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 (Professor Wagstaff) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: Reality (as viewed by Don Black) Message-ID: <635@pyuxd.UUCP> Date: Wed, 6-Mar-85 08:49:00 EST Article-I.D.: pyuxd.635 Posted: Wed Mar 6 08:49:00 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 8-Mar-85 02:42:08 EST References: <888@decwrl.UUCP> Organization: Huxley College Lines: 72 >>Could you please explain why 1) it is the work of an "Antichrist organization" >>when racism is combatted? 2) it is a symptom of a world communist conspiracy >>when racism is combatted? I half expect an answer along the Arndtian terms >>of "If you don't know, you're blind and stupid", but I'd like to see some >>substantiation for this. [ROSEN] > Rich, if you fail to see the obvious, you're blind and stupid.{ :-) } [BLACK] ITYS. (Just when you thought it was safe to have a reasoned argument--- ARNDT II :-?) > Now, in all seriousness, there is justification for armed revolution > when a government is abusive of the rights of men. Terrorism, however, has no > place in modern society, whether it's the bombing of a library in Torrence, > California, or the bombing of a marketplace in Cape Town, or the massacre of > civilians in a refugee camp in Beirut. There is no justification in any > revolution for the slaughter of innocent bystanders. I would guess that includes firebombing abortion clinics and attempts to murder Supreme Court Justices (all, of course, in an effort to "preserve a right to 'life'"). But what of your answer to those who would disagree with you: > And then there are those "Americans" who would want a Communist govern- > ment here in the US. I have an answer for them, but most people get > squeamish at the thought. I fear no man, and when I'm dead and buried, > there's more like me to take my place. What is this "thought" that most people get squeamish at? Why are your postings so rife with hypocrisy and double standard? Considering that fact, and the sources you offer, little can be said in defense of your ridiculous propositions. > Besides, the whole frappin' world knows that South Africa is a treasure > house of natural resources, and it is a target of the Soviet Union. The most > obvious way for the Soviets to take it over is to let the Africans kill each > other, and walk in after the shooting's stopped. It worked in Cuba, it worked > in Viet Nam, it's working in Central America, and it will work in Africa, too. I'd think that it "worked" as a "tactic" (intentional or not---amazing how some people necessarily ascribe intention and purpose based solely on what they would like to believe) due to the "help" this country gave to make it become so. The most obvious way we can help the Soviets (obviously our rivals, but does that necessarily make them "evil"?) is to allow repression to perpetuate, to make sure that we are viewed in the eyes of repressed people as being allied with the repressors, and to act only once it's too late (and then by seeking to "restore order in our best interests"). This is politics and not religion. > As far as Communism being part of the Antichrist conspiracy, I do > believe the answer to that is painfully obvious. By assertion. > As I have previously stated, there > were over 600 churches in the city of Moscow prior to the Bolshevik > revolution. Today there are less than 60. The American Communist Party was > one of the biggest contributors to the great atheist theologian, Madalyn > Murray O'Hare, during her vendetta to remove prayer from the government > schools. (Let me add a few more interesting statistics about the altruism of > the Bolsheviks. In the first 12 months of the Communist regime, they are > known to have murdered 31 bishops, 1650 priests and ministers, and over 2 > million Chistian lay people. How much more anti-Christ can a group be?) Anti-Christian (and anti-religion) certainly. Precisely because Communism seeks to become the "new religion"---complete with a new bible, a new clergy, and a new church. YOU might prefer the old bible, clergy, and church. I'd prefer none at all. At least when it comes to being "in charge" of people's lives. Frankly, I'd expect negative propaganda from you about your rivals. One has to look beyond such stuff to see facts. -- Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen. Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr