From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: About Dating Outside One's Group....
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 16:23:41 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL

In article <1992Dec30.144226.184@cbfsb.cb.att.com> jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.104358.12959@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>>jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
>>] In article <lk168jINN42f@news.bbn.com> pdsmith@bbn.com (Peter D. Smith) writes:
>>] >
>>] >Shelley -- keep up the search!  Compromise is possible on so many things,
>>] >but not on (deeply felt) religious principles.  Dating someone outside of
>>] >one's faith goes well for a while, but how can you respect someone whose
>>] >entire religious beeing is based on error?
>>] 
>>] Which pretty well encapsulates anyone with religious beliefs.
>>
>>James,
>>
>>prudence dictates that you back off on this one.
> 
>Full speed ahead. Prepare for ramming speed. Damn the torpedoes. Rig for
>depth charges.

Oh, I disagree with (I think Pete, or perhaps James) up there.

Religious beliefs are not always exclusionary.  I will give an example:

	I call myself "Sabaean".  This describes both a philosophical and
	religious belief system.  Part of Sabaeanism's >CORE< principles are
	the concept that one must respect another's choice.  This, of
	course, includes the religious choices of those who disagree with
	you.  Another is a strong frowning on hypocracy.

Therefore, it is perfectly possible for me to have a fulfilling relationship
with any person of any denomination as long as that particular value (the
respect of choice) is bilateral.  

Not all persons, of course, live their religious or philosophical beliefs.
Many, in fact most, derive their own beliefs from a central core, and when
they get done they frequently don't match the "original" definition that
some would have you use.

Therefore, there is frequently no problem.

>As a full fledged member in bad standing of the "Once an altar boy always an
>altar boy" yachting club I must say A gored cow(and many altar boys) is a happy
>cow.

Perhaps.  I, as well, was an Altar Boy at one time long ago ;-)

>Actually my post was in response to Peters line:
>>] >  Dating someone outside of
>>] >one's faith goes well for a while, but how can you respect someone whose
>>] >entire religious beeing is based on error?
>>] 

Aha.  Now that is a different matter.  If one takes the point of view that 
there is only one "true" religion or philosophical bent, and that (of course)
is yours, and all others are false and based on error, then yes, you would
have a problem dating someone who is not of your faith.

That is, if you're not a hypocrite.

>>But I would feel safe to say, that when we
>>get down to real core values, rather than implementation
>>specific details, we do NOT compromise. [1]
> 
>I'm with ya.

Yep.  But one's core values are, by and large, a choice.  Depending on what
you choose they may not need to be compromised to be flexible and compatible
with many others.

--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions