From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: A question for Steve Franklin
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:56:10 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <1992Apr8.092411.7760@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> ursic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com writes:

>In article <1992Apr7.195615.7608@cs.dal.ca>, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca
> (Steve Franklin) writes:

>Ok Steve, let me be less subtle, you have misspelled 'embarrass' in posts and
>continue to misspell 'embarrass' in posts. Please delete 'embarass' from your
>memory and replace it with 'embarrass', thank you.
   Well, in the mail we've traded I think you would know that my
spelling isn't a major issue for me, and the fact that it bothers you
enough to make a point of it is curious indeed.

>Now on to bigger and better things, I see that you are a physics major,
>unmarried, Catholic and pro-life. So was I in college. I am now married,
   correct
>pro-choice. I would suggest to you that you drop into your local biology 
>department, grab a microscope and look at a zygote. You will see that
>it _IS_ a clump of cells, NOT a baby or even a fetus. This is a scientific
>fact. I will concede that terminating a third trimester fetus (except for
   How as a worshipping Catholic you can call the zygote anything less
than a miracle of God is beyond me. Although in my mind your status as
a Catholic is questionable, as you already know...

>BTW, my post was also meant to get your attention as you have not replied to
>my last two E-mails. 
Hey, I have only so much time for this. I can't make newsnet my life.
And as you adeptly summated, I can't change the world with my posts, but
I think it's important that both sides are represented here. So, I 
try and express myself through my posts, and only merit criticisms through
the mail.

                      I will continue to ask you why you do not feel a 
>woman can be called by God to be a priest? I have two daughters who I
>need to explain this to. -J.J.
   Ahhh yes, I remember this one. Okay - well, try this out. The Catholic
church, like any structured and hierarchical system has several important
factors which strengthen and secure it's base/foundation. One of
these is faith, and another is of course, the bible. Another 
important "pier" for the Catholic church is it's symbolism. We are introduced
to the symbolism of the Catholic church at a very young age, so that 
we can be introduced to the concept of worship. Then as we grow older, having
been given the opportunity to understand Christ, we are educated sufficiently
that we can support, or deny his existence. 
   However, these symbols or "icons" take many forms, and as we remove
more and more of them, the church suffers. If we manipulate the church
to the extent that you suggest, not only will it break the worshippers
into several rifts, but perhaps break apart the church itself. Uniformity
does not breed ignorance, but it consensus is important. These icons
take many forms, and one of them is of course, the representation of the 
apostolic and spiritual union at the last supper. Simply:
 Jesus Christ = priest
 Apostles     = altar servers
 nuns         = mother of Christ
Every time you go to church you are witnessing a reenactment of the last 
supper. As you distrort the representation of each individual, you are
in turn distorting the MESSAGE. Would the movie JFK have been successful
if JFK was played by a woman, not a man? I think not...

   There is another reason that the setup is efficient as it stands...
Women play a significant role in the church, an dmost likely, the most
important. The nuns of our society input great care and service into
the church, and do a role no man could replace. The maternal nature of
the caring female is important in our church, and no less weighted in
priority than being a priest. Many women (in my humble opinion) want
to be priest and altar-servers just because right now they can't. 
However, women DO have important roles in the church that they should
pursue. Men could never replace the role of the nun. Perhaps this is
because of society's standards and stereo-typing. I do not know.
However, it IS true that the system works as it stands, and if you
feel like changing it, then I wish you luck. Maybe it would
just be easier to go start your own religion that works for YOU? 

   Now J.J., many a time before I have ascertained that one cannot
call themselves a Catholic yet refuse to live like one. Your religion
is quasi-Catholic with spices of J.J. mixed in. A Catholic cannot condone
the act of abortion. God tells us this, The Holy Father tells us this,
and the bible screams it in our ear. How can you overlook this? 
As well, a Catholic cannot support contraception, capitol punishment, 
and a variety of other social maladies. Are you _SURE_ you can confidently
say you are a practicing and worshipping Catholic? I find this very 
misleading to the public. How will the public be able to understand 
religion when it is in such turmoil under the misrepresentation which
you offer them? Pleas reconsider your claims, and clarify your beliefs?
   steve
p.s. - jj, before you roast me for this, go read my post again. I think
it will do you good, and pacify your angers before you go flame
my butt. See ya friend (this post isn't meant to be condascending 
or rude in the least... Dont' see it as such please)
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA
Newsgroups: talk.abortion