On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 01:04:47PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Sorry for the inadvertent send. I can't see how you could have misread
> Jim's post in this way. It was clear to me what he meant. It was clear
> he knew it was irrational. We need to allow people to describe their
> feelings without jumping down their throats

How is the person espousing a viewpoint knowing something is irrational
sufficient that one shouldn't criticize the viewpoint? If one
promulgates an irrational viewpoint, knowing it is irrational, it can
still cause harm. In fact, it may be even worse if the person knows
the viewpoint is irrational but still states it as if it has some
value. It wasn't like he said, "my feeling is irrational but I am
using my intellect to fight that feeling and to take a position that
is rational", or "I am explaining this just to give an example of the
irrational feelings of a large number of people so that you know what
you are up against in opposing people who want to make an anti-gay
marriage amendment". No, the irrational feeling was presented as having
some intrinsic importance. I have yet to see a clear statement from
him that "Although I have irrational feelings about gay marriage,
by my words and actions I do NOT support anti-gay marriage laws or
constitutional amendments".


-- 
Erik Reuter   http://www.erikreuter.net/
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to