Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!dartvax!chelsea
From: chelsea@dartvax.UUCP (Karen Christenson)
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.singles,net.social,net.women
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Ruling on Sodomy
Message-ID: <4834@dartvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Jul-86 15:29:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.4834
Posted: Mon Jul 14 15:29:17 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jul-86 03:21:13 EDT
References: <3098@jhunix.UUCP> <14682@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: chelsea@dartvax.UUCP (Karen Christenson)
Distribution: net
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Lines: 32
Keywords: something to keep in mind
Xref: watmath net.legal:3963 net.singles:14353 net.social:1202 net.women:11324

>>This includes two people of the opposite sex that are married.
>>
>>In this light, does it change your opinion of the ruling?  Do you wish the
>>government to certify ok and not ok sexual habits?  
>>
>Gasp!!! Argh!!! ban ORAL SEX??? What will the bachelors do on the night
>of their holiest vows?  Melanie and the gang of 4 should appreciate this
>ruling.
>
>But to seriously answer your questions:
>NO and YES. 
>
>The line has to be drawn somewhere.  Hasn't anyone else noticed the moral
>decay in this country, or is everyone afraid of getting flamed or called
>a Bible thumper?  
>
>-- 
>----------
>Nick V. Flor 
>..hplabs!hp-sdd!nick

     1)  I'm not convinced we need lines drawn (lines are so inflexible).
     2)  Is it the business of the government to draw those lines?
     3)  Is it the business of the government to address the question of
moral decay at all?
     4)  Are you going to start harking back to the "good old days" when
things were moral, and send all the history buffs into peals of laughter?
     5)  Do you do this just to get everyone all riled up?  Or maybe
provoke discussion?

                                   Karen Christenson
"Mostly harmless."                 ...!dartvax!chelsea