Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sfmag.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!mhuxm!sftig!sftri!sfmag!samet
From: samet@sfmag.UUCP (A.I.Samet)
Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish
Subject: Nausea ad Nauseum
Message-ID: <622@sfmag.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 8-Jul-85 01:29:39 EDT
Article-I.D.: sfmag.622
Posted: Mon Jul  8 01:29:39 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 8-Jul-85 07:29:34 EDT
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Summit, NJ
Lines: 44

> ...  The point being:  you have based your views on
> what is right on the content of Torah.  But who on earth are you to say
> that other people are obliged to hold that same view?  You feel bound
> to those laws for yourself, and that is fine.  But to claim that OTHERS
> *must* adhere to them because you do is ludicrous.

1 - Believe it or not, I don't expect anyone to accept the  Torah
without proof of its validity.

2 - As I have explained previously, it is virtually impossible to
do justice to the issue of proof of the validity of Torah  within
the limits   of net discussions. I therefore  suggested   reading
material on this extensive and complicated subject for anyone who
is genuinely interested in exploring it.

3 - If there were a  net.atheism  or  net.antireligion   I  would
consider it inappropriate to harass contributors of that net with
my beliefs. There would be no purpose in  this,  and  no  genuine
dialogue   would   be   possible,   unless   I  were  willing  to
painstakingly prove my axioms to to all the  atheists  and  anti-
religionists for whom that net was dedicated.

4 - When addressing net.religion.jewish, I feel free  to  express
Torah views, as such, without having to prove the axioms of Torah
belief as a precondition for expressing these views. If there are
atheistic  contributors, I  would hope that they remain cognizant
of  the context of this net, just as I would if I were writing in
net.atheism.

5 -  Within  net.religion,jewish,  I  am  willing  to  engage  in
discourse  with  anyone  who is sincerely interested in exploring
the Jewish religion.

6 - Unfortunately, I made the mistake of debating someone who has
no  interest whatsoever in the Jewish (or any)  religion and  who
argues solely for the sake of malicious antagonism.  I  apologize
to   net  readers   for  my  role  in  encouraging  the  endless,
cyclical, redundant monologues which have ensued.  I will try  to
restrain myself from being baited into exchanges with people  who 
are  not  seeking  real discourse. I  hope that  others  will  do
likewise so that we can get away from the nauseating  and  futile
word contests that we have been witnessing.

                                Yitzchok Samet