HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: paul@taniwha.UUCP (Paul Campbell)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
Subject: Re: Heredity of homosexuality
Date: 1 Sep 92 00:17:55 GMT
Organization: Taniwha Systems Design

In <78584@ut-emx.uucp> zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Mark Gansle) writes:
q
>I think what Jeff was saying was that a gene for homosexuality must
>necessarily be evolutionarily disadvantageous.  Women and men who had no
>desire to have sex with members of the opposite sex would be unable to
>bear children and so unable to pass the gene (or genes) for

Having a gene that causes a tendancy to homosexuality might be advantageous,
especially to those who carry it but are not gay - in a hunter-collector
society there might be great survival advantages to having unattached uncles
or aunts around your family unit who don't have to support families of
their own .....

	Paul

-- 
Paul Campbell    UUCP: ..!mtxinu!taniwha!paul     AppleLink: CAMPBELL.P

	How do you tell when George Bush is lying?
	You read his lips ...
From: kary@col.hp.com (Dan Kary)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
Subject: Re: Definition of "Scouting Spirit"
Date: 28 Aug 92 23:08:52 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

eam@phx.mcd.mot.com (Ed Mohrman) writes:

In our troop we consider "Scout Spirit" to be the qualities
enumerated in:

	The Scout Oath
	The Scout Law
	The Scout Motto
	The Scout Slogan
	The Outdoor Code

The scoutmaster approves/disapproves this requirement at the
time of the scoutmaster conference based on his feelings about
whether the boy did his best to live up to these qualities.  A
boy who is not approved is given specific areas to work to improve.

> During our troop adult leader meeting, we reviewed this issue and 
> established some concrete criteria. We set:
> 
> 1) Attend at least 50% of the regular meetings
> 2) Attend at lest 50% of the troop outings

For Star, Life and Eagle there is a requirement to "be active in your
troop and patrol for N months".  Before the new troop operation plan
that started in 1990, there were also these tenure requirements for
Tenderfoot, Second Class and First Class.  There is now only an "activity"
requirement for Second Class and First Class, 5 and 10 troop/patrol
activities outside of regular meetings respectively.  Our feeling is that
attendance is a separate requirement and is not part of "Scout Spirit".
Scout Spirit is the boy's behavior when he is participating.

> 3) Display a positive attitude toward others

This fits into the 5 "Scout Spirit" areas I enumerated.

> 4) Boys holding leadership positions should be fulfilling their duties

We consider this to be part of the leadership requirement for S, L, & E.
We require over 50% attendance at meetings/outings to meet the requirement
and satisfactory performance of the job as determined by the scoutmaster.

> 5) Participate in a t lest one service project per year

This is already a requirement for most ranks.

> 6) Pay their dues

We make this a requirement to participate in campouts.  If you don't
pay dues, you can't go camping and as a side effect can't advance because
you don't meet the activities/attendance/leadership requirements.

Dan Kary
From: jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
Subject: Re: BSA Advancement question
Date: 2 Sep 92 00:22:30 GMT
Reply-To: jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University

In article <168524D9.R1SCM@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU> R1SCM@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU (Dr. Steven C. Myers) writes:
>
>Each rank requires (1) requirements which many be earned in any order,
>(2) scout spirit for 2nd c. and 1st c. which should show improvement and
>greater maturity, and (3) a board of review which must handle only
>one rank at a time.  oops and a separate scoutmaster's conference for
>each.
> 
>  [...]
>
>If you don't do it this way YOU RISK DOWNGRADING the importance
>or rank advancement and the various ranks.

Exactly.  The single most important life skill developed in Scouting 
is to learn how to set goals and complete the tasks necessary to 
achieve those goals.  At first the goals are set externally, but 
later you must choose your goals (merit badges) for yourself.  In 
every case the important lesson is that the job must be completed 
in its entirety before it is considered done.  Any attempt to make 
it "easier" by short circuiting this system decreases its effectiveness. 

--
J. A. Carr                                    |  "The New Frontier of which I  
jac@gw.scri.fsu.edu                           |  speak is not a set of promises
Florida State University  B-186               |  -- it is a set of challenges."
Supercomputer Computations Research Institute |   John F. Kennedy (15 July 60)
Xref: sparky rec.scouting:2582 alt.atheism:15878
From: skinner@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Gregg Skinner)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:36:31 GMT
Reply-To: g-skinner@uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

merlyn@digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy) writes:

>palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:
>>Point 1: BSA has ALWAYS been an organization with religous ties. Any idiot
>>could figure that out from the start. If you ever attended a meeting, you'd
>>note that they meet in churches.

>If you attended the meetings *I* attended, you would've noted that they
>meet in churches but don't require membership in that church, and didn't
>have any religious tests or rituals.

Indeed, and if you attended the meetings I attended, you'd have noted
they met in public buildings, not churches.
-- 
Gregg Skinner    g-skinner@uiuc.edu         I speak for no organization.
From: 89b0016@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
Subject: Re: What's the use in having this group???
Date: 28 Aug 92 08:20:30 GMT
Organization: UNSW School of Accounting

In article <1992Aug26.173758.11098@tamsun.tamu.edu>, wjh0265@tamsun.tamu.edu (William Hobson) writes:
> This week my KILL file has left me with nothing to read - everything posted
> was stuff I already put in my KILL file.  A special interest group has ruined
> this group for those of us who still feel that homosexuality is immoral.  I

I agree with you partially. I hate all this wasted bandwidth, when I want to
see what other people have to say about scouting, not politics. I don't
care whether homosexuality is immoral or not - as far as this Newsgroup is
concerned, it's irrelevant. Ye gods, nobody's going to achieve anything by
discussing the issue here. These people haven't even achieved anything as
simple as a letter campaign. Since they're achieving nothing, they could
at least do us the courtesy of leaving the newsgroup alone. I'm giving
the group one week, then signing off. Not much hope !

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Czernkowski, Lecturer, School of Accounting, University of NSW
PO Box 1, Kensington NSW 2033, Australia
VOICE: +61 2 697 2435   FAX +61 2 662 6130   HOME +61 2 663 8150
eMail: 89b0016@csdvax.csd.unsw.oz.au
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 ____________________  
|         *          | A blue and white flag for Australia !
|            *       | 
|      *   .         | 
|                    | 
|          *         | 
 --------------------  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: stank@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Stan Krieger)
Subject: Re: Okay, rec.scouting take two...
Organization: Summit NJ
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:52:13 GMT

There is no reason to split rec.scouting; the only problem is that
people, such as Chris Evans, Carl Kadie, and others, have abused
rec.scouting is order to promote their own atheist and/or gay
rights agenda.   Part of this abuse is the cross-posting of articles
to groups totally unrelated to Scouting, of which Mr. Kadie is probably
the most flagrant violater.  The end result is that the same
generic gay rights discussions and arguments get posted on rec.scouting,
and thus clutter up the group for those of us who expected to be able
to use it for legitimate Scouting discussions, questions, issues,
and concerns.

Look, repeating the same thing over and over does not change anything
or prove anything.   It is NOT homophobic, xenophobic, anti-Semitic,
anti-Christian, or anti-whatever for parents to require that, depending
on exactly what kind of group is involved, their children's youth group
leaders adhere to certain standards of religion and/or morality.

Yes, Chris Evans and others; we all have our right to "free speech".
But there is a little matter of "netiquette" too, and one of the rules
of netiquette is that you don't post articles unrelated to the newsgroup,
and you don't cross-post to unrelated newsgroups, which is what you've
done with impunity in order to get your agenda across.

Keep rec.scouting the way it is, and let's all obey the rules of 
netiquette (and to Evans and Kadie- this means you too, and don't try
to rationalize your way out of it; you know you are in violation).
-- 
Stan Krieger                     All opinions, advice, or suggestions, even
AT&T UNIX System Laboratories    if related to my employment, are my own.
Summit, NJ
smk@usl.com
Xref: sparky rec.scouting:2786 alt.discrimination:4098 chi.general:948 alt.atheism:16477 alt.politics.homosexuality:5666
From: aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,chi.general,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Date: 3 Sep 92 20:44:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Sep3.161048.24517@rtsg.mot.com> kutem@motcid.rtsg.mot.com writes:
>In article <hill.715462676@galena12> you write:
>|>
>|> So the scout leader's rights are more important than the scouts rights because
>|> he is a leader or because he is an adult or because he is gay and supposedly a
>|> minority now?
>
>You obviously did not understand a word in that paragraph. The point that
>was being made is that gay scout leaders are being *forced* out of their
>role as scout leader, while a scout (or his parents) can *choose* which
>troop he is a part. The scout has the *right* to be a part of the troop,
>while the scout leader is being told he does not have *any right* being
>a scout leader. So in this case, yes, the scout leader's rights are more
>important, since he is not given a choice.


This thing about having or not a choice is not so simple.
Some people might feel that they have no choice but to take their children
out from the troop. 
Then, neither ine will have a choice.
This is the same in a lot of other cases: I have a choice of buying or not
a house, however, I do not have the money. Ergo: I don't really have a choice.
The same here: If some parent doees not want hie/her children to be near
an homosexual leader (being this a good or bad thing to do), he or she
will not have a choice but to take his/her children from the troop.

The only real choice here is: Do I want my children under the leadership of 
an homosexual?

If the answer is yes or I do not care, there is a choice.
If the answer is no, there is no choice.

AAP






>-- 
>Jon Kutemeier_________________________________________________________________
>----------------Software Engineer               /XX\/XX\  phone:(708) 632-3033
>Motorola Inc.   Radio Telephone Systems Group  ///\XX/\\\ fax:  (708) 632-4430
>1501 W. Shure Drive, Arlington Heights, IL 60004    uucp: !uunet!motcid!kutemj
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: cfaks@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Alice Sanders)
Subject: Re: Heredity of homosexuality
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 00:56:09 GMT
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

>
>And therein lies the difference between racism and discrimination
>against homosexuals.  One is proven to be hereditary and so cannot be
>changed and is not a subject for ridicule.  The other seems very likely
>to be a personal choice, and like all personal choices, is subject to judgment.
>
>+-------------------------+-------------------------+
>|Cloud-gathering Zeus     |Think globally.          |
>|                         |Act locally.             |
>|zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  |Eat my shorts totally.   |
>+-------------------------+-------------------------+
>
>

This is puzzling, though.  If homosexuality were a personal choice, why
would there be so many homosexuals and lesbians?  It can be a tough life.
 And why would they say
they didn't remember ever making the choice? 
 
Also, it does not seem like
sexual preference can be changed any more than race can.  

And if homosexuality were a choice, then wouldn't heterosexuality be a
choice, too?  I don't remember choosing to be heterosexual.  And nobody I
have talked to who is gay remembers choosing to be gay. 

From what I have been able to discern, it does seem like discrimination on
the basis of race is similar to discrimination against homosexuals.

I am not trying to be argumentative.  I just think this is a puzzling
subject.  When I see or hear the 'choice' position, it always baffles me.
Is it possible that something in the genes of the 'parents' of homosexuals
is what is perpetrated because it may be linked to something else, so that
the procreation of homosexuals continues despite the fact that most gays
may not have offspring?  I know of more than one homosexual person who has
relatives who are also homosexual, all on one side of the family.  They
also have sibs who are homosexual and in some cases a homosexual parentt
(who apparently managed to bear some offspring).

I know that none of this is scientific evidence.  But I don't think the
inheritance theory or the biological theory has been exhausted, and it
seems likely, if you look at what homosexuals say about their experience
.  The choice theory doesn't hold up because I doubt you could find a
homosexual who remembers making any such choice.  I mean there would have
to be some homosexuals who said they had made a choice, wouldn't there?

   What do you think?

Alice
 
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,chi.general,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: carlson@ab24.larc.nasa.gov (Ann Carlson)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:42:31 GMT

In article <hill.715462676@galena12>, hill@rtsg.mot.com (Karen Hill) writes:
|> yorton@turtle11.rtsg.mot.com (James J. Yorton) writes:
|>  
|> >This whole thing could be solved if the individual who is prejudiced
|> >would find out why they harbor those feelings with regards to
|> >something that is really nobody's business.  Then nobody would have
|> >to leave.
|> 
|> If it's nobody's business, then why is there such a huge gay/lesbian movement
|> and why is there a gay rights agenda and why are their "rights" to behave as
|> they please being forced on society. If it's nobody's business, then 
|> it should not even be an issue. 
|> 

Yeah, it shouldn't be an issue.  It only becomes an issue when people are 
fired from their jobs or denied employment over something that is "nobody's
business", or when people can't walk safely in the streets because other
people are determined to physically punish them for this aspect of their
lives which is "nobody's business", or when they can't live where they
choose or participate in community activities because people care too much
about what is "nobody's business".  


|> >Whether it's racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, or homophobia,
|> >bigotry is bigotry no matter how you slice it.  It is a
|> >learned behavior and it can be unlearned.
|> 
|> Certainly true. Any behavior can be learned or unlearned. Homosexuality is
|> a behavior and can be unlearned as well as learned. 
|> 
|> -Karen Hill

Yup, breathing is a behavior too.  I'll bet if you could teach those nasty
old "homos" to stop breathing, they wouldn't have any more problems with 
this other "behavior" of theirs either.  In fact, it seems some groups are
already trying this approach.  
-- 



*************************************************      
*Dr. Ann B. Carlson (carlson@ab24.larc.nasa.gov)*       O .
*MS 366                                         *         o  _///_ //
*NASA Langley Research Center                   *          <`)=  _<<
*Hampton, VA 23681-0001                         *             \\\  \\
*************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: mayne@pipe.cs.fsu.edu (William Mayne)
Subject: Re: Heredity of homosexuality
Reply-To: mayne@cs.fsu.edu
Organization: Florida State University Computer Science Department
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 17:33:47 GMT

In article <78584@ut-emx.uucp> zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Mark Gansle) writes:
>
>I think what Jeff was saying was that a gene for homosexuality must
>necessarily be evolutionarily disadvantageous.  Women and men who had no
>desire to have sex with members of the opposite sex would be unable to
>bear children and so unable to pass the gene (or genes) for
>homosexuality on to offspring.

Learn a little about biology and evolution before posting such naive
stuff. Have you ever heard of recessive traits? There are unquestionably
hereditary conditions such as muscular dystrophy and cystic fibrosis
which prevent individuals with the trait from reproducing because few
lived to reach maturity, especially in earlier times. Yet these genes
have not been eliminated from the gene pool by natural selection.

> Perhaps, one might argue, that the genes
>for sexuality are extremely touchy and the slightest mutation can change
>heterosexuality into homosexuality.  This may be possible, but I think
>it is an idea offensive to most.

I don't see why it would be offensive. And since when do our preferences
determine nature?

>There is in fact little evidence to support the idea that homosexuality
>is hereditary ("nature made me this way").

Heredity is not the only mechanism for nature to make someone the way
they are. There is in fact little evidence to support the idea that
homosexuality is determined by environment or is a voluntary choice.
Most of the evidence is to the contrary.

>Even if we assume heredity, we're
>left with the conclusion that a large percentage were anle to *choose*
>not to be homosexual.

We need not assume heredity nor the conclusion that a large percentage
are able to choose not to be homosexual. Even for strictly biologically
determined things genes are not everything.

>And therein lies the difference between racism and discrimination
>against homosexuals.  One is proven to be hereditary and so cannot be
>changed and is not a subject for ridicule.  The other seems very likely
>to be a personal choice, and like all personal choices, is subject to judgment.

