randals (03/09/83)
A couple of totally unrelated topics (maybe), but stuck together
so as to consume less disk space:
(1) So far, my experience with classic religions has been such that:
For any religion X, the paradigm of that religion separates
people into two groups: those that follow religion X
and agree to its principles, and those that don't follow
religion X. All members of religion X are instructed
to either: (1) put up with/ tolerate/ cope with people
that are not X, or (2) try to change them into becoming
members of religion X.
My question: is there a religion that you know of that doesn't
fit this category? Be honest with yourself... and me. Look hard.
(2) What is the real difference between "net.religion", and
"net.philosophy.flame"? Howcum anybody can say just about anything
on net.phil* and it's o.k., but on net.rel* people get cut to
pieces?
Reply to me, or the net. I will make no commitment to summarize (or not)
or redistribute the comments (or not).
Randal L. ("7777 days old today!") Schwartz
Tektronix Engineering Computing Systems
Wilsonville, Oregon, USA
UUCP: ...!{ucbvax or decvax}!teklabs!tekecs!randals (ignore return address)
CSNET: tekecs!randals @ tektronix
ARPA: tekecs!randals.tektronix @ rand-relay