From: rcollins@encore.com (Roger Collins)
Subject: Re: Anti-religious fanatics (Was Re: School Choice )
Reply-To: rcollins@1.com
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:20:07 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc

Since there is not a word in this discussion about politics, how
about taking it to talk.religion.misc.

Reply to these words to go to the proper newsgroup:

In article <1992Sep3.185156.18883@ornl.gov>, de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep3.175614.28280@Csli.Stanford.EDU>, mmarx@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Matthew Marx) writes:
|> >
|> >Whoooooooa, horsie! To speak of "Christianity" as one entity is
|> >problematic, there being several thousand different Christian
|> >denominations in the United States alone.
|> 
|> Fine.  But the traits I'm refering to are, as far as I know, caused by
|> beliefs shared by all of them.  Or are their Christian sects that *don't*
|> believe that the bible is the word of God, that Jesus died for your sins,
|> that there's an afterlife, etc.?
|> 
|> >To attribute to every one of them by attributing to Christians *in general*
|> >(as you have done) guilt for the deeds of a small minority of those who stand
|> >under the Christian umbrella breeds not only ignorance, but the intolerance
|> >you so self-righteously denounce.
|> 
|> I haven't attributed the guilt to *Christians*, I've attributed it to
|> *Christianity*.  I feel pity for those sucked into religious dogma, but I don't
|> blame them for it.
|> 
|> >>Deny it all you want, but that won't stop the next holy war from happening.
|> >
|> >If it does, hopefully you'll take the time to look at who exactly is
|> >responsible and recognize that they themselves are *not* doing what
|> >they have committed to, rather than throwing all Christians into a
|> >black kettle and turning up the heat.
|> 
|> What are you saying?  That the Christian soldiers aren't to blame?  Or that
|> they really aren't Christians?  Or what?
|> 
|> >... You once again generalize to *all* of Christianity, failing to
|> >recognize differences not only in what is taught by individual
|> >Christian churches, but in the way the different members react to
|> >that.
|> 
|> I did not.  I never said *all* Christians exhibit those traits, just that a
|> significant number *do*, and I don't see much effort on the part of Christian
|> religions to correct such blatant non-Christian behavior.
|> 
|> >>Huh?  What's that got to do with the leap of faith, suspension of disbelief,
|> >>and subjugation of will required to be a Christian?
|> >
|> >Once again, you reveal your ignorance. Spend a decent amount of time
|> >learning Christ's teachings and you'll get a clue. 
|> 
|> Well, I was raised Methodist, and have been exposed to Christianity all my
|> life.  If I'm lacking a clue, why don't you just give it to me?  I'm not going
|> to run out and buy/study a bible just to satisfy you.
|> 
|> >Many churches (including mine) do excommunicate many of those "bad
|> >apples" -- if they're not willing to change their ways and try to be
|> >better.
|> 
|> Sure, the really flagrant cases, I suppose.  But you miss the point: many
|> people claim to be Christian, go to church regularly, etc., but constantly say
|> and do things in their daily lives that reflect either a total lack of
|> understanding of Christ's teachings or a total lack of committment to living
|> their lives consistently with them.  I suppose they're just poor sinners not
|> responsible for their actions...
|> 
|> >>It follows, then, that atheists are not accountable as a group since they
|> >>don't act as a group--they're merely a set of individuals with a common trait.
|> >>You can't blame them for the ills of any particular atheist any more than you
|> >>can blame redheads for any deed performed by a redhead.
|> >
|> >But your previous paragraph about beliefs playing a large role in
|> >determining behavior is a shoe atheists can wear, as well.
|> 
|> Wrong.  Atheists don't share a particular belief, they share a nonbelief.  This
|> is a current thread in alt.atheism.  Believing that God doesn't exist and not
|> believing that God exists are two different things.  E.g., to steal an example
|> from that thread:
|> 
|> bsmart@bsmart.TTI.COM (Bob Smart) writes:
|> >If I claim to have Elvis in my spare bedroom, would you consider
|> >yourself a "nonbeliever" or a "disbeliever?"  Or would you, in fact, be
|> >so gullible as to believe it on just my say-so?  Would you consider
|> >outright disbelief of such a fantastic claim to be "dogmatic" or
|> >"religious," or would it merely be sensible considering the facts and
|> >circumstances?
|> 
|> -- 
|> Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov)           For every Bill Joy there is a Kirk McKusick.
|> Martin Marietta Energy Systems     For every Bill Gates there is a Richard
|> Workstation Support                Stallman.                     --Paul Graham
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:2997 alt.politics.elections:11620 alt.fan.dan-quayle:2996