HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Subject: Re: Homos in school, too? What next?
Organization: insert anything here
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:39:09 GMT

In article <Bt7you.Crx@world.std.com> cmr@world.std.com (Charles M Richmond) writes:
>rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
>
>...
>>	And for a straight teacher who shows affection for a member
>>of the opposite sex?  You are aware of course that molestation occurs
>>7 times more often per capita among heterosexuls... (this is the case
                     ^^^^^^^^^^
>>because a lot of molestation occurs as incest).

>According to the Merck Manual (one of the most respected medical
>references) opposite sex pedophilia occurs twice as often as same
>sex pedophilia. Two to one is a lot different from seven to one, and
>given the percentages of homosexuals in the population would seem to
>indicate that on a percentage basis that pedophilia is much less
>prevalent in the heterosexual community. Even if we accept a very
>loose definition (one that includes the majority of incest ) and
>accept 7/1 we are still looking at a slightly higher prevalence within
>the homosexual population.

	Re-read... "per capita" - it's already normalized for the
%age difference of heterosexuals and homosexuals in the gross population.
And, I have read some criticisms of Merck.  Of course, statistics
are never all that accruate since it's impossible to sample the entire
population.  But 2 or 7 or some number in between, it's really awful
to have the "all homosexuals are child molestors" argument waved
around by the likes of Murph when what investigation is done shows
this is not the case.  But people will believe it because they want
to andthe oppression continues unabated.

	The other thing that contributes to the 2->7 thing is that
the *orientation* of pedophiles does not map onto the gender of
the children molested.  Men who molest boys might be heterosexual
and men who molest girls might not.  Actually the sickest offenders
molested both genders per availability.  Researchers assert that
for pedophiliacs, the gender of the victim is less of a concern than
the vulnerability/age.

BBC
From: borden@cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Hypocrasy test: (was Re: Abortion: What does God say?)
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:11:34 GMT
Reply-To: borden@m5.harvard.edu
Distribution: ne
Organization: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, MA,  USA

In article <BswL19.97n@world.std.com> cmr@world.std.com (Charles M Richmond) writes:

> Why is it that
>the discrimination in South Africa is so important but not in Japan ....

Maybe because in South Africa you have a minority population that rules over
the indigenous majority population, while in Japan you have an homogenous
population that merely likes itself more than it likes other kinds of people -
we don't have to like it but it's nothing to scream about.


   - Dave Borden
     borden@m5.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)
Subject: Re: Sex ed in school (WHY JONNY CAN'T READ MUSIC)
Followup-To: ne.politics
Reply-To: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 22:35:36 GMT

In article <2390@mitech.com> gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette) writes:
>In article <FuJgPB3w164w@buscard.fidonet.org>, murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy) writes:
>> rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman) writes:
>> 
>>> One of the purposes of schools is to introduce kids to American
>>> culture and the cultures that have fed into it. Music is just
>>> as much a part of that culture as literature.
>> 
>> Now where in the world did you come up with that idea?  That's absurd and 
>> is EXACTLY why "Johnny" can't read!  
>
>Music *is* literature!
>
>Music is also language.

Oh, OK, I can't resist this topic any more (I agree with George, by the
way, but more...)

Speaking as one who has been volunteering in my public school's music
program for 7 years, and even got them to pay me for a semester :-), and
has to go to bat for it every year, it seems, to remind the administration
of its importance...

"If Johnny's mother wants him to have music," (why is it always his
mother?) "she should pay for piano lessons" very precisely misses the
point.  Piano is one of the things that is rarely taught in any kind of
school.  What we Music Is Basic people are fighting for is Band, Chorus,
Orchestra.

I find it very much part of a school's collegiate duties to sponsor these
activities.  Quite apart from the technical skill, which may well last a
lifetime and provide pleasure long after the French verbs and physics laws
have flown from the mind, these activities teach much about co-creation,
teamwork to a goal under, ideally, inspiring leadership, and a challenge in
which, unlike the conceptually similar challenges of sports, there are no
losers.

Same thing for Odyssey Of The Mind -- I stand in danger of digressing.

Of course, the Murphy Minimalists will tell us that we should form, and pay
for, a private group.  Again, this is appallingly difficult to do out of
the formalizing context of schools: such groups exist, but they tend to
cater to the elite (in the positive sense of this word): N.E.C., GBYSO,
Longy, All-Newton come to mind.  This is no solution for the ordinary kid,
who may not be aware of what s/he is learning at the time.

Music, like sports (are you against football, Brian?) smuggles into it
lessons that go far beyond the mere technical accomplishment.  These
lessons benefit all of society.  And it would need a complete redesign of
society to replace them outside the school context.  I think Brian is by
now obliged to describe, in detail, the society he wants to design.

First, start with a cadre of non-apathetic parents and parents-to-be...
-- 
David Brooks					dbrooks@osf.org
Open Software Foundation			uunet!osf.org!dbrooks
Five more months!  Five more months!
From: jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey Turner)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Foreign policy musings
Date: 22 Aug 92 00:21:04 GMT
	<Bt6Dw1.9CF@world.std.com> <2796988236@dwetzel.mis.stratus.com>
	<BZS.92Aug18195036@ussr.std.com>
Organization: College of Engineering, Northeastern University
In-reply-to: bzs@ussr.std.com's message of 19 Aug 92 00:50:36 GMT

In article <BZS.92Aug18195036@ussr.std.com> bzs@ussr.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:

> From: usenet@transfer.stratus.com (Mr. Network News)
> >The 
> >"rape of Kuwait" is quite possibly all propaganda.

> It is quite a leap to go from one questionable report (suddenly
> classified as a "deciding factor") to ``The "rape of Kuwait" is quite
> possibly all propaganda.''
> Were the Iraqi troops there or not?

	After the US practically gave them an invitation.  Why
didn't the US try to dissuade the invasion _beforehand_???

> Who set all those oil wells on fire?

	Ooooh.  Probably the most heinous war crime ever committed.
Far outweighing "Allied" bombardment of Iraqi cities and 100 to
200,000 dead Iraqis.

> What happened to the contents of those Kuwaiti museums?

	Going to war over museum contents?  Gosh those Iraqis really
rankled Amerikan sensibilities.  I'd bet most Americans rarely if ever
go near museums.  At least after grade school.

> Did we discover heaps of bodies of civilians when we entered Kuwait or
> not?

	Obviously they didn't have the time or inclination to bury
them the way the US did in Panama.

> C'mon, it's not like that nurse/babies incident was the only event in
> Kuwait.

	But what really happened, as opposed to what we've been told
happened we'll probably never know.  Again, it all could have been 
averted diplomatically, either before or after the Iraqi invasion.

> >I have to agree with Mr. Murph that the sole reason we got into Kuwait was 
> >oil.
> Why? Do you have reason to believe that Saddam Hussein would not have
> sold the US (et al) oil? Or not sold it at market price?

	That's not the point at all.  The US has the right to set
or at least heavily influence the market price through the West's
installed and supported surrogates in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.  We
cannot go letting indigenous people control their resources when
they are SO vital to the US.

> I think it's quite obvious the reasons are not this easily cast off.

	Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha.

					--Jeff Turner
From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: some good things about sex ed in schools
Date: 15 Aug 92 14:29:28 GMT
Reply-To: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Organization: The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, MA - Data: 508-682-5329

gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette) writes:

> A very good thing about Sex education in schools
> is that it forces the parents who care
> to PREPARE THEIR CHILDREN FOR SEX EDUATION.

If the prospect of dying from AIDS or unplanned pregnancies isn't a shot 
between the eyes, I don't know what is.  I would think a loving parent 
would be more "forced" to educate their children by the consequences of 
not doing so than the by the prospect of someone doing it for them.

> Another thing that goes on in sex eduation in schools,
> starting with grade "K" is to introduce children
> to the tools to describe experiences such that
> they could report their own parents who may
> be sexually abusing them at home.

It's hard to argue against this except to say that the same function 
could be provided by friends, neighbors, and extended family members like 
grandparents, other siblings, aunts, uncles with more efficiency and less 
cost.  No family is an island unto themselves.

> On the other hand, I think condom distribution in schools
> is pretty stupid. OK. Hand out ONE sample to each person
> in a sex education class. A school can probably even
> get such samples free from the manufacturers.

How about sending that ONE sample to the parent to give to his/her child? 
Along with it, I'd even spring for a pamphlet explaining the consequences 
of not teaching the kid how to use it; there's that shot between the eyes 
again.

                                - - - Murph

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, Massachusetts - Data: (508) 682-5329
SysAdmin:  murph@buscard.fidonet.org / ...!ulowell!wizvax!buscard!murph
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: bzs@ussr.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Homos in school, too?  What next?
Organization: The World
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 03:06:58 GMT


From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
>This is perfect, though, and a perfect example of where discrimination might
>be justified, in _my_ view.  Teachers are role models for children; that's a
>fact we all have to agree on.  Having homos for role models is WRONG!

But you're ok, huh?

No thanks.

This is sort of like the mentality that finds sex on TV a real problem
but killing and violence, hey, that's hollywood.

And we're still waiting for a detailed summary of your own sexual
practices so we can figure out whether you can join this club or not.

--
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: dlw@odi.com (Dan Weinreb)
Subject: Re: Foreign policy musings
Reply-To: dlw@odi.com
Organization: Object Design, Inc.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 13:22:38 GMT

In article <54PoPB1w165w@buscard.fidonet.org> murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy) writes:

   The price for the former is fantastic and is why we went to war.  I say there
   is no better reason than economics or national security to go to war.  Ideals
   run a poor third.

So if another Hitler arises and starts gassing millions of people to death,
we'll just all turn to good old Murph, who'll tell us that we should just
ignore it and get back to our golf game.  Golly, it's nice to know such
comforting people.
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Subject: Re: Hypocrasy test: (was Re: Abortion: What does God say?)
Organization: insert anything here
Distribution: ne
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 03:12:08 GMT

dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks) writes:
>rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
>|> 	I'm no fan of abortion, but the rampant hypocrasy that
>|> enshrouds the pro-life movement really needs to be challenged.

>Now, some fairness needs to be brought to this.  

>Any survey of real people, and not just their more radical representatives,
>shows a spectrum of middle-ground, ill-served by the shrill debate going on
>around them.  And, as it happens, the Catholic Church's record in taking
>care of widows-and-orphans, and other victims of life, is better than, say,
>NOW's.  So, come to that, is the Salvation Army's.

	Apples and oranges.  Nothing in the NOW's charter has anything to
do with saving-widows-and-orphans.

	I agree the Catholic (And other) Church and the Salvation Army
have the ability to do a lot of community service work.  One could
wish that they would spend more of their $$$ and energy on such worthwhile
projects.  It is interesting to note that both organzations you mention
spend $$$ and energy annually on lobbying about various political agendas,
some of which have nothing to do with widows and orphans.

BBC
From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Barry Shein:  Has he ANYTHING constructive to lend to debate?
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:25:21 GMT
Reply-To: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Organization: The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, MA - Data: 508-682-5329

yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:

> If you advocate grossly inhumane positions, you should expect people to
> become upset about them.

Hmmmm....  No, I don't think there's anything inhumane about anything I've
written.  I simply ask that people do things for themselves and not ask the
taxpayers to do it for them.  Further, I ask that if they don't do for
themselves and screw up, don't ask the taxpayer to come to the rescue.

Yes, it's a stark contrast to the touchy/feely PC crowd of the campuses like:

> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu

                               Welcome to the real world....
                                      - - - Murph

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, Massachusetts - Data: (508) 682-5329
   SysAdmin:  murph@buscard.fidonet.org / ...!ulowell!wizvax!buscard!murph
From: rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Sex ed in school
Date: 12 Aug 92 21:57:47 GMT
Organization: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: spcsun25.bbn.com

In article <omLePB1w164w@buscard.fidonet.org>, murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy) writes:

|> That, of course, is extreme.  As a voter in a majority, I'd not cast a 
|> vote in favor of funding sex education in school, universal medical care, 
|> foster care subsidies, or any other program that wouldn't be in the (I 
|> know you were waiting for this) "Ozzie and Harriet" mold of "family 
|> values."

Why be a slave to a "majority"?  How about thinking independently?

As for "foster care subsidies"--would you rather leave kids in families
where they're being abused?

|> Schools, funded with my tax dollars, should be teaching 
|> the basics understood as the Three Rs.  Schools, the K-12 grades, have no 
|> business mucking around in music, industrial arts, home economics, 
|> physical education, and SEX EDUCATION.

One of the purposes of schools is to introduce kids to American
culture and the cultures that have fed into it. Music is just
as much a part of that culture as literature.

|> Whatever happened to your mother insisting you take piano lessons?

Not all mothers can afford to buy piano lessons for their kids.
Not all kids have mothers.

|> What happened to apprenticeships to learn a trade?  

Schools can bring people to the point where they'll make good apprentices.

|> Can't your mother teach you how to cook?  

Not all mothers can cook.
Not all kids have mothers.

|> I believe the Right's answer to Mr. Linoff's plea to "support" his 
|> various concerns about unwanted pregnancies, unwanted children, or how to 
|> minimize these conditions is the correct answer.  The Right will suggest 
|> we remove sex education from school, we not distribute condoms therein, 
|> and that we leave the teaching of morals where it more properly belongs - 
|> within the environment of a caring, loving family - which family ideally 
|> consists of two parents of the opposite sex, thank you.

And what does the Right propose to do when the family is not caring
or loving?  Or when it's incomplete--maybe because the Right sent
the father off to die in some war?

-- 
Ron Newman		rnewman@bbn.com
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: johne@or.credence.com (John Ewing)
Subject: Re: Hypocrasy test: (was Re: Abortion: What does God say?)
Organization: Credence Systems Corp. Beaverton, OR
Distribution: ne
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 19:27:40 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.151810.7235@spdcc.com> rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
>
>	Should this crew gain more power it will be interesting to
>see how a further loss of rights to 25,000,000+ gays and lesbians in 
>this country will affect them... or if anyof the mainstream will care.
>
>BBC

As I understand it, "this crew" is NOT talking about gays & lesbians losing
any rights.  However, "this crew" IS talking about not giving them (or anyone
else, e.g. heterosexuals, whoever) special rights/privileges.  "This crew" is
talking about equal rights under the law to each individual.

John Ewing (johne@or.credence.com)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: cmr@world.std.com (Charles M Richmond)
Subject: Re: Sex ed in school
Organization: Integrated International Systems Corp. One Longfellow Place, Suite 3309, Boston, Ma.
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 02:58:49 GMT

bzs@ussr.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:


>It really all seems to come down to whether one believes that a person
>deserves rights only before birth, or only after birth.


>--
>        -Barry Shein

>Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
>Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD


....what about those of us who believe that there are a variety of rights
that exist, some before, some after, some both?

Charlie (who believes in abortion, but recognizes the moral dilemma )


-- 
*****************************************************************************
*  Charles Richmond 	Integrated International Systems Corporation        *
*  cmr@world.std.com	(Temporary) cmr@chiechan.mro4.dec.com		    *
*  Specializing in UNIX, X, Image Processing, and Communications.           *
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: dlw@odi.com (Dan Weinreb)
Subject: Re: some good things about sex ed in schools
Reply-To: dlw@odi.com
Organization: Object Design, Inc.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 18:25:32 GMT

In article <T4XJPB2w165w@buscard.fidonet.org> murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy) writes:

   It's hard to argue against this except to say that the same function 
   could be provided by friends, neighbors, and extended family members like 
   grandparents, other siblings, aunts, uncles with more efficiency and less 
   cost.  No family is an island unto themselves.

And why aren't you making this same argument about teaching reading
and writing and arithmetic?  Why are those so appropriate for public
schools?  There seems to be no consistency or principle behind your
argument about what schools should do or not do.  It's completely
arbitrary.
From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Sex ed in school
Date: 23 Aug 92 02:56:27 GMT
Reply-To: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Organization: The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, MA - Data: 508-682-5329

bzs@ussr.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:

> From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
> >So, you don't mind forcing a condom in my kid's hand but if I force your kid
> >to pray, you'll call me Hitler?
> 
> "Forcing" a condom into your kid's hand?

Exactly.  In your message, you went on and on about how you were "forced" to
pray in a public school.  You told how children don't know any better and how
they generally tend to go along to get along.  Remember how you mentioned
singing Christmas carols when you didn't celebrate Christmas because you
weren't a Christian?

Same thing with condoms.  You've got a classroom full of kids and the school
nurse walks up and down the aisles passing out these packages.  You expect the
kid to hand it back and say "no, thanks?"  That's "forcing."

Now, PLEASE don't get me wrong; as "conservative" as I am, I DO NOT agree with
prayer in school.  There is nothing preventing little Johnny from saying
whatever prayer he feels like as he awakens in the morn - BEFORE getting to
school.  God's everywhere, right?  He's also in little John's bedroom; John
needn't address his deity in school to pass his God a message.

> >Don't you think a better way is to issue vouchers to the parents to spend on
> >the kind of education that is important to them?
> 
> No.
> 
> You don't build a society by sending everyone off in their own
> direction to do their own thing. Sorry, we got to learn to get along
> in this boat, not to each demand our own boat.

No.  What you seem to want is to build YOUR society where everyone thinks
like you do.  This is a free country where people are free to think whatever
they want.  If people want their own boats, it's not Barry Shein's place to
tell them they can't have them.  Because Barry Shein tells people that they
have to appreciate everyone else's culture and morals doesn't make it so.

The best answer is to issue the vouchers and let people make up their own
minds.  If they are happy to toss their voucher into the public pool for the
public education, more power to them.  If they feel they can get a better
education elsewhere, they should be able to pursue it without being penalized
for it by having to pay for that alternative education AND the public one as
well!

                                      - - - Murph

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, Massachusetts - Data: (508) 682-5329
   SysAdmin:  murph@buscard.fidonet.org / ...!ulowell!wizvax!buscard!murph
Newsgroups: ne.politics