Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) Newsgroups: net.religion,net.news.group Subject: Re: A Proposal for net.religion.coercion Message-ID: <242@pyuxd.UUCP> Date: Tue, 6-Nov-84 10:41:23 EST Article-I.D.: pyuxd.242 Posted: Tue Nov 6 10:41:23 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 8-Nov-84 00:27:34 EST References: <867@ihuxn.UUCP> Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway N.J. Lines: 32 > I propose to setup a new religion subgroup - net.religion.coercion. > The aim of this subgroups will be to: > a. Identify and discuss instances and areas of religious coercion > and oppression. > b. Propose ways to combat religious coercion attempts. > Some Examples of areas of religious coercion and oppression: > 1. Abortion rights > 2. School prayer > 3. Creationism > 3. Book banning. > 4. Witch hunt > 5. Gay harassment [There are TWOOOOOOOOOO... rule #3's!!! :-) ] If people want to see everyone cubbyholed into newsgroups where they will only be talking with those who agree with them, then this subgroup requested by Yosi Hoshen is a MUST. Frankly, to those people who think one reason for net.religion.christian is to keep christian proselytizing out of the main stream, let me say this: I'd much rather have them proselytizing and proposing their imposed moralities and claiming their claims out in broad daylight in a mainstream newsgroup. Because as long as we believe in their freedom to express their viewpoints, others will have the freedom (no, obligation) to try to point out precisely what they are doing. Unfortunately, the very nature of isolationist subgroups makes discussion between people of dissimilar (or diametrically opposed) viewpoints next to impossible. Which is, unfortunately, exactly what some of the proponents may want. Makes for a better world, I guess, from their perspective. A quieter one, perhaps, and a less questioning one... -- "If we took the bones out, it wouldn't be crunchy!" Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr