Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 7/1/84; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!seismo!rlgvax!plunkett
From: plunkett@rlgvax.UUCP (S. Plunkett)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: Re: Steve Dyer's suggestion re: appalling flames
Message-ID: <36@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3-Aug-84 13:00:18 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.36
Posted: Fri Aug  3 13:00:18 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 5-Aug-84 05:34:34 EDT
References: <2732@decwrl.UUCP> <2@clkvax.UUCP> <878@bbncca.ARPA>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 47

To gay and somber readers alike:

Quoting from some constitutional document as to what is and
isn't permissable discussion in this group lacks the necessary
authority.  What are you going to do if I launch into a speech
about scuba diving now?  Ignore it most likely, in which case
I'll sense I've misposted, and go elsewhere.  The so-called
ground rules of this group mention it as a forum "for the discussion
of gay-related issues of interest to all members of USENET."  It
then goes on to mention the group is, however, "NOT a newsgroup for
the discussion of whether homosexuality is good or bad, natural
or unnatural."  Now, I would like to suppose this is because such
fundamental questions are unanimously solved, for all mankind, for
all time (rather like asking if breathing is really necessary in
"net.life"); that it goes without saying that the correct answers
are bad, unnatural.

But no, this is a therapy group designed to coddle the understandable
confusions of homosexual people, and not to make matters worse for
them by actually allowing a dissenting voice to be heard.  If you
are going to invite "all members" to "express their opinions, exchange
ideas," then you had better expect once in a while, when someone from
the outside world stumbles into this den, as I have, to raise some
fundamental questions that may unsettle you.  A little profanity is
to be expected also, because homosexuals, as a rule, are tremendously
defensive and petulant, that it is, for the perverse, a little like
poking a caged and wild animal.  (I do not condone cruelty to animals.)

If you want to talk what ever it is sodomites talk about to each other,
then there are less public ways of doing so.  If you want to educate your
so-called "homophobes" then--if any are listening--you had better
start explaining, and answering their questions in ways other than
throwing a tantrum and replying "go start your own news group."  I
recommend you stick to simply finding acceptance; don't bother
proselytizing.

Explain for instance, why I shouldn't worry about the growing public
health hazard caused by your bedroom activities, a problem only now
becoming apparent; people who always thought gay meant "happy" have
died because of blood transfusions from homosexualists.  The moral
problems loom also, but moralism is confused with opinion these days,
so let's just stay with minor issues like life and death.  If it is
so bloody natural, why are you being gathered to Abraham's bosom?

Go for it.
-- 
..{ihnp4,allegra,seismo}!rlgvax!plunkett