rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Fred Mertz) (02/02/85)
> Nicely done. > But if any of the critics of Theists would care to review some of our postings > you will see that we agree with her on many points. [MARCHIONNI] With one major exception: Nancy has come out quite clearly and said that her articles were intended to show why SHE finds pornography degrading, NOT why she feels (as the "theists" seem to) it should be outlawed (something which she apparently doesn't agree with at all). (I also happened to agree with her on most points as well.) > Nancy said it much less abrasively, for which I thank her. She certainly did, it was actually a pleasure having a discussion with her, something that almost never happens between opposing points of view on this net. (Thank you.) But please note that she did in fact state that she was only stating her reasons for disliking pornography, and NOT proposing those reasons as legitimate reasons for banning it, as others have done. A calm voice in a sea of noise. -- "Does the body rule the mind or does the mind rule the body? I dunno." Rich Rosen {ihnp4 | harpo}!pyuxd!rlr