Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 Fluke 1/4/84; site fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!fluke!tron
From: tron@fluke.UUCP (Peter F. Barbee)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: RE: bigotry
Message-ID: <677@vax1.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Jul-84 11:07:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: vax1.677
Posted: Fri Jul  6 11:07:44 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Jul-84 00:59:05 EDT
References: <351@hogpd.UUCP>
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Everett, WA
Lines: 30

Just a minor point, this has to do with the logic of positive and
negative arguments.  We have all been taught (in math, etc.) that
if A=-B then -A=B, but I don't *think* this holds true for emotional,
or emotionally stated, arguments.  The present argument has to do
with why Trish has chosen her gay lifestyle.  I am not even going
to pretend I could understand her reasons on the basis of one posting
(or even a dozen postings) but I can talk about words and what they mean
to me.

I reiterate, I am no longer discussing these words as Trish's (or Robert's,
or Alan's) but just as words.

If you say you chose the red dress because you can't stand blue dresses
that is different from saying you chose the red dress because you love
the way it makes you look.  Do you agree?  The process of choosing
between two things is indeed complex but I know there is a difference
between liking one thing (and choosing it) and disliking something else
(and therefore choosing the other).

I would love to make this a 99 line article but I think I've already
made my point.  Send flames, I love 'em.

				Peter Barbee

   decvax-+-uw-beaver-+
   ihnp4--+   allegra-+
   ucbvax----lbl-csam-+--fluke!tron
		  sun-+
	      ssc-vax-+