Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tekecs.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxj!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!tekecs!jeffw From: jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: Marchionni replies to Winslow, Mauney et al on porn. Message-ID: <5038@tekecs.UUCP> Date: Wed, 23-Jan-85 12:23:15 EST Article-I.D.: tekecs.5038 Posted: Wed Jan 23 12:23:15 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 25-Jan-85 05:17:54 EST References: <1523V6M@PSUVM> Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR Lines: 39 > "Why does sound like net.religion?"... > Because porn is a moral evil and moral evils are the proper area of religion. Wrong. It's because Marchionni's morals say porn is evil and he insists on presenting this moral view as if it should be universal, on net.women. But I've got to hand it to you. Only someone with a hyperactive imagination (a trait that I tend to admire) would conclude that my making the simple statement that the USA is not the Vatican (or more to the point, the USA is not a Catholic state) shows my "ignorance on the proper role of religion to man". I'm sure my view of this role disagrees with yours, but it would be rash to conclude therefore that I am ignorant. By the way, the point was not to make a cheap shot (are you defensive about your religion?) but to say that the Catholic church is only one of many voices listened to when making legal policy in this country. And moral policy, if such a thing exists. > Why don't you READ a catechism. They are not a restricted item!!! > If you are embarresed about getting one contact me at 215 565 3300 and I'll > send one to you. I'M NOT BEING SARCASTIC. I'll be happy to buy and send one > to you. (No priest will knock at your door.....:-).....) Um, what was that about cheap shots? Why should it embarrass me? I have read some of "A New Catechism" (which I think is hardly official - too bad) and found it very interesting. But consider - in spite of all this friction, in spite of our religious differences (although I am neither atheist or agnostic), we agree on the dangers of censorship. Perhaps there's a lesson there. As for prejudices, Mr. Gerald Owens, Mr. Marchionni references religion far more consistently and with a more single-minded view than I do - why do you single me out for reproach? Hmmm? One's religion is another's prejudice... (Like my non-gender specificity?) Jeff Winslow