HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass)
Subject: Re: Flash! Environmentalists switch off Earth's volcanoes (was: The Fr
Organization: Anasazi Inc Phx Az USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 21:24:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.210602.17949@pmafire.inel.gov> cdm@pmafire.inel.gov (Dale Cook) writes:
>In article <1992Dec21.173951.19584@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>>Keywords: 
>>
>>In article <1992Dec19.215032.18325@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>>]In article <1992Dec17.220703.410@pmafire.inel.gov> cdm@pmafire.inel.gov (Dale Cook) writes:
>>]
>>]>Nobody in science seriously doubts that global warming is happening.
>>
>>Well, in our local Geography Department, we have 2 climatologists
>>that I know of that seriously doubt it: Dr. Bob Ballard and 
>>Dr. Sherwood Idso. In fact, Ballard has published a book that gives an
>>excellent presentation of the issue: "The Heated Debate." I recommend
>>it for the science impaired (it would do Rush a lot of good to read it
>>too - he is out to lunch on many environmental issues).
>
>Do they doubt that the earth has warmed over the last century?  I doubt 
>it.  Do they dispute whether the recent trend is indicative of a longer
>term trend? Or that the recent data (over the last century, earth has
>warmed about .6 degrees C) is nothing more than an aberration in the
>longer term trend? Perhaps, that man has nothing to do with the recent
>increase? Possibly that the effects over the next century of any increase
>in global average temperature will not be significant?
>
>To argue any of these points is NOT necessarily to argue that the earth
>has not warmed recently or will not warm in the future.

That the Earth has warmed (80s hottest decade on record) is obvious.  Is it
natural or man-made is a question, is good or bad is a question, can we do
anything about is a question as well.

While it is easy to look at the 80s and see they were the hottest of direct
measurement history (a century or so), archeological and historical
evidence may indicate we are just exiting a colder than normal period.  For
instance, remember the terrible winter at Valley Forge for Washington and
his men crossing the Delaware.  When was the last time the Delaware was so
frozen and the winter so terrible at Christmas time?  (Could someone from
New Jersey answer this?)  Is that normal or are current temperatures
normal?

Global warming from a "sky is falling and its all our fault" perspective is a 
very debatable question.  That the Earth's climate is changing due to as yet
not completely understood forces is very clear.

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12269 alt.politics.clinton:19103 alt.politics.bush:14919 alt.politics.homosexuality:8450 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10696
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Date: 25 Dec 1992 00:56:46 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
> I thought I already said this, but just in case, I'll say it again.   I
> will wait for authoritative figures.
> What this group, which is still nameless, claims, may turn out to be
> correct or it may not.   We'll see when the crime stats appear.

I think you're missing the point, Jon; the crime stats will never come 
out on those numbers, because they were based on gays reporting the 
incidents to the group, and *not* to the police; so there are no crime 
records to appear.  So should the group (or any group in such a situation) 
use the stats, if they have little to know verifiable backing, and 
support the group's cause? 

> Ugly.   And also official, and apparently a fatal anti-Gay hate crime.

Yup.  Assuming that it is as it appears, which seems likely as you 
conveyed it. 

Walter

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12695 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11109 alt.politics.clinton:19396 alt.politics.bush:15268 alt.politics.homosexuality:8727
From: briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Columbus vs Indians (was Re: PC lives)
Date: 23 Dec 92 22:22:04 GMT
Organization: Anasazi Inc Phx Az USA

In article <nate.980@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:

[deleted stuff]
>Unfortunately for the Indians conversion to Christianity wasn't much 
>protection from disease, and the estimated pre-1500's native population of 
>over 100 million was very quickly reduced to as few as 5 million.
>
>    Your theory concerning cannibalism amongst the Carribs is hardly 
>sufficient to account for the deaths of over 95 million people in scarcely 
>30 years, nor for that matter is the theory that Aztec human sacrifice 

Could you please post some references for the above numbers, 100 mill to 5,
95 mill in 30 years.

Thank you.

>--
>Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
>Psychology Department               Indiana University
>nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Rush Courts the FAAAR Right
Organization: LLNL
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:53:20 GMT


	I don't see how discussing homosexual relationships is a bad
thing. After all, some people are that way.

	As to the Ten-Commandments controversy, the think I find
offensive about this complaint of "can't put them up" is the
insinuation that only the Bible has ever taught that murder and theft
are bad. Murder and theft are widely frowned upon, at least inside of
social groupings (outside them is another question entirely; the Bible
states that the Israelites' conquest of the "Promised Land" was a
proud history of them murdering and stealing on a massive scale).

	What would the Bible-thumpers say about putting up copies of
the Buddha's sayings? After all, he taught such things as:

	Do not kill any living being
	Do not take what is not given to you
	Do not speak falsely

	Now can anyone object to teachings like _these_?

	And does this mean that we ought to make Buddhism the official
religion of our public schools _just_ to teach "values"?
-- 
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/lip@s1.gov
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: bush should be impeached,for the pardon of the good old boys!!!
Date: 29 Dec 92 17:33:04 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec29.080654.29807@gator.use.com> Ted.Schafer@bbs.rn.com (Ted Schafer) writes:
>The pardon is the biggest screw job done on the american public in
>twenty years.We can only hope bush is the last republican president.
>             happy new year to all
>             Ted Schafer
>p.s. If charactor matters so much,I think we picked the right guy two
>     months ago.

NO! NO! NO!

The biggest screw job done on the american public is the $35 million that 
Walsh has spent on the investigation over the last several years, even 
though Walsh and all his spies could find no hard evidence.

Ted

-- 
So the Maples formed a union, and demanded equal rights, "The Oaks are just 
too greedy.  We will make them give us light!"  Now there's no more Oak 
oppression, for they passed a noble law.  And the trees are all kept equal, 
by hatchet, axe and saw.     -  Rush, The Trees
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexual
From: briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass)
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody
Organization: Anasazi Inc Phx Az USA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 00:26:29 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.225448.15658@unet.net.com> stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight) writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.205049.18175@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>>>Just as a point of clarification, Clinton can change or establish an
>>>executive order to allow homosexuals in the military, he cannot as
>>>easily change some of the laws which apply to the code of conduct of
>>>persons in the military.

Stan seems attribute the above line to me.  In fact it was from a reply to
my earlier posting.  Probably a stuck delete key.  No harm no foul.


Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12226 alt.politics.clinton:19070 alt.politics.bush:14895 alt.politics.homosexuality:8413 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10663
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Date: 23 Dec 92 23:49:33 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <BzqApK.54G@andy.bgsu.edu>, jnomina@andy.bgsu.edu (A.P.K.) writes:
|> 
|>  
|> In an article, livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
|>  
|> [ .. discussion of shower room incident omitted .. ]
|>  
|> >So why should we take this seriously in considering whether Gays
|> >should be allowed in the Armed Forces?
|> >
|> >I'm not being flippant.   Why should we?
|>  
|> I'm not about to say that gays _shouldn't_ be allowed in the military.
|> I was merely pointing out that such incidents DO occur (while some
|> people try to argue that such things _never_ occur.) 

Well, that's exactly the point I was making.   What "such incidents"
are we talking about?

If we are talking about something which was never reported, where you
won't reveal who was involved, then we are not left with much.   All
we are left with is an allegation, and as we have seen recently, allegations
are a dime a dozen, and hard facts are difficult to come by.

If someone - and of course that might not be you - wants to show that
having Gays in the military is a problem, then I think that they need
to do better then an anecdote that no-one can verify.

I've deleted the rest of your reply since it's not what I was addressing.

jon.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12469 alt.politics.clinton:19221
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
From: psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek)
Date: 30 Dec 92 17:40:54 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
 <1992Dec28.150608.28353@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> <1992Dec30.160631.17308@ux1.cts.eiu.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

Why I'm going deeply into debt to get my kid into a private school...

The truth of the matter is that the issue of Homosexuality shouldn't even
be debated.  The first and only important question we should be asking
is should ANY values be taught in school.  As far as I'm concerned the
answer is clearly no.  

American children continue to fall behind children around the world in areas
of math, science, reading and writing skills etc. etc.  The very idea that 
any of our public school funding or resources should be spent on teaching 
social issues or values is nonsense.  Forget the details of what is being
taught for a moment and answer me this; at a time when the public schools
continue to fail to provide our children with the skills they'll need to 
compete in college and in the job market, why are we continuing to sqaunder 
our time and resources on garbage curriculums.  The entire issue is a glaring
example of the misplaced priorities that have lead to the decline of our
education system.  Children of the Rainbow, outcome based education and
every other social agenda masquerading as education, are simply bandages
intended to hide the imcompetency of the public shcool and public school
teachers, while allowing some to feel good about their failures.

