Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!speaker From: speaker@umcp-cs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.religion,net.flame Subject: Laura Creighton's bull... Message-ID: <4027@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Tue, 22-Nov-83 21:27:20 EST Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.4027 Posted: Tue Nov 22 21:27:20 1983 Date-Received: Fri, 25-Nov-83 05:18:23 EST Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept. Lines: 44 It was my great-grandfather's farm, but that is not the point. Your whole argument does not wash. There are human societies that have yet to connect sex with babies. (I heard a lecture on one group of them last week -- they are in New Guinea.) What argument? Did you READ the article? At any time did I say that humans do it exclusivly for making babies? In fact I stated the just the opposite. When I said that humans do it for fun, WHY DID YOU THINK I WAS REFERRING TO A HETEROSEXUAL RELATIONSHIP????? I was in fact referring to a HOMOSEXUAL relationship. Your lack of objectivity is showing. Do you really expect that the rats do? I said they "MAY" think they are procreating. Stop trying to force words down my throat. They may also be having a little fun. Can you honestly tell the difference between a homosexual rat and a rat that thinks it's procreating? And then you drone on and ON and ON about the idea of what is natural being derived from Genesis, etc, etc. You DIDN'T read my article DID you? Why must you always lower every conversation to Laura Creighton's personal crusade against the bible? I don't give a fuck about your repressed hatred. You state... "And consider that what you are actually arguing about is not the NATURALNESS of homosexuality, but the MORALITY of homosexuality." I have made NO arguments against anyone. I have said NOTHING of morality. I have NOT envoked the bible. These are all YOUR words... YOU eat them. -- - Bessie the Hellcow speaker@umcp-cs speaker.umcp-cs@CSnet-Relay