HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis)
Subject: Contact info for 'Boycott Colorado Inc.'?
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:56:34 GMT

Does anyone have contact info for the new (Colorado) organization "Boycott  
Colorado Inc."?  (Address, phone?)

The current (Jan. 12) Advocate indicates that it is a new grassroots  
lesbigay organization in CO that is helping to organize the national  
boycott.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: albrigh@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (thomas g albright)
Subject: Re: Military Service and 'special rights'
Organization: The Cabal
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 15:26:14 GMT

In article <1gojftINNc5f@life.ai.mit.edu> ric@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Graffiti 
404-972-4999) writes:
>
>You know..... if we got together, drafted a bill exempting homosexuals
>from military service, and tried to pass it in the legislature....
>
>...Lou Sheldon, Pat Robertson and Rush Limbaugh would all cry about
>how the ho-mo-seck-shu-als were trying to get 'special rights' and
>try to shoot it down.
>
>-- 
> -Ric     __                       __                                 __
>          \/   ric@gnu.ai.mit.edu  \/   Graffiti BBS  404 972-4999    \/
>                 GEnie: GRAFFITI      PO Box 3176, Lithonia GA 30058
>

Just thought this was worth repeating.  Now here's a person who understands
things.

-Tom Albright

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
|                                   \                                         |
| INTERNET: albrigh@ucs.indiana.edu  \    I believe in reincarnation, and     |
|   BITNET: albrigh@iubacs           /\   I'm coming back as a pansy.  AGAIN! |
|                                   /  \                                      |
(-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-: (-:
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: fogarty@sir-c.jpl.nasa.gov (Tim Fogarty)
Subject: Its cool to be queer. (Re: to Howard Black a.k.a Mr. Chemistry (Re: WHY?))
Organization: JPL, Space Imaging Radar Software Group
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 01:18:47 GMT


In article <1992Dec21.233909.7076@nwnexus.WA.COM>, 
elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg) writes:
|>In article <5Nk3VB1w163w@peewee>
|>     peewee@infoserv.com (Philip Stromer) writes:
|>
|>>o Coolness
|>
|>   Oh, honey, it's cool to be queer.
|>

A friend of mine is a high school teacher in Ft Lauderdale.  He says that
all the upper-middle class (2nd generation) Cuban boys love to go to the
underage gay dance club.  It seems to be a very popular way to irritate
one's parents.

--
Tim Fogarty
Sys Man and Sys Admin for the EGSE in the POCC at JSC for SRL-1, STS-59
FOGARTY@SIR-C.JPL.NASA.GOV
From: crr4574@venus.tamu.edu (LARUE, CHARLES L.)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: TWISTED LOGIC!
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:42:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
NNTP-Posting-Host: venus.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <BzMJry.H23@unix.amherst.edu>, twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes...
>In article <21DEC199211565333@venus.tamu.edu> crr4574@venus.tamu.edu (LARUE, CHARLES L.) writes:
> 
>>In article <1gu05dINN15b@mizar.usc.edu>, adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson) writes...
>>
>>>> What species has members that engage in exclusively homosexual behavior? 
>>> 
>>>Who cares?
>>
>>Someone did or they wouldn't have made the argument in first place.  I care,
>>because if you are going to try and use this kind of logic to prove that
>>homosexuality is natural, I say do it scientifically and look at facts. 
> 
>Well, then, why don't you go and tell us what you think "natural" is
>supposed to mean in a scientific sense?  Let's get our terms
>straightened out here.

I think you completely miss the point I am trying to make.  I just think that
trying to compare animal behavior to that of humans is irrelevant.  Animals do
plenty of things humans don't do.  You might as well say incest is O.K. because
you see a bull mount a heifer who happens to be his offspring.  I make these
statements to induce a more logical argument.  I am interested in why you are a
homosexual.  If indeed it is genetic, then a grave injustice has been done to
you by those who discriminate against you.

