HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Subject: Re: Passing out Condoms  (Was Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT)
Reply-To: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:26:36 GMT


In a previous article, c60a-zg@volga.Berkeley.EDU (Martin Guerrero-LabA) says:

>
>One thing that bothers me is:
>  Why is the school, esp. Public schools the one doing the sex ed, and not
>the family where the primary education should be.   We must be careful not
>to get to a point where socialism and communistic ideas take a hold of our
>country.
>
>  Sex ed today is like teaching kids how to have sex without getting caught.
>
>  But happens when they do "get caught?"  
>
>
>  Children today are having a difficult time going through life because 
>there is so much confusion in the world today.  Sometimes the families
>are very unstable.  Sometimes, what the family teaches often gets contradicted
>with what the schools teach.  Peers pressure children to do things they
>wouldn't do had they had been taught to be strong and to have strong values
>which stand the test of time.
>
>   We don't need public schools to confuse our children even more.
>
>   Leave the role of the primary sex educator to the family, and not
>government.
>
The point is, our families _are not_ doing the educating.  They tell our
children "Don't", but do not thell them about the mechanics of their
bodies, the possible conscequences, or how to protect themselves.  
Our children are our future.  Their futures must be protected.  In order
to protect that future, we MUST tell them all we can to help them make
responsible dicisions about sex.
Our children are having sex.  That is a fact.  Preventing the schools from
educating them is not going to stop that, and a vast majority of parents
unfortunatly refuse to deal with the issue at all.  Sex education in the 
school is the only alternative to deal with the problems that the parents
won't.
-- 
*...your Friendly Neighborhood Atheist // "Peter...PETER!!  I can see    *
*      the KelleyMan:Kelley L. Miller // your house from here!"          *    
*                  ae642@yfn.ysu.edu // Jesus Christ, from the cross     *
****************Know God...No peace.  No God...Know peace.****************
From: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Run conservatives, run away! (Was: Re: Homophobics can't...)
Date: 3 Sep 92 17:12:29 GMT
Reply-To: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Distribution: na
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab

In article <12106@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
|> Liberal: someone that believes that the government should raise
|> taxes, engage in income redistribution, increase regulation 
|> on businesses, and actively use state power to discourage religious
|> belief.  Clear enough?
|> 
Not quite:

From Webster's:

1. lib.er.al \'lib(-*)-r*l\ \-r*-le-\ aj [ME, fr. MF, fr. L liberalis
   suitable for a freeman, generous, fr. lib]er free; akin to OE le-odan to
   grow, Gk eleutheros free 1a: of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts
   {~ education} archaic  1b: of or befitting a man of free birth 2a: marked
   by generosity and openhandedness {~ giver} 2b: given in a generous and
   openhanded way {~ amount} : BOUNTIFUL obs  3: lacking moral restraint :
   LICENTIOUS 4: not literal : LOOSE {a ~ translation} 5: BROAD-MINDED,
   TOLERANT; esp : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional
   forms 6a: of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism cap  6b:
   of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the
   principles of political liberalism; esp : of or constituting a political
   party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual esp.
   economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and
   constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure
   these objectives n giving freely and unstintingly. LIBERAL suggests
   openhandedness in the giver and largeness in the thing or amount given;
   GENEROUS stresses warmhearted readiness to give more than size or
   importance of the gift; BOUNTIFUL suggests lavish, unremitting giving or
   providing; MUNIFICENT suggests a scale of giving appropriate to lords or
   princes - lib.er.al.ly av SYN syn LIBERAL, GENEROUS, BOUNTIFUL, MUNIFICENT
   mea
2. liberal n : one who is liberal : as : one who is open-minded in the
   observance of orthodox or traditional forms cap  : a member or supporter of
   a Liberal party : an advocate of liberalism esp. in individual rights

Gee somehow reality (the Dictionary) and your paranoia don't match.

