> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 15:18:47 +0000 (GMT)
> From: RA Stephens <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Queers
> Reply-to: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> > I do not find the advertising of a conference called The Queer Middle Ages
> > something suitable or appropriate for this list. Lending any sense of
> > justification to sodomy is plainly wrong.
> Well!
> Where do I start? I appreciate the desire of Tim and others not to
> clutter up the list with messages to Mr.Pope, but I refuse to hold my
> tongue when confronted by such ignorance and bigotry.
> Who is this Mr.Pope that he should legislate the morality of the
> list? Does he not realise that to the sane-minded of us out here, his
> irrational prudery, prurience and prejudice are as offensive as
> homosexuality seems to be to him?
> I do not think there is any room on this list for someone who so self-
> righteously proclaims a good number of this list's members to be "plainly
> wrong". While we are all entitled to form our own opinions, any more such
> expressions of Mr.Pope's should not, I very strongly feel, have any place
> on the Medieval-Religion list. Should his views be countenanced by
> publication in this forum, then I should have to reconsider remaining a
> member.
> Rebecca A.Stephens
> University of Birmingham.
>
Is it necessarily morally wrong to think someone else's opinion
morally wrong? Evidently nearly all those who have replied to Joe
Pope think so, for that is what they appear to object to in what he
said.
But then, they evidently agree thus far with Joe Pope, for his
offence is of the same moral quality as that of the replies.
Fie on you all. A plague on all your houses.
Is not the real disagreement about the morality of homosexuality?
For the lot of you appear to agree on the nature of moral argument,
and on that score I happen to think you are all "plainly wrong".
So give the rest of us a break, please.
Denys Turner
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|