> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of The Fool
... > > conquestadors, slavery, apartheid, and feudal systems were political > and > > conquistadors: conquer, take gold, convert to catholicism. Notice how > most of south America is adamantly catholic? I don't think there's any question that the primary goal, far and away, was material. And there's a very good argument that Catholicism was (and still often is) abused by the minority to retain political and economic power. The fact that religion can be misused so effectively doesn't prove that it is bad, only that it is very powerful. > Slavery was ever aided and abetted by the bible, the bible says slavery > is OK, tells how to mark slaves, how to treat slaves, how to sell slaves, > how to free slaves (except female slaves). It was the religious who used > the bible as justification for slavery in the south, before-during-after > the civil war. Same argument as above. The war was about economics and states' rights, wasn't it? > divine right of kings: Kings can do anything because god appointed them, > and so they are acting on behalf of god. This is a pivotal christian > doctrine. No, it is most certainly not. That is a medieval idea that was quite self-serving for those in power. Although the Bible says that leaders fulfill God's purposes, it also quite clearly says that the purpose may be to show people a negative example. Christianity teaches that *everyone* makes mistakes, except Adam before the Fall and Christ. You'd do well to learn more about what Christianity actually teaches if you're going to criticize it. Criticism that is based on extreme interpretations isn't going to convince the mainstream. We're not all right-wing fundamentalists. Nick _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
