From rlpowell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Tue Jun 13 14:25:33 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28292 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2000 21:25:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Jun 2000 21:25:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca) (129.97.134.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Jun 2000 21:25:32 -0000 Received: from calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA18251 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:25:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200006132125.RAA18251@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: lujvo In-Reply-To: Message from pycyn@aol.com of "Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:14:43 EDT." <9e.5be0cd1.2677fe43@aol.com> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:25:51 -0400 X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell pycyn@aol.com writes: >In a message dated 00-06-13 16:28:02 EDT, robin writes: > ><< Note that the specific vector of offense for me would be if someone used > a generic expression like that ("one or more mothers of one or more > gods") to refer specifically to Christianity and its mythology. The > all-too-common assumption by Christians that their religion is the only > relevant one pisses me off. >> > >Is this just a contextual thing, that you only come in contact with >Christians, or does the same claim by virtually every other religious group >really leave you unannoyed? In my experience, only the Judeo-Christian religions consistently do that. It annoys me regardless, but when it's a rare thing (i.e. I've never met a Therevadan Bhuddhist who would state something like that) I can treat it as just an abberation. When it's sytemic and common like it is with Christianity (and, to a lesser extent, Islam and Jeudaism; I've only ever been accosted on the street by an Islamic person prosyletizing (very politely) once, and never by a Jewish person) it becomes something that I can't just attribute to a person and have to attribute to the culture of the religion. >Again, it is not an assumption but a carefully defended claim That is not always true. The use of the word God, without qualification, to refer to one particular diety, is only possible when you carry an internalized unspoken assumption that everyone around you shares your world view and/or that those that don't don't matter. The rest snipped because I agreed. -Robin -- http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. ... stripped of our uniqueness as human beings by Darwin, exposed to our own inadequacies by Freud, ... Power -- "the ability to bring about our desires" -- is all that we have left. --- Michael Korda, _Power!_