Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site bbncca.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!bbncca!sdyer From: sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer) Newsgroups: net.motss Subject: Re: Keep Religion Out Of NET.MOTSS Message-ID: <576@bbncca.ARPA> Date: Tue, 14-Feb-84 10:56:43 EST Article-I.D.: bbncca.576 Posted: Tue Feb 14 10:56:43 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 15-Feb-84 00:48:18 EST References: ihuxq.635 <2914@yale-com.UUCP> <572@bbncca.ARPA> Organization: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Ma. Lines: 26 Marty (and others): I think the issue is really one of emphasis. ihuxq!amigo2's reply to Dave Norris in net.religion which he copied to net.motss was addressing the well-worn arguments of justification of gay people (in this case, in the eyes of God.) Variants of this argument have been beaten around in net.singles and net.motss earlier, to the point of exhaustion on all sides. It was appropriate for Robert to ask that such a discussion stay on net.religion--remember that net.motss was not created to support primary discussions of whether being gay is immoral or moral. Now, on the other hand, I feel that the topic of religion can generate some interesting discussions on net.motss if the community is interested. For example, the role of gay religious groups such as Dignity, Integrity, Am Tikva, and the Metropolitan Community Church, the position of gay people within traditional religious organizations, whether being gay has affected one's religious beliefs and behavior, sexual ethics and morality in gay relationships, etc. The difference is the emphasis: these all derive from the generic category "gay issues" and proceed from there. So, really, Marty, no topic is necessarily taboo. -- /Steve Dyer decvax!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbncca