Re: Conciliatory moves over Easter

At 10:39 am +0100 29/4/00, yl-ruil wrote:
[....]
>Maybe. I am quite touchy about my religion, and get sick of having to
>validate my beliefs at every turn.
Yes, I was there once.  I had to defend my change of faith at, seemingly,
every turn & it tended to make me touchy also.  Fortunately, that was long
years ago & the occasions when I have to validate my beliefs are far less.

>_No-one_ should have to defend their religion.
Maybe - but the sad fact of life is that one has to - especially in an age
when having any religion at all is looked up as something odd & archaic by
many.

[...]
>
>Sorry for any offense, it was entirely unintentional.
Fair enough - and sorry for any counter-offense  :)

>Well, I believe referring to
>that old conversational advice would be a good idea now: "Don't talk about
>politics or religion; stick to the weather...". Is it sunny where you are?
I've found it's good advice until one gets the feel of the company one's
in.  On this list we've managed, on the whole, not to exclude religion;
Dirk has told us he is a Mormon on several occasions, Philips's Buddhism is
well-known, Aidan Grey has told us of his paganism, Irina has told us she
is Orthodox, we know that Steg (inter alios) is a Jew, Jeffrey Henning has
told us he a Congregationalist, I've not hidden my Catholicism etc
(I know I've not included everyone or every religion a list member has said
s/he hold - please forgive omissions).

We've learnt to do this in a way that seems to be acceptable; basically, I
guess, refer to one's own religion & avoid saying anything negative about
another's.  Stack around, Dan, and I think you'll pick up the way we handle
it.

Ah, politics - not mentioned much and I have sneaking suspicion that it
might prove more divisive than religion.

At 6:10 pm -0400 29/4/00, Padraic Brown wrote:
[....]
>This is the big hitch about talking religion in public. It is often
>too close to the heart and all to trot out in front of everyone else's
>sensibilities. Even what one of us thinks is an innocuous statement,
>maybe not even a statement of belief; a nother can all too easily take
>great and personal offence at.
Yep - that's the difficult part.

>All the same, I dearly love to hear
>about everyone's believes, so don't stop talking shop on my account!
Indeed, I think that we have managed on the whole to be able to mention our
own religious affiliations has added a richness to this list and I agree
that it would be a pity if this stopped.  Ok, there might be an odd
flair-up but even this latest one is now, I think, gone. Dan & I have
obviously misunderstood one another at some point and both wish to stop the
arguments going any further; we are both I think, agreed on both points.
This is, maybe, part of defining the "ground rules" within which we can
freely mention our beliefs.

Ray.

PS - it was sunny here yesterday.  At the moment (7:30 AM) it's a bit
overcast, but I think it's going to brighten up and we'll have another
sunny day.





=========================================
A mind which thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language.
                   [J.G. Hamann 1760]
=========================================