Thank you.
The person coldly responded that someone at the gallows will grab hold of anything. I thought that crossed the line.
It's not clear to me what principle is behind your concern here. Certainly the comment thoughtlessly portrayed your grandmother and disregarded your personal loss upon her death, but that's a question of general poor manners. The subject could have been anything, not necessarily religion. Unless you're suggesting that non-believers generally have poor manners, which I don't think your are. As for the matter of people often finding religion at the end of life, that, I think, is indisputable. (The Novak book I was yammering about over the weekend had an anecdote about Alexander Hamilton doing that.) Again, the style with which that was conveyed had an edge, but the point seems harmless enough. Is it the edge that you feel crossed the line? Can you zero in more on just what it was about that transaction that was over the line?
I mean, how much can one flog the Crusades
I'm sure that is way beyond tedious for you. It's even getting tedious for me, although I subscribe to the point. I agree with you that flogging the Crusades indicates animus toward the Church, and probably organized religion, in general, as well as making the point that decent behavior and religion don't correlate. I don't see why you find animus towards believers in that, though. Organized religion and personal belief are different things. Many religious people despise organize religion. I think that the Yates family is among them. I realize that things get all mushed together in these discussions, but I don't know that assuming animus toward believers is valid in that case.
(to be continued) |
