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