Of course, this is just SUCH a surprise to us all.

|> 
|> I think of Orwell a lot.  Especially since the crap that he
|> described with respect to language is going on at most public
|> universities in this state.
|> 

As a student of history, you should note that language is ever
changing.  Language is not static, nor is it cast in stone.


-- 
To fathom hell, or soar angelic, take a pinch of psychedelic.
				Dr. Osmond
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,misc.headlines
From: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman)
Subject: Re: Fair Swap
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 03:59:18 GMT

In article <1992Sep04.001354.2458721@locus.com> jle@locus.com (John Elghani/10000000) writes:
>In article <1992Sep3.192057.29754@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> wmuhanna@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Waleed A Muhanna) writes:
>>
>>In article <1992Aug31.200824.9011@colorado.edu>, perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU 
>>(Eric S. Perlman) asserts:
>>>And E. Jerusalem is *not* occupied territory. 
>>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Really? Just because you say so?  For the umpteen time, point of fact is that 
>
>He's right Muhanna.  Jerusalem is stolen territory just like its
>mother Palestine.

Neither is stolen territory.  Israel reclaimed it in a purely defensive
war.  And Israel was not the agressor in '48, either.


-- 
"How sad to see/A model of decorum and tranquillity/become like any other sport
A battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee." -Tim Rice,"Chess"
     Eric S. Perlman 				 <perlman@qso.colorado.edu> 
  Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:26:37 GMT
Subject: Re: Intellectuals and totalitarianism (was Re: WORLD GOVERNMENT)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc

In talk.politics.misc, gary@isis.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand) writes:

> dq> Doug Quarnstrom
> gs> Gary Strand
> 
> gs> Sometimes I think your average blue-collar Joe Steelworker has more sense
> gs> and wisdom than all the lefty intellectuals infesting academia and the
> gs> "elite".
> 
> dq> Of course, to some degree, this smacks of an intellectual condescending to
> dq> admire those 'beneath' him. The noble savage and all that....
> 
>   Well, I'd rather be admired/respected by my "betters" for patronizing rea-
>   sons rather than thought of as an idiot who needs to be told when to blow
>   his nose and wipe his butt, the attitude I've found most prevalent among
>   leftists/academic elites. Do I really need a law to tell me to wear a
>   seat belt when I drive? Come on!

I don't know.  Do you?
From: brownfield!jbrow (Jim Brownfield)
Subject: Re: unc health care study
Reply-To: <jbrow@glv.com>
Organization: Encompass
Distribution: talk
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 21:51:11 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.933.61748@dosgate> "nigel allen" <nigel.allen@canrem.com>  
writes:
[stuff deleted]
> 
>    "This study has one simple conclusion: Bill Clinton's health plan
> would control costs and create 2.2 million more jobs than George
> Bush's approach.

Only democrats would contend that stealing money to employ 2.2 million  
bureaucrats (how else would such a bill "create" jobs?) is a plan that would  
"control" costs.  More pork barrel politics at our expense.

[stuff deleted]

> Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI

Jim Brownfield
#include <standard/disclaimer.h>
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:41443 talk.abortion:33093 alt.politics.bush:2594
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Date: 24 Aug 92 02:46:57 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Distribution: na
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <azdy5xj@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:

>>> I think a friend of mine put it best when she noted that people
>>> who oppose abortion are generally those who are unlikely ever to
>>> need one.

This is an old and tired cliche that doesn't say any more now than it
did when it was first uttered.

>> But doesn't this just say that those who are pro-life are smart
>> enough, have learned enough, and are responsible enough to put
>> themselves in positions where abortion does not become an alternative?

And should this even need to be stated?

> Like being a man or a post-menopausal woman?

