HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: long@next1.acme.ucf.edu (Richard Long)
Subject: Re: The origin of individual human beings
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 22:08:30 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.021630.297@kestrel.edu> mcdonald@kestrel.edu (Jim  
McDonald) writes:
> Unless you have a truely bizarre notion of what constitutes a human  
individual,  there
> is clear scientific evidence that some indivuals are created well after  
conception, by the
> merger of multiple zygotes or embryos.  They are refered to as chimeras,  
and in some 
> sense are the opposite of identical twins. 

Thanks, Jim, for a true gem amongst all this drivel.  I should have  
realized that if a zygote can split into genetically identical twins, two  
genetically different zygotes can merge into one!  I think that this  
should put an end to all simplistic attempts to define the beginning of an  
individual organism.  Obviously, society is going to have to work very  
hard to redefine our moral and legal system, and biologists as well as  
doctors are going to be needed in that endeavor.
--
Richard Long
Institute for Simulation and Training
University of Central Florida
12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826
(407)658-5026, FAX: (407)658-5059
long@acme.ucf.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Subject: Simon dreams of stomping on those who oppose him
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:04:59 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.051024.29239@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>Especially if the Operation Rescue people carried the appropriate hardware.
>Try to squash someone who is armed...
>
>As the people depicted in my planned novel will be.   In my version of the
>future, there's a scene where there are pro-choicers at an abortion clinic,
>and the pro-lifers show u, and proceed to use truncheons.  The police
>then show, and instead of arresting the pro-lifers, they join in with them
>against the pro-choice people.  But then the PC crowd would have a fit....


Simon here illustrates why so many pro-choicer's are cynical of
pro-lifer's claim to value human life and rights.  Perhaps the value of
life and rights applies only to the unborn?

If being disgusted and revolted by someone's wet dream of using armed
might to deal with an opposing side is PC, then so be it.

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail exterior to Novell.
From: rovero@attu.oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: GEORGE BUSH, STOP THE RED-BAITING
Date: 10 Oct 92 07:10:39 GMT
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School,Monterey CA

Remember the misery index?  By that measure, the economy is doing better
than lots of other presidential terms.  The only democrats that did better
were Johnson/Kennedy (first term).

-- 
Josh Rovero   (rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil) | or Internet 5346p@cc.nps.navy.mil 
Department of Oceanography, Code OC/Rv |      Bitnet 5346p@NAVPGS 
Naval Postgraduate School              |              
Monterey, CA  93943   (408) 646-2084   |
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
From: bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: Starfleet Headquarters: San Francisco
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:37:06 GMT

Simon writes:
>To paraphrase your comments:

WHOSE comments?

>I am against abortion being discussed as the only option.

WHO'S discussing it as the ONLY option?

>Ok, flame away.....

Geez, man, you deserve it!  Here, have a clue.  Take two, they're small!

-- 
_/_/_/  Brian Kendig                             Je ne suis fait comme aucun
 _/_/  bskendig@netcom.com                de ceux que j'ai vus; j'ose croire
  _/                            n'etre fait comme aucun de ceux qui existent.
                             Si je ne vaux pas mieux, au moins je suis autre.
                                                                 -- Rousseau
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Quayle won the debate.
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 22:27:44 GMT

In article <98654@bu.edu>, tesco@bumetb.bu.edu (Dances With Babes) writes:

|> Any unbiased observer would conclude that Quayle won the debate last night.

	Err, right, but...

	Quayle kept control and hit on the desired issues, and he looked very
cool doing it. He looked better then Gore in many ways, in fact. None the
less, they all looked pretty foolish by the end of it, so I'm not sure
how resounding a success it was.

	Most of the media reviews I've seen report that it was a full scale
brawl, with no knockout. That seems accurate ... I don't imagine that
Quayles approval ratings went up after his performance, they just didn't
go down as far as Gores did.

-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
  "[PBS viewers are] affluent, highly educated, the movers and the shakers,
   the socially conscious and the well informed. What about the rest of us?"
                                                       - Robert Dole
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 03:10:44 GMT
Summary: The Switch-hitters

In article <1992Oct15.022254.26901@muddcs.claremont.edu> weverett@jarthur.claremont.edu (William M. Everett) writes:
> In article <1992Oct14.165055.8575@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
> >
> >And with the current economy, a product of that highly
> >intelligent conservative government we have, the one that
> 	Why who has the most control over our economy? It's congress isn't it?
> Isn't congress mostly democrat? Now that I've corrected that little 
> misconception of yours, you can replace 'conservative' with 'liberal' and you
> will be insulting the democrats. That would suggest you certainly shouldn't
> vote for a democrat for president. 
> 	Just something I noticed.

