HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: HR 4983
Date: 14 Aug 92 14:26:26 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin

In article <zt1vr*YO0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
>judges fell for it.  They invented the 'right to abortion' via a rather warped
>perversion (interpretation) of the Constitution.


OK, I assume that this perversion is the "right to privacy" which
pro-lifers find so odious.  I finally had to jump in and ask ya'll
- do you really want to live in a country where you DON'T have a right
to privacy?  Suppose you invite me into your house and I start poking
through your personal files or whatever.  What are you going to do?
Does this bother you?  Do you find privacy a desirable thing to
have?  If so, how do you maintain it from someone who wants to
breach it?

Anyway, a friend of mine reminded me that this was exactly one of the
fears that some of the writers of the Bill of Rights had - that by
defining a limited set of rights and leaving others out instead of
attempting an exhaustive list, people would attempt to deny that other
rights did exist which were not listed.

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail.
From: paco@cs.rice.edu (Paul Havlak)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Houston Defending Choice Coalition needs you
Date: 21 Aug 1992 19:39:58 GMT
	<1992Aug19.151943.7035@texhrc.uucp> <BtAp0I.G8K@rice.edu>
Reply-To: Paul Havlak <paco@cs.rice.edu>
Distribution: tx
Organization: Center for Research on Parallel Computations

In article <BtAp0I.G8K@rice.edu> lawera@stat.rice.edu (Martin Lawera) writes:
    [Disagrees with Operation Rescue's methods, compares Operation Rescue 
     to ACT UP, Queer Nation...]

    I also fundamentally oppose violence.
    So far as I can tell, ACT UP and Queer Nation are pretty
decentralized operations, and individual chapters are independent of
any sort of national control.  The violent and destructive activities
of some chapters are controversial even within the movement itself.
    Operation Rescue seems to be very organized, with clearly defined
national leadership.
    To be fair, we should consider different ACT UP and Queer Nation
chapters to be as distinct as OR is from Rescue America, Lambs of
Christ, or even from non-violent abortion protestors.

>4. I don't see those other groups being treated as harshly as OR. Yes, they 
>   get manhandled by the police, but nobody tried to fine them $10,000  or
>   declare churches protest-free zones. Also, nobody tried to prosecute the 
>   leaders.

    OR and its allies are the only protest groups that come to mind
that baldly announce violent and destructive protests ahead of time,
tear up injunctions, and proceed with their illegal actions.  Most
other protest groups are either less violent or more subtle.
    It's as if someone came to Houston with the announced intention of
robbing banks, received an injunction against being within 100 yards
of a bank, then went directly to a bank and whined about free speech
after being arrested.

>5. Therefore, it seems to me that OR is being singled out, which must have 
>   something to do with the contents of their message, and thus violates the 
>   First Amendement.

    I think it has more to do with contempt of court.

>I agree that the clients of abortion clincs have the right not to be harassed
>(although what exactly constitutes harassment is open to debate) but so do
>the customers at Randall's. How about some liberty and justice for all?

    If Queer Nation or anyone else plans, announces, and ignores
injunctions against violent protests akin to OR's attacks on abortion
clinics, I hope they get the same treatment as OR.  If QN assaulted
Randall's the way OR does abortion clinics, I don't think Randall's
would have any trouble getting big fines against the organizers.

--paco
--
Paul Havlak			Dept. of Computer Science
Graduate Student		Rice University, Houston TX 77251-1892
PFC/ParaScope projects		(713) 527-8101 x2738 	paco@cs.rice.edu
From: cobarruvias@asd2.jsc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Houston Abortion Clinic potest News
Date: 20 Aug 92 18:38:46 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: NASA/JSC

Just heard that a northwest Houston abortion clinic was "rushed" by the
anti-abortion group and was met by 3 dozen pro-choice folks.

The abortion clinic director called police and requested EVERYONE to be
arrested for trespassing. This include both parties.
From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: HR 4983
Date: 18 Aug 92 18:26:36 GMT
Organization: Gordon Burditt

>How does the convicted murderer kill anyone if you lock him up for
>life with no parole?  So, why the espousement of so many 'right to

Unless one is prepared to weld the convicted murderer into his cell,
and with few and small openings so he can't grab someone, he can kill 
prison guards.  (Some people are capable of killing with
their bare hands.  Others can use weapons like sheets or plastic forks.)

Of course, some people are going to argue that this is inhumane punishment,
because the prisoner won't have quick access to medical care if
he needs it, and probably won't be able to exercise much.

					Gordon L. Burditt
					sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon
From: tom@europa.lonestar.org (Tom Kimball)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Ann Richards vs. Clayton Williams (was Re: Lottery)
Date: 16 Aug 92 23:32:35 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Moria Mining Guild (BBS) -- Dallas, Texas, USA

In article <TBkkPB1w164w@keys.lonestar.org> cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org (Chris Winemiller) writes:
>john@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>
>> In article <2TgFPB3w164w@keys.lonestar.org>, cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org
>> (Chris Winemiller) writes:
>> 
>> This comment is perplexing.  What "big spending" has Ann Richards been
>> responsible for?
>
>establishments; she has favored a state income tax (spoken through Lt. Gov'r
		 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Bullock).  Is that enough?


Not in the least bit true.  I have a letter from Gov. Richards saying that
she is firmly opposed to a state income tax.

Ann Richards economic policies are no different than Clayton Williams would
have been.  The difference in the two is that Williams would have launched a
Reagan-style assault on civil liberties had he been elected.
-- 
Tom Kimball  			tom@europa.lonestar.org    
tom@europa.lerctr.org   	tom%europa@egsner.cirr.com
From: cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org (Chris Winemiller)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Ann Richards vs. Clayton Williams (was Re: Lottery)
Date: 19 Aug 92 03:27:38 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: None



[Chris Winemiller wrote the following re Gov. Richards:]

> >she has favored a state income tax

to which tom@europa.lonestar.org (Tom Kimball) replied:

> Not in the least bit true.  I have a letter from Gov. Richards saying that
> she is firmly opposed to a state income tax.

Then I will be corrected for now.  You must forgive me if I don't really
believe her letter, though, especially since her Lt. Gov. has been outspoken
about favoring a state income tax, and Richards didn't chastise him.  (Or
did she, and I missed it?)

Chris

-- 
Chris Winemiller         Internet: cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org
                         UUCP    : texsun!letni!keys!cwinemil
From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Republican Candidates
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 06:06:37 GMT
 <1992Aug19.150145.8490@technology.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <1992Aug19.150145.8490@technology.com>, Judy McMillin writes:

> 
> Hey, Jay.  We all think about what Clinton MIGHT do when he gets elected.
> But we all know what Bush has done.  How about he and his co-conspirator
> Reagan creating the infrastructure that allowed the savings and loan mess
> that's costing taxpayers multi billion dollars to fix?  When George's buddies
> made that mess, he (GB) was able to dig into our pockets mighty fast, but
> he stands there now telling us it was the Democrat Congress that got us into
> all this trouble.  If George is such a helpless victim, let's boot him out
> and give someone else the job.  Nobody could do worse that his admin has.

Judy,
      are you from another planet?  The S&L debacle was caused by the repeal
of many of the Real Estate tax advantages.  The liberal Democrats who control
Congress were mad at the Real Estate industry (because they were making profits.)
So, they repealed the tax advantages.  This caused the rapid crash of the grossly
overinflated Real Estate prices.  This, in turn, caused the failure of many S&Ls
which had loaned large amounts of money to people buying Real Estate.  These loans
went bad, and many S&Ls failed.


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
From: rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: HR 4983
Date: 12 Aug 92 21:52:33 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900

In article <5J7IGX3@taronga.com> kossack@taronga.com (Jordan M. Kossack) writes:
>rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally) writes:
>-  allowing the man's vote to override the woman's would not be fair,
>-  for she would then have to carry it to term against her will. He
>-  would effectively control her, which would include his proscribing
>
>	Then, by the same token, if a woman carries the child to term, 
>   against the wishes of the father, he should not be legally required 
>   to support her or the child financially.  After all, in such a case, 
>   she would effectively control him.  If the decision is hers alone, 
>   then she must bear all responsibilty.  Of course, if the sperm donor 
>   _wants_ to support the child financially, that should be his option, 
>   unless the mother chooses to reject such support.  
>
>	Comments?   

	Sounds reasonable. 
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Mullally (rocky@sugar.neosoft.com) PH:713-681-2495
"They say 'David, what shall I do? They wait for me in the hallway'.
I say 'Don't ask me- I don't know any hallways."- David Bowie, "Scary Monsters"
Xref: sparky tx.politics:3990 alt.politics.clinton:1823
From: judy@technology.com (Judy McMillin)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Test Message
Date: 13 Aug 92 15:48:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas

I think I have my inbound mail problem fixed; will somebody please
send me a test message to confirm?  Thanks, Judy.
From: hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: HR 4983
Date: 12 Aug 92 23:41:19 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900

In article <TsJur*KO0@caleb.UUCP>, jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
> In article <1992Aug10.222832.22830@watson.ibm.com>, John Iacoletti writes:
> > Exodus 21:22-25:
> > 
> >      22 And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with
> >         child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further
> >         injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may
> >         demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide.
> >      23 But if there is any further injury [meaning to the woman],
> >         then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life,
> >      24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
> >      25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
> 
> This is for an accidental death (of the child.)  Therefore it is irrelevent to
> the abortion issue.  There is also a law (cities of refuge) to protect the man
> who accidently kills an adult.
 
It doesn't sound accidental to me at all.  Abortion existed at the time
the Bible was written, why is it not prohibited?  After all, they
certainly took a lot of time to detail the law on all sorts of other
issues.
-- 
Doug Andersen
hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally)
Subject: Re: fetus vs. baby
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: tx
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 23:13:42 GMT

In article <qFlxr*IQ0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
>The data shows that since sex education in the schools started, teen pregnancy
>increased dramatically.  Since condoms began being distributed in the schools,
>teen pregnancies have soared even higher.

	Why do you think these programs were begun, Jim? 


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Mullally (rocky@sugar.neosoft.com) PH:713-681-2495
"They say 'David, what shall I do? They wait for me in the hallway'.
I say 'Don't ask me- I don't know any hallways."- David Bowie, "Scary Monsters"
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: john@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Subject: Re: Pro-Choice
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 18:08:51 GMT
Distribution: tx
Reply-To: johniac@hwperform.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstation Division, Austin, TX

In article <TqgFPB2w164w@keys.lonestar.org>, cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org (Chris Winemiller) writes:
 
|> The best solution, I think, is for justices to have a consistent, sound,
|> proven set of principals by which they can consistently interpret the
|> Constitution.  Only one exists: "original intent."  See Robert Bork's book
|> for an exposition of this viewpoint.

This is what Supreme Courts have always done.  It's just that you and
Robert Bork get mad when different justices examine the same documents
and come up with different interpretations of original intent. 
Unfortunately the founding fathers didn't leave behind an oracle to
consult, and the Constitution was *purposely* written in the most
general terms.  The problem with the Court (IMHO) is that they try too
hard to compromise.  They try to throw a bone to both sides of every
issue.  This is how all of these "exceptions" work their way into the
absolutes of the Bill of Rights.  

-- 
John Iacoletti    IBM AWD Austin    Internet: johniac@hwperform.austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
"Now I laugh and make a fortune off the same ones that I tortured, and the
  world screams, 'Kiss me, son of God'" -- TMBG
From: paco@cs.rice.edu (Paul Havlak)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Fetal rights v. Women's rights
Date: 20 Aug 92 17:55:13 GMT
Reply-To: Paul Havlak <paco@cs.rice.edu>
Distribution: tx
Organization: Center for Research on Parallel Computations


    For me, the central problem of abortion is:

	There is no way to grant and protect fetal rights without
	eliminating women's rights.

    Define fetuses to be babies, and any woman could be charged with
endangerment of or injury to a child, for actions take while pregnant
(whether she realizes she's pregnant yet or not).  Any woman who has a
miscarriage could be faced with a manslaughter charge, if she were
found to have deliberately or negligently endangered the fetus by her
actions.  The freedom of all fertile women would be eliminated.
    The government should stay out of this legal tarpit, and focus on
the health and welfare of biologically independent human beings.

--paco
--
Paul Havlak			Dept. of Computer Science
Graduate Student		Rice University, Houston TX 77251-1892
PFC/ParaScope projects		(713) 527-8101 x2738 	paco@cs.rice.edu
Xref: sparky tx.politics:4040 alt.politics.clinton:1949
From: n8443916@henson.cc.wwu.edu (John Gossman)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Trade Imbalance
Date: 14 Aug 92 18:44:44 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Western Washington University

judy@technology.com (Judy McMillin) writes:

>Someone posted a message stating that our trade deficit was "much ado about
>nothing."  I disagree strongly.  Perhaps, this person does not understand
>what this conditions means (who really does?). I have an extremely
>oversimplified explanation for anyone who is interested:

[stuff deleted]

	I suggest you read Robert Reich's book "The Work of Nations".
After reading his chapter about inter-corporate trade you may wonder
if we have a trade deficit or not, and further if we do what we can do
about it.
	To summarize, Reich claims that the vast majority of U.S. trade
is actually within American owned corporations--for instance GM buying
parts from their own factories in Mexico, at cost, and then using them
in cars manufactured here.  So we have money, going from the U.S. to
U.S. interests overseas--is this an import?  Furthermore, the trade
figures do not properly show "symbolic analysis trade", like when an
American design firm with American employees is paid to design computer
chips in Singapore.  The company is American, the employees are American,
but its not trade, because they are working in Singapore (temporarily).
American's make a lot of money that way, because we have the best
university educated people in the world.
	Read the book.  He states it much better than I, and gives case
studies to support his ideas.

	-JG
From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
Subject: Re: Houston Defending Choice Coalition needs you
Date: 22 Aug 92 20:40:20 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Gordon Burditt

>> Gee, sounds like a pro-choice position to me.  Yet this man is busily
>> trying to find ways to deny women legal, safe abortions if they so
>> choose.
>
>Read his lips...  <cough>

If you read politician's lips, *USE A CONDOM*.  The full-body condoms
are best for this.  If you forget, you won't need an abortion, but you 
might need lots of antibiotics.

					Gordon L. Burditt
					sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon
From: root@netmail.austin.ibm.com (Chris Moller)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: fetus vs. baby
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:47:38 GMT
Reply-To: moller@netmail.austin.ibm.com
Distribution: tx
Organization: As little as I can get away with.

In article <21333@rpp386.lonestar.org>, jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
|>> In article <h93ur*ZN0@caleb.UUCP>, jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
|>> > In article <1992Aug6.151114.8975@awdprime.austin.ibm.com>, Chris Moller writes:
|>> > > No, not even semicolon.  What a lot of people want is for you anti-choicers
|>> > > to simply mind your own damned businesses and quit trying to cram your
|>> > > puritanical oppressions down everyone else's throats.
|>> > 
|>> > What about what the babies want?  Why don't you mind your own business and wait
|>> > until the baby is 21 to ask him whether he wants to be aborted?  I'd say that
|>> > YOU are the anti-choicer here.  You refuse to allow the baby to choose life!
|>> 
|>> Interestingly enough, Chris also refuses to give the baby the choice to
|>> commit suicide if the child so desires.

Well, actually, I didn't say a word about the right of the fetus to commit
suicide, largely because it wouldn't have occurred to me to bring up such
an inane consideration.

                                             You must remember that the choice
|>> DOES belong to the individual and only that individual can decide if their
|>> own life is worth living.  It isn't up to the mother to decide if she should
|>> kill her child.  Let some other person who is willing to give the child a
|>> chance adopt it.
|>> 
|>> That's why the current "pro-choice" crowd is really "pro-abortion."  You
|>> want choice, let the baby choose.

Well, actually, I honestly don't care whether women have abortions or not, and
I suspect my attitude is a common one among the pro-choice crowd.  Why in the
world would any of us _want_ a woman to have to go through it?  My philosophy
with respect to abortion, as well as many other issues, is that people should
be free to make up their own minds about things that involve themselves.

|>> -- 
|>> John F. Haugh II                   | Life's Little Instruction Book:
|>> Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            | "#138.  Learn Spanish.  In a few years,
|>> UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  more than 35% of all Americans will speak
|>> Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |  it as their first language."

-- 
IBM pays absolutely no attention to my	|   "Men are the only animals that
opinions, ergo the foregoing cannot	|   devote themselves, day in and day
possibly represent its position.	|   out, to making one another unhappy.
					|   Its virtuosi are called altruists."
Christian H. L. Moller			|     -- H. L. Mencken
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: So Long, and Thanks for all the Fish
Date: 21 Aug 92 03:28:27 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <exuptr.367.714350134@exu.ericsson.se> exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (Patrick Taylor) writes:
>I've always wondered, why do people say  "total" asshole?

Beats me; I guess that's just the way I'd heard it. One friend uses the term
"prismatic asshole": an asshole no matter how you look at him.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
  "Anything that an F-4 can outturn is not maneuverable." -- Mary Shafer
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
From: rbutera@owlnet.rice.edu (Rob Butera)
Subject: Governors are Unfit?
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: tx
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 22:50:49 GMT


Quoted without permission from a UPI news feed:

"       With Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton clearly in mind,
former President Gerald Ford suggested Thursday that governors do not
have enough experience in national and foreign affairs to serve in the
nation's highest political office  ....

	Referring to Clinton, Ford said that governors who have not served in
Congress of other top capacity lack the experience to be president.
	``With all due respect to governors... the House and Senate is a
great, great training ground for people who subsequently become
president,'' said Ford, who served in the House for 26 years. ``In my
opinion, if you look at the career of President Bush, he has had
probably as excellent a background before becoming president as anybody,
at least in my experience,'' he said."


Isn't Jerry Ford stepping on the toes a bit of Ronald Reagan, that Republican
demi-God?

-- 
Rob Butera - ECE grad student   Rice University, Houston, TX   rbutera@rice.edu

"I laid on top of those prayer requests so much, that those chemicals actually
 got into my bloodstream" - Robert Tilton (indirectly explaining his facelift)
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Quayle on Values:  Where he stands and his background
Date: 12 Aug 92 13:41:04 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: tx
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <1992Aug11.212219.10834@watson.ibm.com> johniac@hwperform.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>Wrong.  A state may CHOOSE to regulate or proscribe abortion except 
>where it is necessary for the preservation of the life or health of 
>the mother.  Many states CHOOSE not to do so.

I sit corrected.  I can only hope that we get a Supreme Court ruling
soon that corrects this gross deficiency.

>|> With viability at 21 weeks right now, there are QUITE A FEW illegal
>|> abortions being performed.
>
>If that's the case, then it's up to the states to legislate and
>enforce this.

No, it is up to the Supreme Court to protect the rights of citizens.
If the "compelling interest" of the mother is protected by the court,
so too is the "compelling interest" of a child that is now able to
survive unless medically "terminated".  The right to life, stated in
the 5th Amendment, is not dependent on the whims of the state
legislatures.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | Life's Little Instruction Book:
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            | "#138.  Learn Spanish.  In a few years,
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  more than 35% of all Americans will speak
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |  it as their first language."