Or a responsible woman who is not enslaved by her lusts.  Apparently
those who are [so enslaved] seem to be in a perpetual state of denial.
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush,soc.singles,alt.romance.chat,alt.peeves
From: ssalter@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (-=[SLS]=-)
Subject: Re: Those Annoying Coy Conversations
Organization: OFSA
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:50:07 GMT

chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) sez:

>Holy smokes, drieux, what manner of godhood were you promoted to???
>If it was net.god, please please have mercy on me, a sinner!!!
>
>> Some things are Just TOOOOOOO Disgusting for words....
>
>Why are some gods so darned judgemental?

gods must be judgemental if they are to be
AdmiredWorshippedSacrificed-to by the masses. 

what do you want, a namby-pamby god or a REAL(tm) one that will
require your total devotion and belief?

i think drieux is an avatar of god, his godhood will be bestowed in
time. 

-- 
Spirituality is what is inside : religion is humankind's vain attempt to
express it outwardly.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42312 ca.politics:7108 ba.politics:4816
From: rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: My Purpose In Getting NAMBLA Shunned
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:07:41 GMT
Organization: QueerNet

In article <11846@optilink.UUCP> manley@optilink.UUCP (Dave Manley) writes:
>Question: If these statements do in fact represent the beliefs of the
>people, both hetero- and homosexual alike, how can anyone who opposes
>child molestation find a way to support NAMBLA - when they refuse to
>moderate their position to at least exclude prepubescent children? 

Answer: you confuse supporting NAMBLA with supporting their right to
exist and speak.
-- 
ROGER B.A. KLORESE                                              +1 415 ALL-ARFF
rogerk@unpc.QueerNet.ORG                 {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!unpc!rogerk
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from."
                                                                   -- J. Foster
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: buckmr@rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire)
Subject: On-Line Copy of REPUBLICAN PLATFORM desired!
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 92 17:48:44 -0500
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA07821; Thu, 3 Sep 92 14:55:12 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA01815; Thu, 3 Sep 92 14:55:10 -0700
X-Received: from sub.its.rpi.edu (marcus.its.rpi.edu) by rpi.edu (4.1/SMHUB32);id AA04710; Thu, 3 Sep 92 17:55:06 EDT for talk.politics.misc.usenet@decwrl.dec.com
X-Received: by sub.its.rpi.edu (AIX 3.1/UCB 5.61/RPI-ITS-SUB13-AIXV3);id AA47141; Thu, 3 Sep 92 17:48:45 -0400 for talk.politics.misc.usenet@decwrl.dec.com@rpi.edu
X-To: talk.politics.misc.usenet


Can someone email me and tell me where I can obtain an online copy of the 
Republican Platform? I already have a copy of the Democratic Platoform
Surely the Republicans are on-line, too?

Is there an ftp site or the email address of someone who has it?

Thanks!
---
RON BUCKMIRE, 11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180-3735.  ``D.C. in 93!''
vox:(518)-276-8910 fax:(518)-276-6920 buckmr@rpi.edu buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet
"Yes, you can get AIDS from a mosquito...*IF* you have unprotected
receptive anal intercourse with an infected mosquito..." -- Randy Shilts
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43429 soc.culture.greek:8383
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.culture.greek
Subject: Re: THE NEW BULLY OF THE BALKANS
Date: 3 Sep 92 02:31:27 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Sep1.070138.20948@sunbim.be> sk@groo.sunbim.be (Sasa Konecni) writes:

> ... Glancing at the print-out on a computerised bus-ticket, I found,
> in the space where you might expect "Have a nice trip", the statement,
> "Macedonia was and shall be Greek".

What "computerized" bus ticket?  KTEL?  Since when does KTEL use
computerized tickets?  EAS?  Does EAS even exist anymore?  When I was
in Athens about a month ago, the EAS drivers were on strike, and a few
days later Mitsotakis announced that he was abolishing the outfit.
(Then he raised the price of gas by 50 dr./lit., so I suppose his name
is really mud now.  Can any Greek readers let me know what's going on
with mass transportation in Athens now?)
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
From: kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran)
Subject: Re: Another good reason not to vote for Bush
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 15:09:48 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.023229.6076@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c60a-zg@volga.Berkeley.EDU (Martin Guerrero-LabA) writes:

[Mega Delete.]

