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!linus!decvax!bellcore!petrus!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: support for areligious moral codes
Message-ID: <1849@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Oct-85 23:45:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1849
Posted: Mon Oct  7 23:45:14 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 10-Oct-85 06:42:40 EDT
References: <623@hou2g.UUCP> <5884@cbscc.UUCP> <1154@mhuxt.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 15

I have to offer my admiration to Paul Torek.  Though we have disagreed in
the past about many things, the courage to take on someone as obstinately
wishfully thinking as Paul Dubuc, who insists despite ALL evidence to the
contrary (much of which was well presented by Torek) that moral codes MUST
be rooted in religion, is admirable.  Of course there are solid rational
reasons (such as your fine example of why we "side with the victim"---simply
because we don't want interfering aggressive acts around) for a very solid
and well founded moral code, most of which even coincides with certain
supposed tenets of Christianity (odd, that...).  Some people, of course,
want to impose MORE than the mininum necessary, for no other reason than
to get rid of things they happen not to like.  This is perhaps one of the
single biggest things we have to fear in the years to come.
-- 
Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen.
					Rich Rosen    pyuxd!rlr