[Vision2020] Religious Diversity Education

[Ted Moffett]

Ted wrote:

> > Is support of the death penalty characteristic of dictatorships and so
> > called right wing regimes?  I could say it's a right wing position.  
>Your
> > casting of the death penalty as "left wing" reveals a bias on how you 
>view
> > the issue, it seems.  So you think the Vatican is "left wing?"  That
>Canada,
> > Australia, France, England, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, etc. are all "left
> > wing?"  I am so totally bored with this simple minded linear left vs.
>right
> > wing scheme for analyzing politics.
>

Luke replied:

>You''ve got a nasty bias on this issue, don't you?

Ted replies:

And what bias is that, may I ask?  A bias against simple minded analysis?  I 
would call this intelligence, but then perhaps you have a bias against that?


Ted wrote:

>
> > linked to differing interpretations of one of the Ten Commandments. The
> > evidence is overwhelming that such a difference of opinion in 
>Christianity
> > does exist, is fervent and fundamental, involving millions of people who
> > disagree.  The point of emphasizing this disagreement over the
> > interpretation of one of the Ten Commandments is to argue that indeed it
>can
> > be difficult for the flawed and limited human mind to gain perfect
>knowledge
> > of God's laws.
>

Luke replied:


>     Suppose there's a 35 mph sign somewhere in Moscow. Two men walk up, 
>and
>one says, "Thirty-five? That's a fairly safe speed, don't you think?" Then
>the other fellow replies, "Thirty-five? It doesn't say thirty-five, it says
>20. Are you blind or something?" Then an argument ensues between them. But
>the mere existence of a controversy doesn't make the law wrong, or
>confusing. The sign still says 35, and that's still the right speed to go..
>     The reason that there is a controversy over the death penalty is 
>really
>because of man's sinfulness. Whatever God commands us not to do is what we
>want to do the most. He condemns stealing, yet thievery occurs en mass
>throughout the world. He condemns lying, but it is so natural for us to
>deceive others, and sometimes ourselves, when it suits our purposes. He
>condemns fornication, yet there are millions who either do it or tolerate
>it; the same goes for adultery. And the list goes ever on. Everything
>divinely forbidden is sought after, and so when God draws out a just reward
>for the murderer, the world today shuns His justice and lets the slayer get
>off free.
>

Ted replies:

Luke, stay tuned!  I have been doing research on biblical references and 
analysis regarding the death penalty (but not simple minded analysis, sorry 
about my bias!).


Ted wrote:

>
> > Science is a method of gaining knowledge based on replicable experiments
> > and/or data gathering using theory to make inferences from the facts, 
>but
> > this method does not, as you state, "deny the existence of something
>unless
> > it can be chemically diagrammed or manipulated."  If something cannot be
> > chemically diagrammed or manipulated, it may not be understood in these
> > terms, but why does it follow it does not exist, according to science?
> > Scientific method indicates that many possibilities exist, and none can 
>be
> > ruled out till they are examined with experiment and observation and
>theory.
> >   Even then, many explanations for a given phenomena may still be
>possible.
> > What is your point?
>

Luke replied:

>     Oh, I have nothing wrong with science, but it is a tool with limited
>application; you cannot make moral judgments off of scientific knowledge, 
>or
>upon the basis of empirical probability, which is in effect what you  were
>doing.

Ted replies:

So if I use science to conclude that a chemical pollutant has a certain 
probability that it will kill people, and so should be avoided, the use of 
science in this example is invalid?  Notice I am not saying that science 
tells us it is immoral to kill, merely that it is part of the process of 
finding out what does kill, and therefore what to avoid.

PLease supply the quote from my text where I used science as the total basis 
to determine a moral or ethical rule.

I do not believe I have done this.

Ted

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail