### Apollo BBS Archive - December 10 - 16, 1989

    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 Christmas 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 Christmas!  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 Christmas!

    *=* 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 !