Re: OT: "Science is interesting; if you don't agree, you can fuck off."
|Date:||Wednesday, November 14, 2007, 19:32|
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Philip Newton wrote:
> On Nov 14, 2007 6:00 PM, <MorphemeAddict@...> wrote:
> > In a message dated 11/14/2007 10:08:42 AM Central Standard Time,
> > jsjonesmiami@YAHOO.COM writes:
> > > >To go back to the religion thing: if you
> > > >truly believe that everyone who doesn't share your faith is
> > > > going to be damned for all eternity, how can you in good
> > > > conscience *not* proselytize?
> > >
> > > I agree. But aren't we getting close to dangerous territory here?
> > Can you be more specific about "dangerous territory"?
> I interpret it as "no cross, no crown" territory.
>One part of this thread is directing into the science vs. religion
debate which is Cross; the other part seems to be edging around the
ethics of (state) intervention, IMHO, which is Crown. Neither of which
We can always treat the title as a translation exercise :) In
Lla yscient es interessant, s'w ngongwenith rhen, gw phodeth ffudergw
Now I will have to research to confirm if Brithenig does treat 'fuck
off' as a reflexive. It seems to be normal in Romance languages for
turning transitive verbs into intransitives.