____                          _                 _  ___        _  __      _  ___   ___  ___  
|  _ \  ___  ___ ___ _ __ ___ | |__   ___ _ __  / |/ _ \      / |/ /_    / |/ _ \ ( _ )/ _ \ 
| | | |/ _ \/ __/ _ \ '_ ` _ \| '_ \ / _ \ '__| | | | | |_____| | '_ \   | | (_) |/ _ \ (_) |
| |_| |  __/ (_|  __/ | | | | | |_) |  __/ |    | | |_| |_____| | (_) |  | |\__, | (_) \__, |
|____/ \___|\___\___|_| |_| |_|_.__/ \___|_|    |_|\___/      |_|\___( ) |_|  /_/ \___/  /_/ 
                                                                     |/                      

Message: 61781
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/movie
Date: 12/09/89  Time: 13:03:45

The star of the sequel is Marc Lepine, now deceased. I hope they shot all of
the other scenes first, or it will be a very short movie.

Message: 61782
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/debt
Date: 12/09/89  Time: 13:03:59

OK, I'll expect $100 to arrive on the 15th.

Message: 61783
Author: Phil Moseby
Category: Bulletins
Subject: Saving Money!
Date: 12/09/89  Time: 16:45:33

Welcome to the world of truely useful telecommunications.  Now there
is a system that can actually save you money when you go shopping
for either goods or services, just for using this system.  It is
known as The Connection - Merchants Advertisement Network.  Just use
your current computer system to tie into The Connection.  There you
will find advertisements from many companies around the valley, who
offer special discounts to you, the Connection user. As a user of
our system, you are able to do everything from adding equipment to
your computer system, to getting custom tee shirts, sculptured nail
and manicures, property taxes lowered, hey! there is just too much
savings to print.  So why don't you give us a call and find out 
just how much you can save just by becoming a Connection user.
And best of all, we're free....no fee!  call 956-6814 today.......
 

Message: 61784
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/09/89  Time: 18:45:41

Re:  "If you go back several hundred years to the Code of Hammurabi, you'll
see that they had a list of laws similar to the 10 Commandments."

In what year do you think the Bible was written?  In what year do you think
the Code of Hammurabi was written?  If the code of Hammurabi predates the
giving of the 10 commandments to Moses, it sure doesn't predate God's
standards.  It's very possible that God influenced the Code of Hammurabi.
But to say God based his 10 commandments on the Code of Hammurabi is really
too far out.  Can you picture God who created the heavens and the earth and
everything else both visible and invisible taking advice from the Code of
Hammurabi?  God was probably just sitting around one day and out of
curiosity was watching the Code of Hammurabi being developed.  When all of a
sudden he says, "what a great idea!  I'll make a note of that and give it to
Moses in a couple hundred years."

Spare me please Zak!

Message: 61785
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/09/89  Time: 18:53:56

Re:  "The point is that all contending ideas, no matter how absurd or
repulsive, deserve the right to be expressed."

That is not true!  And that is where both you and the ACLU are in error.

But basically we differ in where the line should be drawn on censorship.  I
just draw it farther to the right then you do.  I feel that I am at neither
extreme but somewhere in the middle.  You on the other hand feel that you
are at neither extreme but somewhere in the middle.  So who is right?  The
courts can't figure it out.  Their decisions are getting more stupid by the
week.

So who is right?  Why I am of course!  Why am I right?  Because I said so!

You see Zak, My logic is every bit as valid as yours, because it just boils
down to opinion.

Message: 61786
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie
Date: 12/09/89  Time: 18:59:17

Re:  "I think this is a good time for some of you to give your definition of
what 'Porn' is and isn't!"

Come on Annie!  The Supreme Court can't even make up it's mind on what porn
is and isn't.  And you expect us to figure it out?  I can give you my
opinion on a case by case situation, but it is difficult to put into words. 
But this works out to the ACLU benefit, because they think _everything_ is
not porn no matter how gross or indecent it is.  Therefore their definition
becomes very simple.

Message: 61787
Author: $ James Taranto
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Thornburg
Date: 12/09/89  Time: 22:22:40

God, what a dolt you are.

Message: 61788
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Last
Date: 12/09/89  Time: 23:22:22

        Why are you so rude J.T.?  With all you got going for you, you are
still unable communicate in a civil manner.  Bob Thornburg happens to be a
very nice person, and not deserving of such slams.  For the most part, I
agree with Bob's outlook on life......  Stick that in your pipe and smoke
it!

        This is to near the Chr.shtmlas Season to fighting...  PEACE to ALL!

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 61789
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Last
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 02:41:08

Well he had the right idea, but he just needed to put reasoning behind it.

At least he did mention your deity.  Great PR, JT.  You're getting a lot
more useful information through your job.

Message: 61790
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Bob
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 02:47:53

You certainly wouldn't make a very good judge.  Your reasoning for the Code
of Hammurabi is pure nonsense.  

I'd like Chrysler to use that reasoning when it produces a Corvette that is
exactly the same except for the Chrysler logo on the rims and hood.  Can you
say copyright infringement?  Sure, you can.

You may not be willing to believe it, but you should be able to consider it
at the least.  

It also seems that you are treating Zak like a 12 year old.  Perhaps you
don't take his ideas seriously, but you should.  

Message: 61791
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Question?
Subject: Ann/pporn
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 06:35:23

Do you want pornography as defined by the courts, or as defined by the heart
of the individual?

Message: 61792
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann/longsuffering
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 06:37:45

The Scriptural definition of longsuffering has little to do with what you
are thinking of as suffering. It is more closely identified with patience,
or the ability to endure under difficult situations or people without
blowing up. Sound better?

Message: 61793
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/porn
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 09:26:53

I might sound awful, but I believe in porn - do not think it dirty and
disgusting. Lets just say, it has it's place. However, kiddy porn is the
worse thing imaginable - to use these kids in that way is beyond words. I
also do not like the kind where they chain woman to bed posts or it's one
step up to rape. As long as there is two willing adults doing what they want
to - not hurting others, is alright with me. I do not believe the naked body
is that terrible to show - nasty, dirty or depraved. I don't think sex
between 2 people that want it is bad (if they are not hurting others). 
                                -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61794
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul/porn
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 09:29:35

Defined by the heart of the individual! It's just like anything else - if
gone over board with, it becomes ugly, revolting AND dangerous.
                            -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61795
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul/last
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 09:30:34

Yes, that does sound better. But I don't have much patience either. Ha.
                              -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61796
Author: $ James Taranto
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 12:58:25

I am sure Bob Thornburg is a very nice fellow.

Message: 61797
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: J.T.
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 13:19:27

Re:  "Bob Thornburg happens to be a very nice person"

Yah J.T.!

Message: 61798
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 13:27:17

Re:  "It also seems that you are treating Zak like a 12 year old."

Well I met Zak, and I know he is not 12 years old.

Re:  "Your reasoning for the Code of Hammurabi is pure nonsense."

I suppose you think J.T.'s reasoning is superior.

I think it all depends on who you agree with.  If you agree with someone
that calls me a dolt, no comment is made.  But if you disagree with me, then
my reasoning becomes pure nonsense.

I'm not sure what to call that type of reasoning.

And I consider Zak to be my friend even though I disagree with him.  And I
consider Dog to be my friend even though he disagrees with me.  What's a few
disagreements between friends.  Hmmmmm, What's a lot of disagreements
between friends?

Message: 61799
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 13:36:15

Re:  "I do not believe the naked body is that terrible to show - nasty,
dirty or depraved."

Well I agree and disagree.  I do not believe the naked body is terrible,
nasty, dirty, or depraved.  But I do not believe it was intended to parade
around naked for everyone to gawk at either.  Everyone is born with a
natural modesty.  You have to work at it to overcome it.  How many people do
you know that have sex in public and enjoy it?  Only the movie stars.  And
they only do it for money.  Without money, they wouldn't do it in public
either.  So if it's so right and good, why doesn't everyone have sex in
public.  I suppose you could find a few that wouldn't mind doing it on the
sidewalk in downtown Phoenix, but you wouldn' call their kind normal either.

Message: 61800
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 13:37:30

Re:  "I am sure Bob Thornburg is a very nice fellow."

Why thank you J.T.  That's the nicest thing you ever said about me.

Message: 61801
Author: $ Robert Knee
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: The hour
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 16:38:11

The hour is growing very late.........

Message: 61802
Author: $ Gary Jones
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Porn
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 17:13:20

Did anyone read the review of the new Roseanne Barr movie?  She shows some
flesh and the reviewer nearly lost his cookies.  And yet there was a letter
in one of the alternate rags the other day praising the show and commenting
on tasteful nudidy.  Guess its all in the eye of the beholder!

                                                    ****  Gary   ****

Message: 61803
Author: Will Bofhelp
Category: In search of
Subject: information~
Date: 12/10/89  Time: 19:07:52

        RESEARCH IN THE TECHMIQUES OF REVENGE
                      ^
IF ANY ONE HAS ANY OTHER ATICLES OR REFERENCES BOOKS I'M INTERESTED.
                        ^
Getting Even I and II by George Hayduke  cc 1890
Techniques of Revenge by Victor Santoro
Poorman's James Bond Volumes I, II and III
The Big Brother Game by French Scott 1975
The Screwing of the Average Man by David Hapgood
The Hater's Handbook Joseph Rosner 1965
Techniques of Harassment Volume I and II Victor Santoro 1979

Message: 61804
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Religion
Subject: Paul/61775
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 02:51:14

RE:  "The Bible really has a lot to say about freedoms and law...in fact, in
one passage, it deals with the fruit of the Spirit..."
 
Huh?  Is that supposed to convince me that the Constitution is based on the
Bible?  Very funny, Paul.

