<div>"I am finished with this topic."</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Chas</div>
<div>--------</div>
<div>Good. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>I don't fully understand why you were opposed to what I wrote on this topic to begin with, when you wrote "I'm sorry, Ted, but this is simply wrong," in response to my comment that the belief that "Everyone deserves death" is "characteristic of the extremist dangerous beliefs of cults." It is. No over explanation, back peddling or ridiculous justifications. Objecting by claiming such beliefs are mainstream is like objecting to calling the Nazis "extremist" during their rise in Germany, because the German people voted them into power. Ridiculous.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>It is disquieting to read someone of your intelligence objecting to the use of plain language, the word "extremist," to describe extremist irrational nonsense, when direct plain language is appropriate to not euphemize the issue, given the disturbing impacts of extremist beliefs of this sort. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>This seems somehow connected to your critique of some people locally for their "intolerance" of some forms of extremism (as expressed in some local churches), as if they are supposed to sit back with a smile, and let the extremists peddle their nonsense without vehement objection. At times you have appeared as a sophisticated apologist for the churches under question, even if stating you disagree with their ideology.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I agree with Ralph Nielsen that perhaps Nick Gier should not have apologized with his "Moscow Taliban" comment, though I understand that Gier was promoting civility.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The following spells it out:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2008-May/053619.html">http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2008-May/053619.html</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ted Moffett</div>
<div> </div>
<div>On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Ted Moffett <<a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/vision2020">starbliss at gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> </div>
<div>><i> A rather wooden narrow definition of the word "extremist," that has been<br></i>><i> applied in this thread,<br></i></div>
<div>A rather ill-considered misapplication of the word "extremist" has indeed been applied in this thread, and then it has been defended ad nauseum, replete with enough backpedaling, over-explanation, and ridiculous justification to make Hillary Clinton proud. I am finished with this topic. </div>
<div>Chas </div><br>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/20/08, <b class="gmail_sendername">Chasuk</b> <<a href="mailto:chasuk@gmail.com">chasuk@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:40 AM, Ted Moffett <<a href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>> Again, I will state, this kind of thinking (Everyone deserves death) is<br>> characteristic of the extremist dangerous beliefs of cults, that<br>> use tactics to control people by making them feel inherently and inescapably<br>
> "bad," then offer them only one option to redeem their flawed moral fate...<br>> Our way or damnation!<br><br>I'm sorry, Ted, but this is simply wrong. It might be nice to be able<br>to consign this unattractive thinking to the "extremist dangerous<br>
beliefs of cults," but it wouldn't be true. This is not only what<br>most Christians who have ever lived have believed, but it is what most<br>of them believe now, at the core of their beliefs.<br><br>Most Christians still believe in Original Sin. But maybe you are not<br>
making a contrary claim and I am just misinterpreting. Are you<br>instead merely expressing your personal distaste of this belief?<br><br>I agree that this belief is ridiculous, though not extremist, because<br>extremist implies that it lies at the fringes, when it does not.<br>
<br>It might be that modern pastors candy-coat it to make it more<br>palatable to their congregation, I don't know. I'm sure there are<br>some pastors who have discarded this ugly, crippling belief<br>altogether. But it is still the majority belief within Christendom.<br>
<br>You speak of Original Sin as a doctrine entertained by "some<br>religions," when it has its roots in, and is virtually unique to,<br>Christianity. It isn't part of Islam, Buddhism, or any other extant<br>
major religion.<br><br>Interestingly (and to demonstrate the extent to which Original Sin<br>still holds sway), the official Vatican astronomer recently stated:<br>""In my opinion this possibility (of life on other planets) exists";<br>
"intelligent beings, created by God may exist in outer space" and<br>"some aliens could even be free from original sin" concluding "there<br>could be (other beings) who remained in full friendship with their<br>
creator."<br><br>Chas<br></blockquote></div><br>