----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 11:36 AM Subject: Re: [L3] Re: Scouted: Protecting Creation on Earth Day
>> Erik wrote >>> Understood. People disagreeing with you must respect you, but you don't >>> have to respect people you disagree with. Crystal clear. >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 11:05:07AM -0500, Dan Minette wrote: > > There is considerable empirical evidence both in his response and in > > past series of posts that contradict this assertion. Why do you make > > it? > > Huh? Lets look at Gautam's post and his posting history. In that post he gives an example of a position he disagrees with (we should not go to war in Iraq) that he says reasonable people can hold...and he offers good reasons for holding it. With this example, he has clearly contradicted your statement by expressing his respect for people he disagrees with...and I consider that post empirical evidence of his beliefs. In the years he has posted, he has stated, although he is obviously not a pacifist, his great respect for Gandhi. IIRC, he has stated that Gandhi ranks second on his list of people he respects...a very high position. He has stated why he respects Gandhi for his views, even though they contradict his own. At other times, I remember his referring to liberal professors by stating "he worships the ground they walk on." Yet, he disagrees with them. So, there is a wealth of written evidence for the assertion that he has great respect for some of the people he disagrees with. Yet, he has also clearly stated that there are some people that he feels hold an immoral position that he disagrees with. Thus, the reasonable hypothesis is that he respects some, but not all, of the people he disagrees with. I also respect the opinions of some, but not all, of the people I disagree with. As should be clear from this post, I respect Gautam, even though we often differ. But, I do not respect the opinion of my former colleague who stated, concerning the Oklahoma city bombing "its too bad about those babies, but those agents had it coming." This person clearly supported terrorism. I think that's an immoral position, which I cannot support. That doesn't mean that I think you are evil just because we differ on a number of topics. Thinking back, there are a number of topics I really felt that you were mistaken on, but none that I recall feeling you were basically immoral on. (I cannot state for certain that there were not one or two out of scores of topics, but I cannot recall any.) Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