William, old darling, why is it that when the economy was
bad the highly popular former president who once played
supporting actor to a monkey blamed it on the democratic
president then in office, and then took credit for the
turnaround in the economy when he came to office, and
his vice president, who some would say was a supporting
actor for a monkey himself, was able to bask happily
in that warm glow, despite the fact that the president in
question presided over a loss of seats in the Senate to
those wicked, evil, cause of all sorrow in the world 
liberal democrats?  (I got lost there in the grammar but
I think that one worked out.)  Now we find out that it
is the fault of that evil, wicked, cause of all sorrow in
the world liberal democratic Congress that is behind
the poor economy.  So which is it, William?  Is good
kin...er, President Bush not responsible for the bad economy
as his predecessor Ronald Reagan was responsible for the
good, or is good President Bush responsible for the bad
economy as his predecessor Ronald Reagan was responsible
for the good?

Dean Kaflowitz

A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy.
-Benjamin Disraeli
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7230 alt.activism.d:3821 alt.politics.elections:16412 alt.politics.bush:8850 alt.politics.clinton:10021 talk.politics.misc:51319 talk.abortion:42234
From: weverett@jarthur.claremont.edu (William M. Everett)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 13 Oct 92 06:21:00 GMT
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711

In article <1992Oct11.075850.1837@schaefer.math.wisc.edu> junikka@schaefer.math.wisc.edu (Jari Junikka) writes:
>sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>>Now don't give me that BS about the death penalty and warfare,
>>because everyone knows that is totally unrelated.
>
>Since I do not know how or why these are unrelated,
>could you explain to me.
>
>If it is wrong to kill a few hundred cells, surely it must
>be wrong to kill 6 billion of them.
>

	It is wrong to kill an *innocent* life. the death penalty applies
to people who have been proven guilty of heinous crimes. as for war, 
you would have to look pretty hard to find someone who said war was a
good thing in and of itself. It is an action to be only when the 
alternative is less attractive.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7280 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6775
From: kb4c+@andrew.cmu.edu (Karin Brennan)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: 900-POLL
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:24:25 GMT
Organization: Design, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


 The RL 1-900 line poll has failed to include The Libertarian Party
candidate, Andre Marrou.   The man IS running for President this year. 
He is a legitimate candidate- on the ballot in all 50 states.   He
probably won't win, but neither will Ross Perot.  Besides that, the
candidates wives have gotten more discussion time than Mr. Marrou. 

Does anyone know a business number where I,(or anyone else who is
interested) can call and gripe?
 
Save the Libertarian, Rush, or Perot insults.  I'm not interested.
Thanks in advance
-k 

(CROSSPOSTED BECAUSE I WANTED TO)
*******************************

',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',','
`,` Democrat:    Give us your money. _We'll_ solve your problems. `,`
`,` Republican:  Give us your money. We'll ignore your problems.  `,`
`,` Libertarian: Keep your money. Solve your own problems.        `,`
',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',','
(borrowed without permission.  Sorry Jason, wherever you are)
 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Simon Booth comes out pro-choice
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 21:03:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.185651.10798@netcom.com> bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
>sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) wrote (in article <1992Oct8.073626.1003@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>):
>>Actually, there will be ice floes on the River Styx before THAT happens.
>
>Before WHAT happens?!?  Are you talking to the walls again, Simon? ;)

Before I become Pro-choice, that's what.  By saying when there are ice
floes on the River Styx, I was being polite.
>>Let me rephrase that--I should have said "Perhaps there are extreme
>>circumstances where abortion might be an option, but I am still against it.."
>
>Define "extreme circumstances", then.
>
>>I can't just walk away from this.  I have committed myself to this debate
>>and cannot give up.  That would be wrong.
>
>Then debate!  Don't just assert!
>
>--
>_/_/_/  Brian Kendig                             Je ne suis fait comme aucun
> _/_/  bskendig@netcom.com                de ceux que j'ai vus; j'ose croire
>  _/                            n'etre fait comme aucun de ceux qui existent.
>                             Si je ne vaux pas mieux, au moins je suis autre.
>                                                                 -- Rousseau
I am trying to debate, but folks get mad when their opinions fly against
someone elses.  I thought I was making it clear why I oppose abortion.

Simon


Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: FWR100@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Extra! Dan is a Genius!
Date: 9 Oct 92 16:53:35 GMT
 <1992Sep24.165339.23323@anasazi.com> <cortez.717592044@milton>
 <1992Sep29.183808.18034@anasazi.com> <qojojm8@twilight.wpd.sgi.com>
 <cortez.718440319@milton>
Organization: Penn State University

In article <cortez.718440319@milton>, cortez@milton.u.washington.edu (Tom
Warner) says:
>I don't believe you for a second. You know, California, press in tow,
>pulls over at a Burger King with a "now hiring" sign and declares
>that it's a sign things are "turning around in America."
>
>I am absolutely incapable of conceiving how anyone with a shred of
>intelligence was capable of that. He was not fumbling over words,
>he was not making minor factual errors, and the press did not distort
>it at all. Reading the detailed reports on the event that came out at
>the time, there was no way to conclude anything other than that Dan
>thought he was showing off a real economic positive -- Dan went on too
>long for there to have been any mistake.

Would you consider having _any_ job as being better than having _no_ job?
There are a lot of people out there who are unemployed with few marketable job
skills.  If all of these people went to work at a Burger King for $4 an hour,
how much less Welfare would we need to pay?   If you have no job, the Burger
King _is_ a step up.  The fact is, there are jobs available.  Whether people
choose to take advantage of them is another matter.

-Frank
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7579 alt.politics.clinton:10823 alt.politics.bush:9418
From: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu (Greg Trotter)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Reasonable men may differ: Capital Gains Tax
Date: 16 Oct 92 03:02:34 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Gallifrey - Home of the Timelords
Originator: news@kittyhawk.ecn.uoknor.edu

In article <1992Oct15.095128.1@azcc.arizona.edu> kgirodias@azcc.arizona.edu writes:
>
>At the very least the capital gains tax should be indexed for inflation!!!!

Well, I think we need to keep it low to encourage investment. But you have
a point: we have a very high capital gains tax and very low inflation!

>The second and more inportant point is while this may help rich people it
>would also help all of us. The best example I've heard was at a town hall
>meeting of Jim Kolbe, my congressman. He gave the example of a mom-pop type
>business. They buy a store 30 years ago and make a living off it. When it
>comes time to retire and the want to sell it would not a capital gains
>cut help them, the extra money would certainly provide them with a bigger
>nest egg.

I don't think it would. Perhaps it would if the store was organized as a
(non subchapter-S) corporation. But I'm speaking off the cuff; I don't
really know how a cut in capital gains would affect them.

Say, that Sub-S comment raises a good point. If Clinton is proposing a
tax hike for the top 2% wealthiest Americans, whether that figure is
at $200K or $56K, wouldn't that have a devastating effect on subchapter
S corporations? My parents own a Sub-S company. They love their work, but
don't make a lot of money. They take home around $30K per year between
them. But their company grosses around $200K. I'd hate to think of their
tax burden.

							- greg

"You can't turn the White House into the Waffle House."
					President Bush, October 15, 1992
From: William.A.Hall.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (William A. Hall Jr.)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: List of speeches
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:31:32 GMT
 <1992Oct08.163805.8003@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Oct08.163805.8003@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>
bdewey@grok116.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Bob Dewey) writes:

> What about Ross Perot's speach to the NAACP?

Yeah? Do "you people" have it?

Just kidding.

---------------------------------------------
William Hall, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH.

"Abortion is advocated only by persons that have themselves been born."
-- Ronald Reagan
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 23:31:40 GMT

In article <BvrJI4.Is1@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> greens@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Shawn Green) writes:
>Here's my blow-hard, simplistic, brutish (and therefore aptly suited to the
>alt.rush-limbaugh group) opinion on the abortion issue:

You can always distinguish a liberal from a distance because they procede
from the premise that conservatives (and other commoners) are basically
idiots.  This is why they believe in big government and social engineering
because they don't think we can be trusted to rule ourselves.

>The right of the woman to choose what to do with her body supercedes any rights
>the unborn parasite has to her body.
            ^^^^^^^^

Though I am by no means an absolutist on the abortion issue, I do object when
the truth is replaced by sophist arguments.  You could get a job working 
for the propaganda department in any war - you are very apt a dehumanizing
the enemy.  Sounds like your prescription for a woman pregnant with a
parasite would be a good horse wormer like ivermecti.


Call the Orkin Army!

Mike Best
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:36:39 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.165152.18989@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>In article <1992Oct6.015922.5611@jetsun.weitek.COM> nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf) writes:
>>In article <ld0okmINN8b6@spim.mti.sgi.com> mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen) writes:
>>>Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>>|>
>>>|> I have one solution, and I'll get nuclear flamed for it, but what is
>>>|> wrong with abstinence as a means to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
>>>|> BTW--anyone notice that I've kept my postings on the level, without the
>>>|> sarcasm of the replies I get???
>>
>>My husband wouldn't like it is an objection that pops into my mind.
>>:-)
>>
>>One issue that the anti-abortion folks really are unwilling to deal
>>with is that many of the women who seek to terminate pregnancies
>>are literally not in any economic shape to continue them. There is
>>a great deal of handwaving at 'forcing employers' to provide unpaid
>>leave, but no real help with expenses and childcare. Many women work
>>at jobs that don't offer health benefits.To go on welfare would often cause them to have to evict their husbands.
>
>This is patently false.  87% of americans have comprehensive health
>care plans.  In addition, there are infertile couples waiting in line
>to pay for the expenses of pregnant women who will then let those
>infertile couples adopt her baby.
>
>Ted
>
>--
>"Vote Democrat.  It's easier than getting a job."
>
>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu

So you see, there are better alternatives.   Pro-choice people don't
like to hear about about it.

Pro-choice: Never have been, never will be!!!


Simon


Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:6705 alt.politics.elections:15412 alt.politics.bush:7979 alt.politics.clinton:8798 talk.politics.misc:49922 talk.abortion:41029 alt.activism.d:3589
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 5 Oct 92 20:33:19 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <wenlKC_00iUzQ151Ax@andrew.cmu.edu> ml3e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Loomis) writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.talk.abortion: 2-Oct-92 Re: Walking down to the
>stu.. by Dave Schabel@calspan.com 
>> You are absolutely right.  However, since we are and cannot be
>> sure if and when it is a person, shouldn't we err on the side
>> of caution?  
>
>Mr. Schabel is absolutely right.  Since the human population of this
>planet is way in excess of its usual numbers, and there is a good bit of
>indication that this may undermine the ecosystem, it is clear that
>abortion rights is desirable.  Certainly that is the sensible cautious
>approach.
>
>Michael Loomis

Way in excess of its usual numbers?  Where do you get your information?  
The earth is not over-populated.  Now before you start flaming, listen 
for just a minute.  Of course some areas have extremely dense population, 
and I agree that places like Los Angeles and Calcutta are over-populated, 
but the earth as a whole is not over-populated, if you mean by that that 
there are too many people for the earth to support.  Are you aware that 
every person on the earth could lay down, spread their arms and legs 
and not touch anyone else, in a mid-sized county in the midwest?  How 
about in one large Florida city?  There is plenty of food to feed 
everyone several times over.  The problem is distribution.  What needs 
of humans did you have in mind that the earth is running out of?

Ted

-- 
"Vote Democrat.  It's easier than getting a job."

krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:6882 alt.activism.d:3653 alt.politics.elections:15675 alt.politics.bush:8225 alt.politics.clinton:9123 talk.politics.misc:50351 talk.abortion:41420
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Simon Booth comes out (perhaps) pro-choice
Date: 8 Oct 92 19:21:23 GMT
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

Simon E. Booth) writes:
|> 
|> Actually, there will be ice floes on the River Styx before THAT happens.
|> 
|> Let me rephrase that--I should have said "Perhaps there are extreme
|> circumstances where abortion might be an option, but I am still against it.."
|> I can't just walk away from this.  I have committed myself to this debate
|> and cannot give up.  That would be wrong.
|> 
So you now state that "Perhaps" there should be choice.

|> I have corrected my previous posting that was thought to be a vote for pro-
|> choice.  I should not have been so vague.
|> 
Vagueness isn't your problem.  Your desire to hold an extremest
position that leaves no room for people to be people is your problem.
So far I have not met anyone who is perfect, but you expect people
to be perfect or pay.  Hopefully the courts and the law will continue
to help you keep your problem to yourself.

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc