Re: MD quality religion

From: Wim Nusselder (
Date: Fri Mar 26 2004 - 07:21:40 GMT

  • Next message: Michael Mathews: "Re: MD quality religion"

    Dear Matt P., Michael, Leland, Dan (rycheworld) and David M.,

    I'm getting a bit tired of explaining that this thread is NOT meant to argue
    about religion, but to present religious practises, to ask clarifications
    and to vote on their relative quality. Please continu your type of
    discussion elsewhere, e.g. in the 'religious content & necessity of
    religion' thread. (This refers to the postings from 25 Mar 2004 by Matt P.
    00:16:18 +0000, Michael 03:05:43, 04:00:00, 22:02:42 and 22:23:05 -0500,
    Leland 07:52:06 -0600, Dan 09:23:17 -0500 and David M. 18:48:05 -0000.)

    What I propose here is NOT 'testing the MoQ against religion' (Leland), but
    applying the MoQ to religion and testing religions against each other. If
    you contest that a 'best religion' exists, Matt (is that what you meant?),
    you are either contesting the MoQ, which holds that everything that exists
    has/is had by Quality (and vice versa), or you are contesting that religious
    practises can be distinguished from each other. (Don't hesitate to present
    past religious practices, like polytheistic Norse, if you seriously think
    that could be the best.) Being agnostic, atheistic or whatever is no excuse
    (in my opinion) for not participating in voting on the relative quality of
    different religions, however low you assess their quality relative to other
    human endeavours.

    With friendly greetings,


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 26 2004 - 07:19:16 GMT