If we stay with the analogy, those were just slaps in the face. Not polite,
but it can wake people up. I would be more careful with posting a complete
analysis of free markets and their implications on this list, although I do
not think that you are *that* far from reality.
I agree with what you say about religions. But I prefer to fight the
institutions than to fight their followers. What's the use in destroying the
beliefs of a happy family? If the institutions vanish, the religous cults
will be reduced to a toleratable minimum. I do my best to collect facts
about the church and the crimes of religion (knowledge monopolization in the
Middle Ages, the crusades, Vatican participation in the Holocaust,
Jasenovac, the role of the church in Ruanda, abortion, prevention and
overpopulation, maybe even the shroud of Turin fake). If you want to destroy
religion, you gotta do it slowly.
I never said that Lee Daniel Crocker wants to destroy anybody's lives, I
just said that it could happen and this would contradict with the idea of
non-coercion.
>Retract what you say, or else prove it. Otherwise I *will* have you removed
>from this list.
I retract from saying that you are the Extropian leader. Sorry, this was the
wrong choice of words.
>Criticism is fine, but this is not the place for it. The Transhuman list
>and many other places are available for that. I think the reason you cannot
>seem to grasp this simple point is that you don't want to. You would rather
>attack than understand.
Not really. I just see a danger in locking out people with strongly
differing opinions. I did not want this debate, it is a waste of time for
both of us, but I don't want to be mistaken. If you allow me to question the
basics of Extropy on the list, I propose that I will restrain myself to
posting criticism founded with facts instead of my usual rant. Is this OK
for you?
Regards,
Erik Moeller