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
