Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!sgi!shinobu!odin!odin.corp.sgi.com!portuesi From: portuesi@tweezers.esd.sgi.com (Michael Portuesi) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: talk.morality (Was CALL FOR DISCUSSION -- talk.politics.gay) Message-ID: Date: 5 Feb 90 13:55:16 GMT References: <34015@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <15894@well.UUCP> <3056@jolnet.ORPK.IL.US> Sender: news@odin.SGI.COM Reply-To: portuesi@sgi.com (Michael Portuesi) Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mtn. View, CA Lines: 23 In-reply-to: dattier@jolnet.ORPK.IL.US's message of 2 Feb 90 21:12:30 GMT >>>>> On 2 Feb 90 21:12:30 GMT, dattier@jolnet.ORPK.IL.US (David W. Tamkin) said: david> I suggest we scrap the proposed name and try for something like david> talk.morality. That's the ideal name for a group where posters can argue david> about what they deem moral or immoral, and it needn't be restricted to the david> morality of particular sexual orientations. I support this idea, and would vote for a talk.morality group. I might even vote for a talk.morality.homosexuality group, even though I remain opposed to the concept. If that sounds contradictory, it is because I see the value in being able to redirect homophobic flame away from legitimate discussions in other groups. I am just upset that people want to confuse morality with politics -- the two are not one and the same. --M -- __ Michael Portuesi Silicon Graphics Computer Systems \/ portuesi@sgi.com Entry Systems Division -- Engineering "Why you? Because you're Electro-Cop, the best there is."