Walter Okshevsky wrote: Suppose someone were to aver: 'There is no true freedom of religion in a democracy if there is no freedom to burn heretics and apostates as required by our religion.' What would the proper response be to such a claim?" Responding to another problem of reason, and surely as good a defence of liberal democracy as has been made, someone once wrote: "Unfortunately for speculation (but perhaps fortunately for the practical vocation) of humanity, reason sees itself, in the midst of its greatest expectations, so entangled in a crowd of arguments and counterarguments that it is not feasible, on account either of its honor or even of its security, for reason to withdraw and look upon the quarrel with indifference, as mere shadow boxing, still less for it simply to command peace, interested as it is in the object of the dispute; so nothing is left except to reflect on the origin of this disunity of reason with itself, on whether a mere misunderstanding might perhaps be responsible for it, after the elucidation of which perhaps both sides will give up their proud claims, but in place of which reason would begin a rule of lasting tranquility over understanding and sense." Sincerely, Phil Enns Glen Haven, NS ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html