Re: Immaculate conception

On Thu, 15 May 2008 12:03:14 -0700 (PDT), Darren Delgado
<darrendelgado@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> On May 15, 6:10 am, remysun2...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> > On May 15, 12:01 am, Jim Gysin <jimgy...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> > > Speaking only for myself here, the issue isn't that the beliefs of
> > > others are being dismissed.  Rather, it's the insensitive and rude
and
> > > arguably antagonistic way that the beliefs of others are being
> > > dismissed.
> >
> > Jim pretty much says it all.  America's freedom of religion is built
> > out of respect for differing viewpoints and beliefs.
> 
> No it isn't.  It is built on an amendment to the Constitution that
> allows people to hold any beliefs they want without being persecuted.

That is correct, and it all hinges on what constitutes persecution.  I'm
not a fan of speech codes or hate crime laws, but if we're going to have
them on the books, then all groups deserve equal protection.

> The problem is that a lot of religious people do not want to merely be
> "tolerated", they want their irrational beliefs to be respected and
> honored by everybody without any weight given to the actual merit of
> their arguments.

Again, you're confusing respect/honor for beliefs with respect/honor for
the person holding those beliefs.  You can demonstrate the latter even
if you don't have the former.
 
> As someone in the thread said before me, if you believe in a burning
> bush that talks to people, I fully sup****t your right to your beliefs
> without fear of persecution, but I also sup****t the right of other
> people to laugh at you.

Just out of curiosity, when does laughter become persecution?

--
Jim Gysin
Waukesha, WI