From: spam@hotmail.com   
      
   Son of Cormack wrote:   
   > "David V."  wrote   
   >   
   >> Son of Cormack wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Like so many others Dave you tie the word and concept of   
   >>> Religion to the supernatural forms it has taken up to this   
   >>>  point.   
   >>   
   >> No, I don't tie the word to anything - the definition of the   
   >>  word does. That is unless you with to base your argument on   
   >>  an equivocation.   
   >>   
   >>> Religion which find it's root in the recognition of Human   
   >>>  evolutionary achievement and potentialities *can* unite   
   >>> people for the good of all.   
   >>   
   >> No, it cannot since a religion is necessarily based on a   
   >> belief in gods and such.   
   >   
   > I'm sorry but that is just not true. I will concede that this   
   >  *has* generally been the case in the past but there is no   
   > reason that it should be so.   
      
   Like I said, unless you want to base your argument on an   
   equivocation, religions include gods. There is every reason for   
   it to be so.  Redefining religion to cover everything makes the   
   word so general that it defines nothing and  becomes worthless.   
      
   >>> Can you not see that?   
   >>   
   >> I can see past that. Religions have been used to control   
   >> people, not unite them   
   >   
   > You make my point for me "In the past" and so we are condemned   
   >  to follow the same path and make the same mistakes??   
      
   Yes - as long as there are religions there will be people that   
   will use them to control.   
   --   
   Dave   
      
   "Sacred cows make the best hamburger."  Mark Twain.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)