[net.religion] To Peter on Wingate

rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Dr. Emmanuel Wu) (04/05/85)

>>It is action that counts.  And while many of your friends who discuss
>>"real presence" or "transubstantiation" theologized with Black, it was only
>>people like Tim or Rich or Byron or S. Aldrich or many others who saw
>>the inherent evil in that man's spouting.  Sorry, Charley.  You'll have
>>to think up better excuses why your friends didn't respond (didn't get
>>a chance to, were busy, 'rn' keys, etc.) or responded inappropriately
>>(were misunderstood, didn't know, etc.).  [BILL PETER]

Uh, Bill?  I'd lay off poor Charles Wingate if I were you.  I mean, the
poor guy has been so unjustly maligned by all of us, and deserves a break.
Besides, he's liable to make up statistics about you and post them in an
effort to get the spotlight of off his inaction.

>>I'm really losing patience with some of your excuses.  If you have
>>a personal grudge against Rosen or Maroney, I don't care.  At least
>>they saw racism for what it was, and FOUGHT against it.

> They did nothing of the kind.  The influence of USENET over the world is so
> infinitesimally small that it isn't worth bothering with.  It's very easy to
> sit back in your office, prop up your feet, take up the keyboard, and flame
> away at whatever catches your fancy.  It also has almost no effect upon the
> world, especially when it is done so regularly and with such self-
> righteousness.

The influence of USENET is huge, Charles.  The influence of USENET would be
huge if only one person got to read it.  For if some positive information
got to that one person, if a realization about the dangers of silence in
the face of bigotry hit home for just one single solitary human being, its
influence would be huge.  Perhaps you don't see individual human beings as
being all that important.

>>By the way, in your article you called Byron a "christian".  Using
>>your notation ("christian" instead of "Christian"), that's not
>>very complementary is it?  Or aren't Gnostic Christians Christian?

> This doesn't make any sense to me.  I recall a discussion a while back
> concerning Byron's beliefs.  About the only sense I can extract from this is
> that Bill has joined the Rich Rosen "Read Things Into Upper and Lower Case"
> club of putting things in my posting which aren't there.  Now watch closely:
> 
>  Gnostic christian==gnostic Christian==Gnostic Christian==gnostic christian
> 
> Clear enough?  (BTW, Byron, if I misread you, feel free to correct me.)

"sure", CHARLEY.  people CHoose to "cAPITALIZE" Or QUOTE "FOR" no particular
ReAsOn aT "all".  "Y", lOOK "AT" this paragraph HERE.  i COULD eVEN Pick
"Words" at my OWN Choosing, and IT wouldn'"T" cHANGE the INtended meaning
of the "schlermdaggle".  Frankly, I have no intention of rebutting any
more of Mr. Wingate's smear attacks.  If he wants to claim to be a
true Christian who abhors bigotry in all forms, he's entitled.
-- 
"to be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best night and day
 to make you like everybody else means to fight the hardest battle any human
 being can fight and never stop fighting."  - e. e. cummings
	Rich Rosen	ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr