From: jhoskins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James M Hoskins)
Subject: Re: Don't tell the Anti-Hunters
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 22:42:57 GMT

In article <Bvrw7o.ps@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>Russell Lawrence writes:
>rl> Let's get back to one of the statements made by your "god" that I
>rl> cited previously:  "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."
>rl>
>rl> Is this the sort of command that ought to be taken on faith?  Or,
>rl> would it not be wise for us to ask ourselves if a "god" really
>rl> gave such a command, and if so, should we obey.   Would you be inclined
>rl> to say that a person who mindlessly accepts such a commandment is
>rl> an "idiot"?

>From article <1992Oct7.142343.13940@spdc.ti.com>, by achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.co
m (Jeff Achenbach):
>ja> Russell,
>ja> Much as I appreciate a lot of your writing, you're really acting
>ja> like a jerk on this issue.  IMO it would be a more appropriate
>ja> dialogue in alt.religion or somesuch, but you've taken it so far
>ja> from tpa it's become totally irrelevant.  Give it a rest, please.
>
>No, it's not irrelevant.  A significant subset of the folks who
>post here apparently think they can win the debate by resorting
>to name-calling and personal insults. I'd truly like to know
>how/why such people haven't considered the possibility that their
>comments may be hypocritical.  Once we resolve this problem, I'm
>sure that we'll make better progress in the future.
>
>Moreover, some of these folks have stated in the past that their
>denial of rights to humans and animals alike is justifiable because
>of the dictates of their "god".   As long as they maintain these
>beliefs, it won't make much sense to banish their rationales to
>another newsgroup.
>
>Again, let's consider a statement and a question:
>
>  -   "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."
>  -   "Why don't hunters hunt hunters?"
>
>Why would someone be willing to accept the first statement on "faith",
>yet be quick to dismiss the second question as "idiotic"?
>Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
>russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ

************************************
And later in the flurry from Russell:
************************************
In article <Bvs3Du.3KH@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>
>Perhaps we should poll logicians, philosophers, and scientists to
>see what they think of a statement that was quite popular once
>upon a time in both Europe and America:
>
>   "Thou shall not suffer a witch to live."

>Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
>russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ

****************************************************************
Russell, you answered your own question with this later post above.
****************************************************************
**********************************
And then still later in the flurry:
**********************************
In article <Bvs3pw.416@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>
>You say that killing of humans is unethical.  Would this include
>"witches" in particular, not to mention all sorts of other people
>who don't share your religious beliefs?
>Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
>russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ


*********************************************************************
Russell, in order to draw tight the logical connection you are hoping
to make between "suffer not a witch to live" and a hunter calling the
assertion that "hunters hunting hunters" is "idiotic," would it not be
incumbent upon you to offer evidence that modern-day Christian hunters
with faith (let's be totally specific, i.e., Mike Linan) either
kill or advocate the killing of witches?
*********************************************************************