Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Don Black says goodbye....
Message-ID: <4493@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 1-Apr-85 22:49:24 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.4493
Posted: Mon Apr  1 22:49:24 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 3-Apr-85 02:45:10 EST
References: <273@unm-la.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 45

In article <273@unm-la.UUCP> cs193bah@unm-la.UUCP writes:

>Speaking of Gillette, he seems to think that Don Black is a good
>'ole boy with just a lot of questions (like "What death camps?").    
>This scares me.  Either Gillette is incredibly naive or incredibly
>deceptive.  Even at the finale, Black made the following comment:
>ONLY THOSE INDIVIDUALS LIKE RICH ROSEN AND BYRON HOWES WHO HAVE
>CONSISTENTLY ARGUED FOR REASON AND KNOWLEDGE IN HUMAN DECISIONS
>AS OPPOSED TO SUPERSTITION AND INTOLERANCE MADE THEIR VOICES 
>HEARD 100% AGAINST DON BLACK.

But Rich argues against EVERYTHING to which anyone has ever attached the
name of Christ, and thus does not count.  Byron Howes, if I recall correctly,
is sort of a gnostic christian.  Bill, if you are going to claim that Rich
argues for reason, you are all wet.  As far as I can tell, Rich is arguing
for shouting at the top of your lungs.

I too was puzzled at Jeff's response, but unlike many on this net, I do not
presume to know what's happening down there at Duke.  I rather had the
impression that he simply had not seen much of the argument.  I fully
apreciate his reluctance to jump into the fray, seeing as how Rich had
decided to turn the whole thing into a kind of litmus test (one, I might
add, which could not be passed).

>It is true that later Charley Wingate and Richard Carnes made
>their voices heard.  And even Marchionni later said that Black's
>positions were not of the RC church, and went back to discussing
>transubstantion.  BUT IF IT WERE NOT FOR PEOPLE LIKE ROSEN OR MARONEY
>OR HOSHEN, WE WOULD BE STILL LISTENING TO DEBATES ON WHETHER OR NOT
>THE JEWS ARE CHRIST-KILLERS, ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A HOLOCAUST,
>OR WHETHER OR NOT JESUS WAS AN ARYAN AND HITLER WAS HIS PROPHET.

The last statement may be true, but not for the reasons Bill implies.  This
whole thing had apparently passed through several rounds of replies before
I was even aware of it.  Having 'rn' at my disposal, I do not hesitate to
edit out great reams of material.  It appears therefore that we would NOT
have ever heard these arguments had not Rich and his ilk drawn them out of
the man.  I suspect my experience parallels that of many others on the net.
When you start to tar people because they do not respond to articles,
remember that the net does not represent ideal communications, or even GOOD
communications.  Things take time to propagate, if they propagate, and I'm
sure that a lot of material expires before I ever see it, even as often as
I read this stuff.

Charley Wingate   umcp-cs!mangoe