Guest guest Posted January 8, 2004 Report Share Posted January 8, 2004 I hear ya, Francesca, and I am cool with it. Thanks for the clarification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2004 Report Share Posted January 8, 2004 If I were asked, I would suggest that religious references of any kind have no place in CR practice, because rather than imparting information, such discussion leads only to division and dissention. That doesn't seem productive. Peg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2004 Report Share Posted January 8, 2004 Whoa, While as List God you can do what you wish, but to say that someone saying that "Jesus tasted death for us" as the words of a : "Then a narrow minded religious bigot can cloak their rhetoric in the mantle of "just answering the question"." Surely I am misreading you here? This is a very common Christian formulation that, among Christians is very non controversial, that 33% of the world population would agree with. For me I always think that any post represents the posters views, and do not see how anyone can think otherwise. There is nothing that has been been contradicted by someone at some time, so by the logic I see here, then there is no such thing as a fact. Foucault might agree but I certainly do not. Actually I do not think that religious posts belong here so forbid them as far as I am concerned, but, maybe I am wrong here, but I viewed your post as a personal attack on Brad totally out of keeping with every other post that you have posted over the years. Positive Dennis Francesca Skelton wrote: Whoa. There's a big difference between saying: "I'm a Buddhist and here's what I believe........." and saying: "The FACT is Jesus has tasted death for us........" (Brad's exact words). The former is giving us info about the poster and what he/she thinks; the latter is states that his belief is a fact; something that not everyone (most of the world's population) does not accept. Then a narrow minded religious bigot can cloak their rhetoric in the mantle of "just answering the question". So post away. But be sure and include the caveat that these are YOUR views and not such pompous, arragant statements that these are FACTS. on 1/8/2004 2:35 PM, kimlynette@... at kimlynette@... wrote: > What the heck. I wouldn't mind hearing a Buddhist perspective, or Hindu or any > other kind and I wouldn't tell them they couldn't say it either. We have had > Judaism alluded to on the other list and I love it. This is what makes the > folks here more real to me. We had moderators on another list I have been on, > get very upset before and one way it was handled was to include the word > "religious" in the subject line, that way, people offended by religious > viewpoints could ignore the posts, or people interested in divergent > viewpoints could access the post. Could we do something like this? It seems > the most balanced and fair to all points of views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.