RE: Compassion

["David Douglas" <ddouglas@pacsim.com>]

Ted Moffet says:

"You do a disservice to your ideology and/or theology by coming to the
defense of misogynist mud slinging."
Ted,

I *just* about gave a little preamble in my letter distancing myself from
Mr. Harrell.  However, I really didn't think it was necessary because that
wasn't the point of my post.  For the record, I neither justify nor defend
what Mr. Harrell wrote.

I see no active defense for Mr. Harrell in my post.  My "defense" of him,
such as it was, came from my disagreement about *your* reasoning.  Based on
your reasoning, I saw no basis for *you* to make any kind of value judgment
at all.  That you can indicates (to me) that your reasoning was
inconsistent; whether you agree with my reasoning or not, it does not
constitute a defense of Mr. Harrell.  Lucy made a pretty good case, I
thought.

Perhaps I was in error in picking that particular example, especially since,
based on your response, I didn't communicate my point well.  Mind if I try
again, sans Mr. Harrell?  By way of a less volatile(?) example, you seem to
be disagreeing with Doug Wilson in a different thread:  let me rephrase and
ask again a couple of my questions.


Mr. Moffet writes:
"  ...mindset, that accepts the validity of and sacredness of the many
valuable cultural and religious traditions of the human race.  "

And I ask:
	What, (and/or how) specifically, does one believe that is consistent with,
and accepts as valid, the many religious traditions of the human race?
and
	"Some say there is no God, while others say God is everything (or rather
everything is God).  If everyone can be correct, why not Doug Wilson? "



David Douglas