🚀 go-pugleaf

pspat@opera.iinet.net.au (Patrick Canion) writes:

>Whilst it would appear that you view my logic as preposterous, my
>desire to see as many of you as possible spend eternity in Paradise,
>where there is only peace, not pain; is this so selfish?

Since the discussion here is generally futile, I was hoping to avoid
this, but yes, this is selfish and intolerant. 

I do not want to go to your Paradise, if it exists. I would be very
unhappy in the company of the devotees of any God so cruel as yours
appears to be. In fact I'd maintain this preference even if I were 100%
certain, on empirical grounds, that your faith is true. I don't care for
your God's morality, I despise his petulance and vanity, and if it ever
turned out that he really did exist I'd still rather rest in peace than
spend eternity in his company.

Of course I am happy for you that you have a faith that pleases you. I
simply can't see why you can't be happy for me that I have a faith that
pleases me. What's more, I can't understand why you feel it is your
business to interfere in my determination to carry on my life (and
death) the way that I see fit, when I'm more than happy to do the same
for you. Heaven knows, religious intolerance has sparked enough war,
incivility and prejudice - how can you, plainly a good-natured man,
promote religious intolerance? What happened to "turn the other cheek"?

>> Perhaps for xian trying to get more souls into your so-called
>>heaven is a Good Thing, for a non-xian this boils down to trying to
>>get more people into your shop. This may be good for you, but is not
>>necessarrilly good for others, notably your clients. Even if things
>>work the silly way you describe, I prefer to take my chances and leave
>>this world the way I prefer.

>Fair enough - but why the need to involve someone else? 

To get it right - to leave the world without torture, false tries, making
your nearest and dearest clean up after you, or taking the chance that the
authorities will pursue your assistants or bystanders through the courts.

>Well, maybe societies don't care, but when has that been excuse?  In
>the past many a society hasn't cared about slavery - it doesn't change
>the absolute stance on the morality of the issue.  But I care - so
>I'll do something about it.

Hang on - doesn't your bible tolerate, or even encourage slavery?

>This has already been demonstrated in the NT - now they're
>proposing something along the lines of "ok, well we can't legalise
>euthanasia, so let's keep it illegal but we'll change the penalty to a
>$50 fine".  

Oh, I hadn't heard that one - sounds splendid - do you know whether they
can really do this?

-- 
| mailto:pete@zip.com.au | pgp DB 3A A3 D8 A7 6A BB 25 EF 2E F4 A4 8F 29 BB E2 |
| http://www.zip.com.au/~pete/ |         Give away what you don't need.        |