rone at ennui.org (definitely what) writes: > David Dyer-Bennet writes: > On the other hand, if people do the same thing repeatedly for an > extended span of time, and the people and hierarchy of the religion > condone or support the action, it seems fair to actually blame the > religion -- even if there are readings of their scripture that deny > the action. Seeking out and burning heretics, for example; that was > done widely enough, for long enough, with broad enough support, that I > think it's quite fair to blame Chrstianity for it. > > It's quite fair to blame the Christian hierarchy of the time for it. > To put the fault of those actions on "Christianity" is specious; what > is "Christianity"? The current batch of cardinals + Pope in the > Vatican? All current Christians? What about events that occurred > before religious schisms? Are Protestants to be blamed for events > perpetrated by the Catholic Church before Martin Luther published the > 95 Theses? Looks like you're trying to construct a scenario where *nothing* could *ever* be blamed on the religion itself. I find that an unacceptable outcome -- there must be at least a theoretical possibility. > Frankly, all you're showing here is prejudice, which you justify by > saying, hey, i've had religion thrown in my face for almost 50 years, > so it's OK for me to lower myself to their level. And i think you > should be above that sort of stuff, as the "thinking" sort of fellow > you claim to be. Thank you for your thoughtful and perceptive input on this issue. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at dd-b.net / http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ John Dyer-Bennet 1915-2002 Memorial Site http://john.dyer-bennet.net Dragaera mailing lists, see http://dragaera.info