Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tekecs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!tektronix!orca!tekecs!jeffw
From: jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: yet more on porn
Message-ID: <5016@tekecs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 17-Jan-85 11:59:32 EST
Article-I.D.: tekecs.5016
Posted: Thu Jan 17 11:59:32 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 22-Jan-85 03:49:47 EST
References: <1511V6M@PSUVM>
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 17

> Last week I summarizied a section on sexual morality from an adult Catholic
> catechism which seemed to answer most of what the non-anti-porn and pro-porn
> were objecting to from the anti-porn people.  I'll try to re-post if anybody
> wants it.
> 
Why should I care what the Catholic catechism has to say about it? It may 
answer the question for devout Catholics, but the USA isn't the Vatican.

> Censorship is not intrinsically evil, but unless my Church is doing it,
> I don't trust the censor!!!!  Therefor unless there is consensu on the clear
> and present danger of an item then censorship of porn is nontenable.

I don't trust anyone to do it, especially no churches, yours or anyone else's.
For that reason I absolutely agree with the your last quoted sentence.

			Why do I feel this is turning into net.religion? 
                                         Jeff Winslow