This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← A religious but not righteous Judge: Cherie Blair

daftness's Avatar Jump to comment 93 by daftness

Comment #460350 by Rachel Holmes

based on the fact that he was religious and had not been in trouble before

If it does not necessarily mean she would have treated a non religious person differently, why would she refer to religion at all?

How are we able better to devine what a person means, what their intentions are and what their reasons for a particullar course of action are than by looking at their own words.

It is how we communicate. Language must stand for something. And in this instance it looks pretty straighforward. A simple assertion that her reason for mitigation (as well as not previously being in trouble) was, self evidently, religion.

We are contorting our selves out of shape to see any other meaning possible in these few simple words. Making Mrs Blair's excuses for her before she even has to.

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 20:01:00 UTC | #440658