HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer)
Subject: Prove That Kids are Precious Gifts From God.  (Was: Re: ra-ising c-hildren)
Organization: Netcom - San Jose, CA
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 01:39:45 GMT

In article <16NOV199214485252@apsicc.aps.edu> jim@apsicc.aps.edu (frost...) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.062327.3208@netcom.com>, rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer) writes...
>>In article <1dv474INNn3@manuel.anu.edu.au> Lubosh <Lubosh.Hanuska@anu.edu.au> writes:
>>>
>>>Okay, but I think little kids are too precious gifts of God to be used
>>>for experiments.
>>>Lubosh
>> 
>>     You have to prove there is a God before you can say that little
>>kids or anything for that matter is a precious gift from God.
>	
>	I disagree with this statement. You don't have to prove that
>	there is a God to say that children are a rare gift indeed.
>	To take and corrupt a fresh childs mind is, or should be a crime.
>	If doubt be taken just talk to people who have been trying un-
>	successfully to have children of their own.
>
>> 
>>     Good luck.
>> 

     Did I miss something here.  Lubosh said "...little kids are too
precious gifts of God...", which says that kids are precious gifts
from God.  I repeat and add, before Lubosh can say that kids are precious
gifts from God, he has to prove God exists and that God says that kids are 
precious gifts from HIM/HER in a scientifically verifiable way.

     Good Luck.

  GIGO = Gospel In Garbage Out

-- 
       +----------------------------------------------------------------+
      /  Keep Abortion Legal and Safe.  Reduce the Deficit.            /
  +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
 /   //  W. David Rohwer   // Amiga       UUCP: apple!netcom.com!rohwerwd |
|  \X/       Go A's!     \X/ 3000UX   Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM      /
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: rll1@kepler.unh.edu (Robert L Lamothe)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: girl/lady/female  boy/guy/male
Date: 17 Nov 1992 20:28:59 GMT
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
NNTP-Posting-Host: kepler.unh.edu

In article <1992Nov17.180510.25922@cbnews.cb.att.com> lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib) writes:
>In article <1e95jcINNt7o@mozz.unh.edu> rll1@kepler.unh.edu (Robert L Lamothe) writes:
>  
>>respect without earning it.  The point is some things are earned and not
>>ascribed, any person who has earned respect from me will recieve the
>>proper addressing.  Anyone else?  Well I guess it depends on whether I
>>feel irascible or condescending.
>>                                                        -Bob
>>
>Ah, so much for basic respect for your fellow human beings. How
>do you treat the janitor in your building?

	That depends on the person, respect has nothing to do with what
type of job you hold.  It depends on who you are as a person that counts.
A decent person who treats others decently and doesn't expect something
for nothing is worthy of respect.  A hard worker is always worthy of
respect regardless of the amount of money or education or job status.
As for basic respect for my fellow human beings?  I've found that most
human beings are a waste of space and resources and take selfishness and
pettyness to a fine art.  I'll give anyone the benefit of doubt, but
no-one gets my respect unless they earn it.
						-Bob
-- 
*******************************************************************************
*                                                                             *
* Robert L. Lamothe                           University of New Hampshire     *
* rll@unh.edu                                 Interoperablity lab room 220    *
*                                             C/S Major                       *
*                                                                             *
* Just because you're not paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you.  *
*******************************************************************************
From: dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Blood types
Date: 16 Nov 1992 21:09:22 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <92321.142221SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>Dawn, who is this Bongwater lunatic and if I was to go to a bookseller,
>what information would I have to provide them to have reasonable odds
>of obtaining some of his scribbles, neatly formatted?
>
>Graydon

Not a bookseller, a record store.  The album I'm quoting from is called
_The Power of Pussy_, the band is named Bongwater, which is Ann Magnuson
and somebody who only goes by Kramer.  Some of it is folky and some of
it is alternative rock.  The lyrics are worth killing to hear.  My friend
Warren (the same sweet guy who sent me a present on the baby's birthday
because "you did all the work") sent me a copy of the lyrics on the day
that my copy of the tape broke.  They have several other records to,  
(_The Big Sellout_ is the only title that I remember) but they didn't
quite knock me flat like this album.

Dawn

Joseph Campbell gave me hope and now I have been saved.
"Folk Song" by Bongwater
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Seriousness.
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 02:07:12 GMT


My definition of seriousness in a relationship is that things
are getting serious when both partners agree to move in together.

What is your definition?

dreas
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: daniel@clsi.COM (Daniel Barclay)
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
Organization: CAD Language Systems Inc.
	<##cqfzk@lynx.unm.edu> <MARTINC.92Nov11181606@hatteras.cs.unc.edu>
	<92316.220655SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
	<BxMvu0.GM8@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
	<92318.104242SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
	<Bxp2L9.Duq@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
	<92319.134627SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
	<Bxqnqu.Gws@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
Date: 16 Nov 92 10:23:01

> >Oh, whups - why on earth assume that the only way to get salmon back
> >in the Pacific north west is to tear down the Hydro dams?  

> Because 40 years of environmental research says so?  (read _Cadillac Desert_)

> Even in the rivers with fish ladders, the salmon population is dropping.
> The reason that "the only way to get salmon back..." is because fish
                                                                  ^^^^
> can't climb stairs, and they MUST get back to their home streams to
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> spawn.  This became a big issue recently with an attempt to list some
> types as endangered.
> ...
> Kiran Wagle                           <kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>

The problem is young fish going _down_stream:  They go through the generating
turbines.  The pressure changes kill a relative small percentage (5-10%) of 
fish per dam, but when (downstream-)migrating young fish go through several
dams, a lot don't make it.  (I saw it on PBS somewhere.)

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel S. Barclay			CAD Language Systems, Inc.
					Suite 101, 5457 Twin Knolls Rd.
Why can't _I_ think of a signature?	Columbia, MD  21045  USA
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Question: How to increase the male sex drive ?
Organization: Intergraph
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 14:39:02 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.040252.19587@netcom.com>, cocoa@netcom.com writes:
> And I've known some 
> younger men who couldn't last longer than a few commercials. :(

So you have sex during the commercials??  Isn't this distracting to the other
people in the theatre who really want to know what goodies the snack bar has?


> 
> Just me,
> 
> little 'e'
> 
> 

just me who could never resist twisting a straight line JUST a little,

Larry Billings
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: net.hugs?
Date: 21 Nov 92 01:54:24 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <31554@hydra.Helsinki.FI> taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina) writes:
|
|Just imagine...
|
|"Yes officer, I'm from Finland.  I want to visit U.S. because... Well,
|there's this woman... No, actually I have never met her, I don't even
|know where she lives... but I was hoping... perhaps she would hug
|me... See, there's this boink happening and I hope that she will be
|there..."

That would certainly be easier to to explain than Allison's Banana trick.

Just how would you explain james.dutton.
-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: Seriousness.
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 08:21:52 GMT

In article 5179@mtu.edu, rossi@mtu.edu (Rossi) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.020712.25404@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>>
>>My definition of seriousness in a relationship is that things
>>are getting serious when both partners agree to move in together.
>>
>>What is your definition?
>
>
>   When I start posting to soc.gruesome-twosomes (couples for the 
>humor challenged ;)

In that case I doubt that I'll ever become serious.
My last brush with seriousness was a hell nightmare!
Guess I'm about due for a hell nightmare one of these evenings.

dreas
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ron@turing.toronto.edu (Ron Wessels)
Subject: Re: girl/lady/female boy/guy/male
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: 16 Nov 92 18:45:08 GMT

>> Better than dating a sculpture...
>You don't want to be accused of statuary rape.

A hard man is good to find?

-- 
Ron Wessels		University of Toronto		ron@turing.toronto.edu
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: mmzn@rice.edu (Mark Mazina)
Subject: Re: Are you a Young Transplant?
Originator: mmzn@tarka.cs.rice.edu
Reply-To: mmzn@rice.edu (Mark Mazina)
Organization: Rice University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 19:25:49 GMT


In article <lgl3e9INNro0@news.bbn.com>, dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
|
|> 
|> I think people figure that I must be armed or I wouldn't dare to be
|> as obnoxious as I am.  Or they have a left-over fear of their last
|> math teacher and they're terrified that I might try to integrate 
|> something in front of them.
|> 
|> Dawn
|> 


    /
    |  obnoxious d(obnoxious)  =?   dawn  +  C
    /






Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: What is attractive to women?
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 12:14:12 GMT

In article <lgj18jINN9f8@news.bbn.com> pdsmith@spca.bbn.com (Peter D. Smith) writes:
>In article <BxvtI7.LDy@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>>Well, it was the only brush with criminality that I could find on my father's
>>side of the family.  Among my mother's, though, two were arrested in 1730 on
>>a charge of "traveling on Sunday."  However, they were able to get the
>>Massachusetts General Assembly to quash the sentence and have the fine
>>remitted.
>
>Hah!  I can beat all of those -- *my* ancestor commited a crime >recorded
>in real history books<!

My apologies for being unclear.  The second story appears in records of the
period.

>                         He fought the first duel in Massachusetts, and had
>to spend a day chained to his partner-in-crime.

Both duellists surviving is the least satisfactory outcome, but I guess that
your ancestor's being killed might have made problems for you, eh?

>ObSingle: the duel was over the hand of a fair maiden who married someone
>else entirely.

She would seem to have been eminently sensible.

