From: danoc@earlybird.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan O'Connell [CONTRACTOR])
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Flames
Date: 12 Aug 1992 16:48:27 GMT
Organization: Lurker's Anonymous
NNTP-Posting-Host: earlybird

(Douglas Graham) writes:

 Actually, I have learned a hell of a lot.  I started out thinking it was
 all just harmless bullshit.  It took about two years before it suddenly
 dawned on me that religious mind control is the root cause of all that's
 wrong with the world.  Having come to that realization, I was able to
 discover some strange stuff in my own subconscious.
 
I agree that those who vehemently attempt to bully others
into adopting some religious (or other) dogma without
question and reflection are most obnoxious and deserve to
be pointedly questioned.

If you believe that "religious mind control is the root cause of
all that's wrong with the world" then I hope I understand 
better where you're coming from. Personally, I think reasonably
intelligent adults who have a minimal self-defense mechanism
can generally think and decide for themselves about
how they truly feel in regards to "religious issues". 

 >One thing atheists know perhaps too
 >well is religious bigotry. Breaking down into an epistolary attack
 >does not serve the voices of reason and rationality too well, IMO.
 
 There's a word I wasn't familiar with.
 
      epistolary: of, carried on by, suited to, letters.
 
 I don't understand.  What's an espistolary attack?

What I meant was this method of communication, i.e., writing
letters/posts/etc back and forth. I suppose I could have done
without that word.
 
 >Kevin was describing a series of events which affected him emotionally
 >and was very important to him. He asked for feedback and you attacked
 >him. He was NOT trying to convert you. You seem to assume that he was
 >in order to justify your smear.
 
 What attack?  What smear?  Could you please state exactly what it was
 about my original response to Kevin that you found so offensive?  I make
 no apologies for having arrived at the conclusion that religion is a
 bunch of mind destroying bunk.  I'm open to being rationally convinced
 otherwise, but I'm not holding my breath.

I didn't save his original post, but it is my recollection that Kevin
was talking about his search, his personal quest, his changing opinions
of atheism and theism and he (implicitly) invited comment. It is my
opinion that ultimately, if a person seems to be making a sincere
search into building their own theology (of which atheism is one
example), that we should treat that process with a certain amount
of respect, just as we would want our own search respected.

Of course this does not mean that we shouldn't point out obvious
fallacies and give our opinion when asked (and I believe comment is
implicity asked merely by posting one's opinion), but it does mean
that if someone appears to be sincere and not zealously attempting
to ram his/her beliefs down others throats, that we respect the
search.

It is my recollection that you called his *search* (not just 
the christianity to which he was headed), a mental phenomenon
which causes people to "give up the use of their reasoning powers
in favor of mindless dogma and superstition (or something like that)"
Further, you questioned his (or my, I don't have the post)
sanity. 

I don't think it is very helpful to question the sanity of those
who are sincerely attempting to come to grips with the problems of
a/theism and religion in general. 

>Why did you not answer my question about judging the sanity of others?

Hopefully I have answered in this post, but like I said, I don't have
the original.  

Dano
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:15594 soc.motss:36346 sci.physics:13292 talk.religion.newage:3941 alt.pagan:8183 talk.religion.misc:14473