For me, and I suspect many other parents that make a fuss about programs
like Children of the Rainbow, the question as to whether homosexuality 
should be taught in an way, is secondary to the issue of whether our 
children should have their economic futures compromised because some
other parent isn't teaching the "correct values".  All the funding in 
the world won't mean squat if public schools continue to ignore their
real jobs in favor of attempting to be set the social agenda for our
country.

Sure you may actually even achieve some of the goals the proponents of
these programs have set (I'll bet you won't but that's another matter) 
but so what.  Your children may be the most tolerant in the world, but
they're still going to be pushing brooms the rest of their lives while
the children that attend private schools and those that get their 
education in countries that ingore such social engineering drivel clean
their clocks in the real world.

Leave the teaching of values to the parents and as a nation we'll be better
off in the long run.

PSG 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.correct
From: ssc@nwu.edu (Steven Chung)
Subject: Re: "My Cabinet" by Clinton (was Re: Affirmative action is dead)
Originator: schung@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 02:19:31 GMT

In article <1993Jan03.033540.2412@microsoft.com> bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:
# /(ssc)
# /No, only the politically correct ones.
# 
# 
# What politically incorrect minorities would you propose?

I thought it would be obvious.

In any case, it's a silly issue--as Rush says, 'symbolism over substance.'

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: freier@mail.physics.utah.edu (rodney james freier)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Organization: University of Utah - Physics Department
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 09:06:33 GMT


|> |> It does exactly bring into question the activities in the bedroom, because 
|> |> sexual preference is a direct correlation with same-sex parents.  Please, 
|> |> show me 3 same-sex couples who are heterosexual.
|> |> 
|> |> Can you say "touche?"
|> |> 

Well, let's see.... I could 'show' you some, but you don't live in my 
neighborhood, so... howabout the TV examples?  "Kate & Allie", "My Two Dads",
and "Full House" (oops, that's a same-sex triple).

I hope you don't dismiss these as pointless examples.  Two men (or women) with
children from a previous marriage might indeed form a stable family.   And
sexual preference has nothing to do with it.


Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: teddybur@netcom.com (John Sanger)
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices and Secular Reasoning
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:24:49 GMT

In article <C095nK.82y@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l) writes:
>lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard) writes:
>
>>In article <C07oBz.F74@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l) writes:
>>>ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>>>
>>>>In article <1992Dec30.162502.6756@asl.dl.nec.com> dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:
>
>>>Why is *secular* reasoning superior to religious reasoning? 
>
>>I'm sitting 10 feet from a machine that can produce 3d images of your
>>internal organs, it was designed by secular reasoning.
>
>And it was designed in a country founded upon a belief in God.  The 
>country founded upon atheism and a belief in man no longer exists.
>

If you are speaking of the United States of America, you need to reread
your history, paying particular attention to the thoughts of Thomas
Jefferson, who had some hand in the writing of the documents that founded
our country.  You also need to take a look at the Bill Of Rights.



Ciao!
	John S. :^)
	teddybur@netcom.com
__

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: elliott@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Jr. Frank W. Elliott)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 00:19:21 GMT

In article <1hqmklINN24o@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
>> Fine....then I shouldn't be paying taxes for something that says I 
>> am wrong.  
>
>If the folks who submitted the school voucher amendment get their way, 
>you might not have to...then again, the public school system may go 
>furthur in the toilet...

Do you seriously think that the voucher system will allow people
without children to stop paying taxes to support public schools?


>Walter
>


Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12392 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10808 alt.politics.clinton:19173 alt.politics.bush:14984 alt.politics.homosexuality:8491
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: 29 Dec 1992 19:43:07 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass) writes:
> 
> I feel that if sex education is to be taught in school it should be optional
> and it must include homosexuality as an equal sexuality.  

Hmmmmmm.....what exactly would you teach as 'homosexuality'?  And what 
about bisexuality?  (or abstinance, for that matter) Should it include 
a module on bestiality?  Bondage?  etc??  (not trying to be flip, this 
is a straightforeward question)  

> I do feel that
> all school should be required to have Counsoling for 'sexuality confused'
> students.  I am tired of the suicides of Gay teens in this country.

Now that's a good idea.  Any schools that you know of currently training 
their guidance counselors to handle (in a proficient manner) this?  Or 
would you rather see a counselor who specializes in such things?  
Anyone here ever talk to their school counselor about 'sexual confusion' 
and have any success in getting help? 

> >>In my view, teaching my children views which are in direct conflict
> >>with our (my wife and I) values is a violation of this respect. 
> 
> And of course you feel the same way about pray in school activities?
> You must respect other's values in the school also, the Jew, the Hindu and so
> on. 

You also have to take a sensible approach; only a small number of people are 
offended by prayer at school functions, and even they are beginning to be heard. 
The 'seperation of church and state' has been cited here over and over 
in this group; over and over out of context.  If the majority of people 
think homosexuality is not a 'good' thing, then it is not proper for the 
public school system to teach otherwise; some posters have said that if 
straight people don't want it being taught to their kids, put them in 
private school.  That isn't something the majority should be expected 
to do.   (dismounting soapbox..) 

Walter



> 
> >
> >
> >>You know bub, Jesus may be real to you (as he is to me), but HE IS 
> >NOT TO THE JEWS!!  AND MILLIONS OF OTHER RELIGIONS!  SO GET OFF YOU
> >DAMN SOAPBOX!! 
> 
> But this Bub is allowed to have his beliefs, no matter how foolish they
> may seem.  I took this posting as a discussion in values...maybe I
> came into the middle of something I shouldn't have come into.
> 
> Bil Snodgrass III
> 
> P.S.  My only issue with this supposed Christian is his claim to be a 
> Christian....but that is another topic matter....
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Howard Black)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 17:11:06 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

In article <1hv47hINN5cv@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
>
>Does it make you feel better to see loathing when there is none?  Does it 
>justify to you that all the 'phobes are out to get you, and all the 
>Christians just can't wait to see you fry?  You obviously have *no clue* 
>as to how Christians think about things like this.

    When you've been around the net as long as I and others have, you get a
pretty good feel for how certain 'phobes think.  Your rhetoric is not as
militant and obnoxious as some, but it conveys the same sentiment.
    Perhaps you are being unfairly grouped with other Xians who have made
their hateful positions abundantly clear.  I have, in fact, corresponded
both on the net and via email with Xians who *really are* non-judgemental
and *really don't* feel the need to teach everyone, including their kids,
that homosexuality is wrong, immoral, etc.  I would be very glad to have
you demonstrate that you are one of these.

>> >Ooooooo...I guess I'm just an evil, Rush-loving, gay-bashing, breeder-'phobe..
>> 
>>     You said it; I didn't.  But I agree.
>
>I'm not suprised...

    If it quacks, walks, and looks like a duck....

-- 
   ******************************************************************
     Howard Black                             cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu
     Department of Chemistry                  Eastern Illinois Univ. 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Subject: Re: RUSH=FAG!
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 14:08:11 GMT

In article <2827.97.uupcb@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us> greg.mable@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Greg Mable)  writes:
>Does the big guy ever get on this conference or is he too fat
>and stupid to use a computer?  I heard he's gay and his lover
>is a black man (and a democrat)!  Hope he uses a condom!

What makes you think he'd waste his time sifting through the 99% tripe
which gets posted here?  Go back to your room little boy and quite
bothering the big people.

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner    Phone: 512/346-8380    MHS: bboerner@novell
Internet: bboerner@novell.com     \  Please use either if replying
   or  Brendan_Boerner@novell.com /  by mail exterior to Novell.

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Howard Black)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 15:01:29 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

In article <C03wnu.7pJ@NeoSoft.com> jpsb@NeoSoft.com (Jim Shirreffs) writes:
>>Now...are yo willing to allow a class on sexuality that shows
>>homosexuality and heterosexuality in the same unbiased light, a
>>class that would be optional....?
>
>What a waist of tax dollars! Pre-schoolers? If you insist, ok, but let us
>not forget the *optional*.

    Yeah, I guess the tax dollars would be better spent teaching adults the
difference between homonyms such as "waste" and "waist".

    I normally avoid grammatical flames, but you seem to have a distinct
idea of what education should comprise.  Besides, this isn't a typo.  It's
just stupid.
-- 
   ******************************************************************
     Howard Black                             cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu
     Department of Chemistry                  Eastern Illinois Univ. 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh