Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!flink
From: flink@umcp-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: govt. vs. religion, Indiana style
Message-ID: <7476@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12-Jun-84 17:55:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.7476
Posted: Tue Jun 12 17:55:14 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 13-Jun-84 06:48:11 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 21

Ah, the joys of iconoclasm!

It seems that many of those who get labeled "secular humanists" or who tend
to take what are called "liberal" positions on social issues are now
supporting the Indiana law to override religious objections to medical care
for children.  Could these be the same people who I so often hear (on or off
the net) railing against "imposing morality", who now ask the government to
interfere in the moral decisions of these parents?  It would seem that
whether "imposing morality" is wrong, all depends on whose ox is getting
gored!

Don't get me wrong:  I support the Indiana legislation too.  Three cheers
for imposing morality, as long as it's the right one!  (Or, failing that, a
good one!)  And now, would it be too much to ask my fellow agnostics (that's
right, fellow) and the adherents of liberal religions, etc., to give up a
stupid slogan, now that I've caught you in the act of hypocrisy?

				"The ideas you love to hate" 
			from
				--The aspiring iconoclast,
				Paul Torek, umcp-cs!flink