Message: 61805
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff on porn
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 02:54:04

Cliff, regarding your quotes about the ACLU:
Please put that first quote in context.  What was the whole passage?
 
 

Message: 61806
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Beau/61782
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 02:56:14

Can I pay the $100 in Commodore 64 software?  The three Zorks, Deadline,
Starcross, and Planetfall ought to cover it.  If you don't have a Commodore
64, you'll just have to buy one.

Message: 61807
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 03:16:15

RE:  "But to say God based his 10 commandments on the Code of Hammurabi is
really too far out."
 
Sorry, dude, if that's too far out for you.  You'll just have to deal with
it.
     The Stele of Hammurabi (on which the Code is inscribed and which is now
located in the Louvre) is dated at 1800 BC.  The Epic of Gilgamesh, one of
the first known written works, is dated at around 2000 BC.  (The former is
Babylonian and the latter is Sumerian.)
     Correct me if I am wrong, but the OT is thought to have been written
between 1000-600 BC.  Can someone offer more details on this?
     I am not saying God got his ideas from the Babylonians.  I am saying
that it seems probable that the writers of the Bible were influenced by the
folk stories and tales that had been passed down for centuries.  The Epic of
Gilgamesh has a flood story, for example.  The Code of Hammurabi has a list
of laws.  In saying this, I am merely stating the facts as I see them.  I'm
not saying God is a plagiarist.  That's your perception, not my denotation.

Message: 61808
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob61785
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 03:23:15

RE:  "That is not true!" in reference to my "all ideas deserve the right
to be expressed."
 
Why isn't it true, Bob?  Do you have a reason?  You say that both our
arguments boil down to opinion.  Yes, I can understand that.  But opinions
have reasons, don't they?  I believe that people have the right to express
their ideas because if they didn't, it'd be a slippery slope where a group
of "deciders" would be pushing the majority around, telling them what is
right to think and wrong to think.  That's an intregal part of
totalitarianism and goes against the first amendment of the Constitution. 
Yes, that's my opinion, and I think it's a good one, and I think yours
isn't.
 
I don't think pornography should be censored except in the case of minors. 
Otherwise, it's a case where adults are making a conscious decision to pay
for the pornographic materials.  The people being photographed are doing so
at their own will, and many of them getting paid well for it.
 
(If someone is being forced to do something against their will, then that is
wrong--as in the case of Linda Lovelace, who claims she was forced at
gunpoint to do the movie Deep Throat.)

Message: 61809
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann/porn
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 05:52:53

OK, then. I'll give you my personal opinion of pornography, but you may not
like it.
 For one reason or another, I have had the occasion to sit through several
pornographic films, and have yet to see one that does not demean and
belittle the female role in the sexual act. THere may be an indication of
willingness on the part of those women who participate in these acts, but it
does nothing to lessen the fact that the woman is being used as a piece of
merchandise, instead of the revered, respected and equal partner in a
committed relationship. Every porn film I have seen includes one or more
scenes in which there is multiple participation with more than one partner.
Certainly no serious commitment there. THere is also homosexual
participation, anal sex and other perversions of what should be the ultimate
in beautiful. permanent personal relationships.
 In short, it is immoral, ugly, perverted, offensive garbage, acts committed
by whores, both male and female, who have no talent other than to peddle
their bodies for a paycheck.
 And that's from my heart to yours.

Message: 61810
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Religion
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 06:06:00

I'm not really trying to be funny, Zak. I'm merely mentioning a few salient
facts. But, of course, your head is already made up as to the Bible and/or
Christianity in general. I wouldn't want to confuse you, or try to convince
you of anything with a few facts.
 The fact is that the founding fathers, those people who wrote the documents
in question, while not all Christians, were nevertheless, people who, after
years of spiritual domination, left England and it's one church to found a
nation where they could be free to worship as they pleased, a God given
privelege. The Declaration of Independence and the COnstitution declare that
desire and that privelege, and yes, my friend, it was based on the
principles of the Bible.
 If you choose to ridicule that fact, that of course is your privelege and
right as well. The first amendment gives you that right. So does the Bible.
 God, through Moses, sent 10 plagues on Egypt in order to set His people
free to worship as they pleased. Jesus willingly gave His life so that those
who believe on Him may have that freedom, and may come freely into grace.
The facts are there. The choice is ours.

Message: 61811
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bobby
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 07:03:49

Re: "Everyone is born with a natural modesty" ..... I don't believe that. I
think it's society that set those rules. Look to some of the native tribes
even in this day and age - some are completey naked - some just loin cloths
that cover, not for modesty reasons, but for health reasons. A lot of the
women are bare breasted. 
Have sex in public? Heck, we won't even relieve ourselves in public,
muchless sex and both are natural things to do, yet we put a conotation of
indecency on both. I don't advocate having sex in public - I think most
people want privacy - intimacy - not be distracted, etc, but if a person's
gotta go, he's gotta go! 
If I saw two people having sex in public, I'd certainly look! ha ha.
                            -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61812
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob on JT
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 07:04:36

And that may be the only nice thing he says about you, so enjoy it while you
have the chance. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61813
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul/your porn list
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 07:16:41

Surprisingly, I agree with you. As I stated, I do not think they should
demean women. The porn that I have seen did not. 
One thing I will say about porn - it sure gets old in a hurry! When we first
moved to the Valley, I immediately subscribed to the Playboy channel. My
husband wasn't interested, but I was certainly curious. (Not that I consider
this porn!) After one week of it, I had my fill. It was plain boring. But
one man's meat is another man's poison, etc. You've heard of that old
expression. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61814
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: 61802/Porn
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 12:29:11

re: Barr's flesh Is this the difference between porn and obscenity ?

Message: 61815
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 16:28:33

Your concept of how the Bible was written is so different from mine that I
feel we are not effectively communicating here.  Let me write something off
line and get back to you.

Message: 61816
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 17:04:40

God sent 10 plagues on Egypt so that his people could worship as they
pleased?  Huh?  You'll have to expand on that one if you want to keep God
from sounding like a mean old dude.
 
Your message is well taken, but I still don't see the evidence for the
Constitution being based on the Bible.  While there may be some similarity
between a few basic principles, it is not clear at all that the Bible was a
*direct* influence.  Historically, there is no evidence for this claim, and
as Lippard said, their construction of the Constitution was based on the
political and philsophical theories of Locke and Hobbes.
 
You're right in saying that I have made a decision about my beliefs.  I
don't believe in the Bible.  But I would like to continue to learn about it,
so please keep talking.  I'll try to avoid ridiculing it, if that's any
help.
 
It might be more constructive if you could get specific about the principles
in the Bible that allegedly influenced the Constitution.  What passages? 
Exactly where are the similarities?  Hopefully you have something more
specific in mind, because what you've stated so far is vague.  
 

Message: 61817
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: My Dinner with...
Subject: Marilyn Chambers
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 17:07:03

Can someone offer a definitive, objective, technical definition of
pornography?

Message: 61819
Author: $ James Taranto
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Last
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 17:45:11

Yes.

Message: 61820
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Answer!
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 17:59:56

RE:  "Sorry, dude, if that's too far out for you.  You'll just have to deal
with it."

Zak, you misunderstand my comment.  When I said, "too far out" I meant, your
statement is so off base I find it incredible!  How could God possibly base
his 10 commandments on the Code of Hammurabi when he had the 10 commandments
before he ever created the world?

As to when the Bible was written, surely you know it was not written like a
regular book but was written over a period of thousands of years.  According
to the Genesis introduction in the NIV Study Bible, the first 5 books of the
Bible (the Pentateuch) was probably written by Moses sometime between 1446
and 1406, during the 40 year period of Israel's wanderings in the desert.

The NT was all written after the birth of Christ which was approximately
1989 years ago.  This date is so significant, that the entire world refers
to it as a time standard.  (this fact must really stick in the craw of all
atheists)  But all this is immaterial to the point considering God knew it
all before he created the world.  The thought that God got any of his
knowledge, wisdom, or ideas from man is ridiculous.

The true author of the Bible (God) states in 2 Timothy 3:16-17, "All
Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting
and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly
equipped for every good work."  And in 2 Peter 1:20-21, "Above all, you must
understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own
interpretation.  For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but
men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

You are probably thinking the above is circular logic, and it may very well
be, but that does not mean it is untrue.  It probably means you wish it was
untrue.

But since I assume (there's that word again Zak) you have pretty much
rejected the truth of the Bible, the whole argument becomes moot.

As long as I base my understanding on the Word of God and you base your
understanding on the wisdom of the world, we will never agree.  But we can
still be friends, right?

Message: 61823
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/Thumping Bibles
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 21:14:51

I'm too busy reading mine to be using it for a rudimentary percussion
instrument. How about you? *grin*

Message: 61824
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/Hammurapi
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 21:22:27

A little text to defend your position:
 
HAMMURAPI'S CODE
   Akkadian - 18th century B.C.
   together with similar law codes that preceded and followed it, the Code
of Hammurapi exhibits close parallels to numerous passages in the Mosaic
legislation of the OT.
 
        (Concordia Self-Study Bible, p.5)

Message: 61825
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff/JT
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 21:25:15

   I agree. I think that JT's most self-deprecating posts are those in which
he tries to lift himself up by digging his spiked heels into someone else's
shoulder blades, usually always without any supporting evidence. If JT is so
convinced that Bob is a "dolt," where is the evidence to back it up?
 
Lighten up, James.

Message: 61826
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James/JT/God
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 21:25:54

He did mention "our" Deity, but not by name.

Message: 61827
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Porn
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 21:28:01

Sex between two consenting (my preference: married) adults is one thing. Sex
between two consenting adults...with a cameraperson shouting "c'mon baby,
let's go for a closeup!" is another.

Message: 61828
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Dangerous
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 21:30:41

"It's just like anything else - if gone over board with, it becomes ugly,
revolting AND dangerous."
 
Hmm....
 
Excessive peace.
 
Hmmmmm...
 
Excessive joy.
 
Hmmmmmmmmm...
 
Excessive selflessness.
 
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...
 
Excessive love? (And we're not talking physical)
 
Dangerous stuff we're talking here. Some things are dangerous in any amount.
These are NOT some of them.

Message: 61829
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/Bible
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 21:37:50

Zak, as a Christian, one takes the Bible's word that all of it's writings
are "God-breathed" or inspired by God (2Tim 3:16). If this is the case, then
God in His infinite wisdom and omnipotence did not need to rely on fables,
stories, or any man-made tales. I believe this is what Bob is trying to say.

Message: 61830
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: The State Of Things
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 21:40:37

"Lose 175 Lbs. Over Your Lunch Hour."
 
  (New Times advertisement for a divorce lawyer.)
 
 
And this is what they call progress... Well, they can have it!

Message: 61831
Author: Steve Hodode
Category: Politics
Subject: law in schools
Date: 12/11/89  Time: 23:10:01

        With the decline of the famaily unite why doesn't the
city, state or federal governments put law education classes 
in all the schools. We have no education program that instills
the laws , mores and tabbos of our society in a child other 
than trail and error. If an error is made the response is
"ignorance of the law is no excuse". In a society as advanced
as ours with thousands of laws it seems a small cost to have
a least one hour a week in all grades. The law concepts can be
matched to the grade levels. Ex. Kindergarden and First grade
might deal with traffic danger, how to deal with strangers and
the concepts of helping each other. This effort might cut the
rising crime and prison levels.

Message: 61832
Author: Lawrence Wilson
Category: Answer!
Subject: Insurance Fraud !!!
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 01:53:45

=================================================
=   QUESTION - W H O    S T E A L S   F R O M   = 
=   Y O U R   F A M I L Y   L E G A L L Y ????  =
=================================================
=   Hint: Ask your insurance agent, what happens
=   to your "cash values" if you die !!!!!!!!!!
=   Call Alex at (602)968-9764
=
= For proof of the following amazing facts get
= the book The Power of Money Dynamics by Venita
= Van Caspel.
=
        THE TRADITIONAL CHOICE -----------
         CASH VALUE LIFE INSURANCE
=
The Traditional Choice
=
* Protection -- level death benefit and level
  premium to age 100
* Accumulation/Cash Value -- emergency cash can
  be borrowed from cash surrender values...and
  you pay interest
* Retirement Income -- funded by cash surrender
  value at retirment

Message: 61833
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bawb Thawnboog
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 03:43:51

     You misunderstand me.  Again, I never meant to imply that God was
stealing ideas from man.  Where you got this idea, I don't know.
     All that was intended was to point out that the Code of Hammurabi
predates the Ten Commandments story in the Old Testament.  Similar set of
laws, different culture and different god.  You can draw your own
conclusions.
     The Epic of Gilgamesh, by the way, predates the flood account in the
Bible by nearly 1,500 years!  What do you make of that?
     It doesn't bother me that our time system is based on the Christian
religion.  Lots of things in our society our based on the Christian
religion; big deal.  The fact that a lot of people believe in something
does not make it true.
     Likewise, the fact that the bible says something does not make it true.
Your argument seems to say:  "God created everything.  We know this because
it says so in the bible.  We know the bible is true because it's the word of
God.  And God created everything."
     Yes, this is circular.  It's logically fallacious and doesn't hold up
in the least.  Whether or not I wish for things to be one way or
another.
     Sure, we can still be friends.  
 
Remember how all this started:  With the argument that the Bible is the
basis of all law.  Obviously, it is not.

Message: 61834
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Answer!
Subject: Taranto/61819
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 03:44:12

Well?  Let's have it.

Message: 61835
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Religion
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 05:40:13

 In some cases, such as Israel's deliverance from Egypt, God does indeed
come across as a "mean old dude" as you put it. THe entire account is fount
in the book of Exodus and is there for the reading. Briefly, the Israelites
had been in bondage to Egypt for some 400 years, and were treated with
extreme cruelty. 
 Gid raised up a man, Moses, for the express purpose of leading the nation
He considered as His Chosen people out of that slavery. Pharaoh, the
Egyptian leader at the time, had different ideas, however, and was not
willing to release the Israelites. Through Moses, God caused 10 plagues to
fall on Egypt, one at a time, giving Pharaoh an option each time of letting
Israel go, or suffering the next plague. Since he (Pharaoh) had the chance,
time and time again, to release the Israelites, and did not, it could be
said that he brought it all on himself. When dealing with GOd, one must
remember that, although He is a God of love, mercy and grace, He is also an
omnipotent, or all powerful God, who will deal harshly when necessary with
those who defy of deny Him.
 As to being more specific re: the Biblical foundations for the
Constitution, I will have to re-read both documents and get back to you. It
is difficult to take that amount of time online. I appreciate your efforts
at non-combatant discussion. That's more than we can sometimes get from
other Christians. Have a good day.

Message: 61836
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Daryl/porn
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 07:01:59

What is the matter with camera close up sex? They take pictures of teeth
don't they? My question is what make a person's sex organ any worse than
teeth or arms or legs, or, etc? Isn't it society that tags these things? 
                       -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61837
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Daryl/your list
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 07:11:44

Lets take that list -
Excessive peace - perhaps excessive peace from war - but in general, it
would be quite boring to have it all the time and quite impossible.
Excessive Joy - who want's that? Also another impossibility. The highs and
lows in life give it interest. 
Excessive selflessness - a person needs to think of themselves also. Only
society tells us we must think of other's to find happiness. Selflessness is
a fine thing - it helps us to coexist with each other, but to excess, it
would be ridiculous.
Excessive love - is the worse of the bunch. 
Excessive anything is not good. However, I will admit I'd reather see us go
to extemes on your list, than extremes in war, hatred, etc. which we always
seem to do. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61838
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Politics
Subject: Junk yard
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 07:15:14

My husband was telling me of this man he knows that owns a junk yard type of
business in Phoenix. About a year ago Terry Goddard, his lordship, came to
this place of business and told the man that it was the worse mess in
Phoenix and that he was going to find a way to put him out of business. (No
witnesses of course. The man was legal for the area and had the proper
zoning!) Later, the man had bought about 50 car dashboard mats. They were
boxed and it rained and got them wet. He took them out and stacked them in a
corner in the office and they had been there about a month, when just before
closing one night, the cops came in and seized this stack of mats and wanted
to see the man's receipt for them. When he couldn't, they took them for
stolen property, arrested him - he got out on bail three days later. He went
straight to his house, found the receipt, was going to take it to the
police, but stopped off at his business before he did. (the police had also
confiscated his keys and had roped off the area. To make a long story short,
they had taken all the stuff this guy owned to the dump and was in the
process of bulldozing the property. The guy showed the police that were
there the receipt, but it did no good - they continued. Even with this
receipt, it took him months to prove his innocence. He sued, but it hasn't
went to trial yet. In the mean time, this guy has no business and he can't
do a thing with the property that he legally owns. Looks like the
politicians of Phoenix have become gustopo(sp?) in their tactics to get what
they want. I don't claim this man to be an innocent, but I don't think he
deserves this. We could be next! I wonder when our police are going to start
wearing black leather coats!

Message: 61839
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: News Today
Subject: New tax???
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 07:16:58

Is anyone aware that we now have a new tax levied at the retail businesses?
We were talking to a guy that sells used restaurant equipment. He said he
use to have 30 accounts and is now down to three. When we ask him why he
said they all went out of business because of the new tax. We did not know
anything about it and questioned him further. He said one of the owners of a
well know restaurant in town was paying $300 a month in taxes (evidently
this is not sales tax) and over night it was upped to $600 a month. He could
afford to pay it, but the smaller businesses could not. Does anyone here
know about this said tax? When it went into effect, etc? Somewhere along the
line our lawmakers decided to triple the taxes. What do they want the money
for? We voted down Val Trans and the stadium? If what this man says is true,
it's a contradiction at best. The politicians are supposedly trying to lure
business to come into the Valley and then stiffs them for this tax. Of
course, this will make the prices of things go higher and who pays? Us. I
don't get it??
Nick? Your parents own a restaurant. Any comment?

Message: 61840
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Answer!
Subject: 2tim3:16
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 11:26:25

Bob, shame on you, you should know better. 2Tim3:16 is a very tentative
and slender reed to base the man-inspired doctrine of the fundamentalist
literalist heresy presently infesting the church. Here's how the NEB shows
2tim3:16
 
"Every inspired scripture has its use for teaching the truth and refuting
error,..."
 
Quite a difference from "all scripture is god-breathed" eh ? Also, the
greek word for god-breathed is the same word used for inspired. Now, what
direction does the breath go in this case. It looks like God-breathed
scripture is breathed in by God, not out. 

Message: 61841
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Daryl
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 16:34:22

Re:  "I'm too busy reading mine to be using it for a rudimentary percussion
instrument. How about you?"

Right!

Message: 61842
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 16:45:55

Re:  "About a year ago Terry Goddard, his lordship"

I find that hard to believe.  But I know you wouldn't make up a story like
that.  My first thought would be to take it to the newspaper.  EJ Montini
might like a story like that.  EJ sure got a lot of mileage out of the rich
drunk that killed the man in the p{ckup truck and got away scott free. 
Although he did make quite a contribution to the legal society. 

Message: 61843
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger Mann
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 16:51:26

Re:  "Quite a difference from "all scripture is god-breathed" eh"

Hello Roger.  You'll like Apollo.  A lot of folks here share your opinion of
God.  You should feel right at home.

As to your comment, The Greek uses the phrase, "God breathed".  So it
doesn't really matter what any translation says.  The original says "God
breathed".

Message: 61844
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 18:07:53

It's Gestapo.

And I would like more information on the story.  Too often all we hear is
one side of the story.  A receipt can be manufactured very quickly.  Why
would it take him three days to get out of jail?  Seems a bit long.  I've
known drug dealers that have gotten released 8 hours after being busted.
 
Many junkyards do recieve stolen goods.  Some on purpose, and some not.

Message: 61845
Author: Mike Carter
Category: On the Lighter Side
Subject: Asking for
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 21:07:54

... A few curious types to try GARGOYLE out and see what you
think of it. Gargoyle is my latest BBS Creation...
Full-screen imapct menus. FAST!.
Guest users can read/write to the public board...
 
When you get a busy signal anywhere else...give Gargoyle
a shot at  943-4523
 
G A R G O Y L E   2400/1200/300  24hrs 7 Days 60megs.
 
Featuring the fastest menus in the West.
Multiuser Chat. 2 Phone lines. 

Message: 61846
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/Bible/God
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 23:10:39

There is much about God that defies logic. This does not void His existance.
Much about God transcends logic. That is why we cannot come to God on our
own. It is the Spirit that works faith into the hearts of men. "There is no
one that seeks God." If you try to fit an infinite God into the finite
limitations of logic, logic is going to fail.

Message: 61847
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Porn
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 23:12:22

Close-ups of genitalia arouse sexual desire. Close-ups of teeth or arms
don't. Legs often do because they are closely connected with the
reproductive area.

Message: 61848
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Excess
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 23:16:56

Love is how you define it. Love in worldly terms is not love as I define it.
In this life, peace will never come about because there is always someone
somewhere who is going to stir things up. As you say, many people cannot
stand getting along with their fellow man; it's "boring," as you say. Sad,
but true. Joy: I'm experiencing excessive joy in my life, and it helps make
the lows more bearable. I'm putting all my problems in the hands of a higher
Authority, and my troubles are diminished tremendously. God takes care of
problems, it's just that too few people remember where to take their
problems to, and they remain with them.

Message: 61849
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob Mann/2Tim3:16
Date: 12/12/89  Time: 23:34:30

Let's stop referring to English translations long enough to look at the
Greek text (phonetically translated of course...Cliff, when do we get a
Greek character set? Heh):
 
"Pasa graphe THEOPNEUSTOS kai ophelimos pros didaskalian,..."
 
"Every scripture [is] GOD-BREATHED and profitable for teaching,..."
 
THEO meaning GOD, and PNEUMA being a word with many meanings, some of which
are BREATH, SOUL, and SPIRIT. In short, "All Scripture is an INSPIRED
WRITING, with the INSPIRATION given by God, and is profitable for teaching,
etc. etc. etc."
 
(But "GOD-BREATHED" is a perfectly acceptable x-lation, and linguistically
parallel to it's Greek counterpart, while still conveying the same meaning.)

Message: 61850
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Question?
Subject: Hawley
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 03:18:59

RE:  "I've known drug dealers that have gotten out 8 hours after being
busted."
 
Me too!

Message: 61851
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Daryl on God
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 03:31:37

There is much about "Bob" that defies logic.  This doesn't void His
existence!  Much about J.R. "Bob" Dobbs transcends logic.  That is why we
cannot come to "Bob" on our own.  It is $lack that works faith into the
hearts of men.  "There is no one that seeks 'Bob'."  If you try to fit an
infinitie "Bob" into the finite limitations of logic, logic is going to
fail.

Message: 61852
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Question?
Subject: Daryl/61848
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 04:11:31

RE:  "I'm putting all my problems in the hands of a higher Authority...God
takes care of problems..."
 
But doesn't God "help those who help themselves"?

Message: 61853
Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: taxes
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 04:37:05

I am not aware of any new taxes for retailers. It is possible that the
restaurant owners you spoke of were not aware of the personal property tax
that they must pay. All property affixed and/or contained within a place of
business that is owned by the retailer is subject to an annual tax based on
its value.

Message: 61854
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/porn
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 06:01:33

Comeon Ann! You are fighting a losing battle on this thing! Surely you
aren't going to compare what people do with their teeth on film with what
they do with their sex organs?
 Pornography portrays every perversion known, makes a mockery out of the
most beautiful consummation of a marriage and turns it into a sideshow for
vouyers, perverts and oddballs who can't get their kicks any other way. The
industry panders to rapists, child molesters, sado-masochists and every
other type of sociopath. It has been directly connected with more violent
crime than any other media. More baby rapers and maniacs who prey on
helpless women get their ideas from pornograpic pictures and movies than
from any other source.
 Why do you defend women's rights on the one hand and uphold with the other
one of the most degrading, demeaning anad belittling means of putting women
in a bad light? You just don't make sense!

Message: 61855
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann/new tax
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 06:06:45

 I believe that the tax you are referring to is the one that was imposed
upon restaurants, hotels, etc. when the grand prix came to town, plus I
think there was yet another tax placed upon the same businesses when the
COlangelo playhouse was approved, not by the voters, but by the council, in
a hurry (as ususal) to avoid prop 200, which wold have put the whole thing
to a vote of the people.

Message: 61856
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/story
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 07:24:24

No, I wouldn't make a story up like that - but perhaps the guy elaborated on
it a bit, I don't know. I do know he's out of business and his property
bulldozed. 
 
Re: Terry Goddard - remember the story in the paper within the last few days
about the El Rancho motel that burnt? Mr. Goddard also appeared to that
owner just before it happened also. Coincident? Who knows. That story has a
lot to it besides just what we read in the paper. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61857
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James H./junk yard
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 07:31:18

Gestapo! Thanks for the correct spelling.
 
Yes, we've only heard one side of the story. As I said, this guy is no
innocent, but I think he was royaly rail-roaded. His yard WAS a total mess
and he wouldn't clean it up - really didn't have to because he was legal. 
 
He supposedly spent three days in jail trying to get bail together.
 
This isn't the first time we knew of the police using the excuse of stolen
goods to shut someone down. It's the easiest ploy in the world to use. I
ask why they bulldozed so quickly? That in itself is suspicious. They had to
have started the first day he was in jail. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61858
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Dyyl/arousal
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 07:35:32

And what is wrong with sexual desire arousal? I thought that was the purpose
of porn! I would not rent an XXX rated movie to help cure my insomnia!
                              -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61859
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul/porn
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 07:50:10

I, as an American citizen, within legal age have the choice to go into one
of those stores and CHOOSE the type of movie I want to see! I would not
choose or finish looking at one that degraded women. As far as the rest on
your list - child molesters, rapists, etc. etc. - they are illegal. At least
they are not found in the video store I go to. 
 
BTW - your statement "the beautuful consummation of marriage" - is an empty
statement. Two people can love each other without that piece of paper (a
contract is all it is!) They can also live with each other for 50 years and
get along just as well as a legally married couple. I have also came to the
conclusion that two men or women can find that same happiness. It is not my
cup of tea, but who am I to judge them? 
 
I remember when the movie Phycho came out and that guy went out and
murdered someone because he saw that film! The papers were full of it and
the moralists were on their proverbial soapbox. No one spoke of the millians
that DID see it and DIDN'T go out and murder or want to murder anyone.
                         -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61860
Author: $ Gary Jones
Category: News Today
Subject: Today
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 09:24:50

Has anyone else noticed that Friday the 13th fell on a Wednesday this month?
 It's gotta be them gol darned new klear tests or maybe daylight savings
time screwing up the calendar this way!

Message: 61861
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: 61843/god-breathed
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 11:16:47

No, Bob, the operative words are "god-breathed scripture is..." and
"all scripture is god-breathed". A big difference.

Message: 61862
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: ann/porn
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 11:20:59

no, daryl, genitalia do not arouse sexual desire. in fact, the setting
is what is important. teeth and arms can be more sexy depending upon
what they are doing. clinical pictures of genitalia can be a turn-off.
I'll never forget when my father gave me a booklet describing the
sexual act with pictures. i was turned off for years !

Message: 61863
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul on porn
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 13:55:11

You are confusing correlation with causation.  Sure, there may be a
correlation between people who watch kinky videos and people who do kinky
or perverted things.  But it's wrong to jump to the conclusion that the
videos cause the behavior.  A more likely explanation is that only the sort
of person who would engage in such behavior *in the first place* would want
to see such videos.  For all we know, watching kinky videos may actually
serve as an outlet for this sort of person, and prevent him/her from acting
out the weird sexual feelings he or she has in other ways.
     I think that people like Ted Bundy, who claim pornography led them to
do bad things, are full of it.

Message: 61864
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Daryl
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 20:37:45

Re:  "Pasa graphe THEOPNEUSTOS kai ophelimos pros didaskalian,..."

Thanks for the help Daryl.  You said it much better than I did.

Message: 61865
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 20:41:22

Re:  "There is much about "Bob" that defies logic."

Hey Zak, when I did that kind of tongue in cheek retort a while back, you
jumped all over me.  Is it different when you do it?

Or maybe it was Dog?

Zak, are you a follower of Bob?  Your logic must be really something there.

Message: 61866
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 20:42:29

Re:  "But doesn't God "help those who help themselves"?"

You read that in your Bible I'm sure.  No wonder you're mixed up on Bible
stuff!

Message: 61867
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 20:44:33

Re:  "Surely you aren't going to compare what people do with their teeth on
film with what they do with their sex organs?"

That's not so far out Paul.  Homos put the two together all the time. 
That's why people find them disgusting.

Message: 61868
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 20:50:35

Re:  "CHOOSE the type of movie I want to see! I would not
choose or finish looking at one that degraded women."

Well, that's not really true Annie.  I can remember you CHOOSING one a while
back that was really bad. In fact it was so bad you told us all about it. In
graphic detail no less.  I was surprised Cliff didn't put you in the Phantom
Zone for it.  Tsk.  Tsk.

Message: 61869
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 20:53:05

Re:  "No, Bob, the operative words are "god-breathed scripture is..." and
"all scripture is god-breathed". A big difference."

You said it right the second time.  "all scripture is god-breathed"  That's
the same thing I said all along.  Why are you disagreeing with me?

Message: 61870
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 20:56:23

Re:  "genitalia do not arouse sexual desire"

Huh?  Then why does Phoenix have all those strip joints.  And why is porn a
mega buck business world wide?  You say the darnest things Roger.

Message: 61871
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/13/89  Time: 21:01:46

Re:  "I think that people like Ted Bundy, who claim pornography led them to
do bad things, are full of it."

Well I guess ol' Ted Bundy was some kind of an expert on it.  He was there! 
I mean, who can you think of who would know more about porn and kinky sex
then Ted.  A self made expert.

I think a good summary of all the thinks you have said about porn and sex
could be summed up in a very short sentence.

Not this sentence; the one below.

If you disagree with Zak about porn and sex, you are wrong!

Message: 61872
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Bob
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 01:02:30

In msg #61867 you say, "That's not so far out Paul.  Homos put the two
(genitalia & teeth [mouth, perhaps?]) together all the time.  

Are you saying that you don't believe in any form of oral sex?  Manual
stimulation?  Masturbation?  

I find it a little hard to believe that someone could be that puritanical. 
Perhaps even if you don't enjoy/agree with such sexual behaviors, that's no
reason to react so strongly.

Sexual repression is the cause of many of societies problems.  Much better
to have porno films available to the general public, than to have people
follow a more dangerous course.  In my opinion there is nothing wrong with
pornography.  Or prostitution....

Message: 61873
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/strip joints
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 01:03:50

Have you been to any of these so called strip joints in town?  Just WHAT do
they take off?I'll read your response before I answer you...

Message: 61874
Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Pornography
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 03:47:59

Is it not true that in countries such as Denmark and Sweden pornography is
not seen as immoral or undesirable?  The violent crime rates in those
countries do not even begin to approach ours, so a direct link between porn
and violence is probably a bit of an over-simplification.

Message: 61875
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/porn
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 05:34:04

 You may think what you will concerning the correlation (or causation)
between pornographic material and sex crimes, but I believe that the numbers
of cases will prove your thinking incorrect.
 I'm not saying that everyone who watches a porn flick is going to go out
and commit a sex crime, but enough people are aroused enough to do just that
to establish a rather frightening relationship between the two.

Message: 61876
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 05:36:47

 Hmmm. The thought of homos never entered my mind when I made that statement
about teeth and sex organs. I was thinking of all those pretty smiles on the
toothpaste commercials.

Message: 61877
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob on that movie
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 08:10:28

But it wasn't a porno movie - just 'R' rated. Sometimes movies can be SOOO
bad you just have to finish watching them to see if it's possible they get
worse. (A case in point - The Nest!) I finished watching 'I spit on your
grave' so that when I went into the video store to take it back I could
raise holy hell over this type of movie sitting on the shelf for anyone
including kids, to pick up. I found out later, one of my grandsons rented
that one - he was 16. I did indeed raise hell with the owner and again when
I found out he had watched it. The ONLY redeeming quality of the film - it
did show rape to be the horror it is. 
If I were to go into that store - into the back room where they have the X
rated and chose one that tied women to bedposts - beat them - gang banged
them - used them against their will, I would NOT finish it and complain when
I took it back. Now, if they were doing the same thing to a man .........!
                            -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61878
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Thawnbugg
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 08:53:56

RE:  "Summary:  'If you disagree with Zak about porn and sex, you are
wrong!'"
     Either you lack basic reading comprehension skills, or you're not
paying attention.
     Do you really think "If you disagree with me, you're wrong!" is a valid
interpretation of my messages?  Do you really think that if my messages have
this quality, your messages do not?
     Personally, that's not what I'm trying to say.  I *am* trying to be
persuasive, but that's what these arguments (and debates in general) are all
about.

Message: 61879
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob on "Bob"
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 08:59:25

I'm not that into "Bob" nowadays.  Everyone should keep moving on into new
areas of strangeness.
 
That "God helps those who help themselves" quote wasn't meant to be a Bible
quote.  It's just something I've heard many Christians say in the past.

Message: 61880
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul/61875
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 09:04:37

RE:  "...but I believe that the number of cases will prove your thinking
incorrect."
     Oh, really?  Paul, in the words of Rush:  show, don't tell.
     The second paragraph in your message seems to indicate that you still
aren't making a distinction between correlation and causation.
     I haven't seen any information that indicates that the commiters of
heinous crimes did their deeds directly after using pornographic materials.
You don't know the exact cause-and-effect relationship between pornography
and crime, and for you to assume that criminals commit crime because they
are somehow inspired by porn is jumping the gun.  I think it's more likely
that a criminal mind already existed in the first place.

-------------------------------
     In much of Europe, many men and women sunbathe topless
or naked.  Sex is nowhere near as uncomfortable or taboo a subject as it is
here.  It's not that it's freer or more abundant; it just isn't such a big,
spooky deal.  Shows such as Geraldo appear ludicrous to Europeans--Americans
look like a bunch of idiots for being so freaked out by people's sexual
practices and preferences.

Message: 61881
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: The SYSOP Speaks
Subject: PORN
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 09:35:39

        We have the COS SIG to talk about that kind of stuff...  This is
maybe going to far on the PUBlic board!   Be careful where you tread.

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 61882
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 09:54:43

I disagree with you because the Greek does not say "all scripture is
god-breathed". In fact, the NEB scholars chose to translate the phrase
as my former quote. Why do you disagree with me ?
 
Finally, even IF it did say "all scripture is god-breathed" it still does
not mean that it is inerrant because god-breathing does not necessarily
mean that god gave the words but that god breathed IN the words. This sounds
like a silly religious argument, but it is a big difference. Finally, even
if god gave the words, there is the knotty little problem of determining
what is scripture. It is certainly arguable that 2tim3:16 did not refer to
itself, but to what was considered scripture at the time, which I believe
would have been the OT canon.

Message: 61883
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/porn
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 10:04:18

Have you ever been to a strip joint ? Have you ever read good pornography ?
Have you ever looked at good pornography ? If you had, you would know what
I am talking about. Unless there is an element of the erotic in the dance,
the story, or the picture, the sight of a naked woman is not arousing. In
fact, if you read _Lady Chatterly's Lover_, the scene in the garden is 
arousing, not because of the act depicted, but by the eroticism surrounding
the act. Mechanical meaningless sex is obscene and humiliating. Sex is
beautiful when included as part of an erotic act. A look from the eyes can
be more erotic than having a woman's genitalia exposed, because the look
is the art of sex, the nudity, only the mechanics. 

Message: 61884
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff on porn
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 10:53:10

How far is too far?

Message: 61885
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: Ted Bundy
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 10:59:59

If Ted Bundy is an expert on the mental effects of pornography, then...

     All drug users are experts on medicine.
     All alcoholics are experts on liver disease.
     All mass-murderers are experts on psychotic behavior.
     All sysops are experts on computers.
     All braces or denture wearers are experts on dentistry.
     All money-grubbing preachers are experts on morality.
 
And so on.

Message: 61886
Author: $ Gary Jones
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann/porn
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 12:14:57

Annie, you're confusing male and female response to visual stimulation. 
Most women are more stimulated by the setting you described.  But ask any
WWII GI about a "stand-up" sometime.  I agree, we'd better take this off to
the COS SIG.  It could get really interesting!

                                                   ****  Gary   ****

Message: 61887
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Cliff
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 17:26:22

Sex is part of human nature.  There are people involved in this discussion
who can NOT use the COS sig.  To have a truly open discussion it has to be
open to everyone.  I'll try not to get graphic if it's not necessary.

Message: 61888
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 18:05:18

Re:  "Are you saying that you don't believe in any form of oral sex?  Manual
stimulation?  Masturbation?"

The conversations getting in an area I feel uncomfortable with.  I'm sure
you think I'm sexually repressed, but I don't feel that way at all.  I agree
that what a married couple do in their own bed is their business.  Mostly
what I'm against is people who want to take what is private and decent and
parade it down the street for all to see.  And when that gets dull, they
also want to trot out all the various  perversions and parade them down the
street too.  Homosexuality is a perversion.  No one is born a homosexual any
more than I was born an  adulterer.  Most anyone who would lower themselves
to engaging in either would probably say the waters fine, come on in.  It's
a free world.  As for others, they can do as they see fit.  As for me, I
will reject adultery, homosexuality, porn, etc.  I also will oppose it when
it is paraded down the street.

I'm sure by now we all understand what each of us engage in.  I'm not going
to change you, and you're not going to change me.  Let's talk about
something more pleasent\ then the sex habits of homos, etc.

Message: 61889
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 18:07:23

Re:  "Have you been to any of these so called strip joints in town?"

I haven't been to a strip in about 20 years.  The ones I went to then took
it all off.  They only left on the shoes.  So what's your point?

Message: 61890
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 18:12:08

Re:  "I found out later, one of my grandsons rented
that one - he was 16. I did indeed raise hell with the owner and again"

Good for you Annie.  Some, like the ACLU, would think you are violating the
boys freedom of speech.  I'm glad to see you take a stand for what you know
is right.  We are not so different; we just draw the lines no so close
together.

Message: 61891
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 18:17:57

Re:  "Either you lack basic reading comprehension skills, or you're not
paying attention."

Well, I guess it could be one or the other or neither.  Tell me again,
specifically, why you think homos, porn, and all the stuff is so good for
our community.  I'll try to listen more carefully.  On the other hand, maybe
you should bother to repeat it all over again.  You didn't convince me the
first time, and I doubt if it will work any better the second.  And you
probably are persuasive, to the younger and more impressionable. 

Message: 61892
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 18:21:03

Re:  "Why do you disagree with me ?"

Because you are wrong!  Why else?

Message: 61893
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 18:23:59

Re:  "Have you ever been to a strip joint ?"

I already answered that.

Re:  "Have you ever read good pornography ?"

I have read quite a bit of porn and watched it too.  There is no such thing
as "good" porn.  Can you define good porn for me?  On second thought, don't.

Message: 61894
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 19:10:36

Re:  "If Ted Bundy is an expert on the mental effects of pornography,
then..."

Your wit is sharp but somewhat lacking in logic.

Anyone who has engaged in any subject to the depth and length that Ted Bundy
has would surely recognize the effects.  Most alcoholics know what causes
hangovers.  Most homos know what causes AIDS.  Most atheists know how to
bash Christians.  And so on and so on.

Message: 61895
Author: Dave Reynolds
Category: My Dinner with...
Subject: Roseanne
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 20:44:11

Actually, the category was supposed to be "Entertainment and Movies", but I
pressed "M" instead of "E".
 
I don't recall Roseanne showing any flesh, (but then, we do tend to repress
traumatic memories), but I do recall that Meryl Streep got me pretty hot,
even though her portrayal was more caricature than characterisation.  But
seriously, she's one fabulous babe.
 
Unfortunately, the rest of the film is pretty lame.

Message: 61896
Author: Dave Reynolds
Category: Answer!
Subject: Roger/genitalia
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 20:51:41

"Darling, your crowns really get me hot."
 
"Better watch out; my arms are getting goose-pimples."
 
"Ooh, baby, I want to grind your molars."
 
"Bite me."

Message: 61897
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Hello
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 20:57:46

Nice to hear that I've been missed by somebody.  No, prejudice against
Apollo -- it's a great board -- I just got tired of spending so much time on
the boards...one of these days I'll get back into it on a regular basis.  In
the mean time, consider me passing through.
 

Message: 61898
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: War!
Subject: free sample issues
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 21:04:44

Some time ago, I responded (via telephone) to ads on television and in
magazines offering free sample issues of magazines.  Specifically,
"World Monitor" and "Mother Jones."  The ads made it clear that there was no
obligation; this was verified by the telephone operator (of the marketing
company) which took my response.  
 
In each case, I have been harassed by numerous billing notices, each more
vehement than the last.  I finally got World Monitor off my back, but I
think it's going to take another letter to Ma Jones (a ghastly rag in any
event) before I'm cleared.  What a pain in the ass.  If I simply blow their
notices off, I risk a blemish on my credit record.  So much for free
magazines. 
 
Just thought I'd warn anyone who was contemplating answering such ads. 
Rumpole is on...
...bye

Message: 61899
Author: $ James Taranto
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Thornburg
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 21:24:27

You didn't answer the question.  Are you against masturbation or not?

Message: 61900
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Last/J.T. on Bob
Date: 12/14/89  Time: 21:46:59

        Not only do you have the right to freedom of speech on Apollo to
post thoughts, ideas and other trivia (within acceptable levels) but you
also have the freedom not to reply to posts and subject matter that you may
not wish to discuss or for any reason whatsoever.

        Bob has stated he is 'uncomfortable' with some of the current
discussion... So let it be!

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 61901
Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: sexual preference
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 00:17:25

No one is born an adulterer because the type of behavior necessary to commit
the act of adultery is not under direct genetic control. Sexual preference
and behavior, on the other hand, is controlled by our genes. Note that I am
in no way saying that homosexuality is a normal genetic expression, nor am I
saying that it always caused by a faulty gene. What I am saying is that far
too many people are unaware of the link between genes and behavior, and
perhaps are less than tolerant of others as a result.

Message: 61902
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Bob
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 01:32:11

You don't feel comfortable talking about oral sex?  You brought it up, I
find it disheartening that you would refrain from talking about it now.  If
a homosexual or lesbian performs oral sex, then it is bad?  I assume you
feel it is bad for heterosexuals as well?

Your responses are not very enlightening.

So you've been to strip joints 20 years ago.  Wow.  Does that mean that you
know what a strip joint is now?  As far as I'm aware Phoenix had no (legal)
totally nude places in town.  Up until 10-15 years ago strip joints (here)
had girls in bathing suits parading around.  

Even now 80% of the places are very tame.  They have G strings and go semi
topless.  By semi-topless I mean with something covering their nipples. 
Either flesh colored bandaids or some other opaque material.  This is
mandated by the state (if they serve liquor).  

There are other places where there is totally nude dancing occurs.  The most
famous is the Great Alaskan Bush Company.  Because they don't serve liquor,
they can have totally nude dancing.  GABC has come upon problems recently. 
They used to be a 'club' where members could bring their own beer, and oogle
the girls.  

What is wrong with any of these places?  Much better to express their
desires in such a setting, than to sit home and be repressed.  A number of
people on Apollo have been there.  It was interesting and I didn't find it
horrible in any way.  

Certainly you are entitled to your opinion but your preaching on the subject
is distasteful to me.

Message: 61904
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: Thournberg
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 02:54:29

     Who's parading pornography down the street?  Much of that stuff you
have to go out of your way to get.  It's in sectioned-off sections of
bookstores, behind the counters of convenience stores, and is only available
to people of a certain age.  That's hardly parading.
     I disagree about homosexuality.  Though not much research has been done
about it, there are many cases where no factor of childhood could be found
to explain the preference.  (Though a lot of the time it's said to be caused
by a domineering mother or an early case of molestation in the family.) 
From what I know of homosexuals, it is something irreversible.  You can't
just turn around and change a preference just because a portion of society
looks down upon it.
     If you think it would be easy for a homosexual to become a
heterosexual, try asking yourself the following question.  If you *had* to
change your romantic/sexual preferences from women to men, would you be able
to do it?  Or would you fight back and go with your own feelings?  You know
the answer, and I bet that if your sexual preferences were reversed, you'd
feel the same way.

Message: 61905
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/61892
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 03:02:40

I don't recall saying that homosexuality and pornography were "so good for
our community."  Just because I defend something doesn't mean I'm a strong
advocate of it.  I'm saying that we're better off letting pornography take
place (with some limitations, such as age), and worse off making it illegal.
Whether it's intrinsically good or bad is anybody's guess.
     I was right; you're not paying much attention.  

Message: 61906
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ted Bundy and Bob
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 03:06:05

     Ted Bundy is hardly an expert, even with his high credentials of having
put sooo much time into studying pornography.  He needed a scapegoat and
pornography fit.  "Oh, no, Ted Bundy wasn't mentally screwed up or anything,
no way---it was all pornography's fault."  Sure.

Message: 61907
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: My Dinner with...
Subject: ...Cliff
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 03:26:12

    "Cliff," I asked, "Why are you against talking about pornography on the
public board?"
     "Because this is a family board, Zak!"
     "But we're talking about it, not engaging in it," I replied.  "And
besides, I know of no children who use the board.  Who would be harmed?"
     "C'mon, Zak!  It's *my* board and I can run it how I wish."
     "That's true.  But can I ask you a question?"
     "You just did!  Ha ha!  No, really, go ahead, Zak."
     "If sex is discussed in a clinical, adult manner, is that still bad?"
     "Well, Zak, the answer is no, but I think that this porn stuff
should be on the COSmos sig.  That's why it was created, so people could
talk dirty, using any language they wanted."
     "Do you consider talking about sex in clinical terms dirty?"
     "No, but..."  Cliff's typing slowed.
     "And have you seen any language violations during this pornography
discussion?  Any foul language?"
     "Well, NO, Zak!  But..."
     "Then what's the problem?!"
     "Zak, you little turd.  That's just the way I want it run, that's all."
     "OK, Cliff, that's your right.  But I beg to differ.  I think it's a
step in the wrong direction for this BBS, and for the last 4 years I've seen
you act a lot more lenient for far more risque posts.  Such as Mychele
Nickels'.  Remember her stories?  In any case, please reconsider."
     "OK, Zak.  Don't expect anything, though.  I'll think about it."

Message: 61908
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 06:22:55

 Since I don't have volumes of such information at hand, I obviously can't
show & tell. I have, however, seen several cases of hienous crimes go to
cort, and evidence that comes out in cort indicate that pornography was
indeed a contributing factor in the crime. Of course, the tendency to do
such things probably was in the mind of the criminal before the porn came on
the scene, but the fact that it (porn) did contribute to the commission of
the act became a matter of public record.

Message: 61909
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 06:29:47

 Since I was removed from the COS SIG, and since, somehow, I have gotten
myself in the middle of this discussion, I would be an unhappy camper if the
conversation were to be moved to a place I do not access. So far, I have
seen nothing so graphic as to be objectionable. Do you have any specific
complaints? If not, I request that the discussion be left here.
 If everything were moved to it's "proper" place, we would also be missing a
very interesting discussion here concerning the Bible as well. Since Rod
Williams is not around, even that one is doing fairly well out here in the
open.

Message: 61910
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/61888
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 06:32:04

 Now THAT'S a statement I can agree with!

Message: 61911
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak's dinner
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 06:39:05

 You sat across a dinner table, TYPING to each other?

Message: 61912
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/good porn
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 08:26:37

Ahem! Pardon me if I answer that question. I only hope I'm not thrown in the
Zone for it. Good porn turns you on and you have good stimulating sex
afterwards with your loved one. It can teach different methods too that
would be good for a sexual relationship. 
Bad porn turns you off and makes you want to go to the bathroom and throw
up! -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61913
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: News Today
Subject: Paper
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 08:36:06

Did anyone catch E.J. Montini's article in the paper this morning? A
criminal doing time for burglary, aggravated assult and kidnapping, sued and
won $25,000 because his rights were violated while in prison. He's doing 25
years. This is our hard earned money folks! -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61914
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Answer!
Subject: Zak on Porn
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 10:30:10

        I have only issued warnings for the talk not to get carried away. 
Not a single post has been zapped....  But if a person does NOT wish to
discuss the subject...do not force his hand by taunting that person with
questions.  That is my caution to the rest of you.  Follow that, and I see
no problems.  I see by reading Zak's "Dinner With" post, he is on the wrong
trail as usual.

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 61915
Author: $ Joe Bottomlee
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul/cpn
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 11:19:38

No Paul I have no ideal, but I don't think it would be very much. they would
not want to price it where hardly anyone would want it.
 
                      <<< Joe >>>

Message: 61916
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: dave/sex
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 13:38:40

I suspect that if you substitute the naughty words for "molars, etc" we
have an example of the type of dialog one would hear from Dave's bedroom.

Message: 61917
Author: Roger Mann
Category: War!
Subject: Jeff/dunning
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 13:42:15

I had a similar problem, Jeff. I sent a registered letter to the collection
agency and the magazine publisher. The letter said that I did not order the
magazine, that I had no obligation to pay them. I received a call from the
agency stating that the matter had been cleared up. It is important that
the letter be registered so that you have proof that the agency and
the publisher have received it.

Message: 61918
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Apollo Trivia
Subject: Today!
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 13:49:24

  December 15th, 1989 On this day Apollo BBS was COMPRESSED
using PC-TOOLS, and then Backed up using FASTBACK to fourteen 3 1/2
floppies.  Apollo consisted of 321 files......

              As promised, it has been done!

              Next backup: Jan. 1st, 1990

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 61919
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Vote
Subject: Old Vote Data
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 13:58:49

Suggested by Mike Carter (aka the Fang) 12/04/89

Within the next year, it is rumored that U.S. West will have an option
on your phone line known as CPN or Calling Party Number. This option,
along with the special phone to decode the signal, will display the number
of the phone where the caller is calling from. Some say this is an
invasion of privacy..others see it as the end of the crank callers.
If you were tasked with a vote to decide this features fate..

[A] Yes. I am fully in favor of it and would be willing to pay.

[B] No. It's an invasion of privacy

[C] Maybe. I'm not quite convinced it'd be a good thing to have.

Poll results to date:
[A] 16   [B] 5    [C] 7

Okay Fang...You Asked for it!

Message: 61920
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: Porn ????
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 14:36:52

        "SEX"   The mere words turn heads and makes every one listen.
But, there is nothing wrong with SEX, it is a wonderful thing when done
between two consenting adults of opposite gender and in private.
However, there are those who like to parade it infront of the world to make
money...  Who use children, or do things that are unnatural that make it
dirty, and hence we have PORN or PORNOGRAPHIC material.

        PORNOGRAPHIC as defined by Black's Law Dictionary 5th edition:
That which is of or pertaining to obscene literature; obscene; licentious. 
Material is pornographic or obscene if the average person, applying
contemporary community standards, would find that the work taken as a whole
appeals to the 'PRURIENT' interest and if it depicts in a patently offensive
way sexual conduct and if the work taken as a whole lacks serious literary,
artistic, political or scientific value.
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 24-25, 93 S.Ct. 2607,2615,37 L.Ed.2d 419

You will also find similar wording in Arizona's Criminal Code, Title 13,
Chapter 35 and 35.1

PRURIENT: A shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion.
Attorney General v.  Book named "John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of
Pleasure", 349 Mass. 69,206 N.E.2d 403, 405.

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 61921
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James Taranto
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:30:45

Re:  "Are you against masturbation or not?"

Hmmmmm.  Why do you want to know James?

Message: 61922
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Nick
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:35:42

Re:  "No one is born an adulterer because the type of behavior necessary to
commit the act of adultery is not under direct genetic control. Sexual
preference and behavior, on the other hand, is controlled by our genes."

I don't think it's in the genes at all.  I think it's sstrictly
eenvironment.  Just like adultery.  The more you allow yourself to get into
it, the more you want to get into it.  It's on the order of a bad habit.  If
you really throw yourself into it, you end up like Ted Bundy (in the case of
porn).

Message: 61923
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:38:31

Re:  "So you've been to strip joints 20 years ago.  Wow.  Does that mean
that you know what a strip joint is now?"

So, what's your point?  Wow.  If I said I did or didn't go to them now or
before, what's the point?

Message: 61924
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:41:56

Re:  "Certainly you are entitled to your opinion but your preaching on the
subject is distasteful to me."

Why is it when I express my views, you call it preaching?  Why is it when
you express your views, it's ok?  The subject would have probably dropped a
long time ago, but you and others keep asking me questions.

Message: 61925
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:46:37

Re:  "It's in sectioned-off sections of bookstores, behind the counters of
convenience stores, and is only available to people of a certain age."

Some is, some isn't.

Re:  "From what I know of homosexuals, it is something irreversible.  You
can't just turn around and change a preference just because a portion of
society looks down upon it."

I have heard that it is reversible.  A preference can be changed.  Besides,
I wouldn't call it a preference, I would call it a perverted lust.

Message: 61926
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:48:06

Re:  "I was right; you're not paying much attention."

Sorry.  It's hard to keep up with so many taking pot shots at me because I
think porn and homosexuality is wrong.

Message: 61927
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:50:21

Re:  "He needed a scapegoat and pornography fit."

I don't think so.  If he needed a scapegoat (and why did he need one?) he
could have blamed it all on religion like most other atheists do.

Message: 61928
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:53:58

Re:  "A criminal doing time for burglary, aggravated assult and kidnapping,
sued and won $25,000 because his rights were violated while in prison."

It's really a shame isn't it.  Our judicial system is going down the tubes. 
Even my kids know better than they do.

Message: 61929
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:55:54

Re:  "[A] Yes. I am fully in favor of it and would be willing to pay."

Whew!  It's good to see I'm in the majority for a change.

Message: 61930
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 16:57:10

Good post Cliff, that last one.

Message: 61931
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: On the Lighter Side
Subject: Hmmmmmm.
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 17:49:38

The following is a prepared statement.

I am a $tatus member of Apollo because I enjoy it here.  But lately it has
not been so enjoyable.  I am tired of talking about homos, AIDS, porn, and
related perversions.  I have said enough that everyone should know my
opinion and feelings on the matter by now.  Recently, I have only responded
to questions (even the leading and provocative ones), hoping the subject
would die out, but it seems to be growing instead.  Therefore, for a period
of time I will decline to comment any further on the topic.  I know some of
my opponents will think ill of me (I think some already do).  They will
rejoice, claim victory, and continue to champion their cause of promoting
perversion.  I only hope that in time they will see things more clearly.  In
your hearts, you know I'm RIGHT!  (smile)

I wish you all a Very Merry Chr.shtmlas!  Remember the reason for the season!

Message: 61932
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: The SYSOP Speaks
Subject: Last on Bob...
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 18:30:35

        I hope Apollo users don't "promote perversion"....  sigh!  I think
they are a better bunch then that, and I am sure no one thinks ill of you
Bob.  (I know you are right Bob!)
        
        Okay, lay off taking pokes at Bob about Homos,AIDs, and other
related subject matter that he has plainly made known he does not wish to
talk about. There are only so many things I can do...  Take it to the COSmos
SIG, (I will give Paul Savage access if he wishes?) or just leave Bob out of
it. If this does not work, we have a very empty [PHA]ntom ZONE and the
((SHIELDS)) can be raised so that Non-Members can't post... (I do not wish
to do this however, but at a last resort I will).

        This is no way to celebrate Chr.shtmlas!

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 61933
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Vote
Subject: New [V]ote
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 19:14:52

Just maybe we can direct the conversation in another direction.

The new [V]ote is if Arizona should legalize gambling?  I am not just
talking social gambling...

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 61934
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak on Bob
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 21:56:26

  Why didn't I expect sarcasm in place of genuine discussion? How foolish of
me.

Message: 61935
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/61852
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:03:38

Care to find that "passage" for me in the Bible? That "verse" smacks of
works-righteousness. Although I would be the first one to admit my mistake,
were I to be wrong, I doubt that you are going to find that line anywhere in
the Bible. Instead, take a look at Romans 3:10-18.

Message: 61936
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Arousal
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:13:37

There is nothing wrong with sexual arousal the way that it was intended. But
for someone out there that has gotten so desensitized by porn, that the only
way he can get excited is by watching a film two of two 275 lb. lesbians
"getting it on" together...there is definitely something wrong there. My
father was a victim of pornography. He started off in the 50's and 60's with
Playboy (that was back when only partial nudity was allowed), and ended up
having to watch hard-core porn just to get excited enough to be able to go
to bed with my mom. He couldn't get aroused any other way. That's what
pornography does to people. It takes a beautiful means of a mutually
committed, selfless act of love and turns it into a cheap means of getting
your rocks off...reducing it to what the animals do. It's not lovemaking.
It's copulating. Plain and simple. Those people on camera couldn't care less
about the people they are doing it with, day in and day out (unless that is,
if they find out that one of the people they've been doing it with has
AIDS.)

Message: 61937
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Co-Habitation
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:19:33

I feel that people that choose to live together (even those that stay
together for 20 years or more) are being selfish by not committing to
marriage. Co-habitation is basically a means of saying "If I ever stop
loving you or just plain get tired of you at any time, I can just pack my
things and leave...no alimony, no settlement of property, no child support."
Not to say that the bonds of matrimony hold much of a place in American life
anymore. When I see ads in the paper for divorce lawyers with ads that read
"Lose 175 lbs. over your Lunch Hour", I just have to shake my head in
disbelief. Yes, I co-habited (so if you want to call me a Christian
hypocrite, go ahead, but it will come to naught - I did it before I became a
Christian, and do resent that I did it.) That my co-habitor became my wife
just means that we were lucky that we made it through anyhow.

Message: 61938
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger/Porn
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:22:12

Roger, there is a big difference between clinical photos and pornography.
I've even seen pornographic books thinly disguised as clinical literature.

Message: 61939
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Hawley/Oral Sex
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:32:59

Sexual REPRESSION? Get SERIOUS, James! Bob is talking about one MAN'S mouth
on another MAN'S genitalia! Now, whether or not YOU find that sexually
exciting or repulsive is your own business. But to try to label Bob as a
sexual repressive without seeing his point (which I believe I have properly
restated in the first three sentences, correct me if I'm wrong, Bob) makes
for an invalid argument. Bob did not make a statement to the fact that he
found ALL oral sex to be wrong. He was stating his opinion that mutual MALE
oral sex was in his (any my) opinion, a detestable thing, as well as
Scripturally condemned (read Romans 1:21-32). You can blast the Bible all
you want, but as Bible-believing Christians, these are words we strongly
believe in, and will defend.

Message: 61940
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul/Porn/Zak
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:37:27

I agree. Just as any unstable person may kill themselves after listening to
a rock song about suicide, an unstable person may turn to pornography for
entertainment. That instability may lead them to act out some of their more
perverse sexual fantasies. I agree with Paul that not many mature,
well-adjusted people are going to go out and go on a bizarre rape spree
after watching a porno flick. But there ARE a lot of people out there
without their heads on straight. And with all this negative reinforcement
being voluntarily fed into their brains...

Message: 61941
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Spit On Grave
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:39:48

Ann, I have read the jacket synopsis and seen the pictures on the sleeve for
that film ("I Spit On Your Grave"). For you NOT to know what was going to
take place in the film would be sheer naievete on your part, and I know you
are not that naieve. There is even a big, glaring WARNING sticker on the
cover. What did you think it was going to be? A Bambi sequel?

Message: 61942
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:44:38

What would you say about 2 Peter 1:20-21?

Message: 61943
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/Porno
Date: 12/15/89  Time: 22:53:45

"Better off letting pornography take place (with some limitations, such as
age)..."
 
When is too much not good? I doubt that there are very many consciences
floating around in the porno biz. Find me a porno director or seasoned
"actor" or "actress" that can honestly say, 'I can't do that, it would be
unethical,' and I'll buy you lunch. Trust me, it's whatever needs to be done
to get paid. I'm sure that few porno stars would have few qualms about
interacting with children.

Message: 61944
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul 61908
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 01:35:16

I wish you had more details to give about crimes made that were allegedly
directly linked to pornography.  The Meese Comission report might have
something, but I don't have a copy of that.
 
As for Cliff and my dinner conversation, we did indeed type to each other. 
We've gotten so used to communicating that way, we can't function normally. 

Message: 61945
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: Baub Thaurenbork
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 02:18:11

     RE:  "Some is, some isn't."  Yes, Bob, some pornography is sectioned
off, and some isn't.  So what's wrong with the porn that is sectioned off?
Sectioned-off stuff doesn't 'parade.'  What are your examples of the
pornography that does parade?  I'm not sure what you're referring to.
     RE:  "I have heard that [homosexuality] is reversible."  There may be
some cases where it was reversed, but I doubt that in the majority of cases
it can be reversed.  You didn't answer my question as to whether or not
you think you could change your preference if you had/wanted to.  Where did
you hear that it was reversible?  From a group of homosexuals?  From
psychologists?  From religous people?
     RE:  "If he needed a scapegoat...he could have blamed it on religion
like most other atheists do."  That doesn't make much sense.  Are you saying
that there have been atheist mass-murderers who blamed it on religion?  I
don't know of any.  Or that religion is more likely candidate for a
scapegoat?  I doubt it--one could solicit a lot more sympathy from going
anti-pornography than from going anti-religion.  
     You don't think Bundy would want to have a scapegoat?  I think he
would.  It's a way to divert the responsibility from himself to something
else.  By blaming porn, he could say, "I'm normal, there's nothing wrong
with me.  I'm just a victim of porn.  A victim of society.  Society made me
do it."  Blah, blah, blah.  
     RE:  (paraphrase) "People have been taking pot-shots at me because I'm
against porn and homosexuals."  You're wrong.  It's not because of your
opinion, it's because of the evasive way you handle it.

Message: 61946
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Daryl
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 02:59:53

    Regarding my oh-so-sarcastic message replacing God with "Bob" --- F***
you if you can't take a joke!
     (The preceding is a SubGenius quote, so don't take it too seriously,
either.  Unless you really want to.)

     How much pornography is too much?  That's a hard question to answer. 
My own personal beliefs are that children should be left out of it.  Nobody
should be forced to do anything they don't want to either.  Nobody should be
forced to watch pornographic material (not that anybody is in the first
place).  In other words, pornographic limitations should start when there is
direct harm to others involved.
     Harm to oneself by getting too involved in something, however, is
voluntary.  If someone overindulges in porn and then finds that he is no
longer turned on by subtle things, that's his own fault--not the fault of
the porn.  The same goes for alcohol, drugs, sex, BBSing...  None of these
things are intrinsically bad.  Not having willpower is bad.  Being
over-excessive (is that redundant?) is bad.
     I'm sure there are porno directors who have limitations.  There are
degrees to porn, you know, and there are lots of different audiences.  One
director might deal solely with soft-core, another with hard-core
heterosexual stuff, yet another with hard-core bisexual sadomasochism
material.  Likewise, the actors and actresses aren't completely immoral
people, at least not all.  I'm sure the majority wouldn't do things with
children.  But then, I don't know them.  Nor do you.

Message: 61947
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: In search of
Subject: Bob
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 03:11:26

     Bob, where did you go?  I'm sorry you've been somewhat upset by these
messages.  Obviously you've got a lot of people coming down on you, or at
least it feels that way.  I know how that feels.  It makes you get really
defensive and makes it difficult to respond to messages with a mild manner. 
     Come back, Bob!  Booooooooooooooobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb...........
(Read the previous line as a long, echoey "Bob," not a long, echoey "Boob.")

     I'll try not to take pot-shots at you and I'll try not to object when
you say something that I strongly disagree with, and...  
 
    (Zak, shut up already!)

Message: 61948
Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: desensitization
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 03:55:03

I've seen a lot of sunsets, and I have yet to feel the need for the sun to
go nova in order to enjoy it.

Message: 61949
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/"good" porn
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 05:27:53

"It can teach different methods that would be good for a relationship".
Right! Methods like homosexual activity, group sex (I suppose likke group
therapy, huh?), adultery, incest and the like. Real good, healthy
relationships. All building blocks to good marriage. Sure Ann. Sure.

Message: 61950
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 08:49:40

"Your opponents will claim victory and continue to champion their cause"
etc. etc.
Heck Bob, no matter if you stay with a subject or drop it - they still claim
victory. Think it's human nature. Ha. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61951
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff on porn'
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 08:53:23

I don't think Bob wants to censor the rest of us and take the subject
somewhere else. I thought we had been talking nicely and not disobeying
any rules. He knows where the skip key is and he has the right to not answer
anyone's posts. Obviously, this is a subject many want to discuss. I've
enjoyed all the messages including Bob's. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61952
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff on gambling
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 08:59:30

I'm certainly all for it and say "It's about time"! I don't say we have to
turn into a Las Vegas or Atlantic city - but to have several casinos through
out the valley. As much as I enjoyed having been able to play cards in the
bars, it didn't work out because too much room for con artists and not to
mention fights. Remember when I said we had been accused of being hustlers
just because we had a winning streak? (All of $7.50!) It would certainly
ease our tax burden considerably. I can't understand why there is such a big
controversy about it anyway - we already do gamble - horses, dogs and the
lottery. Casino gambling could be controled just as effectly. All I know is
'I WANT SLOTS!" -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61953
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Daryl on marriage
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 09:03:41

I read in the paper just the other day that the majority of people that live
together for two years or more end up getting married. Personally, I believe
in marriage - mainly because it is a contract and protects a person. I don't
think it makes a bit of difference in the relationship - except, if you are
truly in love, it's just one more comittment to prove it! Faith!
                            -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61954
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Daryl/Spit on ...
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 09:06:47

I did read the warning label and thought it just hype to get one to rent the
film. I have seen many rape scenes over the years, but not one so realistic,
vivid, nor brutal as this one was. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61955
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Answer!
Subject: Paul/porn
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 09:13:53

But if I don't watch 'group sex - incest and the like' - what is wrong with
being turned on watching two consenting adults having sex? I'm not talking
about watching them as they cohabit in the alley or some sleezy joint - I'm
talking about in the privacy of my own home.
If we were to watch for instance, group sex, we'd probably start laughing
our heads off and totally defeat the purpose. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 61956
Author: $ James Taranto
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Nick
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 10:12:00

Cockroaches are cockroaches because of their genes, but that doesn't mean I
have to tolerate them.

Message: 61957
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Vote
Subject: legalized gambling
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 14:32:00

no.

Message: 61958
Author: Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: daryl/porn
Date: 12/16/89  Time: 14:33:36

Yes, Daryl, that was my point !