Re: [lojban] Re: lujvo

[Invent Yourself <xod@sixgirls.org>]

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Robin Lee Powell wrote:


> I think I maybe just misunderstand lo.  To me, 'lo cevni' sounds like
> the English phrase 'the One True God(s)', which has a _huge_ mess of
> underlying assumptions, many of which ignore the beliefs of 2/3s or so
> of the planet, at least, depending on which god you're reffering to.
> 
> Any set of unexamined assumptions that denigrate that many people
> offends me (a lot of the assumptions westerners make about fat people
> and health issues related to that, for example), but the fact that it's
> about religion may make it more touchy.  Or maybe it's just because
> no-one ever stopped me in the street to scream "All fat people are going
> to die of heart attacks!", whereas having strangers yell at me that
> "Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the light!"" has happened so
> often as to be almost commonplace.


If a Christian really believes there is only one True God, it behooves
them to use "lo" to indicate their absolute belief. It is not a relative,
questionable point of debate for them. The fact that you don't happen to
agree is irrelevant to them.

If we restrict lo for points which are never debated then lo can never be
used, since a trivial nonexistence argument can be raised for anything
(although I will not participate in a discussion fleshing this out).


-----
In the Linux world, all of the major distributions have turned into 
companies. How much revenue would Red Hat generate if their product 
was flawless? How much support would they sell?