Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.postmodern,sci.lang,alt.feminism,alt.fan.camille-paglia
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!scramble.lm.com!news.math.psu.edu!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!torn!watserv3.uwaterloo.ca!news
From: jmkinnib@watarts.uwaterloo.ca (Ghostboy)
Subject: Re: Lesbian feminists?  (was: same old)
Message-ID: <31b9f01e.9375139@news.uwaterloo.ca>
Sender: news@watserv3.uwaterloo.ca
Nntp-Posting-Host: cnts3p14.uwaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
References: <DrznpK.GC1@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <sprague.25-3105190214390001@ts24-9.homenet.ohio-state.edu> <4p98ra$isp@epsilon.qmw.ac.uk> <31b8db38.246798056@news.uwaterloo.ca> <4pcgl0$3jl@peaches.cs.utexas.edu>
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 21:33:32 GMT
Lines: 23
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:178546 sci.lang:55409

On 8 Jun 1996 13:26:40 -0500, turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin)
annoyed the censors with:

>-*------
>In article <31b8db38.246798056@news.uwaterloo.ca>,
>Ghostboy <jmkinnib@watarts.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>> Excuse me for jumping in, but I think the idea that 'Gay' sex 
>> is acceptable inevitably leads to the question of what else 
>> can then be said to be acceptable.
>
>There is a degree of truth in the above.  But to the same degree,
>the idea that *straight* sex is acceptable leads to the very same
>questions.  Sex is a risky area.  Both Califia and Paglia would
>concur with Ghostboy on that.
>
I would tend to agree but only when we are speaking of 'straight sex'
as it relates to the pursuit of personal pleasure.

If one has sex, as the christians claim it should be, only for
procreative purposes, it does not lead to the same questions.

 
Ghostboy --- A non-practicing Atheist
