From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dust In The Wind)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Summary: This is a flame.  Let's hope it works.
Organization: Glassboro State College
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 03:19:18 GMT


John Muehlhausen has written a lot of articles about homosexuality lately, and
many of them include his own personal theories of human sexuality.  So far as
I can tell, he claims no research to support his ideas, but he is more than
happy to tell us all about them.  Mr Muehlhausen has provided us with over 5000
lines of text describing what he thinks, without ever giving us a reason to
believe any of it.

I've dismissed him as a nitwit, mostly concerned with talking about other
people and harping on behaviour he doesn't like.  He'd never tell us about
something *he* does which is wrong, only what he thinks about *others*.  He
has yet to say anything either new or uplifting, let alone post an article
with some actual evidence to support his claims.

Anyway, in a recent article he provided a little chart of relationships and
how they rate on some scale.  This chart referred to `masculine women' and
`feminine men', some of those silly things that people believe in for no reason
that I can make sense of.  Several people dismissed the chart as a bit of
nonsense, and Mr Muehlhausen has responded by producing _more_ theories, about
why people didn't like his chart.  As usual, he gives no clue of doubt at all,
even though he is making all kinds of pompous pronouncements without even
_asking_ anybody why they didn't like the chart.  Whatever else he is, he's
utterly confident that he's right -- so confident that he'll sit in judgement
on others with a perfectly clear conscience.

As part of his most recent spate of babblings, Mr Muehlhausen wrote:

> Lets face it, the pleasure of the sex act is gained (for the male) from
> the orgasm accompanying ejaculation.  The recipient might as well be a hole
> in the wall as far as this is concerned.

and I can only conclude that he is such an astounding ignoramus that no amount
of argument can sway his opinions.  Here he is presuming to make claims about
what over 2 billion people enjoy, and he has given us no reason, no evidence
or argument -- NOTHING -- as justification.

Not only hasn't he got any backup for this ridiculous claim, he is (as usual)
wrong.  Lots of things about sex are pleasant, and few of them would be at
all interesting if acted out with a wall.  This is just another instance of
Mr Muehlhausen opening his mouth and vomiting out garbage.


Given that this bozo has been making my religion look stupid for some time
now, has single-handedly driven up the traffic in this newsgroup about 50%,
and continues to pronounce judgements on people he knows _nothing_ about, I
am starting to wonder if anybody's got any ideas on just shutting him up.

His opinions won't change, he has no idea of what constitutes an argument
(let alone a proof) and, worst of all, I've a feeling that he'll continue his
ignorant blathering for quite some time.  I used to think he was open to
discussion and willing to exchange ideas, but his mode of discourse -- making
unsupported claims and then engaging in bad psychology when people dispute his
opinions -- has not changed.  Mr Muehlhausen does not seem interested in
facts, or the opinions of others, or anything else besides his own little
theories about his own little world.  At least Antti Siivonen is funny.


Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"Shut up!" -- Gene Ward Smith
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc