Re: Sacred tangent (was Re: just checking...)
"Peter T. Chattaway" <petert-LOVM4QxV+tDq6eQxt3vRmLDks+cytr/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.dadl.ot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Mike Findlay wrote: > Using that logic it is wrong for Muslims to refer to the Koran as > sacred? Well, obviously, the Koran is an integral part of the Muslim religion. It is, therefore, sacred *to them*. But not to me. > For me, I'm really uncomfortable with the imposing of religion, or > forcing uber religious meaning onto words that have a very recognizable > and understandable non religious meaning. The problem here is that religion has been *drained out* of the word -- and that Palin's use of it exists in some weird middle-space between the original religious menaing of the word and the secular meaning of the word. -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot