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 (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish
Subject: Re: Down to Brass Tacks
Message-ID: <1315@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Jul-85 19:00:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1315
Posted: Thu Jul 25 19:00:34 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jul-85 01:57:32 EDT
References: <11605@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1236@pyuxd.UUCP> <338@mhuxi.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 27

>>What I am trying to demonstrate is the lack of rooting in actual fact
>>that these beliefs have, which shouldn't dissuade anyone from holding
>>them, but should certainly dissuade them from trying to justify imposing
>>it on others. [ROSEN]

> Okay Rich, this may have been asked before.  I can't prove that the Torah was
> given at Mt. Sinai and that G-d exists; I can't even try to offer proof.
> So, the question to you is:
> Can you offer proof that G-d doesn't exist and the Torah wasn't given at Mt.
> Sinai? [DAVID GREEN]

I always thought it was those who posited the extraordinary claims who had the
burden of proof, not those who didn't posit such claims.  In the absence of
evidence, your claims are just claims.  They may be axioms in YOUR personal
belief system, but that doesn't oblige me to accept them as axioms just because
you choose to, for whatever reason.  If you intend to make me or anyone else
follow your rules, the burden of proof is on your shoulders.  A burden Samet
and his ilk seem unwilling to accept, perhaps preferring that we all just take
his axioms as givens and accept whatever he has to say.

> All I want to know is "the lack of rooting in actual fact that these beliefs
> have".

See the second sentence in your own paragraph (">") above.  That sums it up.
-- 
"Because love grows where my Rosemary goes and nobody knows but me."
						Rich Rosen   pyuxd!rlr