Posted by Lorelei (220.127.116.11) on January 29, 2002 at 11:44:02:
In Reply to: Re: Some Call it Emotionalism posted by pancho on January 29, 2002 at 11:35:58:
: I told you already you nit wit...I accept your definition of me...ANY definition...and everyone here and at aina and the world over is grateful to you for doing it and clearing things up...now, wanna discuss something else...like the topic you already evaded twice?
Ok, "poo poo head," my main argument with you is this: books in and of themselves do not cause mass murders. Of course, the books don't get up
and throw themselves at our heads and by some miracle of osmosis we are programmed to act as the book says. My argument is that people read books like the Qu'ran, the Manifesto, the Bible, and must apply some subjective interpretation of
the text in front of them. This is why some muslims act this way, some christians act this way, etc. But the religion is not the sole nor
overriding factor that determines human behavior, my argument is that there are a multitude of factors, some with more weight than others but none assuming greater than 50% responsibility for human behavior, that collectively shape how humans act.
Post a Followup