HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: djrea@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (david.j.rea)
Subject: Re: Columbus vs Indians (was Re: PC lives)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:58:29 GMT

> On the other issue, giving back "some land," from where do we get this land?
> National parks, city halls, your back yard?  To whom do we give it- individuals,
> tribes?  If an individual is 1/4 Aztec, does he get a piece?  What if "some" is
> not enough?  Since this is a thorny issue, how should it be addressed?
> 
> Since the main theater of operations of the Conquistadores was Mexico, the 
> Caribbean, and South/Central America, how can the US give that land back to
> whomever?
> 
> Dave

In Germany, today, there are some Eastern Germans asking to have the
property that they owned, or thier parents owned, before the wall
went up. These Germans have a claim that they were "on the wrong side
of the fence" and were not allowed to return. Do these people have a
claim to the property. They were, in a sense, conquired and lost
thier land. Should they get it back?

What about the person(s) now holding that property? They have worked
hard to obtain it. Probably made the needed repairs over the years.
Have made a livelyhood(sp?) working the land. Should these people 
give up their land. What happens to them? Should they be held to blaim
for what a few governments did?

If my Grandfather kills another man, Do I then go to jail for his crime
because he died before the trial? 

These things have been running through my mind lately. Please do not
flaim me. I looking for answers and solid information that could help me
settle this issue in my brain. The Germany issue above is from a good
friend of mine who recently was doing buisness in Germany and saw some
of whats going on first hand. I know of no articles or papers to back it
up with...sorry...

David
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 15:25:46 GMT

In article <1ht66dINN65k@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:

>snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass) writes:
>
>> They have that option.  Those who want to send their kids at a later
>> age will send their children when they see fit or they may even opted
>> out of sending their children period.......
>> 
>> 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....?
>
>Not in pre-school, or early elementary school.

Walter, you're contradicting yourself something *awful*.  Your biggest
complaint about the proposed curriculum is that it takes away the
parents' ability to decide when their children are taught this
material.  Bil's suggestion leaves it up to the parents when, *if
ever*, they send their children to this class.  I don't see what your
objection is to this proposal.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
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: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 16:06:31 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

In article <1992Dec28.150608.28353@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>
>... the sexual preference displayed by parents in the home has an 
>enormous effect on the sexual preference of children in the home...to the 
>extent that, children raised in a homosexual-parent home will be extremely 
>likely to be homosexual.  Anyone have any stats?  Any examples of straight 

    As another poster said, and I must have missed your response:  why,
then, are 10% of children raised virtually exclusively in het homes gay?

>children coming from a home where the parent(s) had exhibited homosexual 
>behavior since the child was very young?

    Sure.  As reported in the Advocate, a study from the Univ. of Virginia
looked at a large number of same-sex-parents families and determined that
there was no correlation between kids raised in lesbigay vs. het homes with
regard to sexual orientation or social skill development.

    So...you can rest easy now.

-- 
   ******************************************************************
     Howard Black                             cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu
     Department of Chemistry                  Eastern Illinois Univ. 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: Homophobe: A definition please!
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 20:47:47 GMT

Jeffrey S Linder (jlinder@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
:
: It will not be found in a dictionary [ yet :( ].  I have never been called a
: homophobe either although I am sure I meet the "definition".  It is simply a
: term used by homosexuals (and supporters) for people who don't want to give
: them special rights.  Rights which they think are "inalienable" but rights
: (read 'priveledges') that most people wouldn't have because of their sexual
: orientation... go figure.
:
: JSL.

What special privileges?
-- 
Mike McAngus 			 | As if I needed Another time consuming hobby.
(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org)		 | 
The Truth is still the Truth	 | This Post exploits illiterates.
Even if you choose to ignore it. | 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: fritzs@microsoft.com (Fritz Sands)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: 29 Dec 92 03:25:32 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: usa

In article <1hdo2aINNeea@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
| 
| This exchange demonstrates where some people get the idea that the 
| book is propaganda aimed at young children;  teach them that it is
| 'ok' for daddy to have the same kind of relationship with his new 
| roommate that he used to have with mommy, when the child has no real 
| conception of the "quantitative difference" involved; then when the 
| child is older,  and begins to grasp the "quantitative difference", 
| he will already have a favorable outlook on such a relationship. 

There is a significant difference between

  1) Gay relationships are morally "ok", and

  2) Gay relationships exist among reasonable people, who are quite happy
in those relationships and who raise children.

I agree that "ok" (or "moral", or whatever) is a concept that is, in many
cases, best left to the family.  It is, IMO, imperative, however, that
the second concept -- that gays, moral or not, live together, can be quite
happy and "normal" and can be good parents raising "normal" children --
be taught.  Unlike the first issue, this is one based in fact, not opinion.

  Fritz

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: An Apology to Ted
Date: 21 Dec 92 19:55:34 GMT
Distribution: world, na, usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec20.130523.6747@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> turnert@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Thom F Turner ) writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.231126.21279@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>
>I'd agree with the statement: "What does a person's political affiliation
>have to do with physics?"  If the Physics Department Head had spent more
>time on physics and less time on sending memos to administration (on
>official UA letterhead) comparing gays and lesbians to "gila monsters and
>communists" there wouldn't have been such an interest in "toppling" him
>as department head.

The Physics department head cannot do very much physics due to the continual
demand on his time to fight the university bureaucrats.  This whole 
incident was caused by Jay Stauss who ended up receiving a promotion.  So
much for his objectivity.  This type of BS that the new department head will
no doubt have to deal with has been seen in the fact that they are having
problems getting professors to accept nomination for the position.  I know
of a few respected professors that have declined the nomination because
they don't want to have to give up research time to deal with the university.
They resticted their search to the university because they knew there was
no way that they could attract anyone outside the university that was 
respectable.
 
>On PC existing on American Campuses:  The radical right-wing of this 
>country believes in a myth, that of the "Politically Correct Movement."
>Anytime someone raises an issue that the right-winger doesn't agree
>with, that right-winger writes it off as part of the "PC Movement"
>thereby trivializing someone's legitimate concern(s).  PC doesn't exist...
>at least not as the Radical Right-Wing likes to believe it exists.  The
>Republican National Convention proved this year that there is a PC
>movement of the Right: either you hate homos and force women to have
>children against their wills and are against affirmative action and 
>many other social programs, or you aren't a PC republican.

Thom, with all due respect, why don't you leave campus; go out into the
real world; wander around the country homeless talking to real people and 
collecting aluminum cans; turn them in at an Alcoa recycling center; take 
the change that you get and put a down payment on a clue.

If you can't see PC in action then you are to sheltered by your presence on
campus.  I think that you have jumped on Jay Stauss and Manny Pacheco's
band wagon in asserting that "we have no PC problems here on campus".  You
have then generalized that it mustn't exist anywhere.  Are you trying to tell
me that Pacheco trying to mandate "sensitivity courses" for the physics
department doesn't smell of PC?  If so, please refer to above paragraph.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Originator: elf@halcyon.com
Organization: Pendor, UnLtd.
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 23:40:37 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.140731.15351@asl.dl.nec.com>
     dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:

>In article <1992Dec31.041730.22991@nwnexus.WA.COM>
>     elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg) writes:

>>In article <1992Dec30.194545.8342@asl.dl.nec.com>
>>     dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:

>>   Is it my imagination or is Doug becoming a parrot?  When we ask for
>>documentation, he states simply "I've got documentation."

>When someone makes a claim that studies exist to support their claim,
>I research the claim myself. I do not rely on whether or not they have
>valid sources. I suggest you do the same. Your the one that wants to
>know. I will not waste my time doing research for you. Go to the
>library.

   In case you're deliberately avoiding getting clued, most of my posts
INCLUDE a bibliography of some sort.  I've read Kinsey, Pomeroy,
Klien... I've even read Rutgers and Sanger, and most psychologists don't
remember who they ARE.

   So where's what you use to back up your beleifs, other than the
Bible?

         Elf !!!
--
elf@halcyon.com  (Elf Sternberg)

Then, I was inspired.               God, thy will is hard
Now, I'm sad and tired.             But you hold every card.
Listen, surely I've exceeded        I will drink your cup of poison.
Expectations.                       Nail me to your cross and break me.
Tried for three years,              Bleed me, beat me.
Seems like thirty.                  Kill me.
Could you ask as much               Take me now.
From any other man?                 Before I change my mind.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions)
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 01:32:58 GMT

john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) writes:

>]>But of course if the military allows openly gay soldiers, then you would,
>]>wouldn't you? Isn't that what we are talking about - allowing openly
>]>gay soldiers?
>]
>]That may be what YOU are talking about, but it isn't what Clinton has 
>]been talking about. There is a difference between allowing a person
>]to join the military and not making him or her swear that they are NOT
>]gay and allowing them to join and forcing them to be out and in the
>]open about their homosexuality.
>
>And what happens if they are openly gay? I'll betcha Clinton's
>policy doesn't then discharge them. Let's face it, Zack,
>the policy of admitting gays is, in today's climate, equivalent to
>admitting gays who are public about their preferences.

As another poster has commented, that most people do not discuss their
sexual preferences at work.

You can say it as often as you want but it doesn't make it so, I do not
feel that admitting gays is equivalent to admitting gays who have "come
out". The climate doesn't affect my opinion.

> - - Clinton: "Read my lips: We will bring utopia, at no cost to you!" - -

You know, when you quote someone, you should quote something that they
actually said. Not what your interpetation of what they said.

-- 
Zack Sessions
sessions@seq.uncwil.edu
University of North Carolina at Wilmington (Alumnus)
"Good health is merely the slowest form of dying."
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jpsb@NeoSoft.com (Jim Shirreffs)
Subject: Re: Kicked out of a.f.d-q?  I don't think so
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 02:06:39 GMT


>I don't believe that Mr. Chaney has complained about Susan Garvin's 
>attempts to have him punished.  I'm merely pointing out that Ms. Garvin
>appears eager to have Mr. Chaney punished for a harmless joke.

God knows I *really* don't like defending Susan Garvin, but as one that has
had my posts totally rewritten I must say that forgery of any kind is
unappreciated by the "victim". Others may find it funny, but it really
is, at best, in poor taste. Susan gives us more then enough rope to hang
her without forging her name. I do agree that she over reacted, but one
would have to be a fool to think she would do otherwise. That did Mr. Chaney
think she would do? 
 
jim shirreffs   .... I am the system administrator ....



Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
From: mchenry@latech.edu (Michael Q. McHenry)
Subject: Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about:
Organization: Louisiana Tech University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 22:21:31 GMT

Okay, here's an anti-Limberger throwing in a few cent's worth:

In article <1992Nov30.223723.990@calmasd.prime.com> jhb@calmasd.prime.com (Jim Bishop) writes:
>In article <1992Nov30.194117.19236@nmsu.edu>, 
>dsteinbe@nmsu.edu (David Steinberg) writes:
>> If it ever really came out how hard it is to catch it,
>> we wouldn't be seeing this kind of #$%^&*...)

It has come out how hard it is to catch it, but people aren't or don't
want to listen or believe.  In 2 days my EMT license in Colorado will
expire, and in the past 3 years I've logged several thousand hours in
emergency departments, ambulances, and vol. fire departments in (eww!
awful  liberal  gasp) Boulder county.  In that time I have had the
displeasure of meeting only 2 people in emergency services who were
openly AIDS-ignorant.  We all were well aware of the risks, and I wore
latex to practically all of our calls and around most of our patients,
but in my case only to protect myself from the really bad communicable
diseases, primarily Hepatitis, but also a host of other doosies (esp.
the common cold - you never know where those snot-nosed little conserva-
er- kids have been)

>You have it wrong.  This isn't about some mythical group misleading
>people about how AIDS is contracted.  

How did people become misleaded about how HIV gets around?
(please don't say the liberal media..  anything else..  aliens,
the IRS..  anything but that same tired, old excuse)

>                                      This whole post is an example of
>just how bad AIDS education has been handled.  

100%

>                                               We have a grad student
>in Biological Engineering that thinks you can get AIDS by taking a
>shower with a gay man.  Pretty scary.
>
>Jim

Really scary.  But I've actually become numb to it.  I now go to
school in Louisiana and am constantly nauseated by the culture shock.
(great food, tho)  I had become so comfortable with the popular
liberal views in Boulder that I took them for granted and assumed that
most of the rest of the nation saw things along the same lines. Ha ha!
(We are all intitled to a little cultural astigmatism and ignorance -
of course, Rush does go a little too far here..)

A class mate in Biomedical Engineering actually confessed, as a
group of us drove long distance and debated, that he would immediately
blow his brains out if he found out that he was HIV+.  And I believe
he would.  Does this attitude scare anyone else?  

Quinn
-- 
Quinn McHenry
mchenry@engr.latech.edu
Biomedical Engineering
Louisiana Tech University
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper)
Subject: Lifestyle Choices (was  Re: Sexuality)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:55:45 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.162502.6756@asl.dl.nec.com> dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:
> In article <1992Dec29.233922.2539@netcom.com> harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp) writes:
> >However, removing all of these things from the school environment is
> >impossible, and IMO, not the best solution anyway.  Instead, we have
> >to teach children (at home and in school) to feel free to have
> >whatever views they (or their parents) wish, but to learn and
> >understand that others don't necessarily share those views, and that
> >they should not be persecuted for that reason.
> 
> Unlike heterosexuality, which is dictated by nature, homosexuality
> is a lifestyle choice and should not be presented as such to school
> children.

(I assume the "not" in the last sentence is a typo, BTW.)

Since homosexuality is found in *every* mammalian species, the
statement that it is a lifestyle choice is scientifically questionable,
but if it is, so what?  Christianity, meat-eating, and monogamous
marriage are not dictated by nature--they are all lifestyle choices.
Yet I believe that schools should teach that Christians, meat-eaters,
and monogamists are peple who may hold different views from the
student, but who should not be persecuted because of this.

All people are asking is that unless you can come up with some
*secular* reason for why their lifestyle choice is bad, you grant
them the same rights they are willing to grant you: the right to
live their life without persecution.

And as for tolerance versus acceptance: as a Jew I am not willing to
accept that the schools teach merely tolerance ("yes, we know they're
going to burn in Hell, but you must not kill them anyway"), but
acceptance ("yes, we know that some people think their beliefs are
wrong, but in this country that is not an acceptable reason for
treating them any differently than anyone else").

In some Islamic countries, Christianity is treated as badly as
homosexuality is here--and with all the same justifications.
Are you ready to say that's that is acceptable to you?

Evelyn C. Leeper  |  +1 908 957 2070  |  att!mtgzy!ecl or  ecl@mtgzy.att.com
--
"God does not play dice with the universe."  --Albert Einstein
"Albert, stop telling God what to do."  --Niels Bohr
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Turkey Division
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 17:19:24 GMT

In article <1h9s4gINNikg@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:

[discussion of non-romantic same-sex childcare situations]

>Which is why it has been suggested that the book drop the 'daddy and his 
>roommate go to bed together' and keep the rest...

Probably because very few cases have been cited of a child being
teased or antagonized at school for being raised with her father and
her uncle, or by her mother and her mother's best friend.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12303 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10732 alt.politics.clinton:19123 alt.politics.bush:14940