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