Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!utcsri!uthub!ecf!drascic From: drascic@ecf.UUCP Newsgroups: soc.motss,talk.religion.misc,alt.flame Subject: Re: SAME SEX MARRIAGES Message-ID: <377@mv07.ecf.toronto.edu> Date: Tue, 10-Nov-87 14:09:38 EST Article-I.D.: mv07.377 Posted: Tue Nov 10 14:09:38 1987 Date-Received: Fri, 13-Nov-87 05:54:39 EST References: <81000007@cdp> <2538@ihlpf.ATT.COM> <1670@hou2d.UUCP> <1912@killer.UUCP> <1186@puff.wisc.edu> <866@csun.UUCP> <867@csun.UUCP> Reply-To: drascic@mv07.ecf.UUCP (SpIKe) Organization: Engineering Computing Facility, University of Toronto Lines: 38 Xref: utgpu soc.motss:2612 talk.religion.misc:3522 alt.flame:482 In article <867@csun.UUCP> dlt@csun.UUCP (Dave Thompson) writes: >However much I might agree with Sean, I really don't think it's appro- >priate to call someone a moron on the net and suggest that they jump >in front of a truck! Everyone is entitled to an opinion and be allowed >to express it in the proper forum. I've thought about this alot, and I came to the conclusion that this is wrong. People are not entitled to just any opinion. They are only entitled to have informed, well-thought-out opinions. For those topics about which they are ignorant, whether by choice or by lack of exposure, they must refrain from forming an opinion (or, at least, be willing to admit that the opinion that they have is nothing but a guess). People who are ignorant about a topic, and yet insist on holding strong opinions about those topics are basically liars. They claim knowledge they don't have, logic they've never explored. This then leads to a discussion about how much one must look into a topic before being "informed". There are, as usual, no easy answers. But you can bet that you at least have to consider the topic from more than one point of view! Especially if that point of view is not based on facts, but on other ignorant opinions, such as those of many religious leaders. Since our dearly departed (from this newsgroup (hopefully)) friend Eric Mading only considered the question of homosexuality from his particular brand of Christianity's point of view, I feel safe in saying that his opinion is ignorant, and that he therefore does not have a right to hold this opinion. However, it would be illogical for us to conclude from this single example of Eric's bahaviour that he is a moron. One the other hand, we are justified in concluding that he can lie, since he claimed knowledge and thought he doesn't possess. As to whether or not this means he should through himself in front of a truck, well, I am too ignorant of that topic to hold a valid opinion, so I will express none. David Drascic drascic@ecf.toronto.edu University of Toronto. ============================================================================= All opinions stated above are subject to change, as new facts and better logic comes to light. Feel free to disagree, but only if you can explain why.