There is no evidence that homosexuality is a personal choice. It is a private
matter. I know that I never made a conscious decision to be incurably
straight. That is just the way nature made me. I see no more reason to assume
that homosexuals willfully selected their sexual preference.

Bill Mayne

Newsgroups: rec.scouting
From: kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Crossposting articles with rec.scouting (was Re: BofA and UW ...)
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 23:24:25 GMT

strom@watson.ibm.com (Rob Strom) writes:

[...]
>I'd be opposed to Ted's idea.  Carl Kadie made a
> constructive suggestion based upon
>subject matter.  Ted's countersuggestion makes no recommendations
>as to subject matter.  It sounds too much like "we want one newsgroup
>for postings that the moderators like and a wastebasket group
>for all the rest."  
[...]

I think either my or Ted's idea would be fine. Which one is chosen (if
either) should depend on what the dissatisfied readers want and are
willing to work for.

Although I oppose viewpoint discrimination in unmoderated newsgroups
(because I think they are a free-speech forum), I do not oppose
viewpoint discrimination in moderated newsgroups (because I think
these forums "belong" to the moderator).

By way of analogy, I would object if my university banned criticism of
the BSA on the Quad (a free-speech forum), but I wouldn't object if my
university subscribed to _Scouting_ (as Illinois State University and
Southern Illinois University do).

In sum, my concerns are that:

  1) there remains an unmoderated newsgroup in which scouting policy
         discussions are "in bounds."
  2) the name of that newsgroup is no more awkward than the name(s)
         of any other scouting newsgroup(s).
  3) no unmoderated scouting newsgroup, in name or charter,
        prejudges a viewpoint.

I will not vote against any reorganization that meets these concerns.
(I usually abstain from voting on groups that I don't expect to read.)

I think that any reorganization along these lines could satisfy those
feel that policy discussions interfere with more mundane discussions
while frustrating those who wish to suppress policy discussions.

- Carl


-- 
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,chi.general,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Crossposting articles with rec.scouting (was Re: BofA and UW ...)
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:15:13 GMT


kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>
> Maybe rec.scouting should be split into several unmoderated
> newsgroups.

mycroft@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) writes:

>I must strongly object.  First you (as a group) invade their newsgroup,
>then rather than buggering off when asked, you propose to *split* it so
>you can keep posting to it?  This is completely inappropriate.

I did not *invade* rec.scouting. I voted for rec.scouting. The
rec.scouting charter explictly lists policy as something to be
discussed.

>I have yet to hear someone from rec.scouting actually indicate that
>they want to read this tripe.

I am someone from rec.scouting.

- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Xref: sparky rec.scouting:2563 alt.discrimination:3969 chi.general:848 alt.atheism:15797 alt.politics.homosexuality:5500
From: twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting,alt.discrimination,chi.general,alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Date: 25 Aug 92 16:22:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: amhux2.1992Aug25.162240.8603
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst MA

In article <palane.714626172@pv7426.vincent.iastate.edu> palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:
>In <1992Aug23.210258.12959@amhux2.amherst.edu> twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>
>>BSA gets my tax dollars through the United Way.
>
>Huh? I was not aware that the United Way is a public charity. If we're talking
>nonprofit exemptions, you might as well come out against any tax relief for
>churches.

(Well, I do that, too.)  That was a slip, of course -- that's what I
get for posting after sixteen hours of work.  My point is that the
money I give to the United Way goes straight across the board to all
of the organizations it supports; hence, I cannot in good conscience
support the United Way.  It seemed to me that the original poster was
arguing against this.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "I don't know how much support NAMBLA
\  / twpierce@amherst.edu      /  has in the gay community."
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /   -- Clayton Cramer, August 1992
Xref: sparky rec.scouting:2761 alt.discrimination:4084 chi.general:934 alt.atheism:16368 alt.politics.homosexuality:5636