Point taken, I would say my intention was to explore the possibility of a country run without religious influence. I guess that would be a country run by Brights.
On Jan 13, 7:35 am, "Ian Pollard" <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/1/13 Slip Disc <[email protected]> > > > > > They CAN'T proselytize without, first, logically, declaring > > themselves a religion. < Pat > > > Really, though, it is a "Non-Religion". Atheism just needs to be > > recognized as such. Would a country be better run by a administration > > comprised completely of Atheists or would it present a condition of > > reverse bias? > > You cannot infer anything about a country run by atheists since the > collective term is meaningless in this context. It's like saying "imagine a > country run exclusively by people who like tea". > > Philosophically there's no central, unifying, goal shared by people who like > tea. > > Ian --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