>Perhaps I didn't word it right.  I didn't really mean to say that 'consent
>to sex = consent to bear a child.'  Maybe it is more like 'consent to
>sex = being responsible to any consequence of your actions.'  
>
>So this means that if you have sex and use contraceptives trying not to have
>a baby, then the contraceptives fail, then that means that you should still
>be held accountable for your actions. 

Right.  And one of the responsible things that a woman may decide to do at that
time is:

1)  Carry the pregnancy to term and keep the resulting child.
2)  Carry the pregnancy to term and give the child up for adoption.
3)  Abort the z/e/f.

Things are all reponsible things that mature, adult women must decide upon.

Why do you have a problem with that?
--
=kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu | B(0-4) c- d- e++ f- g++ k(+) m r(-) s++(+) t | TSAKC=
=My thoughts, my posts, my ideas, my responsibility, my beer, my pizza.  OK???=
=I am not "pro-life"... - Doug Holtsinger in article                          =
=                                          <1992Aug18.171231.1162@ncsu.edu>   =
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: WELFARE:  AN IDEA
Date: 2 Sep 92 03:34:21 GMT
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Sep1.222905.16787@nntp.uoregon.edu> Eric_Gorr@coglab_psych.uoregon.edu (Eric gorr) writes:
>
>Being a student in college, I am very familiar with all types of financial
>aid.  One type of financial aid is call a Work Study Grant.  Basically the
>way it works is that I find a work-study eligable job and the Goverent then
>pays a very significant percentage of my pay check.  I get a great job (the
>only real good jobs (unless you get lucky) are work-study ones) and my
>employer gets a cheap employee.  It's a win-win situation.
>
>Now, my idea for the welfare system would be very similiar to the way work
>study works.
>
>If you're on welfare and can work, you must work in order to receive your
>welfare check.  I would suggest that only non-profit businesses (maybe?) or
>volunteer organizations be allowing to hire people on welfare.  There is
>typically no limit to the number of people these types of organizations can
>use to do what ever they do, also, they are better able to work with
>bizaare schedules, children, etc...  The welfare check would basically
>serve as that persons paycheck.

One thing you have to remember is that a fair number of welfare
receivers are single mothers.  You have to include provisions for
daycare, or else the children, if they're young, may not be cared for
during the day.

You may also wish to consider what _kind_ of work they will be
doing.  Will they learn skills on the job?  If not, they may be
stuck permanently in a low-skill, low-wage job for the rest
of their lives.  They will then still require government supports.
You may want to include worker training, then.


--
Sweet Thames, run softly till I end my song
Sweet Thames, run softly, for I speak not loud or long.
			-- T.S. Eliot, "The Wasteland"
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Clair George's trial a mistrial!!
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 23:07:44 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Aug28.181505.14336@panix.com> eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler) writes:
>In <ART.92Aug28102416@world.std.com>, art@world.std.com sez:
>>In article <NEERI.92Aug27182449@iis.ethz.ch> neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Neeracher) writes:

>>   In article <17ga7eINNa6j@roundup.crhc.uiuc.edu> sunder@altair.crhc.uiuc.edu (Srinivas Sunder) writes:
>>   >What's the tally so far? 3 small cheeses, no big fish? Someone ought
>>   >to thank Walsh for showing us why this special prosecutor thing was
>>   >not that great an idea after all. 

>> What makes you think that someone else might have been more successful? Or do
>> you think that there shouldn't have been any prosecution at all?

>>That's right, none.  Why?  Because juries have consistently been
>>acquiting.  

>Like the North and Poindexter juries, right?  Ooops, better check
>those facts again.

>(And before you saddle up on your high horse, I know perfectly well
>that those convictions were vacated on appeal.  I could even give you
>a fair account of the reasons.  That doesn't alter the fact that the
>nonsense above about juries consistently acquitting is, well,
>nonsense.) 

