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