Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sdccsu3.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdccsu3!kenn
From: kenn@sdccsu3.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Just replying to an idle offensive comment
Message-ID: <1786@sdccsu3.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 1-May-84 18:01:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdccsu3.1786
Posted: Tue May  1 18:01:28 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 3-May-84 08:33:25 EDT
References: <694@bbncca.ARPA>
Organization: Hacker's Haven, U.C. San Diego
Lines: 25

[]

From: ..bbncca!sdyer (Steve Dyer)

> ... those who do not recognize the teaching authority of the Church.

How about those who are strong enough to form their own system of values, 
rather than accepting on blind faith a popular attitude?

Seriously though, we can't argue with those we cannot communicate.  People
run around blindly following the teachings of the bible, and every arguement 
against it is invalid "because it is so."  I am not so much against religion 
if the people involved also think for themselves, but too many will take 
everything from the church as their own and pretty much blindly follow it.
Blind thinking is a form of prejudice -- a preset of opinions about a subject
without even truly evaluating it to it's fullest.  Those of you who are 
fighting abortion because "it is murder", how far have you explored in your
thinking?  Most people will get rather annoyed if they are rejected because of 
some creed or rumor or irrevelant past experience, ie prejudice	of one form
or another.  What makes you think you can do that to arguements of abortion?

				   Kenn the Kenf
				...!sdcsvax!kenn
				...!sdcsvax!sdccs6!ix192
				...!sdcsvax!sdccsu3!kenn