[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Baker) wrote on 17.12.03 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:25:11PM -0800, Nunya wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:56:41PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > > > For the record, however, if you consider saying that the lifestyle or > > > beliefs of someone you don't agree with are sufficient to condemn them > > > to an eternity of suffering as hate speech (and I generally do), I'm on > > > the catching end of such a statement from every person who supports, > > > directly or indirectly, any sect of Christianity which I am aware of, > > > all of whom advocate divine justice, and most of which also advocate the > > > continued denial of civil rights as well. > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > "Straw man" means imagining a problem and then attacking it, which is > > preciesly what you are doing here. > > Imagining it? I suppose it's possible that I've hallucinated the > stated positions of the Catholic, Luthern, Episopalian, Baptist, and > Mormon authorities (the latter not technically being considered a sect > of Christianity under most circumstances, but drawing from the same > traditions). Somehow, though, I find this unlikely. I haven't bothered to > look closely at the smaller and more fundamentalist sects. The Unitarians > might have a different position; they seem the most likely. But they don't > have enough voting members to succeed against the above. > > Since you have no idea *what* civil rights I'm claiming are denied, your > claim that I'm just imagining this denial is... well, I'll just let it > stand on it's own, for people to evaluate it's backing. If I were a betting man, I'd bet I can guess what exactly it is - what the Anglicans are currently in not-quite-civil-war about. Of course, don't expect Nunya to ever get it. MfG Kai
