P.C. and may relieve
adults who have already declared their sexual preference for life, but
these either/or theories create therapeutic problems for young people
who discover their normal and universal homosexual capacity before they
have gotten comfortable with their normal and universal heterosexual
capacity. They man panic, thinking they have no option but to lead a gay
life, when they might prefer a straight one. I find people often switch
back and forth between gay and straight, or both, and homosexuality is a
common, if not routine, phase of growing up. I is not P.C. to mention
this because it makes sexual preference seem a controllable choice."

-- 
jspence@cmptrc.lonestar.org                                (214) 235-7161 x4100
John E. Spence                                                  CompuTrac, Inc.
"I don't speak for CompuTrac, and CompuTrac doesn't speak for me!"
From: kraig@athena.cs.uga.edu (Kraig Count)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Letter from OCA post-election: real or hoax?
Date: 19 Nov 92 13:51:48 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

>And some of the folk who support the OCA *are* that scary. I called the
>voicemail numberr of the local "Populist Party" presidential candidate.
>It was also the voicemail number for the local KKK! And the message was
>at least as outrageous as any of the hoaxes, only *these* folks *are* 
>serious!

Brrrr... Not A nice thought.  The hoaxes are bad enough without
this.  *fealling very vulnerable*

kraig
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: entropy@world.std.com (The Entropic one)
Subject: Re: Don't Promote it as a lifestyle
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:45:34 GMT

In article <BxxAvH.4tF@acsu.buffalo.edu> v115r4q5@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Perry M Jowsey) writes:
>
>   I understand that homosexuals in today's society face widespread discrimina-
>tion and abuse, but instead of taking a hint,it seems to make the gay commun-
>ity want to be in limelight even more.  America does not wish to see gay pro-
>testors fighting for gay rights and preaching their platform to those who give
>them the time. 

Tough.

>While physically assaulting a homosexual may be wrong, these 
>acts are only encouraged by the homosexuals themselves.  

While physically assaulting a bigot may be wrong...

>If they would take the
>time to realize that their way of living is wrong

How can you realize something that is false?

>and more importantly that 
>society doesn't want to hear it falsely declared a lifestyle, 

Your the ones calling it a lifestyle, we call it sexual orientation.

>they would realize
>the way to combat this discrimination is to adopt a normal kind of lifestyle and
>stop corrupting others.  

Maybe you should take the time to read some physcology texts.

> See Old Testament, Leviticus 20:13

See old testament Leviticus 1:1-

Once you have followed it completely come back and complain.

Hope you like sacrificing animals.

-- 
------  Linux, Religion, and electronic shopping all in one place!
\    / Repent of Bean eating, MS-DOS, OS/2, and windows NT, no sales man
 \  / will hassle you, no priest will sacrifice you. Free 9600 baud download.
  \/ Call the Virtual World Information Systems BBS at 508-793-9568        
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: kraig@athena.cs.uga.edu (Kraig Count)
Subject: Re: Don't Promote it as a lifestyle
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 14:20:58 GMT

In article <BxxAvH.4tF@acsu.buffalo.edu> v115r4q5@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Perry M Jowsey) writes:
>
>   I understand that homosexuals in today's society face widespread discrimina-
>tion and abuse, but instead of taking a hint, it seems to make the gay commun-
>ity want to be in limelight even more. 

Hint?
Sorry to disappoint you, but we are here, and here we will stay.
We aren't out stricktly to make a political statement.  Those of us
who are out are because we can't handle having to live the lie that
being in the closet demands.

>America does not wish to see gay protestors fighting for gay rights and
> preaching their platform to those who give them the time.

Tough...

> While physically assaulting a homosexual may be wrong, these 
>acts are only encouraged by the homosexuals themselves.  

This is the most stupid argument I have heard.  How many people *want*
to be beaten and killed because of the sex of the people they are
attracted to?
That's as bad as saying that women who are raped and assulted, ASKED
for it.

>If they would take the
>time to realize that their way of living is wrong and more importantly that 
>society doesn't want to hear it falsely declared a lifestyle, they would 
>realize the way to combat this discrimination is to adopt a normal
>kind of lifestyle and stop corrupting others.


How can you claim to speak for all of 'society'?  One persons limited
viewpoint on morality is hardly representitive of everyone.
I have always been attracted to both sexes, and I am not willing to
go back into the closet just because you say so.
BTW, we don't recruit.  Your sexuality is your concern.  Let mine
remain mine.

> See Old Testament, Leviticus 20:13

Perhaps your should review your biblical teaching.
Jesus's teaching replaced the holiness code in Leviticus.

Also, consider the phrase 'Love thy neighbor as thy self'

later,
kraig

*sigh* where do all these people keep coming from?

Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality,co.politics