Comment: For example: We could

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: deng, I find your thoughts (see in situ)

For example: We could

For example:
We could partition American people into different sets: Hispanics, Black, Asian, White... or Republican/Democrat or Urban vs. Rural folk, or Christian, Catholic, Jews, Atheist, Agnostic, Moslem, Buddhist. The partitions would be arbitrary and you can get good an bad in each partition.

Let's partition people by race and judge them using their stance on war as a basis. We could say:
a. Whites are for war. Examples: George Bush, Chenney, McCain, etc.
b. Whites are against war. Examples: Ron Paul, Dennis K, Tom Woods, etc.
both statements are accurate. We could also say:
a. Blacks are for war. Examples: Condolezza Rice, Obama, etc.
b. Blacks are against war. Examples: Tmot, Barbara Lee, etc.

An so it goes. If I wanted to discredit any group (in this thread it would be Atheist or Christian) I would just get the examples that make that group look bad. That is my whole point. Even if I am Catholic I do not hold that all Catholics are "good" (take Gingrich or Biden for example).

I was very impressed when reading "man's search for meaning" by Dr. Frankl. He was an immate at Auschwitz. While in the camps Frankl studied the lives of the German guards, the capos (Jewish guards), and the prisoners. He said that - even in this circumstances - there could be good and bad in all different groups ???!!!!. A quote follows:

"One of the most interesting, and disturbing, issues in the book was the idea of the Capo. These were were people put in charge of their fellow prisoners, in order to keep them in line. Dr. Frankl describes these people as, often, being more harsh than the actual guards. This seems to be a disturbing lesson in the abuse of power. This also goes along with Dr. Frankl's discussion of how the camps brought out the true personality of the people within it (after all the social trapping had been stripped away): The cretins, the saints, and all of those in between."