Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!uunet!bellcore!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: gja@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (Grenville Armitage) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: QUESTION FASHION Message-ID: Date: 27 Jun 91 07:11:06 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Basket Weavers, Inc. Lines: 17 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article jhpb@garage.att.com (Joseph H Buehler) writes: [...] >I grant, a dress is not always the most modest or practical thing for a >woman to wear. The point I was trying to make was that I think it more >important to talk about the rule, rahter than the exception, lest the >exception become the rule. Much of the discussion so far has been in response to your perceived attitude that "this rule has no exception", hasn't it? If you then accept that there are situations where your "rule" doesn't apply then your "rule" is incorrect. You need to re-word your "rule" to embrace the situation you have apparently conceeded is okay but chose to term an "exception". gja