My belief is that homosexuality is wrong.  I once believed when I was young
that the earth was created in 7 days, but the evidence prompted me to change
that belief.  If you want to convince people that there is nothing wrong with
what you do, you must present evidence in your favor.  If you could care less
what other people think, then don't bitch when you are discriminated against.

The animal argument fails on several counts, which I have already mentioned. 
What an animal does in a sexual sense can't be compared to what humans do in a
sexual sense.

In conclusion, let me state that my beliefs are not set in stone.  My beliefs 
are based on what has been taught to me throughout my life.  Since what
I have been taught has not always been correct, so can my beliefs change if
presented with the evidence. 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Subject: Re: Is sexuality chosen or inborn? A users guide.
Originator: elf@halcyon.com
Organization: Pendor, UnLtd.
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 23:40:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.023656.13340@bsu-ucs>
     d000dlphi@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu (David Speakman) writes:

>Preference vs. Orientation vs. Behavior
>Can people choose these things??

   Yes.

>Sexual orientation (the biological, uncontrollable attraction to
>another) is inherent.

   And I will argue that this isn't necessarily so for all people!
You're pigeonholing a term.  By your argument, my sexual orientation is
heterosexual and my sexual preference is homosexual and my eventual
behavior is bisexual... and I want to know how, in this ridiculously
heterosexual world THAT happened?

   Either that or I have NO sexual orientation at all, and I dictated
my sexual preference by choice, not conditioning.

         Elf !!!
--
elf@halcyon.com  (Elf Sternberg)

Then, I was inspired.               God, thy will is hard
Now, I'm sad and tired.             But you hold every card.
Listen, surely I've exceeded        I will drink your cup of poison.
Expectations.                       Nail me to your cross and break me.
Tried for three years,              Bleed me, beat me.
Seems like thirty.                  Kill me.
Could you ask as much               Take me now.
From any other man?                 Before I change my mind.
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: THE FINAL WORD ON TWISTED LOGIC!
Date: 22 Dec 92 22:11:33 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <22DEC199215075319@zeus.tamu.edu>, crr4574@zeus.tamu.edu (LARUE, CHARLES L.) writes:
|> >	In article <21DEC199215423972@venus.tamu.edu>, 
|> >			crr4574@venus.tamu.edu (LARUE, CHARLES L.) writes:
|> > 
|> >	If you want to convince people that there is nothing wrong with
|> >	what you do, you must present evidence in your favor.  If you 
|> >	could care less what other people think, then don't bitch when you 
|> >	are discriminated against.
|> > 
|> >Had you forgotten that you wrote that?
|> 
|> No, I wrote that.  I still don't see how that you can get out of that statement
|> that I say it's OK.

You mean you think that discrimination against Gays is wrong, and you
*also* think we shouldn't complain about it?   Why shoudn't we complain
about something that even you admit is wrong?


|> My point is that you are discriminated against.  Fact.  If you want to 
|> stop this discrimination, you will have to educate people.

What do you mean "will have to educate people?"    What are we supposed
to do that we don't already do?


|> I didn't say it was OK, I just said don't bitch about it if you don't care 
|> what people think.

I *don't* care what bigots think.   It's not my job to persuade every
bigot in the country to smarten up.      What is my job is to try to make
sure that they don't take over society and persecute people.


|> I didn't even insinuate that it was OK, but if you fail to see that, 
|> then that's your problem.

No, my problem is pointing out to other people how twisted your logic is,
so that they don't fall into it themselves.

In a free society, people are allowed to think anything they like, no
matter how bigotted it is.   What they should not do is to act out their
bigotted fantasies in a way that impacts other people.

I don't have to persuade people who are so narrow-minded and determined
that they are unpersuadable.   I just have to point out to people that
persecuting minorities in unacceptable.   It's the *behaviour* of bigots
I care about, not what they think privately.

I also have to point out that your argument that a minority has to "prove"
something to bigots, or else accept discrimination without complaint, is 
simply twisted logic.     

Nice to see a Subject line that makes sense, for once.

jon.
From: owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families)
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:22:25 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <1gtiktINNdbc@hp-col.col.hp.com>, smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
> owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley) writes:
> > In article <1gnskcINN6ac@hp-col.col.hp.com>, smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
> > > Which leads me to a question relating to Col#2.  The reason some people
> > > voted for it was over the idea of minority status and quota preferences
> > > for sexual preference/orientation.  
> > 
> > Did you vote for it Walter?
> 
> Does it matter?  Do *you* think I did?  What makes you even ask? 

Yes it does matter, you had the opportunity to vote on this item, and 
I'm interested in disscussing it with someone who did.

> > > Because gay-rights activists often 
> > > equate the two (blacks and gays) and equate the way they would like 
> > > to see stereotypes removed (like forced education in public schools) 
> > > there has been some credence given to the notion that the gay-rights 
> > > movement might very well want the same type of minority status, with 
> > > the attached quotas, given to homosexuals.  
> > 
> > theres that loaded language again Walter, and this time 
> > followe up by an assumption.
> > do you know how to spell ass-u-me.?
 
> No kidding!  Am I saying that gay people *do* want quotas?  Or is that 
> what you are reading between the lines?  What I'm saying is, a lot of 

the Loaded language I was reffering to was the use of *forced education*
Walter all public education in this country is *forced*
when you spit out words like that making it sound like radical homosexuals
are trying to do something different than other more reasonable people
you distort the issue.
I have already made my views on quotas crystal clear in another reply to
you. Put simply I am against quota based solutions to discrimination under
any circumstances.

> people DO believe it, because they haven't heard clearly otherwise. 
> Most people don't have access to USENET like this, and don't have someoen
> they can ask.  I'm not ASSUMING that the gay-rights movement wants it,
> I'm ASKING if they do or not.  

Walter, the Gay rights community can't answer here.
you can ask individulas
Walter, is it difficult to understand that I want to disscuss thius with
you as a peer, and do so on an equal basis.
i won't be relegated to lesser status.

> If you're *trying* to piss me off by twisting what I write around, 
> you *are* succeeding, congratulations on your accomplishment.  And 
> I'm STILL waiting to hear what this secret agenda of mine is that 
> you were taking about. 

Your doing a pretty good job of pissing me off too Walter.

LUX ./. owen
--
D. Owen Rowley {uunet,fernwood,sun}!autodesk!owen

  " It will be a cold March 17th that I celebrate the imposition of
	Romes rule, on Pagan Ireland. Erin go ppphhhhhttttttt! "
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: walter smith
Date: 23 Dec 1992 14:30:13 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley) writes:
> It looks like Walter tired of us.
> Perhaps I asked to many hard questions.
> LUX ./. owen

Or maybe I had a few days off, and didn't see the need in dialing 
in from home for this discussion?  Nah....

>That was absolutely sincere Walter.
>if you don't believe me when i say that then there is no point in replying
>to me at all.

You know, you have a good point there.  

>your move walter.

Owen, consider it taken, Owen.
(you sure you weren't a Jehovah's Witness at some point? You use their 
"first-name" approach pretty well...) 

Walter Smith 
smithw@cs.itc.hp.com
 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.homosexuality:8748 alt.rush-limbaugh:12725 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11134 alt.politics.clinton:19418 alt.politics.bush:15292
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Samegender Families))
Date: 1 Jan 1993 00:09:52 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

greg_bradt@msmgate.mrg.uswest.com (Greg Bradt aka The Lensman) writes:
> 
> Show me where a value is being attached to the fact that something (such as
> homosexuality) exists.  Yes, young people must be taught to "accept" that
> they exist, just as we must "accept" that Aryan Nation exists and has a
> right to exist, but simply stating the fact does not automatically imply
> that one must approve of them.

Greg,

As it was explained to me (by those in *favor* of the books), their purpose 
is to show homosexual families in a positive light, so that kids who come 
from them will not be picked on for it, or feel 'odd' because of it. 
If there is no 'value' being attached to the whole subject, it is rather 
pointless at achieving its goal.  People know that gays exist; kids know 
that gays exist, although they don't understand what it all means.  If 
they didn't know they existed, you wouldn't have kids calling other 
kids 'faggot' and other similar derogatory things.  

I'm not trying to be difficult, but proponants of the book have 
said things that just don't agree with what you are saying about
it; so it just isn't that convincing.  

Walter
 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas)
Subject: Re: WHY?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 16:15:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.140856.11193@qiclab.scn.rain.com> Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org writes:

>>        >Why do men like to stick anything up women's assholes?  
                      ^^^^
>>        
>>They don't.  The only men that do this are closet queers.        
>
>In which case most of the male population is "closet queers". I 
>suggest that you do some reading. *Most* men have tried anal sex.
                                              ^^^^^^^^^^^
>

To have tried is not the same as to like doing it.


aap
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: jmfuchs@unix.amherst.edu (JESSE MICHAEL FUCHS)
Subject: Off for vacation!
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 06:15:24 GMT


	Well, I'm finally off. I stuck around this place as long as I could
(actually, I have to stay to the bitter end - being a resident counselor means,
among other things, I have to let all the frshman into storage :( ,) but
as of 3:00 pm tomorrow, I'm off for New Jersey. Whee. My town  (Denville) is to
New Jersey what Linda McCartney was to Wings. I'll be back on the 4th, and am
looking forward to continuing all of the fun discussions that have been going
on here. Happy Chanukah/Merry Christmas!

							-Skippy 
--

"There are five billion people in the world.
 I wonder how many of them we can screw over."
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Subject: Re: Why not cure homosexuality?
Followup-To: alt.politics.homosexuality 
Originator: elf@halcyon.com
Organization: Pendor, UnLtd.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 23:00:19 GMT

In article <92364.223718MEH124@psuvm.psu.edu>
     <MEH124@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>Regarding a previous post that got a good deal of response about the
>thought of curing homosexuality, most people on the net seem strongly
>opposed to whole idea of a cure.  But what about those people that
>really struggle with their sexuality and really don't want to be
>"homosexual."  Most often they deny their sexual feelings for religion
>reasons

   Well, first of all, homosexuality is not a disease and therefore it
needs no "cure."  People who are making a choice between their religion
and their sexual orientation may well attempt to change one or the
other... there are stronger reasons to believe homosexuality is inborn,
while it's pretty clear that religion is not.

   As for homosexuality needing a change, well... I chose to be queer,
I wasn't born this way.  Being gay has as much merit as being straight,
and it doesn't need "correcting."

         Elf !!!
--
elf@halcyon.com  (Elf Sternberg)

Then, I was inspired.               God, thy will is hard
Now, I'm sad and tired.             But you hold every card.
Listen, surely I've exceeded        I will drink your cup of poison.
Expectations.                       Nail me to your cross and break me.
Tried for three years,              Bleed me, beat me.
Seems like thirty.                  Kill me.
Could you ask as much               Take me now.
From any other man?                 Before I change my mind.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: robj@netcom.com (Rob Jellinghaus)
Subject: Re: A Few Questions
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:39:14 GMT

In article <21DEC199210521002@venus.tamu.edu> crr4574@venus.tamu.edu (LARUE, CHARLES L.) writes:
>1.  Would you be heterosexual if you had a choice?

Most gays would not.  Would you be homosexual if _you_ had a choice?
If not, why not?  This is very much like asking a black man, "Would
you be white if you had a choice?"

>2.  What terms do you find offensive?  I thought I knew until I heard of Queer
>    Nation.

Gays find insults offensive.  "Queer" is an insult if the person saying
it intends it to be an insult.  Some blacks call each other "nigger",
even though that term would be an insult if yelled by a white man at
a black man.  People don't find terms offensive; people find offense
offensive.

>3.  I never understood what the problem was with Perot's comments in the
>    election.  He said that he did not want gays in his cabinet because he 
>    wanted to avoid controversy.  After this he was insulted and shouted down
>    several times.  I felt this did not look good for the homosexual community,
>    that someone should have asked him to clarify his position instead of 
>    insulting him.  Can someone comment on this?

He did clarify his position.  His position, clarified, was that he did
not want to nominate any homosexuals to his cabinet, as he didn't want
to put any homosexuals through the torture of the nominating process.
This is patronizing to homosexuals; if the candidate is qualified, and
accepts the nomination, the candidate has to deal with the process,
and would be happy to do so.  And this is pandering to bigots; if the
candidate really is qualified, then the candidate should have Perot's
full support against the prejudice which Perot so feared.

Consider this analogy: someone in 1960 saying he wouldn't nominate
blacks to the cabinet in order to avoid controversy.  A leader is
supposed to lead, and I want my leaders to lead in the direction of
including all people regardless of race, religion, or sexual
orientation.  That's why I voted for Clinton, and that has a lot to do
with why so many millions of others did, too.

>4.  Finally, are you able to have heterosexual sex and enjoy it?

Most gays do not enjoy heterosexual sex.  There are many people who
are bisexual, meaning they enjoy sex with people of either gender.
"Gays" generally refers to people who prefer homosexual contact.
-- 
Rob Jellinghaus    |  "Next time you see a lie being spread or a bad 
robj@netcom.com    |   decision being made out of sheer ignorance,
robj@xanadu.com    |   pause, and think of hypertext."
uunet!netcom!robj  |       -- K. Eric Drexler, _Engines of Creation_
From: owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Military Alternative Lifestyles??
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:10:35 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <BzGJD5.HsG@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins) writes:
> owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley) writes:
> 
> >All this stuff about Queers in the military is a dodge.
> >There always have been queers in the military, there always will be.
> >All that is being proposed is that we don't throw out people.
> >The Military will not see a flood of queers showing up to be signed
> >up, all that will happen is that the government will be recognising a
> >reality.
 
> Wrong.  They already recognize the reality by prohibiting it.  What the
> Bozone Brothers want to do is force the military to unconditionally accept
> homosexuality as a normal and perfectly acceptable lifestyle.

I would think that you would agree with me that the heterosexual lifestyle
is a perfectly acceptable one right ?

In case you don't know it the Uniform code of military justice has
regulations banning sex between heterosexual soldiers of opposite gender.
Those regulations have nothing to do with the relative appropriateness
of sex between opposite genders outside the miltary or the acceptability
of their lifestyle choice.

The proposed changes do nothing to change the UCMJ's stance of sex between
soldiers, they are about the mere fact that some people have the sexual
orientation of their same gender rather than the opposite gender.
we are talking about behavior here, not the reality of what makes 
their pupils dilate.

Besides BOZO, queers are a normal and natural part of the spectrum of
human experience, and the relative acceptance of that fact by ill
educated and naive individuals is rapidly vanishing as the millenium
approaches.
better hurry or you'll be late.

LUX ./. owen

--
D. Owen Rowley {uunet,fernwood,sun}!autodesk!owen

  " It will be a cold March 17th that I celebrate the imposition of
	Romes rule, on Pagan Ireland. Erin go ppphhhhhttttttt! "
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
From: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Subject: Re: GOOD NEWS: St. Louis Law
Originator: elf@halcyon.com
Organization: Pendor, UnLtd.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 22:59:41 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.162437.16711@wam.umd.edu>
     aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) writes:

>In article <C02tCq.Inx@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>>In article <30DEC199202252599@zeus.tamu.edu> olw7845@zeus.tamu.edu (Zeke E. Pez) writes:

>>>Am I making too much sense??

>>Oh, no.  Trust me, you're in *no* danger there.

>Trust Pierce on this one. He is talking from experience.

You guys crack me up!

         Elf !!!
--
elf@halcyon.com  (Elf Sternberg)

Then, I was inspired.               God, thy will is hard
Now, I'm sad and tired.             But you hold every card.
Listen, surely I've exceeded        I will drink your cup of poison.
Expectations.                       Nail me to your cross and break me.
Tried for three years,              Bleed me, beat me.
Seems like thirty.                  Kill me.
Could you ask as much               Take me now.
From any other man?                 Before I change my mind.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality