Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Arthur Pewtey) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: Controlling one's ([homo]sexual) urges and Halakha Message-ID: <1017@pyuxd.UUCP> Date: Wed, 31-Dec-69 18:59:59 EDT Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1017 Posted: Wed Dec 31 18:59:59 1969 Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 03:24:56 EDT References: <411@oakhill.UUCP> <564@sfmag.UUCP> <1672@cornell.UUCP> <1594@aecom.UUCP> <572@sfmag.UUCP> <995@pyuxd.UUCP> <113@starfire.UUCP> Organization: The Chartered Accountants Who Want to Be Lion Tamers Association Lines: 48 >>Replace all references to homosexuality and homosexuals with "Judaism" >>and "Jews", and replace "Jews" with "Christians" or "Americans" or >>some such word, and the paragraph above sounds awful hateful, doesn't >>it? [ROSEN] > Replace all references to homosexuality and homosexuals with "murders" > "theives" or any other less societally-enobled group (tax cheaters?) > and see what you read. What does this teach you about this substitution > argument? NOTE: I am NOT equating homosexuality to murder anymore > than Rich is equating it to Americanism. If you want to invoke > Freud, do it on someone else's time. [JOHN LIND] Murderers kill other people. By definition. What do either Jews or homosexuals do that harms other people? Sorry, John Lind, but the substitution argument holds very well, until you can show a difference between hating Jews and hating homosexuals, by preaching hatred for homosexuals you ARE justifying hatred for Jews. It's that simple. Whether you would like it or not. (Freud? Sounds like *your* argumentative technique is invoking FRAUD, not Freud. :-?) >>If the religious right were to make your sorts of statements about >>those who practice the "abomination of Judaism", you would be rightfully >>upset, no? Is there a reason why you can't have the same level of >>tolerance for others and their ways that you would expect others to have for >>you and your ways? It's your opinion that sexual practices other than your >>own are abominable. Fine. There are those who have the same feelings about >>the way you practice your religion. In what way are you any different from >>them? > Swell. Let them show creditable documents from antiquity with a long- > standing tradition to support them. No? If you want to reject Torah, > reject it, but at least be open about it. I reject Torah. OK? I thought I had always been VERY open about rejecting arbitrary contradictory subjective and hopelessly presumptively written religious documents. You have as much "objective" support for your "tradition" as Dan Boskovich does with his presumptive nonsense to "objectively" support Christianity (read his "objective proofs" in net.religion). Given that both of you haven't a leg to stand on, what right do either of you have to invoke your "traditions" to tell other people what to do? > Shalom The word means peace. I wish you were preaching peace instead of intolerance. -- "Wait a minute. '*WE*' decided??? *MY* best interests????" Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr