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.