Subj : Clarification [3/3]
To   : TODD HENSON
From : DAVE OLDRIDGE
Date : Thu Nov 09 2000 03:15 pm

TH> >
TH> > TH> Annnnnddddd.......your point is what exactly?
TH> >
TH> > 1.  Worldnetdaily is not a very reliable source of information.


TH> Yes it is.

Saying so won't make it so.

TH> > 2.  As an organ of the Religious Right (which it clearly is from even a
TH> > cursory reading of its articles), it is clearly biased.


TH> And empty, hollow accusation that is not the product of insight or thought.

Just of a little cursory reading of the way they present issues.


TH> > 3.  The reporter responsible for this piece is absolutely dotty on the
TH> > subject of homosexuality (maybe even a bit insecure in his own self-
TH> > definition).

TH> Irrelevant (yet typical) dodge that tends to come from liberals.

Not irrelevant.  It affects his judgement.  In other words, if you cite 
this publication as an "authority" you can expect me to be skeptical.  
I strongly urge you to check primary sources on anything they claim.

I ain't a liberal.  I'm so traditional you're considered a radical 
where I come from.  And that's what the Religious Right mostly are: radicals 
and heretics.

TH> Sorry, not a very substantial commentary on your part. Especially since WND
TH> was not the
TH> original source of the report, but a news source in Massachusetts.

Yes, but unfortunately not available to me.  Did you check it yourself 
or did you take WND's word for it?

---
 þ MM 1.1 #0357 þ To err is human.  To really screw it up takes a computer!
 * Origin: FONiX Info Systems * Berkshire UK * +44 1344 641625 (2:252/171)

.