[Billthedrill]

I like Heinlein. That drivel is, however, insupportable by its own putative standards. He states that one cannot both enjoy reason and bask in the comforts of religion. It is an assertion that is challenged by the evidence of a vast number of intelligent people who consider themselves perfectly happy in both.

It isn't really much of a logical proposition. The critic states that in his opinion the two are incompatible and hence in his opinion people cannot be happy with both. The commonality is "in his opinion." Mine is that he is mistaken. I have evidence. He does not.

My principal point remains, however, that to go out of one's way to deliberately mock another's beliefs at a time when they are most vulnerable to such mockery is an act of rudeness and intolerance. It should be beneath well-adjusted adults. Would you agree with that?

[GL of Sector 2814]

It is an assertion that is challenged by the evidence of a vast number of intelligent people who consider themselves perfectly happy in both

I think the key phrase here is "consider themselves". Note the distinction Heinlein makes:

"a religionist, having accepted certain propositions by faith, cannot thereafter judge those propositions by evidence"

I don't believe he's saying that someone can't apply both reason and faith to their life, just not at the same time regarding the same subject. In the past, I've asked people of faith to suppose (strictly for the sake of argument) that they were presented with well-reasoned arguments and strong verifiable evidence that the underpinnings of the faith were incorrect. If that was the case, would they acknowledge since their faith had no rational basis that it should be abandoned? In every case, the answer was "no". Thus, Heinlein's point.

My principal point remains, however, that to go out of one's way to deliberately mock another's beliefs at a time when they are most vulnerable to such mockery is an act of rudeness and intolerance. It should be beneath well-adjusted adults. Would you agree with that?

I agree. Even though I'm an atheist myself, I would never put up such a sign...although I still maintain that as long as the State invites people to put up whatever display they wish (such as the one in question in this discussion), they shouldn't discriminate between the displays. I don't want a government bureaucrat determining which messages about religion are officially sanctioned...and I certainly don't think people have the right to set fire to such displays because they're offended by them (as advocated on this very thread).

Well, enough of this for now. I'm off to my sister's for Christmas dinner. I'm not a Christian but I love the secular aspects of the holiday!