Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Professor Wagstaff)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Christians converting Christians
Message-ID: <596@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Feb-85 10:00:22 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.596
Posted: Wed Feb 27 10:00:22 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Mar-85 07:01:28 EST
References: <3297@umcp-cs.UUCP> <573@pyuxd.UUCP> <3583@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Huxley College
Lines: 41

>>Note that this "pattern" of random capitalization and quoting only evinced
>>itself after Charley had made remarks about the difference between:
>>	Jewish intolerance       and      "christian" intolerance

> As I explained (but Rich chose not to listen) the quotes around christian in
> that sentence were intended to indicate that a large proportion of those
> "christians" weren't christian in any significant sense.

Right.  I understood then and now.  Thus, the Jews who engaged in what you
called Jewish intolerance *were* in fact Jews (unlike the "christians" who
weren't Christians, or is it christians?), representative of Judaism in a
way that "christians" aren't truly representative of Christianity.  According
to your capitalization and enquoting scheme.

>>>Notice, however, that the archbishop did not demand rules to prevent these
>>>proselytizers from continuing in their practices.  There seems to be a 
>>>problem in this newsgroup in distinguishing moral persuasion (what the
>>>archbishop is doing) and moral coercion (writing "morality" into law).

>>Here Charley praises the archbishop because he didn't demand "rules" for
>>prevention of proselytization, he just expected some common courtesy and
>>respect for other people's beliefs.  Considering that the biggest single
>>complaint about the evangelistic Christian right is their desire to legislate
>>morality (*their* morality, of course), it is more than ironic that Charley
>>claims there's a problem in this newsgroup regarding the ability to
>>distinguish moral persuasion from moral coercion.

> So join the fundamentalists, Rich, where you belong.  Your ignorance of the
> rest of Christendom is as vast as theirs, especially when you try to lump
> the Protestant mainstream in with them.

From your own private and public communication, Charles, indicating very
clearly your opinions of Jews, homosexuals, etc., I'd say again (as I've
said before) that it frightens me that a self-proclaimed "liberal Christian"
like you, who claims to dissociate himself from Falwellism, has so much in
common with that movement in terms of attitude.  I don't do the lumping.
The lumping is evidenced by the attitudes.
Charley Wingate    umcp-cs!mangoe
-- 
"Which three books would *you* have taken?"
				Rich Rosen	ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr