Same old objections from Mr. Jonathan Howell LOL

by Miguel

 

JONATHAN:
"You still have not given even one logical reason for a dietary restriction for philosophical, religious, reasons."


Yes I have actually - whether you forgot, never read it, or couldn't be bothered I really don't care to speculate.
However I'll repeat myself for your benefit:
The reasons for dietary laws conform to one of several reasons: health (in the case of pork for example - prevention of the spread of trichinosis which is quite common in the Middle East and other hot regions), philosophical - in order to differente temselves from non-religionists through dietary restrictions, religious - ritual purity or holiness, or for symbolic purposes.


JONATHAN:
"But to do so for some wacky religious reason, or because it is perceived as "unclean" is simply stupid."


It's "wacky" to you and as such displays how closed minded you are. Religious or philosophical reasons - be they for purification, symbolism (whether or not they were originally instituted in partr or whole for health reasons) are still REASONS.
Stupidity is the absence of reason.
Your opinions themselves are illogical because your one oft-regurgitated argument centers on a subjective idea of what "stupidity" is rather than what it actually means.

As usual no cee-gar today Jonathan.
;-P

Keep trying though - this is fun. Just remember - make those arguments and objections NOVEL ok?

By the way - when are you going to answer my post in NAiG?
Ever?

;-D



Posted on Oct 28, 2006, 6:13 PM

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home
Responses

Find more forums on Religion and PhilosophyCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2009 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement