> At 10:59 AM 9/22/98 -0400, sodom wrote:
>
> >This happens every day, all over - "Snake oil" is still sold to millions
> in the
> >form "touch therapy" "aroma therapy" "Iris Diagnosis" - should we force these
> >people to stop selling their wares? There is no doubt that these people are
> >responsible for many deaths every year by discouraging proven techniques.
> Should
> >we go after these practicioners, prosecute them? Admittedly I have never
> been in
>
> This is not about prosecution or legislation, so you can stop attacking that
> straw man. I'm asking whether we should help the people being victimized by
> them. Do we have an obligation or a right to inform them of their delusion?
When you say "Do we have an obligation or a right to inform them of their
delusion" it sounds like you are talking about legislation, but Ill assume you
are talking about ethics alone. I think you should try to dissuade them - I never
meant to suggest otherwise. But in the end, they still must make the decision
without anyone forcing something on them. (unless they are minors or for some
reason unfit to make decisions for themselves)
>
>
> >diatribe about my disgust for the religion, it came down to this. Your belief
> >system is your choice, but I cannot risk my children to Christianity, so
> "the day
> >you convert, I will divorce you. The choices you make and the people you
> listen
> >to are your choice, but I have the same choices, and I will not entangle
> myself
> >or my future children in the web of religion
> OK, so if she converted before asking you, you would have just divorced her
> without even warning her of the consequences? If so, that doesn't seem fair
> to her. If not, then you are actually in agreement with what I am trying
> to say.
>
Well, my wife has always known, long before getting married or even being lovers,
my feelings about religion. So this situation could not arise in this way. If she
did not know, then I would have had to hide the fact. As you all might guess, I am
a bit outspoken so I could never hide something of that magnitude, it's just not
in my makup. However, I will not permit Christianity into my home except to study
or as guests. If she converts, she loses me unless we already have children, In
which case I have no idea what I would do. (except be extremely agitated)
> >I have chosen the black and white because it seems quite clear cut to me.
> >Physical or the threat of physical action is the deciding factor for me. And
>
> That is hardly clear cut. Does there have to be intent to threaten? What
> degree
> of physical threat warrants action? Is everyone expected to have the same
> reaction
> to the same level of physical threat?
> --
> David McFadzean david@kumo.com
> special agent http://www.kumo.com
For me any contact at all is too much, or any threat of contact at all. If
somone I did not know wanted to hug me, I would consider that a threat. I take all
threats of physical harm very seriously. I do understand jokes however, so when my
brother sais, "Im gonna kick you ass" I respond in kind. If a stranger or someone
else would say such a think I would pursue police assistance immediatly or
whatever action seemed appropiate.
It seems to me that in your case, communication was the only viable option - what
other action could have been taken that still respects his right to free will?
Sodom
Bill Roh