On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:27:36 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

John H wrote:
On 6 Jun 2005 08:09:10 -0700, wrote:


It *assumes* a
religious intolerance that may or may not exist. In my case, it doesn't

*********
Which is why it is "likely", not "certain".

And as far as "religious intolerance may not exist!".....that's a very
interesting approach.
Does it salve the conscience when applied to other social issues as
well? That puts religious intolerance into the same junk-science
category as global warming, doesn't it?

My point remains; Harry is once again getting out of control with these
political trollings.
Everybody already *knows* what the ten guys who will get outraged, call
him names, take the
discussion to a personal level, etc, are going to do and say- including
Harry. Very boring.


And my point (in no way defending Harry) was that your post was the same thing
as Harry's, a troll. In my case, the religious intolerance you want to "very
likely" dump on conservatives, does not exist.

As for other social issues, ask and I'll tell. I personally don't see the
relationship between religious intolerance and global warming.



Many of those who refuse to accept "global warming" are the religiously
intolerant. A coincidence?

I'm sure many of those who *accept* global warming are *very* religiously
intolerant! A coincidence?

--
John H

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
...."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003