On Sep 22, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Charlie Bell wrote:
On 22/09/2009, at 7:57 AM, Chris Frandsen wrote:
A referral to "Religion" without being specific often sparks a
response on this list.
Sure, but this isn't one of those times. Asking non-Christians and
Christians alike to be more civil is one thing - civility in
discourse is one thing. But what you forwarded was specifically
saying we should ask "What would Jesus do?" and to the millions of
non-Christians in your nation and elsewhere that's meaningless at
best.
Charlie, I think you are being a bit defensive here. First her message
was as much to those that claim to be Christians than anyone else so
the question is appropriate to that audience and of course he is
considered as a prophet to millions of other religions followers
My wife is not a follower so she did not write this with this
illustrious group in mind. Guys, I suggest taking her to task on
this is part of the problem. There are many out there with
religious beliefs be they Christian or otherwise. Being civil means
respecting their beliefs though not necessarily accepting them.
Being civil has nothing to do with respecting beliefs. Being civil
means not being unnecessarily offensive while pointing out where
beliefs are damaging our societies. Some beliefs deserve ZERO
respect (creationism, anti-vaccinationism etc). However playing to
Christian beliefs if it helps frame a debate in a way they'll
understand can be useful and help keep the tone civil.
One of the ideals behind the foundation of this country was religious
freedom. To me that means that we respect the right of an individual
to have his/her own religious beliefs. Another principal was the
separation of church and state. I think it is appropriate to point
out when religion crosses that line but not by attacking the beliefs
themselves.
learner
_______________________________________________
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
