HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: Reconciling OT with NT
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
Date: 15 Nov 1992 19:38:11 UTC

In article <1e5m2jINNob7@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> 
bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:
>   The New Tesament CANNOT be reconciled with what you refer to as
>the 'Old' Testament, and I refer to as the Bible.  The whole idea
>of the New Testament was that the OT was replaced, not augmented.
>   I am a Jew.  As a Jew, I have no use for, or interest in Jesus
>or Christianity.  As the focus of the NT is on Jesus, the form of
>the NT is 'biographical.'  The OT is a narritive of the growth of
>the human race as a moral species.  It is the story of God trying
>to teach us right from wrong.

I agree. The "OT" is all about the human being discovering free will. Like
a child growing to adulthood, we must learn we have no one to blame but
ourselves. It is we who have made a mess of the Earth and it is we who
must turn it around. We still have a great deal of "growing up" to do.
We have met the enemy and it is us. The Lord has delivered us from
slavery, any clinging to the broken shackles is of our own design. We
were intended to have dominion over the Earth and the other creatures.
That is not a position of power, that is a position of great responsiblity.
Knowledge of good and bad was a gift so that we may do right by it.
So that we may do the right thing. The right thing can not be found in a
book because each person has their own right thing of which they should
learn. Obviously this free will and freedom is a great responsibility
and that is why we see so many people yearning for the days of an all
knowing slave master thus removing the burden. Just as a child must grow
into an adult, so the human being must grow towards full realization of
free will, self determination and full responsibility for others. This
is not an easy task, but what else is there for us to do? Is such a goal
beyond our grasp?
From: joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: ProChoice Question
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:46:32 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Dept. of CS Ball State University Muncie IN

In article <1992Nov19.172142.3363@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> brian@lpl.arizona.edu (Brian Ceccarelli 602/621-9615) writes:

>Oh?  The authors and signers of America's own Declaration of
>Indepence would disagree with you.  Even Thomas Jefferson,
>a probable non-Christian, author of the Declaration of
>Independence would even disagree with you.

Let me see if I have this straight.  The man who wrote the words "We 
declare these truths to be self evident..." would not have agreed that
the constitution recognizes natural rights.  Hmmmm....

Joe


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: compromise
Keywords: Holtsinger refuted
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Distribution: na
Date: 17 Nov 92 19:17:24 GMT

In <BxowEK.Kpp.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:


>That was, well, amazing.  In a burst of selective editing, Petey
>Honey deleted a reference line and spent hundreds of lines 
>replying to someone else as if he were me.  

No, I left in a superfluous reference line.  And that "someone
else" *is* Susan Garvin.  And her post was 500+ lines long, a lot
longer than my follow-up.

I've explained all this in a follow-up to James Purdon on the
"STEVE wants it both ways:" thread earlier today.

Peter Ny.

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: ProChoice Question
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Distribution: talk.abortion
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:10:54 GMT

brian@lpl.arizona.edu (Brian Ceccarelli 602/621-9615) writes:

> I have a simple question for pro-choicers:

The quote thing didn't work out so well, eh?

> You say you have the "Right to Choose".  Who is the
> authority that grants you this right?

My dear Brian, what authority can or should abrogate a pregnant
woman's right to choose?  And what choices should be taken away?

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  / standard disclaimers
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's
character, give him power."  -- Abraham Lincoln
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby)
Subject: Re: To Lost Boy...Re  The thoughts of a fetus
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 23:14:21 GMT

In article <Nov.19.12.27.06.1992.15494@andromeda.rutgers.edu> hauk@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Keira E. Hauk) writes:
>I think this is who I'm sending this to... It's in response to your "what 
>really pisses you off about prolifers", or whomever.
>
>Did you know that the human fetus can dream?  Recent studies have found that
>the human fetus can actually dream!  

And what does it dream about???  I really want to know the answer to this one.

And does this occur before or after it loses the tail?

>"Think" about it.


-- 
Scott W. Roby           *This sentence no verb.*      "No Matter where you go..
Phys.& Astr.Dept.    ///// / /  /  *|*  \  \ \ \\\\\      there you are!"
Univ.of Delaware    ((((( ( (  (  * + *  )  ) ) )))))   -> Buckaroo Banzai
roby@brahms.udel.edu \\\\\ \ \  \  *|*  /  / / /////   *Standard Disclaimer*
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48556 alt.abortion.inequity:5173 soc.men:19577
From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men
Subject: Re: Male Choice Revi (1)
Date: 19 Nov 1992 10:00:23 -0800
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <Bxyv6v.M74@ddsw1.mcs.com> karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
(someone else)
>>What is so hard about donning a condom to protect yourself?
>
>The rate of condom failure is about 5%.  If you use them religiously for 10
>years as birth control your risk of an accidental pregnancy is a coin toss.

Which is an argument in favor of better birth control methods, but is
hardly an argument for NOT using a condom, is it?

Not using a condom means you risk of accidental pregnancy in year 1 is
near a coin toss....

Adrienne Regard
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48938 talk.politics.misc:61170 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8928 alt.rush-limbaugh:10136
From: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh makes my life a HELL!
Date: 21 Nov 92 00:21:51 GMT
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu (DERRELL EMERY LAROCQUE) writes:
: 
: 
: 
:    I have a gf with fundamentalist parents who treat Rush Limbaugh as though
:  he has the answers to life's problems. Well, I am here to say that because
:  of this, I will have to fight in order to marry her. Has it come to the point
:  in this country where conservative ideas like the ones he presents are so
:  much a part of the United States now, that two people in love can't even
:  marry for fear of outright attack like this? I fear for our happiness.
:  I don't want her to choose between keeping her family or keeping me.
:  I hate liberals (I am moderate), but even moderates aren't safe from Rush
:  Limbaugh!! Can someone PLEASE give me some ideas???
: -- 
: delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu
: 
: 
:       
: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------   
: 1988,1989,1990,1991 AFC East Division Champions
: 1991,1992 AFC Conference Champions
: 
: Hungry for some fish.. Monday Night Football, November 16, 1992..
: 
: If you are a Buffalo Bills fan, email me at delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu
: so we can talk all about the games, insight, etc.
: If you are a Packers fan, let me know. I am interested in any news
: out of Green Bay...
: A PROUD MEMBER OF THE BILLS COALITION TAKING THE BET II.     

Well, I could; but I'm a liberal, and you hate me...
Bill   
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48604 soc.men:19588
From: joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.men
Subject: Re: Male Choice Revi (1)
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:29:10 GMT
Organization: Dept. of CS Ball State University Muncie IN

In article <Bxyv6v.M74@ddsw1.mcs.com> karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
>The rate of condom failure is about 5%.  If you use them religiously for 10
>years as birth control your risk of an accidental pregnancy is a coin toss.

Assuming your information os correct, the chance of failure over ten
years is less than a coin toss:  40.12630607616 %.

Joe


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: roby@brahms.udel.edu (Scott W Roby)
Subject: Re: Let's Play Attributions, Take 2
Keywords: campus joke, little bit, lying, false accusations, empty threats
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 21:50:50 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.200010.23641@wdl.loral.com> bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com writes:
>roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby) writes:
># nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
># >But the cause of my complaint still stands.  Susan Garvin did indeed 
># >omit a # (or> as the case may be) in front of the bard@cutter attribution, 
>#   [...     104 more lines deleted]
># 
># I guess not.  Sigh.
># Have we wasted enough time, yet?  :-)
>
>Hey, if y'all are gettin' all up in the air about whether or not *I*
>wrote something here -- why dontcha jus' aks me?
>
>This is the first I've tuned in to this silliness.
>

OK: Let me clarify what I meant in MY post ....

I said:
       Can we drop this boring discussion of attribute allegations now?

Then I quoted two lines of Peter's stuff before deleting the rest....
       >But the cause of my complaint still stands.  Susan Garvin did indeed
       >omit a # (or> as the case may be) in front of the bard@cutter attrib.,
         [...     104 more lines deleted]

Then I replied to myself rhetorically....
       I guess not.  Sigh.

My "I guess not" comments was directed at my OWN question and not the 
two lines I left in from Peter's text.

I can see how the mistake could be made and am sorry that I did not 
foresee this second way of reading my post.  Gaack.  This is almost 
as boring as talking about attributes!!  :-(

Have we wasted enough time yet?  :-)


-- 
Scott W. Roby           *This sentence no verb.*      "No Matter where you go..
Phys.& Astr.Dept.    ///// / /  /  *|*  \  \ \ \\\\\      there you are!"
Univ.of Delaware    ((((( ( (  (  * + *  )  ) ) )))))   -> Buckaroo Banzai
roby@brahms.udel.edu \\\\\ \ \  \  *|*  /  / / /////   *Standard Disclaimer*
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: Humor Break: Those Wacky O.R. Newsletters
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:48:12 GMT

judi@wam.umd.edu (Jay T Stein -- hooked on only 7 phonics) writes:

> [Keith Tucci writes:]    "I am sure that there are others who
>                           could write more exciting letter and
>                           perhaps illicit a greater response..."
>                                   ^^^^^^^

Who said these OR people didn't have one-track (or is that one-tract?) minds?

> [Disclaimer: this article makes no claims whatsoever about pro-lifers in
> general.  It notes only that O.R. papers usually contain more errors
> than an early Mets game.]

Or a recent Mets game.  Whoever writes the syndicated column "Baseball Week
in Review" did a stat-by-stat comparison of the '62 and '92 Mets.  The
resemblance was uncanny except for one stat:  the average salary was a couple
of orders of magnitude higher!

Should we cross-post this to rec.sport.baseball?

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  / standard disclaimers
 "One of the HORRIBLE things of trying to defend a FREE REPUBLIC is
 that I get to support your RIGHT to say STOOPID THINGS." -- drieux
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Post Natal Abortion (couldn't find original)
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 19 Nov 92 21:56:47 GMT

In <1di3faINNcs6@haven.umd.edu> spinoza@next06wor.wam.umd.edu (Yon Bonnie Laird of Cairn Robbing) writes:

>In article <1992Nov7.235252.17395@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu  
>(Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>> The idea that infanticide is not wrong has been expressed by a
>> number of other pro-choicers on this newsgroup; it's nothing new.  
>> And don't be surprised when the other pro-choicers stay silent
>> on the subject. 
>> 
>> > John J McVey
>> 
>> 
>> Doug Holtsinger
>Post-natal abortion (if, in fact exists, and is not just a figment of the  
>FeveredImaginationofaFetalIdolator (tm)) would be wrong. So what, exactly  
>is your point?  Could you give us a list of pro-choicers making that sort  
>of a statement,  please? Or are you merely speaking out of that part of  
>the anatomy which most BornPersons(tm) sit on? 

Michael Loomis has spoken out in favor of infanticide.  I can document
this.

Doug has been around longer than I, maybe he knows some more examples of 
people posting on talk.abortion expressing support for legalized 
infanticide.

PJN

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: MENSTRUAL EXTRACTION AND THE 5-WEEK LIMIT
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 03:32:18 GMT

<nyikos.722203426@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
><1992Nov8.233052.18819@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
>>In article <nyikos.720712272@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>}In <1992Oct30.130948.10139@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
...
>>}On the other
>>}hand, LOTS of countries have a 12-week limit [again with exceptions
>>}similar to the ones I would grant after week 5] and that seems to
>>}have worked quite well.  
>
>>Where legislation has brought about desired change as opposed to no
>>legislation?  Since there are "LOTS" of countries that have tried this
>>I should assume you'd have no trouble offering some stats, but you,
>>continuing a trend, do not.  Sigh.
>
>Hey, don't go away.  I wasn't sure you were interested in pursuing this
>line of thought.  An example: Hungary had one of the most liberal 
>abortion laws in the world once, and births were outnumbered by abortions
>at one point.  They introduced a 12-week limit and that seems to have
>worked out well.  I don't have stats with me now, but perhaps some other
>reader can find them easily.

Can you define "worked out well"?  How did the ratio change and why does
it qualify as "working out well"?


Gordon
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,talk.politics.misc,alt.discordia,alt.slack,alt.secular-rastafarianism,alt.ska-beat,alt.jah'erb,alt.canvas
From: cliftonr@netcom.com (Pope Clifton)
Subject: Re: On Completion
Followup-To: misc.test
Organization: t.b, t.p.d, & a.d
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:16:41 GMT

Paul Harvey (pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us) wrote:
: In article <1992Nov15.185614.17128@wetware.com> 
: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
: >bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:
: >]    The New Tesament CANNOT be reconciled with what yourefer to as
: >] the 'Old' Testament, and I refer to as the Bible.  The whole idea
: >] of the New Testament was that the OT was replaced, not augmented.
: >EXCUSE ME! Oh ZionistToadyOfTheEuroDisneyKonspirakii!!!!
: >Its NOT a matter of 'supplanting' but of offering 'completion'
: >of the text.
: ...
: >The JudeaoChristianIslamicSeXularHumanistMarxistMaoistScientology Continuum
: >is a means of understanding the forward 
: >progression of the ManDate of Heaven!!!
: 
: I'm afraid it's much worse than that. You see, first there was The Epic
: of Gilgamesh from Persia, then the Mahabharata from India, then the
: ...
: latest and greatest, the Book of the SubGenius, ISBN: 0-671-63810-6.
: This self-"help" book for sinners, creeps, junkies, morphodites, and
: wise men and guys who know they wouldn't get "help" from any book even
: if they needed it in the first place. With special INSANE bonus offer,
: "The Prescriptures" or Prophecy of the SubGenius.
: "Yes, YOU can rape your *own* mind. YOU can finally relax in the safety
: ...
: thousands before you have done!"

*PLONK*

 -- Pope Clifton the Anonymoid (and do check your headers)

--
Home: cliftonr@netcom.com     +1 808 521 9073
Work: clifton_r@verifone.com  +1 808 625 3234
Pope of the Church of the Subgenius in Paradise
"Have a revelation, the first one's free/Soon to be addicted to eternity" - HMR
From: ivory@e7sa.crd.ge.com (John Ivory)
Newsgroups: alt.adoption,talk.abortion
Subject: Views on a new group
Date: 23 Nov 92 21:09:22 GMT
Organization: Tower Concepts

I believed for some time that there was great need for this newsgroup.
So much so that I began the official, formal mechanism for requesting such
a group.  My posting(s) to the newgroups news group yielded basically
the following information...

* The vast majority of people couldn't give a hoot.  Although the people
reading this now view adoption as an incredibly important topic, that
is not reflected any significant number of net people.

* Many comments came back suggesting that those interested in this topic
could just post to misc.kids and get a conversation going there.  I'm not
sure that's a workable idea.  Many people trying to adopt are infertile,
and find it uncomfortable to mill around in the conversation place of those
who already have kids.

* There's already an e-mail group for adoption, and many felt that that
should suffice.  I joined that group for a while and was basically disappointed.
The dialogs were mostly monologues.  The bulk of the traffic dealt with
people who had already completed the adoption process.  Each would chronicle
their ordeal, but there would be very little flow beyond that.  There
were a lot of nice people on there, but very little extended interaction.
The group was small in number (~25 or so?), but that could be due to
lack of knowledge of its existance.

I still believe that the net is an excellent vehicle for interaction
between people on this topic.  I'm not confident that you'll get enough
votes to have it become a full fledged 'real' news group.  I could
be wrong though.  To make it happen, everybody reading this should begin
subscribing to the newgroups newsgroup and have dialog about the viability
of this group cross posted there.  Cross posting to misc.kids wouldn't
hurt either.

The whole adoption process is amazing, frustrating, costly, emotional,
frenzied, etc, etc.  Acting as a group, however loosely, perhaps we can
change some of that.

Yeah, lets get some dialog going here!
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48233 alt.abortion.inequity:5147
From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: Re: Male Choice Revisited
Date: 17 Nov 1992 07:53:53 -0800
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <nyikos.721976470@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>  Give the taxpayers the choice,
>>and it'll be MANDATED abortion for everybody who cannot prove that they
>>have a big trust fund put aside for little Joey.
>That does it: from now on, until I am corrected, I will call Adrienne
>"pro-abortion", not "pro-choice"
>This last statement
>of hers, by itself, would not be enough either, it was just the last straw.

And this from our own Sweety Petey Honey Nyikos who *just* before this
article told James Keegan that he didn't lie about adrienne regard.

(Hmmmm.  Like the persons who occasionally use my parking space, there must
be someone else on this net with my name, they just don't capitalize it.)

And Petey honey didn't lie about her, but he did about me.  Or, we can all
see, he's certainly done so now, and for reasons that *he* *admits* aren't
good enough until they are taken out of context.

There's character!

There's analysis!

There's moral fiber!

Yessirree.

Peter, you are so *good* at this.  Don't stop!  We love it.

Adrienne Regard

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.men,alt.dads-rights
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Biological Reasons
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 21:42:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.023623.153981@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>In <BxzDx5.IMu@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>>
>>the abortion argument is about reproductive freedom for *women*.
>
>If a woman got pregnant, and was unable to get an abortion, would not the
>man be forced to become a father just as much as the woman would be forced
>to become a mother?

The woman has the legal freedom to choose in one case, but not the other.

The man has no legal freedom to choose in either case.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
From: frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Jim, the chastity belt theory, and me, Part 1
Date: 23 Nov 1992 11:04:13 GMT
Organization: Siemens-Nixdorf AG
NNTP-Posting-Host: d012s658.ap.mchp.sni.de

In article <1992Nov19.171412.19686@panix.com> jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb) writes:
#In <1eds3tINNl6d@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
#
#>In article <1992Nov17.215527.23123@panix.com> jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb) writes:
#
#>,People should be responsible for their sexual activity, as they are
#>,for their other activity.  That responsibility includes the
#>,responsibility to foster and support rather than destroy the life that
#>,results from sexual activity.  
#
#>Why?
#
#The life is a forseeable (even if not probable) consequence of the
#activity, life is valuable, and destroying life is bad.

Destroying life is not always bad.  Sometimes it is necessary to destroy one
life in order to save another.  And as far as the laws of most enlightened
democracies (and many totalitarian dictatorships, too) are concerned, one may
often destroy a life with far less moral cause than this.  I haven't given
blood today, for example, and in selflishly paying off a mortgage in order to
cling onto a house for my family, my wife and I are (quite foreseeably)
destroying life in countries afflicted by famine, when we could instead live
in the street and give all of our money to the relief agencies.

#Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com)
-- 
Frank.ODwyer@ap.mchp.sni.de   "You take slaves when you make us free,
                               when you make us free your way"
                             World Party - 'Ain't going to come til I'm ready'
From: smezias@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Petie versus Petey (or should that be Peetie?)
Date: 20 Nov 92 14:13:45 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: NYU Stern School of Business

In article <1992Nov20.075121.85266@watson.ibm.com>
margoli@watson.IBM.com writes: 

>Every time I think Petie can't make a bigger fool of himself, he goes ahead
...
>This is referring to J. S. Greenfield's article, which Petie kept
...
>Do you *enjoy* playing the fool, Petie?

I have posted this because I was recently accused of being the only
person on the net that spelled our affectionate form of address for
Prof. Nyikos, as Petie rather than Petey.  Larry demonstrates that
this is not the case.  Maybe it's an East (Petie) - West (Petey)
thing.  You know yin yang, lightness darkness, high SAT low SAT.

SJM


Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men