Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ssc-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!david
From: david@ssc-vax.UUCP (David Norris)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Public responses
Message-ID: <686@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 16-Dec-83 13:19:57 EST
Article-I.D.: ssc-vax.686
Posted: Fri Dec 16 13:19:57 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 18-Dec-83 06:02:44 EST
Organization: Boeing Aerospace, Seattle
Lines: 30


	Most of the responses I recieved about my "religious test" were
private.  I publicly thank those who did respond in private, and I should be
happy to continue discussions with these individuals in private.  The number
of private responses has outweighed the public responses by about 5:1.  Happily,
(I mean that) all of the private responses have been positive.
I will respond to the public responses here.

	Without singling out anyone, I got complaints about wording from a
number of folks.  Surprisingly, the private notes indicated that they were
dissatisfied with the wording, but knew what I was getting at, so for the
sake of continuing the discussion dropped it.  I am pleased that there are
some who will not get into useless discussions over semantics.

	The point of the article was to have individuals examine themselves
to see if any predispositions or prejudices existed.  Most of the private
responses understood this perfectly.  This, of course, puts me on the spot to
provide adequate evidence for my case.  But this varies from person to
person, and so will be treated privately.  Public responses, though, centered
not on predispositions in general, but assumed that I was trying to make a
case for Christianity on the spot.  Which, I guess, was what my original
article was testing after all.

	-- David Norris
	-- uw-beaver!ssc-vax!david

P.S.  This article, I think, will cover many of the future public rebuttals.
When you see another response to my orignal article, dig this out of old news
and use it as a response.