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