On 1/27/2011 9:55 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 19:11:06 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>
>> Yes, well.. Those would be the sports "nuts". My point was, when push
>> comes to shove, among religions, everyone has something they are *nuts*
>> about.
>
> The vast majority of religious people (or people who self-identify as
> such) just go to church on Sunday and get on with their lives.  Of course
> you never hear about them, you only hear about the lunatics, because the
> normal people aren't interesting news.
>
> It's been my experience that *most* people who are religious also won't
> get offended by something you say about their religion if you frame it in
> a way that isn't offensive.
>
> If you walk into an LDS wardhouse and start screaming "you're all nuts,
> Jesus never came to the US and you're all LOOZERZ!@!!@!@!@", you'll get a
> strong reaction.
>
> But at the same time, if you sit down with individuals and have a
> rational discussion with them, you may not change their minds, but you'll
> get a respectful discussion.
>
> I know.  I've done it.  (The latter, not the former).
>
> Jim
Again, depends on the point of discussion. An argument is only rational 
if it is *possible* to change someone's mind. If the reason they can't 
is religion, then QED, they are not rational about that subject.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message