A Fallacious Tear-Jerking Scenario
Greg, Nancy, and James Todd todds@pa.net
Thu, 11 Sep 1997 17:03:49 -0400 (00874033429, 199709112103.RAA32473@emh1.pa.net)
><snip>
>NANCY
>Yes, Matt. What one *can* do and what one *does* do are two different
>things. That is why I find the xtian god so damned abhorent. He could
>prevent innocent children from suffering, but he choses not to. He could
>have made himself known to everyone, and thus have saved countless millions
>from the neverending torment *he* choses to impose upon those he is
>supposed
>to love, yet he prefers to torture his creation. He made his own son suffer
>for the sins of others even though he is perfectly capable of forgiving
>sins
>without human sacrifice. The only reasonable conclusion to draw is that the
>xtian god is a sadistic bastard who gets his jollies from human suffering.
>If a human stands idly by while others suffer or causes others to suffer,
>as
>the xtian god does, we call him a heartless, inhuman monster. Perhaps we
>should just call him God.
>
>MATT
>What would you do if your son/daughter was being raped by a group of men.
>Intervene or stand back and watch?
>
>Thanks
>
>Matt
>
>
NANCY
What is the relevancy of this question?
Nancy Todd
todds@pa.net