Re: [OT] Good, evil and religion [WAS] Re: A way to compile 3rd party modules into deb system?

[Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/12/07 02:58, Joe Hart wrote:
> Celejar wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 May 2007 11:40:20 +0200
>> Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl> wrote:
> 
>>> Celejar wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 10 May 2007 11:40:01 +0200
>>>> Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron Johnson wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>> I am playing the Devil's advocate here.  So I might as well fulfill my
>>>>>>> role.  So, you're saying God was merciful on Isaac because a lamb was
>>>>>>> sacrificed instead.  Fine.  So God demanded cruelty to an animal, which
>>>>>>> is also against our modern laws.
>>>>>> Cruelty?  Where does that come from?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or are you a vegan?
>>>>> No, but I don't think it is right to kill an animal for any purpose than
>>>>> to eat it, or perhaps to end it's suffering.  But, that's where we can
>>>> What possible logical / moral justification do you have for that
>>>> distinction? If one believes that there's some purpose to animal
>>>> sacrifice, and the Bible clearly does, than how on earth can you
>>>> conclude that that purpose is any less of a legitimate one than
>>>> nourishment?
>>> Well, just try it.  Go out and sacrifice a few dogs or cats and watch
>>> the Humane Society step in.  Do it in front of the police headquarter
>> I don't particularly care what they think. You are attacking the Bible
>> as advocating immoral behavior because the Humane Society disagrees
>> with biblical morality?
> 
>>> building to save a bit of time.  Oh wait.  We don't eat dogs and cats
>>> (well in some places they do) go sacrifice a little lamb.  Make sure you
>>> steal it from Mary. ;)
>>>
>>> To me, animal sacrifice is immoral.  To the law it is too.  That is my
>>> logical justification.
>> I asked you for a logical justification for a distinction between
>> killing an animal for food and killing it for religious ritual, and
>> you're responding that the distinction is that that's how you and the
>> law feel. Surely you can do better than that!
> 
>>> Joe
>> Celejar
>> --
>> mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email
>> ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator
> 
> 
> 
> I did, in another message in this thread.
> 
> I will quote my own message:
> <qoute>
> The difference is that the person "dressing" the lamb is preparing it
> for use, usually to eat.  That serves a purpose in at least nourishing
> the body.  I suppose sacrificing the lamb could be said to be nourishing
> the spirit, but I don't think a court of law would see it that way.
> </quote>
> 
> So, what I am saying is that to some people it may seem justified to
> slaughter an animal to feed their "spirit".  I just don't think that the
> authorities, if they found out about it would accept this excuse as
> cause for committing an illegal act.
> 
> That being said, if you want to do it, go right ahead.  I have no
> problem with you doing whatever ritual you feel is appropriate to your
> faith, as long as it doesn't involve me.

It's my lamb and the church I belong to has given me permission to
kill this livestock animal.  As long as we're not in the city limits
(where livestock aren't allowed), I don't see how the authorities
could have any legal issues with such a sacrifice.

No, I take that back: they might be concerned if the blood were left
on the alter.  It would attract more flies than you could shake a
stick at, and they'd lay eggs and thus create maggots and then more
flies.

So yes, the government probably would create certain minimal health
regulations, but I'm sure that the SCOTUS would allow it on 1st
Amendment grounds.

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGRZQXS9HxQb37XmcRAp2pAJ9XFTR93djrm1lCcjV0QjUV6kyhgwCfQXY4
Hd3Mxe/24cJ81z2cL3o5/as=
=iWfm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----