From: lking@athena.mit.edu (Loren King)
Subject: Re: Ms King Is this your real name???
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:34:44 GMT

In article <4377@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU>, aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov11.205855.21054@rd.hydro.on.ca> nbadie@rd.hydro.on.ca (Navid Badie) writes:
|> >
|> >Here we go again with RACIST attacks on people whose opinions do not
|> >fit some preconceived notion of "truth". One of the primary purposes of 
|> >forums such as this is **to exchange ideas and opinions**. If you choose
|> >to engage in personal attacks on those who participate in these
|> >discussions, you will only take away from your own credibility in 
|> >the future.
|> 
|> It is true that the purpose of this (and other) newsgroup/s were established
|> to exchange ideas and opinons; HOWEVER, when these ideas and opinions are
|> used as personal attacks against sensitive issues (like religion), they lose
|> their credibility and are vulnerable to being attacked by people who wish to
|> uphold the dignity and rights of not only their religious beliefs but identity.
|> 
|> I don't appreciate reading very racist remarks towards anyone and perhaps it
|> should be addressed via email, but you, Mr. Navid, should restrain yourself
|> from supporting this by justifying the statements of such people who initiated
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

He was justifying nothing; he was merely condemning racism.



|> it - unless, of course, you share in their opinions and slanders of Islam and
                                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

|> Muslim people.
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The kind of inference that the Soviet police state used all the time:
"well, if you don't agree with everything the state does, then you are
against everything the state does ... you're an enemy of the state, ... 
yeah!"

  If my carefully worded remarks in favour of womens' rights to choose
basic things about their life and faith are "slanderous," then I'd say
you've got a pretty selective standard of slander, i.e. whatever you
disagree with.

  None of my posts have been personal attacks, and if you read them as
such then you should maybe question the strength and coherence of your
own convictions ... I study with several people of varied faiths (Islam
included) who enjoy challenging their own beliefs, and then defending
them.  Never have I heard, outside of self-righteous fundamentalist 
ranting, a suggestion that such reasoned discourse is `slanderous,' 
and constituted of `personal attacks.'



|> 
|> And to those confused about the name Loren, it is a man's name.  Lauren would
|> be for the name of the woman.


It can be either; I think the point is that we shouldn't make assumptions
about someone's sex on the basis of the arguments they present.


|>  
|> Anisa
|> 
|>  	"For the first time we could say to everyone - this is our
|>  	faith, this is our way of life, this is who we are.  And
|>  	nothing could stop us.  You can't imagine what that was
|>  	like....."  Alfred Molina in Not Without My Daughter
|>  


Loren King
MIT
                "It'll all go back to normal if we put our nation first,
                 but the trouble with normal is it always gets worse."

                              - Bruce Colborne   
Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian