<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.3790.2577" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Robert Bradbury<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR>I saw a show on CSPAN2 a couple of nights ago. Apparently a
presentation by Sam Harris [1] author of "The End of Faith" [2,3] to the New
York Society for Ethical Culture [4]. He made ~5 arguments against the
tolerance by rational individuals of religious based perspectives (be they
Christan fundamentalism or Muslim). One of his perspectives seemed to
revolve around the fact that all religions are *not* equal and we should stop
pretending that they are. He asked the fundamental question of "Where
are the Buddhist suicide bombers?" (given the extent to which the Buddhists
have been abused by the Chinese), or to an even greater extent "Where are the
Jain militants?" (Jain's are an Indian religion that he suggested were
extremely non-violent in their beliefs). <BR><SPAN
class=757352002-10012006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2> </FONT></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><SPAN class=757352002-10012006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2><STRONG>The simple answer for the Buddhists is that their suicide bombers
killed only themselves when<BR>they felt something was egregious enough a
violation to warrant self-sacrifice and made</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=757352002-10012006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2><STRONG>sure that no one else was harmed.</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=757352002-10012006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2><STRONG></STRONG></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=757352002-10012006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2><STRONG>And I think this makes your (and Harris') point even more
strongly.</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><SPAN class=757352002-10012006> </SPAN><BR>His fundamental position
seemed to be that the traditional position of "tolerance" by "moderates" for
religious extremism, particularly that which is fundamentally unextropic, and
particularly that which is based on the acceptance of irrational perspectives,
should be discontinued. I.e. it is no longer acceptable for one to
reject active forms of the destruction of information (e.g. suicide bombers)
but one must extend that to passive forms of the destruction of information
(e.g. irrational religions). <BR><BR>I would tend to agree.<BR><SPAN
class=757352002-10012006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2> </FONT></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><SPAN class=757352002-10012006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2><STRONG>It's only logical.</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV></BODY></HTML>