HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.sex
Subject: Re: pounding the "10%" figure into the ground: Nature, 12/3/92
Date: 30 Dec 92 18:07:37 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <13710@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>In article <BzMEHL.46t@exnet.co.uk>,
s0xjg@exnet.co.uk (Xavier Gallagher) writes:

>>Come on, be fair!  97% of reported child molestation is done by hetro
>>men.  The rest is made up of gay men and women.

>FALSE.  Depending on which study you read, at least 21% of molestation
>is by exclusive homosexuals, or about 30% is done by homosexuals or
>bisexuals.

This is very misleading. Intentionally misleading, I'd have to say, since
I called Mr Cramer on it repeatedly in ca.politics.

Folks, what Mr Cramer doesn't tell you about these studies he quotes is
twofold:

	1. Presumably, the 21% figure he refers to is from Abel and Harlow,
	   August 1987 _Redbook_. Abel says that 21% of the ***men who molest
	   boys*** are exclusively homosexual. This flies directly in the
	   face of Cramer's assertions that molesting boys is a facet of
	   their homosexuality . Clinical psychologists regard pedophilia, at
	   least in its fixated form, which comprises the vast majority of
	   molestation of boys, as a narcissistic confusion, instead of an
	   object-choice like adult homosexuality.

	2. Mr Cramer refers to 30%, but he doesn't tell you that this is
	   the percentage of VICTIMS of pedophiles who are male. NOT,
	   repeat NOT, the percentage of pedophiles who molest boys. There
	   is ample evidence, reflected neatly in Abel and Harlow, which
	   shows that men who molest boys, fixated pedophiles, do so with
	   about 12 times the number of victims as girl-molesters. Thus the
	   30% needs to be divided by roughly 12, all other things equal, to
	   get the percentage of MOLESTERS who molest boys (about 3%, that is).

Xavier appears to be right, Clayton. 97% of molesters who are men appear to be
heterosexual. Of course, saying that homosexuals are "overrepresented" among
molesters depends crucially on the overall incidence, which is unknown. I've 
seen studies showing incidence anywhere between 1% and 11%.

Brian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kane@{buast7,astro}.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) Astronomy Dept, Boston University,
Boston, MA 02215. True personal salvation is achieved by absolute faith in
ones true self.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65462 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10770 alt.rush-limbaugh:12353 alt.politics.bush:14960
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Space program necessary
Date: 28 Dec 92 23:42:21 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group


> 	Can any of you think of any moral or philosophical justification
>	for using huge amounts of taxpayer money to fund the "space
>	program" at all?  Not counting, of course, it provides high-
>	pay, high-tech jobs for a bunch of us.

A few months ago I was hiking on the high desert, carrying a small transistor
radio.  I listened to a weather report, which told me that a large storm
front was moving in.  I judged the best place to be when it would hit, 
and safely made it before the flash floods hit.

Hurricane Andrew - weather reporting saved a lot of lives.

E-mail and networking to Europe - couldn't do it without satelites.

Many other spin offs.


Admittedly none of these things were envisaged when they started the space
race.   But that is a characteristic of speculative research.   Often the
biggest payoffs are not what the original research was all about.   For
example, genetic engineering was not a goal when people started doing
research on plasmids, etc...

Basic research is an INVESTMENT.  You cannot tell which investments are 
going to pay off.   But you can be sure that if you never make any 
investments in the future, you will be condemned to settle for what 
little you garner from current technology.

I assume you are not against research, only against throwing government money
at it...

Some basic research is too costly for any company to engage in, especially
when it is not clear what the outcome will be.   The space program, for one.
No company in 1955 could ever have put the resources together to get us to
a point where we could have created weather satelites, communications
satelites, etc...   But when the basic work was done, private enterprise
took up the slack and commercialized it.

I'd say the improvement in the quality of life has more than paid back
the tax dollars spent on the space program.


I cannot guarrenty that our current tax dollars will be equally rewarded.
They may flop, they may reward us beyond our wildest dreams.  But that's 
the nature of investment.


So what should we be like - the silly grasshopper who says "don't spend 
any of my tax money on space, I want to spend it now on fun things",  or 
the industrious ant who is willing to spend a few tenths of a penny from each
dollar on the future?
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65116 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10620 alt.rush-limbaugh:12148 alt.politics.bush:14868
From: stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Scott William Unger)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Space program necessary
Date: 22 Dec 1992 18:11:32 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

From article <1992Dec22.021415.8073@cs.rochester.edu>, by dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz):
> In article <1992Dec22.005651.3627@news.stolaf.edu> kamilewi@lars.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Alex Kamilewicz) writes:
> 
> A country that spends less on space is Japan.  Boy, that lack
> of spinoffs has really crippled *their* technology.  And the
> country that launches the most rockets, Russia, sure has the
> world's most advanced technology, doesn't it?
> 
This is a bad analogy.  I dont believe there is all too much that the 
Japanese have actually invented, that added to their technology.  
Sure, they make the best technical products in the world probally, but
they didnt really invent much of it, they are just better workers, and
what the rest of the world invents, they perfect.  Im sure someone will
disagree, but I feel the Japanese actually lack in the technology   
department when it comes to actually creating brand new ideas.  How many
things have the Japanese actually invented?  As far as Russia goes, 
geez, who knows what they have been doing for the past 20 years?  :)

- Stalker

> 	Paul F. Dietz
> 	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
-- 
|  stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu  | University of Wisconsin Milwaukee   |      
|----------------------------|-------------------------------------|
| "If the answer is 'What's the question?', then the question is." |  
|                                     - Paul T.G.E. Britton        |
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: Health insurance stuff
Followup-To: talk.politics.medicine
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 18:18:02 GMT

Dennis G. Shea, <DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>
>I heard a comment over the weekend on CNN Newsmakers (Stu Altman, I think)
>that it is ironic that the U.S. is moving towards managed competition.  Most
>other countries decided that in creating their system it was more important
>to preserve consumer choice of physician than consumer choice of insurer.

If one were to read about how British National Health Service is
conducted (or, the Italian equivalent that they are trying to move
over to public health insurance, from what I've gathered over the 
weekend on CNN), and if you are familiar with HMO, well ... it's
the same.

Actually, in countries with public health insurance (not service) like
Canada, France and Germany there is private insurance beyond the basic
comprehensive coverage, but that tends to be for amenities and in the
German case, to cover deductibles.  My fiancee's uncle, who's a
private practicioner in Saarbrucken near the French border, was in
town and her cousin was practicing her translation craft with me and
her father (I don't speak German, he doesn't speak English) ...
basically, the German model differs from Canada and France in one
aspect and that is the German system is "voluntary" ...  in theory.
Nobody in private insurance will provide equivalent comprehensive
coverage like the public plan* and the first question they ask is if
you have basic public coverage --- if you say NO, they show you the
door.

(* like in Canada; after all, our doctors can "opt out" and need not
participate in taking public insurance, rather billing directly and
the patient getting reimbursed.  And, private insurance is not illegal
-- but since private insurance helped to design the present system and
its divisions, well ... no market.)

Let's say that after a year of following this topic (with years in the
real world, being the token Canadian in my department), I like the idea
of the German system ... as long as a good army of Repo Men are around
to deal with uninsured libertarians who'd otherwise ring up a big tab
on my nickel. (-;

>The U.S. appears to be moving to a system in which we will retain consumer
>choice of their insurer through these purchasing co-ops; this system will
>probably involve more consumers losing some choice over their provider.

Bob Blackshaw's comparison last week of how his physician selection
is limited was illuminating ... in Virginia, it's a small book given
to him by his insurer/HMO; in Ottawa, it was the Yellow Pages ...

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		Support NAFTA
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			 Eat Mexican  (El Teddy's ad)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton)
Subject: Re: Cuba : Is an embargo still necessary?
Reply-To: cmort@ncoast.org (Christopher Morton)
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 23:21:58 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc

As quoted from <1992Dec23.091043.21846@vlsi.polymtl.ca> by d40937@pascal (Jean Yves Desbiens):

> With the demise of communism and the now non-existent support
> of Russia to its former ally, what is the reason, if any,
> behind the continuing embargo of Cuba. The Cuban's
> should be flourishing if not for this uncalled for economic 
> drain on their country. The cuban missile crisis is not relevent
> here : 30 years have passed and germany was forgiven for its
> actions in lot less time than that. The US's overpowering
> urge to rid the world of every communist country like a plague
> that must be eradicated smacks of hipocrisy after its support
> of an uncounted number of dictators and despots. For the US, if
> someone is not an ally, he must be an ennemi.
> 
> This might be flame baiting but I truly 
> think that the USA's heavy handed actions everywhere must stop.
> It cannot do something claiming it is for a countries good when in
> fact it is for its very narrow and short sighted objectives.
> 
I won't flame you.  I'll just make a simple point.

Do you or did you support sanctions against South Africa?

     a. The demise of National Socialism and the lack of Nazi Germany to 
     support Afrikaans fascism has eliminated any real reason to be very
     concerned about apartheid, hasn't it?  We don't need to worry about
     RSAF as a base for hostile German forces, do we?

     b. Do you feel that, "The US's overpowering
     urge to rid the world of every fascist country like a plague
     that must be eradicated smacks of hipocrisy(sic) after its support
     of the Soviet Union during WWII and Yugoslavia afterwards.  For the US, if
     someone is not an ally, he must be an ennemi(sic)."

I supported sanctions against RSAF.  If you did too, then I detect some 
hypocrisy in YOUR position vis a vis Cuba.  Why is it ok to impose sanctions
on South Africa and NOT ok against Cuba which is even LESS democratic than
RSAF, which at least provides a semblance of democracy to a PORTION of its
population...?


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------  

"Well whose opinions did you THINK these were...?" 
------------------------------------------------------------------  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Subject: Re: Mandatory Organ Donation
Organization: DigiBoard, Incorporated, Eden Prairie,MN
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 01:34:19 GMT

PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
>In article <92358.114511DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu>
>>The actual law would make organ donation the default option, which
>>individuals and families could reject.  In fact, they would have
>>to be informed of their right to reject the organ donation.  It seems
>>to me that this retains the individual right to dispose of their
>>affairs.

>        The decision should be the individual's.  What this group is
>proposing is making a decision and then "allowing" the people involved
>to reject it.  I'd just as soon make my own decisions, thank you.

Doesn't there have to be SOME default action?

What is done with dead people who leave no indication what they want
done with their bodies?  ANY action, including doing nothing and leaving
them lying around, is essentially making a decision for them.

What about people who think burying people is grotesque, but see nothing
wrong with organ donation?  How is burying people any less a decision
than organ donation?

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Make Mine Puree'
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65016 alt.rush-limbaugh:12060
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Bob Hooker's possibly fraudulen (was Re: Trickle Down Economics)
Date: 21 Dec 1992 18:02:55 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com
Keywords: hate

Steven R Fordyce) writes:
|> >>|As a *moderate* Republican I see a lot wrong with Buchanan and I
|> >>|don't like being lumped in with whackos.  I think that the 
|> >>|economic problems have forced a lot of slugs out from under the rocks.  
|> >
|> >>|Buchanan, Limbaugh, and Duke are hate-mongers.
|> >
|> >>I'll agree with you on Duke, but why to you think Buchanan and Limbaugh
|> >>are hate-mongers?  You never explained that.
|> >
|> >Limbaugh and his "Femi-nazi" comments are insensitive, if nothing else.
|> 
|> Rush uses this term to refer to people with particular (intolerant)
|> political views.  To claim this shows possible racism, sexism, or
|> hatred is asinine.
|> 
Please present any similarities to the feminist movement and Nazi-ism.
It must have escaped the notice of the press.  I think a better
description of Bush is that he panders to the racist attitudes in
others without making overtly racist statements.

|> >But Buchanan?   He's an out-and-out racist and anti-semite.  
|> 
|> No one who knows him has said that, and many have come forward to
|> defend him, including Michael Kinsley, whom you quoted.  He has known
|> Pat for years and says he is definitely not an anti-semite.
|> 
Pat is not anti-semitic.  He just thinks that anyone who isn't a
Christian should not have a place or say in his world, should not affect
our politics, and should not dirty his doorstep.  This is true religion
at work.  Tolerance, not understanding.  Pity, not sharing.
Pat isn't worth the print it takes to discuss him.

|> >William F. Buckley, who agrees with him ideologically, even admits that
|> >he's an anti-semite.
|> 
|> You better read that piece again ("National Review", December 30, 1991) --
|> that isn't what Buckley said.  He said that some of what Buchanan has said
|> could reasonably be taken as anti-semitic, and he should apologize for
|> those statements (which he hasn't done -- something I view as a character
|> flaw), but that he doesn't think that Buchanan himself is anti-semitic.
|> 
You are giving him a lot of lattitude.  If it walks like and anti-semite,
and it talks like an anti-semite then it probably is an anti-semite.  I agree
with your charcter flaw statement -- anti-semitism is a serious character
flaw.
-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65473 soc.motss:53914 alt.sex:40339
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,alt.sex
Subject: Re: pounding the "10%" figure into the ground: Nature, 12/3/92
Date: 28 Dec 92 19:18:12 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <168C7D5B8.PKJAMES@UKCC.UKY.EDU>, PKJAMES@UKCC.UKY.EDU writes:
# I wish I could have said what you said.   I should have known by the
# time I looked at your sig you weren't from here.  I think we all like
# the USEnet because of it's complete openess-it's like a "freedom wall"
# where everyone can go, BUT that doesn't mean we have to agree and I will
# let you know that if that fucking Clayton ever comes here to KY and
# starts that bullshit-he better be bringing body guards.   He can say
# stuff like I'm crazy- I think he's the crazy one, and if he say's it to
# my face he's just damn suicidal.                Paul  (...xavier only
# mad dogs and englishmen go out in the midday sun..smile)
# PAUL JAMES   (PKJAMES@UKCC.UKY.EDU)

The average homosexual: he doesn't like what you say, so he threatens
you with violence.



-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: George Bush pardons criminals
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 12:32:24 GMT

In <72587@cup.portal.com> L-Bueno@cup.portal.com (Louis Alberto Bueno) writes:
>kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) writes:
>>In article <1hq11vINNq1f@spim.mti.sgi.com> mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen) writes:

>>> Ollie North was a criminal.

>>Not for his part in the Iran-Contra deal.  His conviction has been
>>overturned.

>	Due to procrastination on the part of the prosecutor, which, in
>this case, happened to be Walsh.  Rather than indicting him on a narrower
>case, he decided to go after the larger conspiracy theory (i.e. Iran-
>Contra).  But since Ollie North gave congressional testimony under
>immunity, his trial (in which he WAS convicted) was eventually judged to 
>be tainted, and thrown out in '91 by an appeals court.

Minor nit: his trial was not judged to *be* tainted.  The appeals court
said that Walsh had to prove that every bit of the evidence used was not 
tainted, and since Walsh said he couldn't do that, they threw it out.

IOW, it wasn't that it was tainted, it was that Walsh couldn't prove that it
wasn't.

>	By the technicality of the law, he is "innocent."  Factually, he's
>not.  You're not sure how this works?  If a cop doesn't read you your
>rights while arresting you, any evidence of your wrongdoing, indeed, even
>your crime, can be legally nullified in court.  This does not mean that
>you did not kill the man, rape the woman, steal the money, etc... (try
>to remember, this is ONLY an example :-)

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Is it too early to start making predictions for 1993?
niepornt@phoenix.    | Probably, but that never stopped me before.
   princeton.edu     | ALE: Baltimore ALW: Chicago NLE: Montreal NLW: Atlanta
Baltimore Orioles 93 | AL MVP: Cal Ripken  AL Cy Young: Mike Mussina
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Cuba : Is an embargo still necessary?
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 16:35:11 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.091043.21846@vlsi.polymtl.ca> d40937@pascal (Jean Yves Desbiens) writes:
}With the demise of communism and the now non-existent support
}of Russia to its former ally, what is the reason, if any,
}behind the continuing embargo of Cuba. The Cuban's
}should be flourishing if not for this uncalled for economic 
}drain on their country.

Excuse me.  Could you please enlighten me - what nations, other than
the US of A, are prevented from large-scale economic dealings with Cuba?


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,alt.sex
From: rlshuck@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Robert L. Shuck)
Subject: Re: pounding the "10%" figure into the ground: Nature, 12/3/92
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 06:03:56 GMT

 Hello do you like Stephen King?

emc         
rls


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: dong@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Don M. Gibson)
Subject: Re: What is Clay's real motivation?
Reply-To: dong@oakhill.sps.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Semiconductor Products Sector
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 21:37:37 GMT

In article 13721@optilink.COM, cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>In article <1992Dec23.172153.27129@seachg.uucp>, chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask) writes:
>> Clay;
>> 
>> Personally I think  you ARE an emotionally disturbed homosexual.  And I still
>
>Wrong.
>
>-- 
>Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
>C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.

that was poor speculation on CB's part.  CC, perhaps you could help
us net-psycoanalysts out by answering a few questions:

1) how do you feel about your mother?

2) how do you feel about your father?

3) did you have a pet when you were a little boy?
    how do you feel about that pet today?

4) if you were an animal in the jungle, what kind
   of animal would you be?

....

Others are welcome to enter their questions to further complete
the psychological profile.
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: alt.flame.spelling,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: stop repetative [sic] posts
Date: 28 Dec 92 11:40:15 GMT
Followup-To: alt.flame.spelling
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Learn to spell, Andy.  The word is "repetitive".
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc