David Bandel wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:11:14 -0500, Matthew Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here is what you wrote:
> I don't care what anyone's religious beliefs are. Its their own
business. I don't force mine on anyone, and all agents of government in
the
> united states are legally prohibited from doing the same. Ashcroft
somehow decided that law doesn't apply to him.
It is my opinion, judging from posts over the past several years, that
you do not have a religion, or at least not that you make a significant
part of your life. So when you use phrases like "force mine on anyone"
I have to question where the disconnect is.
Religiosity, or the claiming of some religious tie and perhaps some
rituals without applying the standards to your life, is not the same
thing as taking a belief-structure to heart and applying it to every
decision you make (ideally speaking). Most people I hear preaching
"Separation of Church and State" the way you do are either atheist,
agnostic, or lukewarm -- lacking any religious convictions whatsoever.
I think you need to re-read and re-think this statement, especially in
light of what you say about where atheists come from in your ultimate
paragraph.
I'm not sure why. Perhaps I'm missing something?
Agnostics may be lukewarm. But you need to understand the definition
of atheist and agnostic (if you did, you wouldn't say what you just
said).
I understand their definitions. The comment was not a
mutually-exclusive inference. Atheists may be lukewarm, as may
agnostics. I suppose the better way of putting it would have been
"atheists, agnostic, or religiously lukewarm". Again, I think I'm
missing your point.
First, lets define religion: religion is a belief system. Doesn't
necessarily matter _what_ you believe in. Shamanism is a religion,
although I'm sure most Christians would poo-poo it as such because it
doesn't include a belief in a God as Christians define it. Be that as
it may ...
You could define religion that way as well. It definitely changes the
conversation, but it's not unheard of. This paragraph might have read
more easily had I separated the last sentence into its own paragraph.
Atheists _believe_ their IS NO God. It _is_ a belief. This belief may
or may not be fostered by the reasons in your ultimate para, but it is
a belief none-the-less.
Sure.
Agnostics are not atheists. They just do not believe there _is_ a God,
but they _don't_ believe there IS NO God. So perhaps they are
"lukewarm" as you say, or perhaps they're just not convinced.
I'm saying they are lukewarm. I simply offered a selection, not a
singular description. I believe what I said was grammatically correct
for the point being made.
Let's face it, folks from Missouri are proud of saying: I'm from
Missouri, _SHOW ME_. Religion is a belief system because you'd be
hard pressed to _prove_ there is a God. All "proofs" are anecdotal.
But by the above, folks from Missouri are all Agnostics ;-).
:)
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsub/Pause/Etc : http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
