On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 07:43:41 -0700 Nick Arnett wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 03:04:43 +0100, William T Goodall wrote >> One instance would be an anecdote. Establishing a pattern of >> behaviour from many instances isn't. If religion is so good why is >> it so bad? >Religion isn't good per se. But a critical piece of my religion and many >others is a belief that God is good. >For me, this is like saying that democracy is good, but that doesn't >automatically make democratic nations good or right. >I am not religious because I believe that everything religion does is good. I >support it because I believe it it can yield a kind of goodness and truth that >aren't available from other kinds of sources. >Similarly, I don't support democracy out of any belief that it is always >right. I support because I believe it because it deals with human nature in a >way that creates good lilving conditions and opportunities for people. >Nick (as in 'ol Nick?) --It's my understanding that the JudeoChristian take on "Original Sin" (i.e. the pattern of acting/thinking which initially leads away from repatterning the transcendent) was that Humans embrace the tendency their own understanding of "this is good/this is evil". We grow to depend on this understanding and get upset when others challenge it. It might further be asserted that "religion", especially in its classical Western sense, is OFTEN little more than a codification of "what is good/what is evil". As much as I hate to admit it, I think Mr. Goodall is mostly accurate with his assertion that "religion is evil". After all, it IS in the bible (genesis chapter 3). Leonard Matusik [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
