From: Dehede011@aol.com
Date: Sat May 31 2003 - 20:26:48 MDT
In a message dated 5/31/2003 9:03:55 PM Central Standard Time,
fauxever@sprynet.com writes: Ron - are we missing some connection here - hello? hello? -
what did I write? "If" ... (which only means ... "if"). I was invoking one
imaginary incident - of many other examples I could have used - where I would bend
rules and lie my face off. It was meant as an example.
Olga,
Does your example or your argument gain power when it is couched an
offensive manner? No I didn't misunderstand anything. You have made yourself
very clear. You feel prerfectly justified in insulting people that you have
never had offend you in any way.
Olga, in North America if you hear the pounding of hooves you expect
horses not zebra. One or more German troops wear belt buckle in the 1930s or
40s that offends you so that you are entitled to gratuitiously insult every
religious Christian or Jew in North America over there having a different view of
the world than you? I ask you what you even know of "religious nuts" and
which ones threatened you personally that you can insult all of us because we may
(or may not) see the world differently?
I do see the world differently than you. Listening to you blast off,
you most definitely do believe in a God, and you just appointed yourself.
Ron h.
What I hear here is someone attempting to apply the rules of science to
philosophy. That doesn't work. Philosophy, I believe, deals in questions of value
judgements but science does not.
As I read religion most of the higher level discussion is about
various speculations about God, if any or not, about ultimate good and its nature if
it exists. About the way to live ones life and to face ones mortality. It
is not about belt buckles or "give me" prayers.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 31 2003 - 20:37:38 MDT