OK, Ron, you want quotes. Here are some from you, along with explanations of why they are rude:

"The media- induced religious frenzy" is in the mind of the rather imaginative poster."

Two problems here: 1) you are talking about me in the third person, using a disparaging nickname. I'm a member and my name is on my post. Common courtesy says you should answer me if you want to answer me, and not call me names if you want to be taken seriously. You've since done the same thing to Sleepy Rosie. 2) Instead of actually responding to what I said, you called me delusional. This is what is known as an ad hominem attack.

More from you:
"The intolerance of some Mudcat atheists--a perfect pairing to Falwell, etc.-- is real--and obvious to any objective observer. The imaginative poster is no doubt concerned about "unhealthy knowledge" also--and a member in good standing of the "freethinkers"--who thinks you should be free to express yourself--unless said poster thinks it's "unhealthy".

The problem here is that you are making a series of assumptions about my spiritual, philosophical, and intellectual life from the basis of absolutely no knowledge, except that I don't think health-care providers should offer to share their religious faith with their patients. As a matter of fact, you are more wrong than right in about the things you listed in that paragraph.

And you keep right on: "And he appears to be yet another Mudcatter who can't tell the difference between a offer ot pray and a "violation". Fortunately, outside of Mudcat, he's in the distinct minority--and obviously feels threatened by that.   Pobrecito."

Here, aside from more gratuitous insults and calling me baby, you are saying that the majority should decide what is right and what is wrong. That kind of thinking is somewhere on the slippery slope to civil rights abuses and worse. I'm now imagining you thinking, "Aha, he things an offer of prayer is the same as slavery." Please disabuse yourself of the notion before you engage your fingers. The reason I'm imagining that, since you want examples, is your response to Sinister Supporter when he made a similar comment. Perhaps, instead, you should notice that (I think) every actual medical professional who has chimed in has said there there are professional ethics rules that say it's a bad idea to bring your religion to work. Do you think they do that because a majority of the population would feel uncomfortable with it? Or is it just possible that being confronted by someone in a position of authority over you who is professing strong religious belief -- of any kind -- can be easily construed as having pressure brought to bear to follow in their faith, or at least the outward forms of it? And we're not talking a fanciful, imaginative fear of that, either; as I said, most of us who are not Christians have had unpleasant examples of being treated badly because we are not Christians. A few examples are gossip at work, not getting a job because of not professing belief at the right point in the conversation, police officers trying "save" people they stop on the street. The list goes on and on.


The reason I go through all this again is to demonstrate that good, intelligent, thoughtful people can come down on another side of an issue from you. You should keep that in mind, instead of saying things like:

"It's interesting that "freethinkers" have no problem being just as bigoted as any Bible Belt fundamentalist."

Best,
John