>>>I suppose we talk about this )in the general sense of humanity) because there is a need to so do. There's no question that this need is universal and consistent, by virtue of all the various and assorted methods man has devised to assuage this god.
>>
>>Thanks for excluding me from humanity.
>>I am offended now.
>
>Oh, give it a rest Dragan. <g>
>
>Now you're making no sense whatsoever. Why in the world, if this god means nothing to you, should you be offended? You placed yourself in this position by the choices you've made. Regardless, I stand by my assertion that in the general sense all of mankind does indeed try and resolve their guilty consciences by devising some sort of religious exercise.
>
>This in no way say all, it says in the general sense. It's a generalization that is absolutely true. Perhaps you don't think you fit this generalization, perhaps not. I'd assert that most liekly you do - you just don't recognize it. That's not a criticism just a general observation I'd make about anyone.

That's what ticked me off, your generalization about all mankind doing what you think it does. Since I don't do that, I don't comply with your definition of humanity. It excludes me.

In general, "all humans are inherently religious, only some of them don't want to confess it." You always know what's best for humanity, right? Well, I'm not subscribing to that POV, specially not to the notion that you know better than I what's best for me and what's going on in my mind.

The highest sin of all the religions is most eloquently stated in the first commandment: we are right and everybody else is wrong.

I assume "forgive him for he does not know what he's doing" applies to me? That's another sure way to get my attention and lose my attendance.

>Regardless, I'm comfortable that you feel the way you do.

Stay so. This was my last message.