Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site cvl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!cvl!rlh
From: rlh@cvl.UUCP (Ralph L. Hartley)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: St. Thomas Aquinas
Message-ID: <189@cvl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 21-Mar-85 09:07:10 EST
Article-I.D.: cvl.189
Posted: Thu Mar 21 09:07:10 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 23-Mar-85 03:28:13 EST
Organization: Computer Vision Lab, U. of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 18


>> Rich, you seem to think that the arguments you bring against christianity
>> are new.  They're not.  Most of the things you've brought up were argued
>> against by Aquinas, and there are lots of responses to them through the
>> years.  I don't suppose you've bothered reading any of them, though.
>>
>
> Aquinas believed that women were produced by "defective" circumstances
> (Ia.92.I): if conception took place under completely "natural" circumstances
> males would always result ("for the active force of the male seed intends to
> produce something similar to itself, perfect in its masculinity"), but if
> some peculiarity intervened - a defect in sperm or seed or the prevalence of
> a moist south wind at the time of conception - females would be born.

Would someone please post a definition of the word "ad hominem"?

				Ralph Hartley
				rlh@cvl