stoney wrote in message <3791fe5d.10055675 at news.meganews.com>...
[...]
>And there's the key point; "Religion has often been used to justify
terrible
>crimes against humanity."
what about stuff like 'nuclear' weapons, "Love Cannals", "Big Brother", &c.?
it's not so easy to dillineate the wellspring of "terrible crimes against
humanity" along the lines of "'religion'/'not-religion'".
the problem has been that, in an absence of an understanding of how our
nervous systems process inforation, folks have viewed all that's "self" as
"good" and all that's "not-self" as "bad".
so 'science' views itself as "good" and 'religion' as 'bad', and 'religion'
views itself as 'good' and 'science' as 'bad'... when doing so is,
verifiably, nothing more than prejudice toward that which is
merely-familiar.
>It also is used to turn honest citizens into
>crimminals, mostly brother/sister theists, based on the insecurities,
ignorance
>and prejudice of the theist legislator. Contrary to what is often asserted
both
>on alt.atheism and in real life, Christianity does not generate morality.
you cannot present a single example with respect to which i cannot present
an example haveing prejudice with respect to that which is merely-familiar
simply reversed.
any discussion that does not get beyond such denies its own veracity.
>What many atheists have indicated is believe what you want, just don't
bring it
>into areas it doesn't belong, such as school boards and the legislative
arena.
>Follow it personally and set an example to others based on your beliefs.
the difficulty, here, is that all of the stuff inherent in venues of the
kind you cite greatly impacts upon folks' beings. so, if the rule you
propose were to be Law, the Law, itself, would constitute an egregious
assault upon folks' beings.
it's a big problem, but it's been resolved for more than two decades, and i
hope that, one day, folks of all stripes who, like you, profess 'openness'
will finally allow the resolution to be communicated.
cheers, ken collins
