From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re:      Should we respect others?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 20:01:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.102747.1@cuavax.dnet.cua.edu> 78witherspoo@cuavax.dnet.cua.edu writes:
>> to say my beliefs are any better than yours?"  In my opinion, the person
>> who thinks someone else's beliefs that contradict his own are just as
>> good as his own beliefs, lacks the conviction of his own beliefs. 

>How can this last statement be true?  I guess I don't understand.  Are you
>saying that someone's beliefs are a _separate_ part of them?  That they sort
>of dangle above them in mid-air, while christians are the _only_ people who are
>wholly integrated beings?  

   What's the matter? Can't you understand a two-and-a-third-line run-on
sentence 8-)?  What I meant was a case in which Person A has belief X, and
Person B has belief Y, where X == not Y (as opposed to X != Y).  If Person
A thinks that Person B's belief is just as good as his own, then this is
the same as saying, "I believe X, but the belief that X is totally false
is just as valid as my belief that X is true."  In this case, Person A
must not believe X very strongly.  I hope this makes what I said a bit
clearer.  I was tired when I wrote my article.

>I guess my point is that what _harm_ could it do to you?  I had no idea that
>simple respect would be so scary a topic.  I hold the opposite opinion on this,
>but I am still going to respect you as a human being.  Nothing is influencing me
>to do this, no little imp is sitting on my shoulder whispering "Respect!"
>in my ear.

   I guess it's a matter of falling into the trap of thinking of religious
truths in terms of "one man's opinion is just as good as another's."  This
is OK for things that truly are opinions (e.g. how to fight poverty, etc.),
but not when we start talking about how we are enter the Kingdom of Heaven
(i.e. Christ said, "I am the way...").  Of course, Tom and I may actually
be closer in agreement than it may seem on this matter of respecting
beliefs.  There are probably lots of subtleties to it.

>Okay, I will call the foul on my own comment.  I meant to say that the crusades
>to take the Holy Land back from the infidels during the middle ages were an
>example of using one's belief as a blank check to run havoc over another
>people-- simply because they believe differntly than you do.  This kind of
>stuff has been going on for a long time, and is nothing more than human
>political power struggles masquerading as "holy causes".  That is so much BS to
>me that I can't think about it for very long.  And christians are not the only
>practicioners of this, but they seem to be very good at it...

   I agree that people often do perform various evil things in the name of
something good.  The Crusades were no exception to this.  You can always
find riff-raff among any army.  Overall, though, the intent behind the
Crusades was not an evil one, nor were the Crusades unimportant to the
survival of Christianity, at least in many places.  In fact, some of the
battles of the Crusades were fought as deep into Christendom as Hungary,
and an invading Turkish army was defeated in Poland.

   I hope the tone of my last article wasn't too harsh; using the Crusades
as an example against the Christian Church is one of my pet peeves.  It's
too often done with malice and disregard for the facts.

>Should we just "agree to disagree" on this one?  I have no interest in
>prolonging this point, we will probably just go 'round and 'round the same
>point of departure.

   OK; that is, if we actually do disagree on it.

--Steve

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia