ripdog

I read this article last Sunday and was struck by the way Pitts chose to end it. I'm a bit confused. Is he saying that athiests are truly horrible people? Or is he joking around, really implying that athiests would probably be less likely to commit horrible acts of violence? All I know for sure at this point is this (about that last sentence): What a wierd thing to say.

<a href="http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=pitts01&date=20021201&query=imagine+w hat+they+might+do" target="_blank">Seattle Times Op-Ed article</a>

Is there any way to preview posts so that I can make sure my link works before I formally post it?

[ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: ripdog ]

[ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: ripdog ]</p>

Orestes

He was being sarcastic. I think that's why the imagine is emphasised, those people wouldnt have done a damn thing in that article had they been non-religious .

Prodros

ripdog,

This article by Leonard Pitts has been addressed <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=47&t=001409" target="_blank">here</a>.

I must say that I agree with his point of view; Pitts' conclusion is not against those who are non-religious, but against those who use religion as a justification to whatever they may do.

Prodros...

ripdog

Thank you. That answers my question very directly. It was such an absurd statement that I guessed he had to be either very clever or very stupid, I just wasn't sure which it was (though I suspected that it was a joke).