HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bruce Varney)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 01:30:32 GMT

In <1992Sep25.215003.9493@crd.ge.com> cook@dollar.crd.ge.com (Cathi Cook) writes:

>In article <Bv20t2.JEx@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu
>(Bruce Varney) writes:
>|>	A couple DOES consent to the possibility of pregnancy when they
>|>consent to sex.

>But I am still unclear as to why you are making the gigantic leap from
>this that the woman has consented to carry to term.

	I never made that leap. I don't need to. Once a woman has consented
to the possibility of pregnancy, and a child is conceived, that child
has the same rights that anyone else does. The most important of these
is the right to live. It is not fair to let a woman take that right
away from her unborn child.

>|>	No - it is an irresponsible and cowardly acy. Killing a defenseless
>|>child for convenience's sake is deplorable.

>Do please tell us Bruce, how inconvenient you found it to be when you
>were pregnant.

	Hmm. Tell me about the time you killed your best friend cause
he slept with your wife. You say that has never happened to you? Ah, so
then you cannotpossibly have an opinion on the subject right?
Bullshit. Just because I have not been pregnant before (nor will I be)
does not mean that I cannot hold an opinion on abortion.

>If you have never been pregnant, please do not insult the intelligence
>of the women here who _have_ with your high-handed, arrogant dismissal
>of the very real physical and emotional risks of every pregnancy.

	It is interesting that everyone is expected to take responsibility
for the results of their actions EXCEPT women who get pregnant. Interesting
too that the only defense that proaborts can come up with sometimes is
"Hey you've never been pregnant so you don't know". 
	Well, for your information, (and I know this might shock you)
I am NOT the only person in the world who stands up for the right to
live. In fact there are even (gasp) women who are opposed to 
abortion on demand. And furthermore (you may need to sit for this one)
some of them have even been pregnant before.
	In fact, another article in this thread reported some statistics
saying that the pro-life position was more widely supported by females
than males. I am not sure of the validity of those statistics, but I
AM sure that support for right-to-life is NOT disproportionately male - 
it is pretty much equal.

			Bruce

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,talk.politics.mideast
From: ronf@panther3.panther.mot.com (Ron Feigen)
Subject: Re: Jack S Defends MLKing Slur (Was: ARF DEFENDS HIS HONOR)
Organization: Motorola Panther Project, Chandler, AZ
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 16:39:54 GMT

In article <BvI9wn.2z3@ddsw1.mcs.com> arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
>In article <1992Oct1.232325.22775@panther.mot.com> ronf@panther3.panther.mot.com (Ron Feigen) writes:
>>In article <BvGDJr.6xn@ddsw1.mcs.com> arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
>>>In article <1992Oct1.023319.2619@cs.brown.edu> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:
>>>>Arfie lead a crusade for David Duke, who did far worse things than
>>>>"sleep around". Kindof makes you wonder why Arfie is willing to
>>>
>>>Perhaps you would like to point out the "far worse things" Duke has 
>>>done.
>>
>>We know you think the KKK,White Aryans,White Supremists and Neo-nazis are really
>>an enlighten bunch of guys, who are way ahead of their time.  But most of us
>>find them revolting.  The activities and beliefs that they promote are 
>
>I think you will have to dig a little to find some quote of mine that would
>lead one the that conclusion.  I never said or implied any such thing.

Could someone please re-post barf's praise for ralph winston, the local neo-nazi
that barf loved so.

Could someone also re-post barfies agreements/approvals with quotes/ideals 
from white supremist/neo-nazi propaganda.


>
>Furthermore, you conveniently forgot to tell us what evil things David
>Duke has done.    
>
>js

Barf,

  As mentioned (and ignored by you, what a surprise) you might consider the 
KKK , white supremists, and neo Nazi a bunch of "great" guys.  Most of us
consider then disgusting (evil).  As is the ex Grand Wizard of the KKK david
duke.


-- 

>
Ron Feigen
ronf@panther.mot.com
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48795 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6128 alt.politics.bush:7327 alt.politics.elections:14767 talk.abortion:39660 alt.politics.clinton:7966
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Date: 1 Oct 1992 00:04:13 GMT
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

Larry Margolis) writes:
|> John Townsend) writes:
|> >
|> > It most certainly is.  You can't possibly think that if George Bush is
|> > reelected abortion will be made illegal.
|> 
|> Why not?  Certainly the Republican Party platform is anti-abortion - it
|> doesn't allow any exceptions for rape or incest.
|> 
Actually, the real problem is tht I don't know what to think.  George Bush
says he supports the Republican Party platform, and then says something 
else as well.  Also, I was under the understanding that the platform does
not even allow for abortions for rape or incest.

|> > the Reagan/Bush "packed" Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld
|> > Roe v. Wade.
|> 
|> Barely.  And Blackmun has stated that he's not going to hang on another
|> 4 years.
|> 
If you only counted the votes of the justices appointed by
Reagan and Bush, RvW would be long gone.

John must be prevaricating.  He can't possibly believe what he
posted.  Can he?
-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: More Democratic Campaign Songs
Date: 1 Oct 92 18:30:16 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Sep30.160503.15798@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>
>In article <1992Sep29.224338.20572@anasazi.com>, best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
>> Say, when was that last balanced budget?  I'm not sure I was even born yet.
>
>Fical year 1969, proposed by Johnson and passed by the Democratic Congress.

Wasn't that when some fiscal juggling was introduced by putting Social
Security on budget rather than as a separate account. Seems I recall
that SS was collecting surplus taxes at the time and bringing it on
budget was a way to make the budget appear in balance when it otherwise
would not be. In prior years SS was a non-budget item, at least through
JFK's term, the fiction that you really had an account with Social Security
was maintained. When they moved it on budget, it became clear that it
was just another welfare program funded by current taxes.

Gary
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 03:14:10 GMT

Check my previous postings about the problem I've run into concerning the
term "pro-choice".....

Simon

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: saarinen@sp1.csrd.uiuc.edu (Sirpa Saarinen)
Subject: Re: Perot to be on CNN 9/28 Larry King 9pm, live from Dallas
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 18:03:30 GMT

mikeq@aspen.CNA.TEK.COM (Mike Quigley) writes:

>>The answer..........? ROSS FOR BOSS! VOTE FOR ROSS PEROT FOR PRESIDENT!

>Yeabut, what happens when things get hot and he quits! Better to vote
>for Ross' vice president!

Seriously, please tell me, who *is* Ross' vice president candidate - or is he 
going to do it all by himself? I admit that I have not followed the 
Perot-to-be-or-not-to-be-game lately.

Sirpa
saarinen@csrd.uiuc.edu
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49474 alt.politics.elections:15114 misc.headlines:6489
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Kremlin_Gate: Bill Clinton in Moscow during Viet Nam.
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:20:45 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Oct6.003817.15753@pony.Ingres.COM> garrett@Ingres.COM  writes:
]In article <5OCT199219033406@utarlg.uta.edu>, b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice)               writes...
]>I really had no reason to be against Clinton before this.
]>I did have real concerns about anyone who's a war protester
]>being able to lead the country in the event of war, since 
]>you have to have people go and fight.
]> 
]To protest a moraless war is a duty of patriotism, not a weakness.
]To send young men to die for no clear cause IS a weakness. 

To conspire with an enemy country during war is an act of a traitor.
Bill Clinton may or may not have done this - he was more likely a
"willing dupe" - but for him to protest the war IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY,
and to travel to the capital of the main enemy, is, to say the
least, very suspect. As a veteran of that period, I find it
reprehensible and offensive.

Oh, by the way, he says that he went to Moscow during a time of
"warming relations." They may have been warming between him and
the Soviets, but the soviets were actively involved at the time
that he went there. Furthermore, one could not travel to the
USSR without their permission, and they did a background investigation
of people before granting permission (you had to give them a lot
of personal information, and then wait a long time). They tended to
admit people who would further their anti-US cause, and ban people
who would damage their cause. They were especially fond of anti-war
leaders, as they felt (correctly) that the war could only be
won for them by the actions of these people.

Then, there is the fact that a several of pages from his state department
file are missing - specifically those from that period. This is VERY
suspicious.

---John Moore, VietNam Veteran
-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
- Democracy is two wolves and a sheep using majority vote to decide what -
- to have for dinner. SUPPORT THE BILL OF RIGHTS - INCLUDING THE 2nd! -
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (Rini Clarkberg)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 02:49:02 GMT

In article <Bv9LIx.qt@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> 
varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bruce Varney) writes:

>	Well, for your information, (and I know this might shock you)
>I am NOT the only person in the world who stands up for the right to
>live. 

I stand up for life too.   That's why when I look at the picture 
on page 310 of The New Our Bodies, Ourselves and see the picture with 
the caption:  "Woman dead on motel room floor.  Her death was due to
an air embolism suffered during an illegal abortion," I want to cry.

