Re: DISCUSSION/Iraq and domestic protest

[Mushroom <mushroom@moscow.com>]

Douglas wrote:
> 
I support some of what we have done thus far in this war,
while opposing the
> various pieces of a police state that are being assembled in the name of
> our war on terror. It has been well said that the first casualty in any war
> is truth. But the second is liberty.
> 
> But in the meantime, I would like to come to my personal request, addressed
> to all ethical relativists who have posted to this list in the past,
> whether opposed to the war or supportive of it. For the duration of the
> fighting, would you please withdraw from the public discussion of the war.
> I am not saying this to be rude -- it is just that the relativist (on his
> own terms) has nothing to contribute.


The way Doug Wilson uses the term, I don't think there are
many ethical relativists posting to this list. I doubt there
are ANY. What we have here is Doug Wilson trying to whip the
same old dog, or flame the same old straw man.

But every time I find someone else opposed to the "war," I
am heartened, no matter what their stand on other issues.

After emphasizing that this has NOTHING to do with ethical
relativism, I'd like to share -- as a secular humanist -- a
definition of secular humanism. It is not original with me,
but it makes a great deal of sense to me:

Secular Humanism is a way of thinking and living that aims
to bring out the best in people so that all people can have
the best in life. Secular humanists reject supernatural and
authoritarian beliefs. They affirm that we must take
responsibility for our own lives and the communities and
world in which we live. Secular humanism emphasizes reason
and scientific inquiry, individual freedom and
responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need
for tolerance and cooperation.

I wish the best for the sense of community which we may in
the future attain in Moscow.

Don Coombs