Collin, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Collin Brendemuehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> #1 "Teats" is still commonly used in the agricultural community, particularly dairy production, > when speaking in mixed company. It's just the civil & courteous thing to do. Interesting. I didn't know that. Mammalian glands on humans have names derived from the corresponding glands in other species in many languages, I think. More or less honourable... > #2 It would be appropriate, especially in a group of mixed world views, not to place links to such > material in PDML. Many of us have enough trouble keeping porn out of the house without it > being handed to us. (Yes, this is porn because of its clearly sensual content.) It would also be appropriate not to demand of everyone to look upon sensual content as porn. I, for one, differ strongly between the two. > #3 Your title and clearly sensual composition have absolutely nothing to do with the Biblical > account. This is a patent insult to those of Judeo-Christian heritage because it alters the > story from on of sin (which would lead to redemption) and makes it a display of mere sensuality. The process of biblical sayings diverging from it's original meaning started centuries ago. It's a natural process. Also, I don't see how you can take it upon yourself to speak for me with regards to the insult part. I'm certainly of Judeo-christian heritage and don't feel insulted at all. > #4 There is an ongoing debate about how right (yes, some see it as perfectly acceptable and > to be encouraged) it is to patently offend the faith of orthodox Jews and Christians. > That's what the movie "Saved" is all about. Can we keep that clear offense off PDML? Sure. Haven't seen the film anyway, so it's impossible for me to know how the two relate. > #5. Don't keep confusing Puritan morality with the rest of Christianity. > That usage is nothing more than a perjorative. Sorry, Collin, but I don't think your post made things better in that respect. Coming from circles of a living faith, I see your point, but I don't think the message goes home. Personally, I'd say you come across as an angry member of List Police. With the anger peeled away I respect your stance, even if I don't agree with your view of this particular case. Best, Jostein
