[geeks] Glad I don't live in Texas!

[Tim H.]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:02:16 -0500 (CDT)
Amy <scoobydoo at ohno.mrbill.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Tim H. wrote:
> 
> > I don't think so, Religion, if properly applied, gives you a reason for life
> > and what happens in it
> 
> Personally I always figured the reason I live is due to my Mom, Dad, and
> my older sister who once bitched to both of them about wanting someone to
> play with and NOT the holy trinity.
> 
> > Politics, on the other hand, is just people arguing about who should tell
> > other people what to do.
> 
> You're obviously religious and proselythising your religion, telling us to
> not mix it with politics. Now who's arguing about telling others what to do,
> again?
> 
> > Religion is internal, politics is completely external.
> 
> A belief is a belief, be it in a god, John Ashcroft, or Tiger Woods.
> They're all internal beliefs until people start opening their mouths.
> 
> > My Political beliefs may be very strong and sincere, but they aren't
> > truly political until I broadcast them.
> 
> And I assume that until you broadcast them, they're just hot air?
Politics by definition (http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=politics) involve others, until you broadcast them they are beliefs, but they aren'r politics


> 
> > Politics requires discussion, Religion does not.
> 
> Why shouldn't religion require discussion? As I recall most
> devoutly religious folk love to go on and on and on about their version
> of the beliefs and thoughts of their particular diety. Oh, wait, they just
> talk...they don't expect any rational person to come out and question
> their version. Right-O.
>
There is a difference between allow and require.  Religion allows, even encourages, discussion, but doesn't require it.  If I am in an environment which makes religious discussion innapropriate, it in no way changes my beliefs or how Religious I am.
 
> > Some Religions do require attempts to convince others
> 
> Southern Baptists, Pentecostals, Seventh Day Adventists...I could go on
> listing versions that require this for days...

attempts to convince does not require unsolicited browbeating.  If an evangelist comes to town and holds tent meetings you are not required to attend.  In most churches there will be an "attempt to convince" every Sunday.  If we happen to have lunch together and you ask why a pray before I eat there will be a discussion of why I do so. All fit in the category of attempt to convince, none are unsolicited.  Yes there are also unsolicited attempts to convince, but how often are they successful?  If someone knocks on my door in an attempt to convince, or an attempt to sell, or an attempt to find out what I think about soething, they all get the same treatment, either I ignore them, or I just tell them I am not interested.
> 
> > but except for the relatively few militant sects, they do not require
> > others to enter into the discussion if they don't desire to.
> 
> I thought you said earlier that religion doesn't include discussion?
> 
see above, I said require, not include.

Tim

> --a
> _______________________________________________
> GEEKS:  http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/geeks