On Fri, 20 May 2005, Robert wrote:
Alphax writes to me:
At present, there is *no* neutral way to represent dates. Let's just call a spade a spade and not try to make something sound like something it's not.
You're very confused. I am not making any such claim.
Alphax writes:
If you feel you are being forced to use Christian
terminology,
why use the Christian date system at all? CE is still
based
(albeit incorrectly) on the birthdate of one Jesus of
Nazareth.
Stop being disingenous. We all agree that the numeric dating system currently in use has to be the one that is used in all articles. It is just the Jesus-worshipping honorifics (BC/AD) that some of us object to. The growing consensus in the academic community is to use religion-neutral terms such as BCE/CE.
Alphax, you know this, as we have explained this many times to you. So please do not pretend that you are still unaware of this.
I had written:
I already have put up with enough abuse today, as
several
of my fellow faculty and staff came - as well as many students - in with T-shirts advertising "Jesus Day" at a public school. It had a motto that said that only
through
Jesus will anyone find God, and that all others are
doomed
to be without God (i.e. damned to Hell.) Apparently
being
in the vast majority is not enough for some right-wing Evangelical Protestant Christians. They have to push
their
threats of damnation via religious proselytizing in
public
arenas?!
Alphax replies:
e-van-gel-i-cal adj., of the Gospel noun, one who is
committed to
the Gospel of Jesus Christ; the only gospel of salvation;
by grace,
through faith, under the authority of the Bible,
empowered by
the Holy Spirit, to the Glory of God. You live in the US?
Again, stop pretending that all members of this list are illiterate. We understand fully how Protestant Chrisitan fundamentalists define this term.
You have heard of Freedom of Religion?
Yes, and please stop making such bizarre implications. No one is preventing Christians (or Muslims or Jews) from having their own theology, from having their own beliefs, from worshipping in their own houses of worship, or from following their own religious practices.
Freedom of religion, however, prevents people from one religion from harassing people from another religion. US law prohibits people from harassing others with this kind of religious proselytization. (In fact, I already have been notified that if I choose to bring a case against the people I referred to, I will almost certainly win. I am trying to find a non-legal way to do deal with them. They do think that all Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and agnostics are damned to hell, and they are making difficult to work where I am an employee.)
You seem to imagine that "Freedom of religion" actually means "Freedom for religious fundamentalists to create a hostile workplace environment", and that "Non fundamentalists have no rights at all." You worldview is the same as that of religious dictators. You also seem ignorant (in the literal sense of the term) of US law.
We live in a society that has seen the marginalisation, desecration and humilitation of Jesus Christ.
Are you joking, or trying to start a holy war against all non-fundamentalist Christians? It is enraged fundamentalists like you who start inquisitions, crusades and jihads. I hope other Wiki-En editors are keeping a close eye on your submissions.
Robert
Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
An incorrectly done system of dates oriented around a bias is better than no dating system or a correctly done system of dates oriented around a bias, and Dennis the Short's mistakes have bequeathed upon us an incorrectly done system of dates. We might as well use it, as there are no unbiased dating systems that I can think of.