Mark, read the damned post before you reply.  The guy you were
responding to said that he couldn't get a conviction when he did a
fair trial.  Obviously, the North and Poindexter convictions were
unfair.  That's why they were vacated on appeal.  You, however,
deleted the bit where he mentioned fair trials.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Cultural Elite?
Date: 27 Aug 92 23:30:43 GMT
Organization: NMSU Computer Science

In article <92239.170834DART@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> DART@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (415) writes:
< It's very similar to what Hitler did in the 30's to silence and discredit
< people who might oppose him.  

	Has Quayle suggested passing any laws to silence these people?
	You know, making it a "hate crime" to have those opinions?
	No?
	
	Hmm....just WHO is following in the footsteps of Adolf, again?

<It's a shame to see McCarthy...er, uh, Quayle,
<   (I can't imagine why I keep doing that.), 

	I can't imagine, either. I assume by McCarthy you mean
	the Senator from Wisconsin? Or are you confusing the
	VP with Senator Eugene McCarthy?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Rich Bond said WHAT?!!
Organization: LLNL
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 05:54:23 GMT

In article <farenebt.715466890@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:
: I was reading a Sandy Grady column on the GOP convention and he quoted
: GOP national chairman Rich Bond as saying, "We are Americans; they 
: [Democrats] are not." 

: First off, has anyone heard of this? Secondly, if he really did say that,
: it is reason #12,935,452 that I won't vote for Bush this year. This
: is clearly a cheap-shot low-blow EVEN for politics. I can say that I 
: honestly never thought that Bond or any Republican (save, perhaps, Jesse
: Helms) would stoop this low.

	Well, Rich Bond was not the first. James Watt once stated that
it's not Democrats and Republicans, it's liberals and Americans.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: WELFARE:  AN IDEA
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 16:58:49 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Sep1.222905.16787@nntp.uoregon.edu> Eric_Gorr@coglab_psych.uoregon.edu (Eric gorr) writes:
>Everyone says that they want to reconstruct the welfare system.  Also,
>everyone complains about all there is to do and no one seems to be doing
>it.  Well, I have an idea.
>
>Being a student in college, I am very familiar with all types of financial
>aid.  One type of financial aid is call a Work Study Grant.  Basically the
>way it works is that I find a work-study eligable job and the Goverent then
>pays a very significant percentage of my pay check.  I get a great job (the
>only real good jobs (unless you get lucky) are work-study ones) and my
>employer gets a cheap employee.  It's a win-win situation.

    except for some poor folk who are forced to subsidize your paycheck while
    being unable to get a "real good job" through, and parrtly due to, the 
    goverment largess.
>
>Now, my idea for the welfare system would be very similiar to the way work
>study works.
>
>If you're on welfare and can work, you must work in order to receive your
>welfare check. I would suggest that only non-profit businesses (maybe?) or
>volunteer organizations be allowing to hire people on welfare.  There is
>typically no limit to the number of people these types of organizations can
>use to do what ever they do, also, they are better able to work with
>bizaare schedules, children, etc...  The welfare check would basically
>serve as that persons paycheck.

    This is fairly close to what we have now: poor single mothers are employed
    by the goverment to look after their own kids.  The pay isn't as bad as
    the welfare advocates would have us believe: here in Massachussets it is
    $30,000+ a year for a family of three (this number is ~4 years old and 
    includes Medicaid, foodstamps, subsidized housing, fuel assistance, etc.),
    yet by all accounts the system is seriously broken.  

    I think we should do away with the welfare system as we know it altogether.
    Instead of paying women for having children outside of wedlock and not
    working, we should give parents who are unable to support their children 
    an opportunity to temporarily place them in a foster home, get back on their 
    feet, and take the kids back.  That will take away an incentive to raise
    one's children poor with no man in the house, and reduce the number of 
    children living below the poverty line.



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: all opinions are mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43499 alt.desert-storm:1737