(December 17, 2011 at 2:47 am)Rhythm Wrote: Well, if somebody pops up to argue for the factual existence of Hal, his rulebook, and why it belongs in a position of authority in social, scientific, and legal spheres I'll be the first to offer the strong anti-hal arguments. Does that make it easier to understand? All fictional characters need not be argued against. Some apparently do. Believers cant keep their mouths shut and their noses out of places they don't belong.
Yep, that is clear enough. It is the Christian intrusion into public affairs that is the problem. God has nothing to do with it. I remain skeptical on the power of rational argument to help this problem. Perhaps all that is left to us is to rant about the unreasonableness of living in a society where the medieval mind set of the Constitutionally empowered masses is unphased by the fruits of science or rational argument.
Still, in the interest of keeping straight in my own head, I shouldn't want to mistake a good rant for a rational argument.
