"jose colaco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I wish not to set the LIMITS of what one can/should or >not on Goanet, but I feel that there should be NO >BASHING of any religion or anyone anywhere. > >Bashing after all means: Criticizing (another) >harshly, accusatorially, and THREATENINGLY. >
Dear Josebab, If bashing involves filthy and overly harsh language, then of course I agree that there should be no bashing of any kind at all. But that was not the issue I was dealing with when I posted my original response on Goanet. My original statement: "There ought to be no limits to religious bashing on Goanet", was made in response to a post urging that "there should be limits on religious bashing on Goanet". That statement singled out religion (and religious folk) for special treatment, because the justification the said post gave for such limits was that there were religious folk on Goanet who would be offended by such bashing. My contention is that in a secular public forum no issue, subject or group of people deserve special treatment or exemption. Everybody is equal. I would not want to exhort people to set limits on bashing of science or medicine on Goanet on the basis that there are scientists, nurses, paramedical workers and doctors on Goanet who would be offended. I am sure nobody wants to limit bashing of politics because there are politicians on Goanet. If, instead, the said post had said that there should be no bashing of any kind at all, I would have reluctantly agreed. Reluctantly, because in a free society we ought to be able to bash ideas, issues and public figures that are perceived to be unfair and unjust. The bashing of private individuals is a separate issue. Indeed, there ought to be stricter controls on this front. And, as you and I agree, nobody should be allowed to use filthy, obnoxious and offensive language. Cheers, Santosh
