<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sign of the Times</title>
	<atom:link href="http://polypyloctomy.24kblogs.com/2007/12/21/sign-of-the-times/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://polypyloctomy.24kblogs.com/2007/12/21/sign-of-the-times/</link>
	<description>Splitting philosophical hairs</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:11:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Stefan Monsaureus</title>
		<link>http://polypyloctomy.24kblogs.com/2007/12/21/sign-of-the-times/comment-page-1/#comment-110</link>
		<dc:creator>Stefan Monsaureus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2007 02:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://polypyloctomy.24kblogs.com/2007/12/21/sign-of-the-times/#comment-110</guid>
		<description>It's been pointed out to me that the American Humanist Association recently issued a statement called "&lt;a href="http://www.americanhumanist.org/press/IslamStatement.php" rel="nofollow"&gt; A Sensible Approach to Islam&lt;/a&gt;," pointing out that Islam should not be viewed as a "doctrinaire monolith." The sentiment expressed in this statement is both sensible and obvious, but it seems strange to single out Islam for this expression of tolerance while simultaneously aligning with the anti-Christian atheist community on other issues. Better, I think, would be a simple reference to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief. Why try to reinvent the wheel, especially when the new one has a few loose spokes.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s been pointed out to me that the American Humanist Association recently issued a statement called &#8220;<a href="http://www.americanhumanist.org/press/IslamStatement.php" rel="nofollow"> A Sensible Approach to Islam</a>,&#8221; pointing out that Islam should not be viewed as a &#8220;doctrinaire monolith.&#8221; The sentiment expressed in this statement is both sensible and obvious, but it seems strange to single out Islam for this expression of tolerance while simultaneously aligning with the anti-Christian atheist community on other issues. Better, I think, would be a simple reference to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief. Why try to reinvent the wheel, especially when the new one has a few loose spokes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://polypyloctomy.24kblogs.com/2007/12/21/sign-of-the-times/comment-page-1/#comment-109</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:16:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://polypyloctomy.24kblogs.com/2007/12/21/sign-of-the-times/#comment-109</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;But to assert that, in essence, to rid the world of religion would make us automatically safer is to strain credulity.&lt;/em&gt;

agreed. but try to suggest that to blowhards like sam harris and watch him get all indignant and red-faced. after all, phd students can't be wrong, dontchaknow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>But to assert that, in essence, to rid the world of religion would make us automatically safer is to strain credulity.</em></p>
<p>agreed. but try to suggest that to blowhards like sam harris and watch him get all indignant and red-faced. after all, phd students can&#8217;t be wrong, dontchaknow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
