Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utastro.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!utastro!padraig From: padraig@utastro.UUCP (Padraig Houlahan) Newsgroups: net.religion.christian Subject: Re: Evidences for Religion (reposting) Message-ID: <353@utastro.UUCP> Date: Sun, 14-Jul-85 16:02:31 EDT Article-I.D.: utastro.353 Posted: Sun Jul 14 16:02:31 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 06:55:51 EDT References: <1182@pyuxd.UUCP> <800@umcp-cs.UUCP>, <1202@pyuxd.UUCP> <2127@pucc-h> Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX Lines: 14 > If human beings, as you believe, are mere biological organisms, bags of > protoplasm, collections of chemicals, pieces of meat, then why should there > be even the rudimentary morality of non-interference rules which you have > plugged many times? Why should it matter in the least if one collection of > chemicals -- if that's all it is -- is violently put permanently out of > commission? This seems to be a notable logical inconsistency between > different parts of your beliefs. It is consistent to maintain a view point which accords protection to members of society on the basis of the increased stability and comfort resulting for the group as a whole. This approach does not require absolute moralistic criteria. Padraig Houlahan.