garys@bunkerb.UUCP (Gary Samuelson) (05/18/84)
Quoting Rich Rosen: > This is probably the very last reply I will ever make regarding Larry > Bickford. It is very clear from his latest article that his beliefs are > fundamentally different from those of rational thinking people (or at least > from those of THIS rational thinking person). It's awfully tempting to say that you consider any one who disagrees with you to be irrational, ipso facto, but I won't. Rich quoting Larry Bickford: > > Full religious tolerance is impossible. And you expect me to stand idly > > by while people are being offered up as burnt offerings? Our laws state > > a certain moral/religious code, necessarily at the expense of others. Let me try to rephrase that so that Larry's intent here is clearer. Would you permit the practice of a religion which required human sacrifice? If not, then "full religious tolerance" is indeed impossible. Every law which proscribes an action is "at the expense" of those who wish to perform that action. Directly quoting Rich again: > I'll say it again. It is the belief system's that are under scrutiny, not > god. Please explain how to strutinize God independent of anybody's belief system. > Rationalism's "circularity" begins with certain postulates that Larry would > probably agree to, then extends from there using scientific inquiry to > obtain knowledge. Please state the postulates on which your rational belief system is based. I am not at all certain that I (or Larry) would accept all of them. (I remember making this request once before, and not receiving any reply. You said you would reply by mail instead of news, but never did.) Some of the postulates which you appear to accept (you haven't stated all of them explicitly yet) are: 1. Only the material universe exists. 2. There is no absolute standard of right and wrong (and it's wrong to say that there is!) 3. Anyone who disputes the above is hopelessly irrational. > There ARE no absolute standards. All these > things, like good and evil, are evolved precepts from human minds. Why did > they evolve? As a means of better organizing society. Thus, as humanity's > rationality increases over time we evolve better and more humane ways of > organizing society for everyone's benefit ... No doubt you have evidence for all the assertions in the above quote. Start with the "There ARE no absolute standards." What evidence supports that position? > I refuse > to believe that Larry's belief system has anything to do with real > Christianity. Just out of curiosity, what is your concept of real Christianity, and where did it come from? Gary Samuelson ittvax!bunker!bunkerb!garys