HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
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 23:23:01 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass) writes:
> How about heterosexuality where fathers rape their daughters and 
> where women aren't able to walk at night because of the heterosexually
> dominant practice of RAPE....Maybe we should teach people that rape as a 
> heterosexual ritual is alright!!!

I can see this is going to be a productive conversation...

> Saying something nasty then saying I am not being flip just doesn't work
> for me....

What exactly was nasty? 

> 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...

> I shouldn't pay for breeders to continue to have children
> they cannot afford to clothe house and feed.  I shouldn't be paying for
> spousal insurance through my premiums for Child birthing and Spousal
> Benefits.....How dare your type call me equal when it comes to taking
> money from me but don't allow me basic human rights.  

Yeah, this is gonna be *real* productive...do you call your mother 
and father 'breeders', too? 

> And as far
> as the seperations of Church and State goes, it has nothing to do
> with this discussion....

Some folks arguing *for* teaching homosexuality is OK brought it in, 
not me...piss at them if you feel the need. 
> 
> Our country isn't ruled by a majority.  It is a republic.  

Ah, that explains democracy...

Walter

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass)
Subject: Re: An Apology to Ted
Organization: Anasazi Inc Phx Az USA
Distribution: world, na, usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:38:11 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.174843.13914@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> glen@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Glen Sonnenberg) writes:
>In article <1992Dec22.004304.28942@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec20.130523.6747@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> turnert@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Thom F Turner ) writes:
>>
>>That's a personnel issue to be dealt with by a personnel office.  But
>>original commentary again portends that he was summarily dismissed because
>>of his views, not because of any insubordination of authority (ie. a rule
>>that says you can't compare gays to gila monsters on UA letterhead for
>>which he should be disclipined).
>
>Where did you get this from?  

I can only assume you missed the front end of this from Thom F Turner who
posted a gloating article that the gay and lesbian caucus toppled the
Professor in question.  I submit that if he violated University ethics and
standards by writing something on UA letterhead, it is a personnel office
and should stay inside that office.  My contention being that politics
should have nothing to do with physics.  And that by Thom F Turner's logic
that Freddie Mercury (were he alive) would be more qualified than Edward
Teller (is he still alive), because of Teller's politics.

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12861 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11323 alt.politics.clinton:19502 alt.politics.bush:15404 alt.politics.homosexuality:8841
From: teddybur@netcom.com (John Sanger)
Subject: Re: using the bible to advance bigotry
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 02:48:56 GMT

In article <casivils.726097308@node_508ba> casivils@lescsse.jsc.nasa.gov (craig sivils) writes:
>In <C07DBw.1oE@math.uwaterloo.ca> shallit@graceland.uwaterloo.ca (Jeffrey Shallit) writes:
>
>Whats next, if we can be intolerant toward people for what the beleive but
>not what they do, whats next.
>
>Why is wrong to rob a grave, have sex with animals, children, would it be wrong
>to spike a pregnant mothers drink with RU42 (or whatever it is), why is
>blackmail wrong and taxation not?  Fact is that we have to make moral decisions
>and when it comes down to it, you have to assume something.  If I choose to 
>believe the Bible and find it to be a workable basis for me then why don't you
>practice some of that toleration
>

Because you insist that all others must have the same views as you hold and
you go to the extreme of trying to legislate them into being.  When you and
yours stop trying to force your views onto everyone else then the tolerance
will be there.



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

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Subject: Re: Are the Rush Summaries history?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 20:07:29 GMT

In article <28942@optima.cs.arizona.edu> bakken@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Bakken) writes:
>I've been gone for a bit, but I don't see any summaries
>(and saw them slowing down quite a bit in recent weeks).
>Are they a thing of the past now?  I never understood how
>John Switzer could have kept up for that for as long as
>he did!

Tell me about it! I'll start them up again when Rush gets back on Jan 4th, 
but do have a few highlights of the Dornan shows to post when I can get
around to it this week. Unfortunately, I missed yesterday's show with 
Oliver North :-(. 
-- 
John Switzer               | "What we have here is a failure to 
                           | masticate."
Compuserve: 74076,1250     | -- MST3K's Dr. Clayton "Firebrand" Forrester, 
Internet: jrs@netcom.com   | after TV's Frank is unable to eat his 13th turkey.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: David Hanson was Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Be
Followup-To: junk
Date: 28 Dec 1992 02:26:10 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Department MSCS
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: studsys.mscs.mu.edu

In article <1992Dec28.014736.6210@engr.LaTech.edu> mchenry@latech.edu (Michael Q. McHenry) writes:
>dlhanson@nap.amoco.com (David L. Hanson) writes:
>> [Yet another bible quote post showing how clever Davis Hanson is]
>Oh, puke.  My stomache actually hurts after reading this.

Micheal,

David is one of the net.people who comes into a newsgroup and
posts bible quotes, then refuses to back up the quote in the group
or in e-mail.  His greatest moment was when the quarterly abortion flamewar
started up in this very group and at the end of his message was a line 
which stated how he would not respond to any 'negative' mail/messages.


-- 
Marc Rassbach    marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu    If you take my advice, that
MS-DOS - it's not   marc@milestn.mil.wi.us    is your problem, not mine!
my problem!     If it was said on UseNet, it must be true.
   Unix - It's a nice place to live, but you don't want to visit there.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:14:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

In article <1992Dec31.181358.17099@asl.dl.nec.com>, dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:
|> 
|> That is the whole problem. Teachers in sex ed. and drug ed. classes are
|> told not to tell children what is right and wrong, to just present the
|> facts. This has the opposite effect of what they intend. Kids tend to
|> be more promiscuous and use more drugs. Please read 'Why Johnny can't
|> tell right from wrong' by William Kirkpatrick (recently published).
|> Another book is 'Moral Illiteracy' (I believe that's the title)
|> by William Bennett. You wanted references, well now you have them.

It's not the teachers job to present morals.  IT'S THE
PARENT'S JOB!  The parents are the ones at fault in this
because they aren't informing the children in the first
place, leaving it up to the schools to attempt to save
these kids from AIDS, DRUGS, and TEEN PREGNANCY.  If the
parents would do the job this would not be an issue.


Jared Dahl
Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.
Don't send e-mail - I won't get it.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12443 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10865 alt.politics.clinton:19208 alt.politics.bush:15031
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Be
Date: 28 Dec 92 15:31:32 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec27.151922.10864@nmsu.edu> dward@scf.nmsu.edu (Dan Ward) writes:

>    I agree that people who search through the Bible to find some
>    phrase which supports their particular form of bigotry are NOT
>    the kind of Christians I would want my kids around...  Dan 

Yeah!  That's right!  Can't have anyone judging others.  You know, all that
Judge not lest ye be judged stuff.  We wouldn't want our children to think 
that murder, theft and covetousness were wrong now, would we.  You know, 
I thought that all of our problems would be solved once we got those pesky 
10 Commandments out of our classrooms.  Maybe the problem is that they are 
still hanging on the walls of congress, and, you know, they do open the 
congress and supreme court with prayer.  Damn!  When will they ever learn?

Ted

Miles and miles of ;) for the humor impared.

-- 
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.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: young@ssdd475a.erim.org (Peter Young)
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
In-reply-to: berger@gauss's message of Sat, 26 Dec 1992 21:47:15 GMT
Organization: Environmental Research Institute of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
	<Bzvz6s.FEA@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: 1 Jan 93 21:26:03

In all these anecdotes about homosexual rape in the military, what
most people seem to be ignoring is that most of the perpetrators do
not consider themselves to be gay.  Just as in prison the sexual
agressors were heterosexual, exclusively, before incarceration, and
are exclusively so after release, soldiers in stressful situations
behave oddly.  Most of them would cite lack of any other interpersonal
outlet for their sexual urges as the reason for their behavior.

Do we believe that the kid who corners a sheep on the farm has
expressed his sexual orientation thereby?  Of course not.  The sheep
is simply the most convenient target at the time.  So it is for the
kid in the military, away from home for the first time, scared,
convinced by the powers that be that he is as bad as they come, and
the world is his for the taking.  It is surprising that more such
incidents are not reported.

While the Col. David Hackworth (Is that right?) incidents cited by Mr.
Moore clearly indict a particular homosexual captain, we cannot
reasonably condemn a significant portion of our society based upon
this one documented case.

--
Peter Young
young@erim.org
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12850 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11301 alt.politics.clinton:19497 alt.politics.bush:15397
From: popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,a
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Be
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 02:52:57 GMT
Distribution: add
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX

rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu writes:

> In article <1992Dec29.184740.20472@lclark.edu>, snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snod
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> |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.  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.
> | 
> |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 s
> |on.  I mean I pray all the time at work, even on work time.....
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 	I have an idea.  If voluntary prayer is okay in school, certainly
> voluntary sex-ed and homosex-ed is, right?
> 
>      ____                _
>     /    )               /          
>    /    /               /       
>   (____/   ___     ___ /   ___,    ___   ,___ 
> __    /   ____)   /   /   (__     /   )  /   )
>  /   /   /   /   /   /       )   /   /  /   /     
> (___/   (___(_  (___(_  (___/   (___/  /   (__    
> 
> 

Read Matthew 6:5.   Christ commands that all prayer be done in private.
Public prayer such as school prayer or prayer befor sports gams are 
bibically prohibited.

Jesus said so.
The Bible Proves it.
That settles it.

Note that throughout the 4 gospels, christ almost always withdraws to 
pray and never is sepicted as taking part in group prayer or leading 
group prayer.  Why can't America's Christians foolow christ's commnds on 
this?

--
popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 481-3763
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12545 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10964 alt.politics.clinton:19282 alt.politics.bush:15123 alt.politics.homosexuality:8612
From: dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: 30 Dec 92 21:26:15 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: NEC America, Advanced Switching Laboratory

In article <30DEC199214481979@morgul.carleton.edu.> LAMBERTN@CARLETON.EDU writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.162502.6756@asl.dl.nec.com>, dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.
>com (Doug Dillhoff) writes...
>> 
>>Unlike heterosexuality, which is dictated by nature, homosexuality
>>is a lifestyle choice and should not be presented as such to school
>>children.

Let me clarify this. I do not think that children should be taught
that the homosexual lifestyle is normal. I respect the rights of all
human beings, I just believe that the homosexual lifestyle is
wrong (IMO).

>
>WHAT?!?!  So I chose to be gay?  Hah!  Just the thought of letting some hairy,
.
. stuff deleted
.
>I DON'T FIND MEN ATTRACTIVE.  Tell you what, Doug--if you *choose* to find men
>attractive and _succeed_ in doing so, *I'll* become straight.  Deal?

What??????????

-- 
Doug Dillhoff            Any opinions expressed are strictly my own.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: fogarty@sir-c.jpl.nasa.gov (Tim Fogarty)
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military 
Organization: JPL, Shuttle Imaging Radar Software Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 00:53:31 GMT


In article <1992Dec23.183439.17001@anasazi.com>, briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:

|>BTW, in some services, hetro soldiers can still be prosecuted for consential 
|>sodomy or oral copulation with a women while on base.  Should Clinton repeal 
|>this ban also, while he repeals it for homosexuals?

Clinton is not repealing any band on having sex while on base.  Please 
learn the difference between being homosexual and having homosexual sex.

Currently, you will be kicked out of the military even if you only state
that you are homosexual.  You will be kicked out even if the military has
evidence that you had same-gender sex while on leave.

Gays and straights will still be required to separate their professional 
and personal lives.  But who they date while they are on their own time
should be of no concern to the military.

--
Tim Fogarty
Sys Man and Sys Admin for the EGSE in the POCC at JSC for SRL-1, STS-59
FOGARTY@SIR-C.JPL.NASA.GOV
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices (was  Re: Sexuality)
Date: 01 Jan 93 18:52:59 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Dec31.205337.11369@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>In article <1992Dec31.043531.4304@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>>
>>     Let's look at it from a different angle:  Should it be illegal
>>for people to eat vegetables, simply because you are a meat eater?
>>Should employers be able to fire vegetarians for not eating meat?
>>Should school children be taught that vegetarians are abnormal?
>
>And must we have a law to prevent each and every one of these incidents of
>descrimination?  As I pointed out before, Smokers have been fired for
>smoking on their own time, at home, in their car, etc.  If employers can
>get away with that (some have, some haven't), can Hormel firing vegetarians
>be far behind?
>
>I repeat, can't we just have one law that forbids discriminating against
>anything other than appropriate job qualifications?

    I'd be all for it, if you can find some good way to codify
"appropriate job qualifications."  I haven't seen any such law
proposed, anywhere, though.  Maybe we should be lobbying our
Congressmen instead of wasting time posting to the net.

					-Phil
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.correct
From: bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver)
Subject: Re: "My Cabinet" by Clinton (was Re: Affirmative action is dead)
Date: 03 Jan 93 03:35:40 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Dec31.203407.14578@microsoft.com> bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:
# 
# What Clinton said was that his cabinet would "look like America".  
# 
# It was a comment designed to convey Clinton's desire to include women and 
# ethnic minorities.


/(ssc)
/No, only the politically correct ones.


What politically incorrect minorities would you propose?
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12691 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11105 alt.politics.clinton:19392 alt.politics.bush:15263 alt.politics.homosexuality:8722
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Bisexuality (was Re: [a long list of subjects])
Date: 30 Dec 92 21:11:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec30.182736.25870@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>In article <1hsme2INNdu@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
>> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>> between teaching same-sex families, vs teaching families where one or both 
>> of the parents are active bisexuals.  It is the question of sexual monogamy. 
>> Most people I know of think that marriage should be monogamous.  Not that 
>> it always is, but *should* be; we're talking an ideal.  Active homosexual parents 
>> can be monogamous, but by definition, the appearance is that active 
>> bisexual parents cannot, unless they are married to a male and a female. 
>
>Monogamous means that you choose to be faithful to one person.  It does not
>mean that you stop finding other people attractive.
>
>It is a source of constant amazement to me that men who are attracted
>to both blondes and brunettes have such difficulty with the concept that
>bisexuals can be monogamous.

So then, if you are a gay man, but married to a straight woman, you are 
still monogamous as long as you don't like having sex with her?

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
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12332 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10754 alt.politics.clinton:19140 alt.politics.bush:14952 alt.politics.homosexuality:8473
From: rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu
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: 27 Dec 1992 23:49 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu

In article <1hdo2aINNeea@hp-col.col.hp.com>, smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes...
| 
|I asked this in another thread, but it seems like a good place to
|bring it up again; as long as mainstream churches in the western 
|world teach that homosexuality is wrong, how can 'acceptance' of 
|homosexuality be accomplished?  Can the two (current mainstream
|Christianity and gay rights) coexist?  Or does either the outlook 
|of the churches on homosexuality or the goal (accpetance, not just 
|tolerance) of gay rights activists have to change?  

	Well... I'll put it to you this way.  If we consider the issue of
homosexuality as a moral issue, and extend it to being a religious issue,
then you'd have what Judaism and Christianity have been facing for the last
2000 years or so.

	Mainline Chistianity teaches that the Jewish faith is wrong, at
least parts of it.  Jews say Jesus is not G-d, and that he isn't the
Messiah, and that you don't need to believe in Jesus to be on G-d's
good side.

	Mainline Judaism teaches that it is an abomination to call a
man G-d, and it is also an abomination to drink the blood of the
sacrificial Lamb. 

	Yet, the two religious groups have eventually found a more or less
peaceful coexistence.  This has come as a result of sheer numbers living 
together enough to see the good aspects of both cultures, and from these 
people learning to tolerate religious differences.

	Can this happen with with mainline (anti-Gay) Christianity and
the various pro-Gay denominations of Christianity? or between the former 
and the Gay culture/religions in general?

	Quite possibly so.  We have one advantage in this country, and that 
is the alleged freedom of religion.  Of course, just because we are 
supposed to have this freedom doesn't mean it will be granted.  Religious 
freedoms of many have often been overlooked from time to time.

     ____                _
    /    )               /          
   /    /               /       
  (____/   ___     ___ /   ___,    ___   ,___ 
__    /   ____)   /   /   (__     /   )  /   )
 /   /   /   /   /   /       )   /   /  /   /     
(___/   (___(_  (___(_  (___/   (___/  /   (__    

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh