Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bbnccv.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxj!mhuxn!ihnp4!bbnccv!sdyer From: sdyer@bbnccv.UUCP (Steve Dyer) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: Footnote to Samet's PS (SUE!!) Message-ID: <140@bbnccv.UUCP> Date: Fri, 5-Jul-85 12:06:37 EDT Article-I.D.: bbnccv.140 Posted: Fri Jul 5 12:06:37 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 7-Jul-85 05:07:43 EDT References: <277@ucdavis.UUCP> <329@mhuxi.UUCP> <611@sfmag.UUCP> <669@digi-g.UUCP> <330@ucdavis.UUCP> Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, MA Lines: 25 > I think I am going to be sick! If anyone wants to call anyone on > this net a Christ-killer, I want to see the fingerprints and the > evidence. Otherwise, I think a lawsuit for defamation of character > is in order. > Whether you call "Sodomites" by "Gay" or not, they ARE guilty of > doing their thing. Many will even proudly confess their acts. > We just spent weeks going over what the Torah says about Homosexuals. > Do we have to now go through what Paul said? Is irony really lost on EVERYONE who reads the net? While I allow for the tastelessness and offensiveness of the posting, the person above is simply missing the point. Samet very carefully described the orthodox (small-oh) view of homosexuality, but then made a rather repugnant editorial comment that was just as offensive to me and many other people, gay or straight, as the comment about "Christ-killers" was to anyone who took it on face value. Clearly, the person who made this statement (brian@digi-g?) was reacting to Samet's smugness, and responded with an tasteless attempt at irony. It is one thing to discuss the status of homosexuality within Judaic law; it is quite another thing to step outside of this argument with a gratuitous remark about gay people and how they choose to be called. Samet was out of order here as much as brian@digi-g. -- /Steve Dyer {decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbnccv.ARPA