Klarinet Archive - Posting 000437.txt from 2004/03

From: Bill Hausmann <bhausmann1@------.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Mating patterns
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 13:29:05 -0500

At 05:45 PM 3/7/2004 +0000, Bob Davenport wrote:
> >I did not make the rules of biology, I only follow them. I have no problem
> >with people doing what they wish behind closed doors, but I will not
> >legitimize it by declaring it EQUIVALENT to biologically correct behavior.
>
>But what does 'biologically correct' mean? If biology is concerned only
>with continuing the species then homosexual behaviour is, I suppose, not
>'biologically correct' - nor, on that definition, is contraception.

Well, that WOULD be the Catholic Church's take on it.

>A Xavier Gallagher wrote to the (London) Independent a few days ago, 'Those
>who oppose same-sex marriages are implicitly admitting [odd word] marriage
>is just about what sort of genitals are involved. Love, commitment and duty
>are nice but not essential.' I don't think 'biology' *is* necessarily the
>most important thing.

To fit the definition of "marriage" as it has existed for millenia, yes. I
am all for loving, committed relationships for any one who wants them, but
they must call them something else. And the rights and benefits that were
set up for the purpose of promoting traditional marriages do not
necessarily apply, since those other relationships are not what was
originally intended to be promoted. Whether they should be extended or not
is worthy of discussion in legislatures and has already been addressed by
some corporations and insurance companies, and that is fine with me, I
guess. But these mayors and judges who have set themselves up arbitrarily
as the final authority in these matters have made a serious blunder,
totally polarizing the issue, and forcing the necessity of a Constitutional
solution, which is attacking a fly with a shotgun, but it is the only
weapon available.

>Incidentally, was anyone on the list shocked by Tony Pay's announcement
>that top joints characteristic of one type of instrument are now mating
>with bottom joints characteristic of another, even though such heterodox
>behaviour defies centuries of precedent?

I think the Klarinet Morals Committee should look into this gross
perversion! ;-)

Bill Hausmann

If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is TOO LOUD!