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!rrizzo
From: rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: Fundaphobia
Message-ID: <818@bbncca.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 2-Jul-84 12:18:35 EDT
Article-I.D.: bbncca.818
Posted: Mon Jul  2 12:18:35 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 3-Jul-84 00:30:51 EDT
References: <1665@seismo.UUCP>
Organization: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Ma.
Lines: 24

> What has that got to do with homosexuality being OK or not OK?

About as much as Paul Dubuc's article does, which was my point.

I wouldn't read nongay studies of gay topics (they're biased,
you know).  Should we seek out bisexual researchers?  Or asexual
ones?  Maybe we'll just have to wait for extraterrestrials to
do the surveys.

If you don't consider "Is homosexuality OK?" either badly posed,
or futile, or meaningless, I sure hope you're not in a position
to decide what research hypotheses get funded in any field.

Since I'm partly responsible for net.motss filling up with postings
debating (groan!) justifications [sic.] for homosexuality, which
runs counter to the express purpose of this newsgroup, I hereby
promise to do my part to bring up worthwhile topics, or at least
refrain from answering "OK/ not OK" mail.  I'll also use my "n"
key to minimize temptation.


				"Please, I don't give interviews."

				Ron Rizzo