From: holst@xenon.arc.nasa.gov (LAURA HOLST)
Subject: Re: OLTL: Billy Douglas Storyline (was: SOD Awards)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Ames Res. Ctr. Mtn Vw CA 94035
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:11:00 GMT

In article <C0CC9C.IBp@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, wyatt@ccu.umanitoba.ca (David 
Anthony Wyatt) writes...
>root@candle.uucp (Bruce Momjian) writes:
>>I am surprised by this.  I thought the story line was really
>>unrealistic, with the pro-gay characters being 100% sympathetic, and the
>>anti-gay characters acting like brutes.
>> 
>>I hope society does not view all people who disagree with a gay
>>life-style as "brutes".
> 
>LAURA HOLST (holst@xenon.arc.nasa.gov) wrote:
>>Oh, I don't know Bruce, I thought it was very well done.
>>Is there really a middle ground on this?  Seems to me that
>>either you're 100% FOR, or 100% AGAINST!  (somehow, that
>>word doesn't look right... ;)
> 
>root@candle.uucp (Bruce Momjian) writes:
>>I agree with what you said, but I think you can be "against" without
>>being hateful.  Certainly those who are "against" on religious grounds
>>should not be hateful, IMHO.  If you are "against" for other reasons,
>>well, all bets are off.


Oh, I don't know about that... Peaceful protesters maybe? :)
My brother's fiancee is a vegetarian, she's pretty peaceful when
we have turkey at Thanksgiving.  But did you ever see anybody
peacefully protesting "gays"?  Like a picket line, or something?
A sit in?  A.. a... ????

>>
>>It seems like everyone on the show in the "against" croud was very
>>hateful.
> 
>I want to tread carefully here, but it has been my own personal experience that
>"religious" is just about the only widely used grounds for an "against"-type
>position these days, and (again, personal experience) individuals who espouse
>religiously-based prejudices are often the least "reason"able and the most 
>hateful.  One can debate medical, psychological, sociological, be called upon
>to support one's own position rationally, and even be lead to question the 
>opinions one holds, but "God said" is indisputable unless you question the 
>individual's sense of "God" and "God's will."  Such a questioning almost 
>invariably comes across as a personal attack and receives a similar response.
>Hate all around the table.
> 

I couldn't agree more.  Just look what's been going on in the 
Middle East... 

OK, on a triple TAN here:  What I'd like to know is, how come
it's ok for two *women* to be together, as long as they're not
"lesbians"? You know, how it's always promoted in those X (not
mentioning any names ;) magazines?  Somehow, that's not "gay". 
Oh, I don't know.  Sometimes I think that this whole "gay" issue
comes not only from religious fanatics, but from "macho" men who
are innately afraid of something within themselves... Like Oprah
said, there are two basic emotions in the world:  Love, and FEAR. 
Bisexual is ok with these guys ;)

>Back to more r.a.t.s'y commentary...
> 
>Did anyone notice what I think I noticed on the Christmas eve episode of OLTL?
>Another caroller broke away from the group of kids to introduce himself to 
>Billy, praise Billy for coming out, and indicate that he too was gay.  Did we 
>see Billy Douglas meet his future boyfriend?  This Rick Mitchell character was 
>then shown in the two subsequent carolling scenes practically staring at young 
>Mister Douglas.
> 
>Perhaps Joey, Alana, Billy and Rick can double-date!

Sounds fun to me!!!  Flame proof suit: ON
I just don't see anything wrong with it.
FPS:OFF.

> 
>-- 
>---David Wyatt          
>Internet:  David_Wyatt@UManitoba.CA            Continuing Education Division
>Bitnet:    WYATT@UOFMCC                      University of Manitoba DOWNTOWN
>                                          Winnipeg, Manitoba,Canada R3T 2N

--Laura "just as long as you don't hurt anybody" Holst
Internet:  holst@xenon.arc.nasa.gov  Decnet:  XEN::HOLST
Snail Mail:  NASA/Ames Research Center  MS 219-1
             Moffett Field, CA  94035-1000
Live:        (415) 604-6588
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.soaps