Why post this?

The people you hope to offend would be very likely to *approve* of
turning our service academies in to Christian-only organizations and
nobody else will be the least surprised. Remember, this is the era in
which 52-53% of the public votes "values".

Been boating lately?

On 6 Jun 2005 07:49:14 -0700, wrote:

Why post this?

The people you hope to offend would be very likely to *approve* of
turning our service academies in to Christian-only organizations and
nobody else will be the least surprised. Remember, this is the era in
which 52-53% of the public votes "values".

Been boating lately?

He posted that for the same reason you added your paragraph, to be inflammatory.
Your comment, that those he hopes to offend "...would be very likely to
*approve* of turning our service academies in to Christian-only
organizations...", I find very distasteful and offensive. It *assumes* a
religious intolerance that may or may not exist. In my case, it doesn't.

--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

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.

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.

--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)