Re: Love-Hounds digest V12 #49

[RansomGroup1@eworld.com]

For some reason (unexplained), Phil V. Wrote:

>What I resent is the government deciding what defines 'immoral'.

<begin>
>: Treat these questions as if they've been asked by somebody who has no 
>: knowledge of history or politics whatsoever, and explain why those in 
>: chargs should not have the right to determine certain topics too lurid or 
>: graphic, or otherwise potentially harmful, for a person still in the 
>: developmental stages of life?
>
>: Just curious...
>
>This is too stupid to respond to....

Excuse me, but why is it too stupid to respond to? And would that be your 
answer if someone about to vote on this issue asked those questions? And 
how would that sway their opinion, and their decision, if your answer to 
their concerns was to call them "stupid"?

People who question our dogmas, however, are usually "stupid".


To make this relevant, let me say that I feel sure that KaTe would feel 
the same way.

Kevin Willis
http://www.ransomgroup.com/al_phlipp/