-- Herb Huston
-- huston@access.digex.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: ISO MY PRINCESS
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 20:06:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.235541.19384@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>In article <Bxv2FE.E1t@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>>
>>And marsupials are *not* second-class mammals!
>
>Now, even though some of my best friends are marsupials (well, they could
>be--I haven't checked), don't they usually score in the lowest placentiles?
                                                         ^^^^^^

Lower, perhaps, but monotremes would probably score lowest.
 
>Trygve   (I know, I know--the tests must contain a racial bias....)

No, they're just out of order.

-- Herb Huston
-- huston@access.digex.com
From: taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: net.hugs?
Date: 19 Nov 92 11:10:36 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki, Finland

In <lgl06rINNqsi@news.bbn.com> dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:

>In article <1992Nov17.194033.20468@informix.com> bradl@neptune.informix.com (Brad Levy) writes:
>>
>>Similarly, alt.romance is a place where most people
>>have agreed to be safe for open expression (kind of like a some church
>>groups). 

>In that case, cross-posting to soc.singles is probably a *BIG* mistake.
>We're not very safe.

I don't know about others, but I've always felt safe here.  I started
posting to soc.singles about 6 months ago and during that time I
haven't seen any inappropriate followups to my posts.  And what's
important to me, nobody has flamed my English! :)  I think that a good
article will get good followups here.

>>I feel I've gotten to know a side of a
>>number of regular posters here - Dawn, Mysti, Jason, Diana, Stephen, Ed,
>>Stewart, Michael, Mike, and others, from what they've revealed of themselves
>>in their posts.

>I guess there must be a different Dawn posting over there.

Well, although you are the first person I got to know in soc.singles
and you are a terrific net.persona, I still wouldn't dare to hug you
here. :)

-- 
Juha Taina  taina@cs.helsinki.fi  Phone: +358-0-708-4247
From: jsmt@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Julia Smith)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Being Alone? - Feedback/Survey
Date: 20 Nov 92 22:55:22 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <1992Nov20.100559@is.morgan.com> mpiet@is.morgan.com (Mark Pietrasanta) writes:
>I am looking for feedback regarding relationships that people have
>had and what their individual experiences were.  I have a number of
>questions for anyone who is willing to spend a little time answering
>them.  This is for a paper.
>
>I am specifically interesting in people who have had failed relationships,
>either having been broken up with or the person who broke the relations.
>Also, either currently 'recovering' or can look at their recovery in 
>retrospect.
>
Mark, it would probably help your interests if you had some specific
questions for people to answer.  Stuck for questions?  Try these:
  Why did the relationship break up?
  Who did the breaking?
  How did you feel about the breaking up?
  How long did it take you to feel "recovered"?
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer)
Subject: Re: nkill
Organization: Netcom - San Jose, CA
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 06:42:02 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.232936.196@fid.morgan.com> sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>In article <MARTINC.92Nov11205329@hatteras.cs.unc.edu>
>martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>
>>  So your question seems to reduce to "do
>>we owe a discriminated-against minority any special consideration?"
>
>So: A discriminated against B.  Should C be required to discriminate
>against D, in favor of B?

     No, never.

>
>>If you answer "no", of course, you're claiming that you don't believe in
>>affirmative action at all.
>
>I don't like the form of AA that requires discrimination.  I'm in
>favor of the initial meaning (e.g. advertise your opening in Veterans'
>Weekly and Minorities Monthly as well as the Wall St. Journal, then
>hire the best applicant.)

     I agree.
>
>>But maybe it's a question of the volitional nature: so the real question
>>is "do we owe a discriminated-against minority any special consideration
>
>Those people who do the discriminating, maybe (depends on the facts).
>The rest of us, no.
>

     No, we do not owe a discriminated-against minority any special
consideration if the consideration hurts someone else.

-- 
       +----------------------------------------------------------------+
      /  Keep Abortion Legal and Safe.  Reduce the Deficit.            /
  +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
 /   //  W. David Rohwer   // Amiga       UUCP: apple!netcom.com!rohwerwd |
|  \X/       Go A's!     \X/ 3000UX   Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM      /
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (dreas)
Subject: Re: Why do women
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 21:56:58 GMT

In article D6C@unix.portal.com, mzank@shell.portal.com (matthew c zank) writes:
>Why do women just go for men with big muscle and lots of hair,
>and for any man who does not have any of this "too bad"?
>for that matter why do women have such narrow minds when
>it comes to views on men.
 
I guess your problem includes mostly the women in Eau Claire.

Women here in Vicky are a little more BROAD MINDED! :+)

>Have a nice day

I will but can you?

dreas



Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:25:54 -0500 
From: "Francis J. Yenca" <fy03+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Smiles, Food, and Other Ways of Seducing Women
	<1992Nov13.232214.19847@beaver.cs.washington.edu>

Dave Johnson writes:

>Stef Jones writes:
>>I usually want to sleep with a guy if he smiles a lot at me. 

>:-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  (etc.)
>
>Is it working?

Yep.  I knew I wouldn't be first on this one.

Frank
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (eleanor.j.evans)
Subject: Re: What is attractive to women?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 21:00:59 GMT

In article <lh1stdINN3gt@news.bbn.com> kgorman@bbn.com (Karen Gorman) writes:
>In article <7260@news.duke.edu>, diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
>writes:
>|> 
>|> Wow, sounds as bad as being named 'Elizabeth' in a decade in which popular
>|> consensus has decreed that all Elizabeths be called 'Liz'.  I often
>|> introduce myself as Elizabeth Abrams because it sounds more formal and
>|> adult than Beth Abrams,
>
>During this introduction, do you state clearly that you prefer to be
>addressed as Elizabeth or Beth, or whatever you wished to be addressed as
>(since there are so many nicknames/variations on the name Elizabeth and 
>Robert too)?
>
>|> but this often backfires when someone decides
>|> to call me Liz in attempt to sound friendly (and earns, instead, my
>|> hostility).
> 
>If you didn't state your preference clearly during the introduction, then
>I really don't think hostility is called for, particularly since you 
>realize people are just trying to be friendly.
>



"Trying to be friendly" is the operative phrase.  Using my first
name is friendly enough for the "trying to be" stage.  I use the
name people give me when they introduce themselves, and I expect 
them to use the name I give them when I introduce myself.

If Ms. Abrams and I were to meet, and she were to introduce herself
to me as "Elizabeth", then that is what I would call her, until
such time as we really were friends.  At that time, I expect that
I would know not to call her Liz, whatever else I might call her
<evil grin>, and she would know me well enough to tell me to cut
it out if I called her something she didn't like.

Of course, at this point, I'd probably call her "Beth".....


Piglet, but you can call me.....never mind....
Newsgroups: soc.singles,talk.abortion
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer)
Subject: Re: nkill
Organization: Netcom - San Jose, CA
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 05:40:54 GMT

In article <MARTINC.92Nov11182550@hatteras.cs.unc.edu> martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.070916.11329@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer) writes:
>
>	[lots of explainations deleted]
>
>	[me:]
>   >
>   >Oh, I'm so glad to see that the spirit of tolerance and the ideal that
>   >one ought not be persecuted or killed for differences of opinion is
>   >still alive on the net.
>   >--
>
>	I do not mind if there are differences of opinion.  Just do not
>   make others do what you want them to do against their will.  If you
>   do, then you must expect consequences.  Basically, live and let live.
>
>David, I don't think I disagree with any of the positions you took as
>explained.  But nkill-ing people whose positions you dislike seems to
>display the opposite of "live and let live".  It sounds an awful lot
>like "do what I say or I'll kill you."
>--
>		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu

     I think that you did not read the second and third sentences of my
response.  If they have a different opinion from me, then I do not have
a problem with that.  That does change though when they try to stop me
from doing something when it goes against what they believe and the law's
sanction.  At that point, I believe that I must defend what I am doing and
then try to punish them.  An example involves abortion.  I believe in the
abortion right.  Since the pro-lifers attempt to make pro-choicers
relinquish their abortion right, I do not have a problem with defending the
abortion right and then attempting to punish the pro-lifers by taking away
one of their rights.

     My position is not "do what I say or I'll kill you."  I have a
modified "live and let live" philosophy as one can see from above.  I do not
believe in turning the other cheek.  I do believe in an eye for an eye.

-- 
       +----------------------------------------------------------------+
      /  Keep Abortion Legal and Safe.  Reduce the Deficit.            /
  +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
 /   //  W. David Rohwer   // Amiga       UUCP: apple!netcom.com!rohwerwd |
|  \X/       Go A's!     \X/ 3000UX   Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM      /
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith)
Subject: Re: What to do, What to do?
Organization: Gagging Sloth Records
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 23:54:25 GMT

In article <thurlow.722466125@convex.convex.com>, thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:

|> 5) Never, never, ever, ever, crosspost to soc.singles and general
|>    again.  I got three pieces of e-mail flame because I followed up
|>    an article you posted.  I accept responsibility for that, but
|>    please don't make it more likely that it'll happen in the future.

I will never crosspost again, and I mean never. Never ever ever never
never again...

I know, it wasn't aimed at me, but I couldn't resist...visions of Dana
"George Bush" Carvey were just too vivid :-)

jds

***************************************************************************
                               *
Jeff Smith                     * Can't you just graduate from junior 
smith@fl08-g.comm.mot.com      * college and start sweeping like the rest
                               * of your kind?  Huh, rave-boy?
                               *              - Mathew Neill Sharp
***************************************************************************
 
Newsgroups: soc.singles