From: robj@netcom.com (Rob Jellinghaus)
Subject: Re: God is intolerant of sin!
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Distribution: net
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 06:00:55 GMT

In article <1jki0hINNsu7@transfer.stratus.com> markc@eomer.hw.stratus.com (Mark Christensen) writes:
>Should homosexuals be foster parents?  I would state an
>emphatic NO!... Would you allow child abusers to be foster parents?

Child abuse is a crime of victimizing a person who cannot legally
consent to sex.  Homosexuality is not a crime, not a victimization,
and involves no violation of consent.  Child abuse is a symptom of
psychological illness; homosexuality is not.  You are comparing two
completely different things in the hope that everyone will agree
they're the same, just because you say so.  It's a favorite trick of
your ilk.  By the way, most child abusers are heterosexual, as are
most rapists.

>When one starts making up their own
>code of ethics and morals, that opens up  the possibilities of
>allowing murder, rape, theft, etc.

Ridiculous.  Murder, rape, and theft are all unequivocally crimes
committed without the consent of the victim, and are obviously not
tolerable activities in a civilized society.  Simply because the USA
does not choose to write your particular moral code into law does not
mean that all morality will suddenly disintegrate.

>I do not find homosexual or adulterous relationships acceptable
>behavior based on the moral code as derived from the Bible.  Others
>may have their own made up moral codes...but our country has
>traditionally adhered to the moral codes of the Judeo/Christian
>thought.

Um, "separation of church and state" is a much older idea than that.
Do you happen to know what it means?  One minute you argue that
the government should enforce the Judeo/Christian moral code, the
next minute you say

>I do believe that government should stay out of EVERY portion of
>our society except for common defense, monetary policy, and a 
>judicial system.  

Then why do you think the government should not stay out of it when
homosexuals want to adopt?  And why do you think that the government
should stay out of almost anything, since your moral code is the
True Correct One?

>I, as a free citizen, should have
>the right to hire, rent to, exclude anyone I so desire.

Should I have the right to not hire you because you are a
fundamentalist anti-gay Christian, and I like excluding fundamentalist
anti-gay Christians?

>I have the right to be a bigot, racist, homophobe, etc. (This is
>all hypothetical...I am none of the above as far as I know).

I have news for you:  you are definitely a bigot and quite possibly
a homophobe.  You certainly seem to be afraid of what would happen
if homosexuality became more accepted by society.

>The state has NO RIGHT to one's child.

Except if you're a homosexual, you mean?

>All this to just say that homosexual behavior is sin, plain and simple.

Says you.  Why should society listen?

-- 
Rob Jellinghaus    |  "Next time you see a lie being spread or a bad 
robj@netcom.com    |   decision being made out of sheer ignorance,
robj@xanadu.com    |   pause, and think of hypertext."
uunet!netcom!robj  |       -- K. Eric Drexler, _Engines of Creation_
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.sex,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh