response 207 of 293:

Dec 16 09:34 UTC 2003

Wow, lots of meat here.

I agree with jmsaul (#200) on almost every point except the last one.
As jep says (#201), the Middle-East provided us with cities, and at a
time when their organized religion(s) w(ere) not monotheistic Islam,
but polytheistic and usually variant from city to city.

Also, during the Dark Ages and Early Mediaeval period when the whole
of Western Europe was still persecuting witches and had descended into
feudal chaos, Muslims and Jews were making adfvances in medical and
the other sciences which seemed like witchcraft to the nearly
barbarian Christians; especially in the case of the Muslims, they are
also often our only surviving source for Greek scientific texts, which
they often studied and improved upon (lest we forget, the Greeks knew
that the Earth was round. It's the only possibly explanation for the
fact that you see the sails of a ship first when it comes over the
horizon.) The Turks, who at one time ruled almost the whole of the
Muslim world, and Palestine, allowed Jews to practice freely on
payment of a tax. I don't know about you, but I'd rather be taxed for
being X than be gassed for it (although, of course, it's not right or
fair to do either; it's the lesser of two weevils.).

Re: #206: I doubt that the internecine strife between Jews, Muslims
and Christians, or persecution by any of these religions against
"infidels", can be seen as the only, the first, or the last instances
of religious persecution. The recent rioting in Gujarat, an Indian
state where the majority religion is Hindu, is one example; further
examples could be provided by the Viking raids on Northern Europe,
taking no account of the fact that the richest pickings, which they
found in churches, were also religious relics, etc.

Furthermore, in respect of Islam, opne of its aims was to *prevent*
tribal warfare between different groups of Arabs, which, afaik, it
succeeded in for a large part of its history - and even now, Arabs
still see themselves as part of the same "nation"; many of the states
that exist now did not exist before the British Empire carved them out
of its Ottoman possessions. If you want other examples of "how the
mighty have fallen", just look at Russia after Catherine the Great,
moddern Italy, modern China, or modern Britain :-(.

response 209 of 293:

Dec 16 11:36 UTC 2003

You're welcome, but let me clarify a few other points. (:

> The Turks...  allowed Jews to practice freely on payment of a tax.

Isn't that an oxymoron?  It's true that under the rule of Suleiman the
Magnificent (who rebuilt Jerusalem) Jews fared well. But this was the
exception rather than the rule. In the 19th century, the plight of
Jews in the "Holy Land" (no such place as "Palestine" existed yet)
was so extreme that they turned to western powers for protection.
Look into the Capitulations and the short-lived Tanzimat reforms.

The reason one sees the top of sails before the ship is obvious.
They are less likely to be hidden behind waves and one usually sees
taller objects first anyhow.  It has nothing to do with the curvature
of the earth.  (:  [Archimedes triangulated the diameter of the earth
and came quite close.]

> in respect of Islam, opne of its aims was to *prevent* tribal warfare
> between different groups of Arabs, which, afaik, it succeeded....

I don't think this was an aim. Islam was spread by the sword, through
tribal warfare. Polytheists who refused forced conversion were put to the
sword (Christians and Jews were tolerated).  I'm not sure that a "Pax
Islamica" was ever achieved, but the schism between Sunni and Shiite
Muslims would lead to millions of dead.  The concept of "Arab unity"
is something like the weather. People always talk about it....

response 211 of 293:

Dec 16 18:18 UTC 2003

I'll grant that Judeo-Christian monotheism made important contributions
to morality, but that it led to nationalism and industrialization? 
That's a bit of a stretch.  

response 213 of 293:

Dec 16 18:35 UTC 2003

re resp:211 (who slipped in): It's fodder for another item, but if you 
look at the basic innovation which occurred in Dark Ages and Middle 
Ages monasteries, where the monks were constantly striving to free up 
time to exercise their devotions, the connection is there.

The striving for improvement, and exploration, that originated in 
Western Europe was not an accident.  The dominant influence in Europe 
from 4th through 18th centuries was the Roman Catholic church.  I'm not 
claiming it *wanted* the change that it catalyzed, but it'd be pretty 
blind to deny it didn't have a lot of influence.  The Catholic religion 
was *wildly* successful in a whole *lot* of ways.

response 215 of 293:

Dec 16 19:13 UTC 2003

<remmers wonders what "available facts" supported the concept of the
 sun going around the earth on the backs of turtles.>

response 217 of 293:

Dec 16 19:39 UTC 2003

re #213:  Well, I guess I'll cheerfully argue with you in another item,
then, if you start it.  For here I'll confine myself to saying that I
disagree, mostly.  :)

response 219 of 293:

Dec 16 20:44 UTC 2003

Re #216: you seem to be confused. I made no such claims as you attribute to
me. Would you care to explain what you are trying to say?

response 221 of 293:

Dec 17 03:09 UTC 2003

I admit this is drifting, but jep -- the monotheistic religions didn't invent
nationalism as opposed to tribalism (China had it, as did Rome, the Greek
city-states, the Aztecs, and many other societies).  As for industry, there's
no reason to believe it wouldn't have evolved in a polytheistic society.  A
number of polytheistic cultures attained great achievements in science and
engineering:  Egypt, the Maya, China, Greece, Rome, etc.

Some of those societies are the ones that contributed the knowledge the
monasteries preserved during the Dark Ages.

response 223 of 293:

Dec 17 14:48 UTC 2003

Re resp:213: I don't know.  In some ways didn't the Catholic Church do
everything it could to *halt* progress?  I mean, look how they treated
Galileo.  (Granted, they eventually apologized...over 300 years later. 
This is the kind of pace of progress the Church can deal with. ;> )

response 225 of 293:

Dec 17 15:13 UTC 2003

Or maybe it means the Republicans are religious zealots and thus care
little for the opinions of those who don't want other people's religious
rules forced on them?

(Hint: Both are overly-broad generalizations.)

response 227 of 293:

Dec 17 18:50 UTC 2003

Maybe us Democrats don't need to prove our "God Feariigness" by attending
church once/twice/three times a week.

response 229 of 293:

Dec 17 20:03 UTC 2003

re resp:220: Are you disputing that some of the monasteries produced 
innovations in labor saving devices?

re resp:221: Maybe other cultures could have produced the Industrial 
Revolution.  I don't know.  (A characteristic I share with every other 
person here.)  Western Europe, dominated for a dozen centuries by the 
Catholic Church, *did* produce it.

I agree, this is all drift.  I apologize; the gay marriage debate 
wasn't done.

response 231 of 293:

Dec 18 00:49 UTC 2003

Re #222:  Absolutely.  As is Japan, mostly.