Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!jj
From: jj@alice.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: For Sean, (flamers may also read this)
Message-ID: <3321@alice.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 22-Jan-85 10:12:26 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.3321
Posted: Tue Jan 22 10:12:26 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 23-Jan-85 06:59:30 EST
Organization: New Jersey State Farm for the Terminally Bewildered
Lines: 61

>In article <3293@alice.UUCP> jj@alice.UUCP writes:
>>I was under the impression that two of the basic tenets of Christian
>>belief were "Turn the other cheek" and "Judge not, lest ye be judged."
>>
>>The people who are currently inhabiting net.flame (with one exception,
>>at least, Paul) seem to have either forgotten this or think that they
>>themselves are beyond judgement.
>>
>>Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin!
>>-- 
>The line beginning "The people who are currently inhabiting net.flame..."
>certainly sounds like a judgement to me! The capacity to adjuticate is,
>insofar as I am aware, a trait which is singular to humans among all
>Earth-dwelling creatures. I can see where one might object to personal
>insult (and there is a lot of that on the net), but a sweeping comment
>like the one above reflects BAD judgement (which might be better than
>none at all).
>
>Whatever happened to people using real (and intact), names and accurate
>site names? (Don't we have a right to know who our accusers are?)
>
>Sean McLinden

Sean, you seem to make a couple of bad assumptions.  The first is that
I am Christian.  I quote the Christian rule.  I don't say that I
believe it it.  It's relevant because a lot of Christian types
are telling us how bad we are, and I find people acting in that
fashion utterly self-contradictory.  The irony is that your specious assumption
makes ME look that way.
	The second is that you base an entire diatribe on your first
assumption.
	The third is that you ignore my statement that there ARE exceptions, 
and then complain that I didn't say so.  If I didn't think there were
exceptions why would I name one, and use the word "seem" to indicate
that what I say is the overall impression  that I have?
	The last is that you seem to have a complaint with jj@alice,
which is  a perfectly normal, exact, and correct login ID AND
site name.  I've been on the net for T-.5 year, where T is the total
lifetime of the net, or so, and most people seem to be able to
think of rabbit/alice/icarus!jj as an individual who is quite well
intentified. (This is  not to say that people always agree with me
or anything silly like that, of course...)

	Of course, I don't recall reading anything else by you, so
I'm more than slightly stumped  that you are offended.  I don't see
how you think YOU are accused (but WHY did you respond?), and why
I should have any positive reaction to your feeling accused.

	In short, your complaints are completely specious, and based
on which you choose to infer, rather than what I said. If your article
is supposed to be parody,  you didn't succeed.


Let me put it this way...
Rince philib a choeil!
-- 
TEDDY BEARS PROTECT PENGUINS FROM WALRUSES
"I wish I was home again, back home in my heart again, it's been such a time
since my heart's home to me. ..."

(allegra,harpo,ulysses)!alice!jj