RDFRS US:
The mission of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science is to support scientific education, critical thinking and evidence-based understanding of the natural world in the quest to overcome religious fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and suffering.
The Magic of Reality
for the iPad
Sean Faircloth:
Attack of the Theocrats!
J. Anderson Thomson Jr. MD:
why we believe in god(s)
RSS Feeds
"Here are the words she used: âI am going to suspend this sentence for the period of two years based on the fact you are a religious person and have not been in trouble before. You caused a mild fracture to the jaw of a member of the public standing in a queue at Lloyds Bank. You are a religious man and you know this is not acceptable behaviour.â"
I could think of a different formulation:
"You are a religious man and you know this is not acceptable behavior. Since you knowingly engaged in unacceptable behavior, I can only conclude that you are of bad character, and therefore deserve the full sentence."
Isn't this more logical? Am I missing something?
Permalink Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:17:00 UTC | #440549