Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 Fluke 1/4/84; site fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!tektronix!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!fluke!nxs
From: nxs@fluke.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Request for semantic content
Message-ID: <258@tpvax.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 4-May-84 16:27:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: tpvax.258
Posted: Fri May  4 16:27:56 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 18-May-84 00:04:37 EDT
References: <121@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Everett, WA
Lines: 61

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><><

NORRIS ASKS     1) Does the concept of Desert have any meaning in this system?

I do not have the manifesto of rationalism at my desk, but I have a feel for
the basic concepts (although I not sure if you are reffering to rationalism
or humanism).

REPLY	 Yes. In direct opposition to Levitian(sp?) religions, Desert is
	 served (sorry) here on earth. By doing good unto others, others
	 are more willing to return the favour (not all, but some, and the
	 more people react to one another in this fashion, the more we will
	 see of this type of interaction). 

NORRIS ASKS    2) Does the concept of Justice have any meaning in this system?

REPLY	 What Justice are you reffering to. Devine, or The loose collection
	 of laws which humans use to avoid suffering? 

I'm moving on to number three because its response is also a part of
question 2.

NORRIS	       3) Are murder and rape "bad"?  What do you do with rapists,
	       and why?

REPLY	 First of all a mild flame. I think you are confusing rationalism
(of which Humanism is a part of) with Anarchy. Maybe you are
mis-interputting what rich was pointing out in his tretise on chemical
reaction. I understood it to mean, that there is no inherent difference is
the processes of the body, therefore one cannot be born evil or born good. 

Yes killing is wrong, it is also totally UN-Rational. If killing humans was
not WRONG, eventually, there would be no humans. 

(Flaming again. What bothers me the most about fundimentalist and religous
persons with an evangelistic bent is the mass genocide the have carried out
throughout the ages. Now I have no intention of accussing anyone on the net
of murder, understand where YOUR history has been. For better or worse, noone has given humanism a chance at creating one).

And this leads us to question number 4. Wheres the MORAILITY. Let me answear
that with a question. Where is the morality of killing someone EVER. Most
humanists I know won't hunt or eat meat. (Personally I beleive in the food
chain, but thats another story). 

I guess the morality is right here. Things are right and wrong because of
how the effect another human (i.e. Having sex with someone is great, forcing
sex upon someone is wrong; now, is that so hard to differentiate). The
problem with this type of thinking is that it becomes very hard to impose
YOUR morals upon OTHERS when the question really does not concern you. If
you feel that having sex with another (who may not be your spouse) is
immoral, then don't particapate. If someone forces it upon you, then they
are immoral. It really is that simple.

Well I've said enough for now, hope this has been enlighting.

				       Bruce Golub