Re: virus: Blue Pill Theorum

James Veverka (
Sat, 22 May 1999 05:39:11 -0400 (EDT)

Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

Dan.......Well yawe....editorials vs editorials, legislative combat, activist networks, political talk show debates, nasty bumper stickers (I have one that says "Right Wing Sucks") Anything more and I would be condoning what I condemn: extremism!

Any legislation has to be in keeping with freedom of religion and freedom FROM religion, and a strict adherence to secular government. I for one think that we need more legislation to undo what religious conservatives have foisted upon us in recent times. Did you know that the "in god we trust" was put on our money in the 1950s and was not a founding father idea? This is just the tip of the iceberg. jim

Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Message/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

Received: from ( by; Fri, 21 May 1999 23:52:42
	-0700 (PDT)

Return-Path: <>
Received: from ( []) by (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97)
	with ESMTP id XAA10432; Fri, 21 May 1999 23:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by (8.9.1/8.9.1) id
	AAA11601 for virus-outgoing; Sat, 22 May 1999 00:37:12 -0600
X-Sender: X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1 Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 23:36:07 -0700
From: Dan Plante <>
Subject: Re: virus: Blue Pill Theorum
In-Reply-To: <> References: <"Rhonda Chapman" <> Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <> Sender:
Precedence: bulk

At 11:22 PM 21/05/99 -0400, James Veverka wrote:

>Roni........I live next to a church and they are all real nice
>people.......UNTIL they attempt to legislate my life with their beliefs.
>Then its war. So it matters to me WHAT they believe in their service to
>their god. The evangelism that continually attacks the separation
>between religion and government that is dangerous to liberty has to be
>treated with hostility.

I agree, as long as the hostility doesn't manifest itself in anything more extreme than words. Otherwise, we'd be legislating _their_ lives with _our_ beliefs. It would also contravene other ideals of your constitution such as presumption of innocence and freedom of (not from) religion. I assume that's what you meant, James, but I wasn't entirely sure.