[net.religion] Once again on religious tolerance and the like

aeq@pucc-h (Jeff Sargent) (11/16/84)

From Andy Banta (pucc-k:agz):

> Why do you [Christians] feel that you have a
> obligation to tell me I'm wrong, and continue to tell me I'm wrong until
> I "break" and agree with you?  Sorry, it ain't gonna happen.

I can quite understand that you would react in exactly this way to someone
repeatedly telling you that you're *wrong*.  How about my repeated telling
you that your choice is merely *suboptimal*?

> ... why do people feel that because they
> are "Christians", they have a right to attack other faiths or lack of
> faiths, but it is unthinkable to atack Christianity in this country?

Why Christians think they should go on the attack I don't know.  The famous
"full armor of God" passage describes metaphorical weapons all of which are
defensive except one.  That one I must confess to having used little:  "the
sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God."

As to your other question, I wish it were unthinkable to attack Christianity.
It's done all the time, certainly in this newsgroup, but also in more public
situations.  So far most of the attacks have been directed at the right-wing
types.  But a number of Christian leaders of varying fame believe that those
who hold to genuine faith in Christ will face real persecution in this country
within the lifetime of most of us.

-- 
-- Jeff Sargent
{decvax|harpo|ihnp4|inuxc|seismo|ucbvax}!pur-ee!pucc-h:aeq
"I'm not asking for anyone's bleeding charity."
"Then do.  At once.  Ask for the Bleeding Charity."

ken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow) (11/21/84)

--
>From Andy Banta (pucc-k:agz):

> Why do you [Christians] feel that you have a
> obligation to tell me I'm wrong, and continue to tell me I'm
> wrong until I "break" and agree with you?  Sorry, it ain't
> gonna happen.

[Jeff Sargent, pot-calling-the-kettle-black dept.]

>> I can quite understand that you would react in exactly this way to
>> someone repeatedly telling you that you're *wrong*.  How about my
>> repeated telling you that your choice is merely *suboptimal*?

But that would be the height of arrogance, wouldn't it?  How can
you contrast a religious choice *that you don't even know*, and
certainly have never experienced, to your own?  Not to mention
come up with a rank order!  Beware such simplified comparisons--belief
systems are not integers.  I respect your rapture, Jeff (even though
I see scant evidence of any helpful effect); you respect mine!
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******  20 Nov 84 [30 Brumaire An CXCIII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7188     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken   *** ***

chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Cheshire Chuqui) (11/27/84)

>repeatedly telling you that you're *wrong*.  How about my repeated telling
>you that your choice is merely *suboptimal*?

*urp* There is an assumed superiority there. So being a Zen-Druid isn't
wrong anymore, it is simply not as good? Why is that any different, Jeff?
Why can't you simply accept the fact that it is different, without forcing
a value judgement on it? Are you THAT insecure about your own religion that
any alternative at all makes you question its validity?

sigh.
chuq (not better, just me)
-- 
From the center of a Plaid pentagram:		Chuq Von Rospach
{cbosgd,decwrl,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui  nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

  ~But you know, monsieur, that as long as she wears the claw of the dragon
  upon her breast you can do nothing-- her soul belongs to me!~

dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (12/03/84)

> >repeatedly telling you that you're *wrong*.  How about my repeated telling
> >you that your choice is merely *suboptimal*?
> 
> *urp* There is an assumed superiority there. So being a Zen-Druid isn't
> wrong anymore, it is simply not as good? Why is that any different, Jeff?
> Why can't you simply accept the fact that it is different, without forcing
> a value judgement on it? Are you THAT insecure about your own religion that
> any alternative at all makes you question its validity?

Paraphrase:  Jeff, you're wrong.  You simply can't tell anyone they're
wrong in this newsgroup.

Right?
-- 
Paul DuBois		{allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois

chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Cheshire Chuqui) (12/05/84)

References <603@pucc-k> <> <1902@nsc.UUCP> <529@uwmacc.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Cheshire Chuqui)
Distribution: 
Organization: Plaid Heaven
Keywords:
Summary:

 
>> >repeatedly telling you that you're *wrong*.  How about my repeated telling
>> >you that your choice is merely *suboptimal*?
>> 
>> *urp* There is an assumed superiority there. So being a Zen-Druid isn't
>> wrong anymore, it is simply not as good? Why is that any different, Jeff?
>> Why can't you simply accept the fact that it is different, without forcing
>> a value judgement on it? Are you THAT insecure about your own religion that
>> any alternative at all makes you question its validity?
>
>Paraphrase:  Jeff, you're wrong.  You simply can't tell anyone they're
>wrong in this newsgroup.
>
>Right?

uh, wrong... *grin* misguided, perhaps, intolerant, maybe, but not wrong.
I'm not asking either of us to be right or wrong-- I'm asking for him to
allow me the same ability to follow my religion that he wants for his
religion. I don't tell him he is wrong for not being a Zen Druid-- I'm
certainly not teling him he is wrong for being Christian. I simply want to
be accepted as an equal-- his Christianity for him is just as right as my
Zen Druidism is for me, and his Christianity for me would be just as wrong
as my Zen druidism is for him.

the key here is not right, not wrong, just different.

chuq 
-- 
From the center of a Plaid pentagram:		Chuq Von Rospach
{cbosgd,decwrl,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui  nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

  ~But you know, monsieur, that as long as she wears the claw of the dragon
  upon her breast you can do nothing-- her soul belongs to me!~

dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (12/05/84)

> >Paraphrase:  Jeff, you're wrong.  You simply can't tell anyone they're
> >wrong in this newsgroup.
> >
> >Right?
> 
> uh, wrong... *grin* misguided, perhaps, intolerant, maybe, but not wrong.
> I'm not asking either of us to be right or wrong-- I'm asking for him to
> allow me the same ability to follow my religion that he wants for his
> religion. I don't tell him he is wrong for not being a Zen Druid-- I'm
> certainly not teling him he is wrong for being Christian. I simply want to
> be accepted as an equal-- his Christianity for him is just as right as my
> Zen Druidism is for me, and his Christianity for me would be just as wrong
> as my Zen druidism is for him.
> 
> chuq 

Chuq, I really and truly (and non-flamingly.  Really!) think you're
playing word games.  Are you?
-- 
Paul DuBois		{allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois

gadfly@ihu1m.UUCP (Gadfly) (12/06/84)

--
[Chuq]
>> Why can't you simply accept the fact that it is different,
>> without forcing a value judgement on it? Are you THAT insecure
>> about your own religion that any alternative at all makes you
>> question its validity?

[DuBois]
>> Paraphrase:  Jeff, you're wrong.  You simply can't tell anyone
>> they're wrong in this newsgroup.

>> Right?

WRONG!

Jeff should post his religious experiences and beliefs, but it's
silly for him to try to belittle someone else's.  One can point out
errors of fact, even interpretation, but not blind faith.  If that were
possible, all the proselytizing evangelists herein would have been
cured, if not of their dogmatism at least of their logorhea, a long time
ago.
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******  05 Dec 84 [15 Frimaire An CXCIII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7188     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken   *** ***