Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site allegra.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alan
From: alan@allegra.UUCP (Alan S. Driscoll)
Newsgroups: net.motss,net.religion
Subject: Re: Gay Rights
Message-ID: <2802@allegra.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Sep-84 09:52:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: allegra.2802
Posted: Mon Sep 24 09:52:54 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 08:08:55 EDT
References: <174@usfbobo.UUCP>, <1136@pyuxn.UUCP>, <180@usfbobo.UUCP>, <2796@allegra.UUCP>, <183@usfbobo.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 47

In a previous article, I criticized Dave Brunson for his narrow
and bigoted views on homosexuality.  There is another point I'd
like to make:  Even if Dave convinced me that homosexuality was
wrong, I would still consider his position reprehensible.

Deciding what is right and what is wrong is terribly difficult.
However, once a society, or an individual, decides what it will
consider wrong, I believe it's easy enough to divide those acts
considered wrong into two categories:

	Type 0 wrongness:  an act which is wrong because it hurts
	another person.

	Type 1 wrongness: an act which is wrong because it hurts
	oneself, or [for the religious] because it is unpleasing
	to God.

I believe it is the responsibility of a society to protect its
members from type 0 wrongness.  At the same time, I believe it
is the right of the individual to do what he damn well pleases
(even if he hurts himself), as long as he doesn't wrongly hurt
others.  In fact, I would go as far as to say:

	It is a type 0 wrongness to prevent someone from engaging
	in a type 1 wrongness, or to persecute or harass them for
	engaging in a type 1 wrongness.

This is a cornerstone of my personal ethics, and I think it is
a fundamental principle of our political system.  This doesn't
mean that the principle hasn't been violated -- there are laws
agaist victimless crimes, such as prostitution, in many states
-- but I still believe the principle underlies our government,
as it should.

So, Dave, even if you did convince me that homosexuality was a
"sin", it would still be a type 1 wrongness, and thus, none of
your God damn business.  I would still consider it wrong (type
0 wrongness, the serious stuff) for you to persecute or harass
gays, to refuse to employ or sell your house to one, etc.  You
would still be dead wrong in my book (and, by my understanding
of it, in that Book you keep talking about).

-- 

	Alan S. Driscoll
	AT&T Bell Laboratories