Steve, Margaret, Firstly hypocrisy is widesperead and "normal" .... that's not really the issue here.
People using "the word god" like that (ie most of us brought up in a theist culture) are using it figuratively - could easily mean an unspecified natural cause - god simply equates to nature beyond our control in the circumstances. Professing god in a causal way comes in many levels - from casual linguistic useage above to claiming god to actually be the cause of things. "Espoused Theory" But "actual" belief is the kind people act on ... and as this (Harris-driven) thread indicates it's the balance of faith and openness to rational questioning ... in actual actions and decisions .... that really matters. "Theory in Use". Not the belief in the existence of god, or not. Ian On 2/4/08, Steven Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Margaret, > > On Sunday, February 03, 2008, at 10:33PM, "Margaret Warren" <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Just a funny thought of the day - > > > >How many people who call themselves 'athiests' wouldn't > >hesitate to use an "Act of God" defense in a legal setting? > > > >(e.g. my boat slammed into the neighbor's house during a hurricane - > >but it's covered by an 'act of "nothing" clause...) > > > I would guess all of them. Does that make atheists hypocrits in your book? > > Regards, > Steve > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