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49798 alt.politics.usa.misc:100 alt.politics.usa.constitution:545
From: tyersome@toxic (Randall Tyers)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Term Limits are Constitutional, Study Shows
Date: 6 Oct 1992 20:18:25 GMT
Organization: Plant Biology
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: toxic.berkeley.edu

In article <farenebt.718340867@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell)
writes:
...
>Finally, I'd like to remind you about how stable and long-lived
>the nation was under the Articles.
            ^^^
1) this is the correct tense even if it was unintentional
2) there are other aspects of a system that are at least important as
stability - you know abstract things like freedom, justice ...
 
Randall Tyers                        - just say no to cute signatures



Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: New anti-abortion tactic
Date: 29 Sep 92 18:37:55 GMT
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon


I understand that one of these people (it could be Bailey) won
the primary.  I'm not sure if he ran the ads during the
primary race or not.  

Nightline did a segment on the use of the ads.  The "politicians"
were fairly upfront about not wanting to be elected, really, they
just wanted to air their ads.  The last I heard of this whole
thing was that one of them had bought time during the ABC
"Afterschool Special" or some other program that targeted
children.  Parents were complaining that they didn't want
their kids to see the bloody fetus pictures, and the "candidate"
answered that "children need to know what abortion really is."
I'm willing to bet that this guy would oppose sex education
in schools because only he should decide when his children
are ready to know about sex and what they should be taught.

Susan
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49596 ca.politics:8466 ba.politics:5890
From: manley@optilink.UUCP (Dave Manley)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: No on 9
Date: 5 Oct 92 22:03:24 GMT
Followup-To: rchilder@us.oracle.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: DSC/Optilink Access Products

In article <1ajaliINN6jf@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> stephen@orchid.UCSC.EDU writes:
>[deleted bandwidth waste- my opinion only]
>
>Hmmm! again this type of attack process accomplishes nothing, 
       ^
>except the possible satisfication of the poster.
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>You have accept arguments from another poster (let me be sly and
          ^^^^^^

>not say "the same origin') as being correct in there (their) conclusions.
         ^---------------^
>
>I would only say, examine the content of the post, study the post
>in the sense of, is it correct- do conclusions follow without doubt
>from the premises.
>
>And BTW I hope your spellings were in a joking manner... otherwise???

A response from BIFF operates on many levels. As you are obviously
unfamiliar with this form of posting let me enumerate a few characteristics
of BIFF postings [I hope you find this tutorial informative]:

 1. It attacks those who cannot or will not use a dictionary.
 2. It attacks those who cannot or will not proofread their postings.
 3. It attacks those who needlessly waste bandwidth ((such as a name
    and two .sigs) in part by satirically responding by wasting 
    more bandwidth).
 4. It offers non-sequiturs, usually in a humorous fashion, in
    response to those whose postings contain no content or whose
    postings show some idiosyncratic discontinuity with reality.
 5. Any conclusions made are guaranteed to not follow any logical
    process from any premises made.
 6. It does bring satisfaction to the poster and to others.  
    (My email is running 100% positive on this issue!)
 7. It mirrors 96.3% of all postings made.
 8. It raises the overall quality and intelligence of the net.
 9. It carries on a long standing net tradition.
10. It reduces the competitiveness of the US in a global economy
    by incuring transmission costs, consuming disk space, and 
    wasting both my time to write it and your time to read it.
11. It reflects The Human Condition.
12. It is non-federally funded Art.
13. It is non-coercive.
14. It is mutually consensual.
15. It is both political, apolitical and non-fattening.
16. It is the heat death of the universe.
17. It IS.

In the beginning there was BIFF, and it was good....

Finally, let me assure you my spellings are done in the most serious manner.

--
I"MNOTBIFF@BIFF"S>SK00L>OF>INGLISH.EDU
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: New anti-abortion tactic
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:37:44 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.


	It's happened before (although not with abortion pics).  I remember one
guy in CA running for office so he could use profanity on campaign literature
and in TV ads.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Date: 30 Sep 92 00:57:36 GMT
Organization: Our Lady of Heavy Artillery

In article <1992Sep22.173704.15681@sniap.mchp.sni.de>,
frank@D012S436.sniap.mchp.sni.de (Frank O'Dwyer) wrote:
> 
> An analogy:  I smoke of my own free choosing.  If I then get lung cancer, 
> (god forbid) it's not unreasonable to say that I consented to that risk of
> my own free choosing.   If killing somebody else would save me (fantasy)
> why would that be justified?   

So, of course, if you _did_ get lung cancer, you should be deprived of
access to treatment for that condition, right?

> Bizarre, really bizarre....

My thoughts precisely.

--
Lefty (lefty@apple.com)
C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: JZ lands in a Hot LZ...
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:19:01 GMT

zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide) writes:
] In article <1992Sep30.201523.24410@wetware.com>, drieux, just drieux writes:
] >Or Are You not one of 'Those "ProLifers"' who understands
] >the Pure Sanctity of Life gambitry to the point where
] >allowing one's actually born daughter to be raped is
] >an acceptable choice in life.
] 
] Hey, there's a biblicalPrecedent(tm) at work here, doncha know...
] 
] Lot (he of the salty wife) sent his two daughters out to be raped by the
] perverse populace of Sodom 'n' Gomorrah when they rioted outside his
] door....I guess that was acceptable then, so if it was good enough for Lot,
] I guess it's good enough for Randall Terry...
[ deletions ] 
] There's Lot for you, one the MajorRighteousDudes of the Old Testament. 

And some folks wonder why we support Biblical Literalism.....

There is a Lot Going for Lot...

ciao
drieux

ps: now if only the Wimp Liberals in the White House would
stop interfering in the Divine Work of the Religious Right....



-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Entropy, Its not Just a Good Idea,
IT's The LAW!!!!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: Bush's China policy--what the hell is going on?
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 18:47:48 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <farenebt.718240223@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell ("Droopy")) writes:
>Bush vetoed a bill passed by congress that would have made China's
>most favored nation trade status dependent on their human rights
>record.
>
>Is this the same Bush who condemned SAfrica's human rights record?
>Is this the same Bush who has condemned Serbian atrocities in Bosnia and
>	croatia?
>Is this the same Bush who sent troops to the middle east to prevent
>	the continuation of Iraqi atrocities in Kuwait?
>
>I wonder how much oil China has.

    You make a rather cynical assumption that all Bush cares for
    is his oil investments.  Not so, GHWB is a family man and he cares
    deeply about of his family's values.  It so happens that the family,
    namely Bush's brother Prescott, has substantial real estate investments
    in China.  Should China be stripped of its MFN status, those real
    estate values could be negatively affected.  Does this mean that what's 
    good for Prescott is good for the US?  Of course not, this is a pure
    co-incidence.  If you want to know more about it, as well as other 
    co-incidences like that (i.e. no-experience-necessary off-shore oil 
    drilling contracts), look up an article that appeared in WSJ between
    12/11 and 12/13 of 1991.

    Supporters of Bush's policies toward China are quick to point out
    that fostering capitalism there will strengthen the Chinese economy
    and ultimately lead to democracy and other good things, hence we should
    continue to maintain the second largest trade deficit with China ($15B
    per year, or 750,000 jobs), but will it?  Singapore has proved that it 
    is possible to have both a Marxist-Leninist goverment and a highly-efficient 
    capitalist economy.  Is that what we want to see happening in China -
    an 800-pound communist gorilla?

    A policy of containment toward the USSR is widely credited for
    the collapse of communism there, and Mr.Bush does not hesitate taking
    credit for standing by while the policy was being implemented.
    So, why is he practicing a policy of appeasement toward China?
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: all opinions are mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.environment,talk.environment
From: pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis)
Subject: Re: Subsidies for Roads and Cars in the USA
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 17:41:23 GMT

In article <JMC.92Oct5193532@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> 
My Favorite Professor of Technological Optimism jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>Loren Petrich asks:
>
>	     And is one to be a second-class citizen if one
>     cannot afford a car or would prefer not to drive one?
>
>The short answer is yes.  Cars are only some of the things whose
>avoidance leads to a cramped life.

The long answer is no. This country made a set of decisions, some
explicit and some implicit, some individual and some group-based, to
take the technology of internal combustion and use it for
transportation in the form of small (!), individual vehicles.

A different set of priorities and a more explicit consideration of the
future consequences of the possibilities for using IC might have led
to a quite different scenario, one in which the lack of car ownership
did not lead to "a cramped life".

Personally, its not clear to me how the combination of bicycle, bus,
train, plane and occasional car rental can be described as "cramped".

-- paul

-- 
There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a
little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider
price only are this man's lawful prey.
						John Raskin
From: B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (STEPHEN TICE)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Call 1-800-325-9992 if you want Bill Clinton for President
Date: 30 Sep 92 06:43:00 GMT


        This is the Clinton / Gore Information Line.

                      1-800-325-9992

If you want a Democratic Congress & a Democratic President

                   then give it a call

           On this line you can leave a message.