From: linan@argon.berkeley.edu (Mike Linan)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Don't tell the Anti-Hunters
Date: 9 Oct 1992 18:01:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: argon.berkeley.edu


In article <BvtLvJ.2su@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:

>Russell Lawrence writes:
>rl> Personally, I'm not interested in finding someone to "worship", but
>rl> I am deeply interested in the foundation of Jefferson's philosophy.
>rl> Would you be more inclined to respect Jefferson's ideas if he had
>rl> claimed that they were the dictates of a deity?  

>From article <1b1i63INNc8s@agate.berkeley.edu>, by linan@argon.berkeley.edu (Mike Linan):
>ml> It's obvious the only thing you worship is the almighty empirical 
>ml> fact.

>I don't worship facts and reason, Mike, but I do respect them.

>rl> Who do you think truly wrote the phrase: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch 
>rl> to live."

>ml> I have not read the verse so I cannot say.  It is true that the 
>ml> Bible was written by mortals but they were told directly by God 
>ml> or Jesus what to write.  This is for you to believe or 
>ml> disbelieve.  Your choice.  

>According to Jesus, Moses wrote the Pentateuch, which contains the 
>passage concerning witches.   Is it ok to kill witches, simply because
>your "god" says so?  Would it be ok for someone else to kill
>protestant christians if "god" told them to do so?


Do you believe in God?  We already know you don't so if you want to know
what my position is, read the Bible and you will know.  That is if your
interpretation is the same as mine.  Again, I don't know what you aim to
achieve by asking these questions.


>rl> I'm still trying to understand your penchant for name-calling, Mike.

>ml> Can you point out where I called you any names in the above 
>ml> paragraph Russell?  What are names for?  They are labels.  You 
>ml> fancy yourself as an intellect.  If that was what I labelled you, 
>ml> I doubt you would be complaining.  If I were to call you a fool, 
>ml> that would be my opinion and that is what the word if for.  If 
>ml> the shoe fits, wear it!  

>You have a particular fondness for the names: "fool" and "idiot".


When dealing with you, yes I do.  You have made comments and displayed
behavior that lends me to use these subjective labels where you are con-
cerned.


>It seems to me that a "fool" is a man who's gullible and easily 
>mislead.   You, on the other hand, apparently believe that a "fool"
>is a man who doesn't mindlessly believe stories about gods, ghosts,
>demons, angels, etc.


As I said, these terms are totally subjective.  You have your views, I
have mine.  You may notice that I have not attacked your views and beliefs
until you started in on mine.


>It also seems to me that an "idiot" is a man whose mental faculties
>are severely impairied, and thus, has difficult mastering facts
>and thinking clearly.  You, on the other hand, apparently believe
>that any person who doesn't accept your beliefs on "faith" is an 
>idiot, regardless of the paucity of facts and lack of rational
>argument.


No, more accurately, I view an idiot as someone who asks foolish, sar-
castic questions like the one I called idiotic.  So once again you are
wrong in your perception.


>rl> Which person is truly more immature: the man who labels his 
>rl> opponents as "idiots" and "fools" while claiming that "god" is on 
>rl> his side?  Or the man who's trying very hard to understand such 
>rl> behavior?  

>ml> Oh boy.  Now Russell wants to start a battle of maturity.  No 
>ml> battel will ensue Russell.  I'll just call them the way I see 
>ml> them and you can do the same.  Perhaps you might choose to 
>ml> reflect on you behavior over the past few months and ask yourself 
>ml> why so many people have a problem with your "style" and 
>ml> integrity.  Can we all be wrong and you right?  I can't help but 
>ml> thing there might be something there that you should examine 
>ml> critically.  

>Can truth be determined by polling?  Since millions of medieval 
>and renaissance christians believed that the protestant "heresy" 
>had to be eradicated by whatever means necessary, would you be 
>inclined to endorse the torture, the killing, the imprisonment, 
>and the confiscation of property that subsequently ensued?  


Unfortunately, the truth can not be found since "foolish" and "idiotic"
are subjective terms and no matter how many people view something or
someone as such, there is not real way to prove it.  I was just curious
how many people felt you would qualify for those labels.


>Or, are you one of those timid folks who only values the 
>fallacious "truth by polling" concept when he thinks that he's 
>surrounded by a gang of like-minded individuals?  

 
No, I am far from timid and the truth about you is how I view you.  I
don't need anyone else to bolster those views.


>Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000


Mike Linan