Re: Let your voice be heard on the sanctity of marriage...

Pastor Frank wrote:
> "bob young" <alaspectrum@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:4838E3D6.4A6DF660@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> default wrote:
>>> On Sat, 24 May 2008 05:22:54 -0400, "Pastor Frank"
>>> <PF@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >    "All good" exists only where there is all evil to contrast and
give
>>> >meaning to what is all good.
>>>
>>> You are playing word games only.
>>> Perhaps it would be easier to think of Good as the absence of evil or
>>> Evil as the absence of good, or just a nebulous gray area - continuous
>>> gradient (I think that's how politicians like to rationalize their
>>> evil)
>>> When trying to justify a deity where none exists, word games are all
>>> you have . . .
>>
>> Frank is the expert of experts when it comes to 'word games,
>> that is until it becomes laughable
>> and eventually, terribly tiresome -  his quotes are lacking
>> in substance.
>> He is one of those orators of whom it was well said, 'Before
>> they get up, they do not know what they are going to say;
>> when they are speaking they do not know what they are
>> saying; and when they have sat down they do not know what
>> they have said.'
>> [Winston Churchill 1874-1965]
>> Bob
>> Humanist Brit.
>> Hong Kong
>>
>    Again, nothing but incoherent non sequitur screeching.  You have NOT 
> shown, and that good can exist without evil to contrast it, and vice 
> versa. Therefore, the philosophical law stands.

I have already given examples of good that can exist without evil.
Mother's love for a child at the time of birth.
A couples love for each other at the time of their kiss at a wedding.
The playing of musical compositions
Drinkable water is good.
Grandma's Cruschicki were good.
My first wife's hugs were better than good.

However - if you are trying to prove that god had to be both good and 
evil - that is true only when considering the religious definition of god.