Re: Prime Ministers should undergo mental checks

"PeteM" <Otcbn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:PDWHhLAqE1DEFwjx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
donot@xxxxxxxxx posted
"Scott" <blackhole@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
I can think of many wars launched in the name of religion

Wrongly if you are referring to true Christianity.

It's the No True Scotsman argument in one of its purest forms.

1. "No Scotsman would take water in his whisky."
2. "But my friend Alec is a Scotsman, and he takes water in his whisky."
3. "Ah, but no *true* Scotsman would take water in his whisky."

Notice the similarity to the PP's argument:

1. "No wars have been launched in the name of Christianity."
2. "But look - this particular war *was* launched in the name of
Christianity. The people who launched it said so."
3. "Ah, but they weren't *true* Christians."

If Christ says Do not kill/lie whatever, and bush kills and lies, does that
prove that the fault is with Christ, or with bush?

- where one
religion targets another. None that I know of was launched in the name
of
atheism.

Doesn't have to be in "name", but in effect and/or by atheists. And it's
not
confined to wars either.

So a war that is not about atheism is an atheist war if it happens to be
launched by atheists. However, a war that is not about Christianity is
*not* a Christian war even if it is launched by Christians. I see it all
clearly now.


Maybe you'd prefer to live under an atheistic government, which would
do
away with freedom of speech, movement, press, and ownership.

Yes indeed I would prefer that to a christian country which would do
away with freedom of speech, movement, press, and ownership.

Except that a Christian country would not do that,

Or rather, a *true* Christian country would not do that. Because if a
country did that, then it wouldn't be a *true* Christian country, right?

--
PeteM
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
http://www.SecureIX.com ***


.

Relevant Pages