Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to i

From: Susan Cogan (Susan-Brassfield@ou.edu)
Date: Mon Dec 11 2000 - 17:42:15 EST

  • Next message: Chris Cogan: "Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to i"

    >Susan said:
    >>It's not so much that we mind our own business, but that we consider
    > >proselytizing to be in bad taste. :-)
    >
    >Bertvan: As an agnostic I would never proselytize, but I regard
    >ridiculing anyone's
    >religion in the worst possible taste.

    Other than the Church of Elvis I don't really remember ridiculing
    anybody's religion. There are many things I actively detest about
    various religions, but that's on the merits in my opinion--and I get
    to have *my* opinion too.

    Susan 

    -- 
----------

      I am aware that the conclusions arrived at in this work will be 
denounced by some as highly irreligious; but he who denounces them is 
bound to shew why it is more irreligious to explain the origin of man 
as a distinct species by descent from some lower form, through the 
laws of variation and natural selection, than to explain the birth of 
the individual through the laws of ordinary reproduction.

    ---Charles Darwin

    http://www.telepath.com/susanb/

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 11 2000 - 17:43:04 EST