That doesn't seem very convincing to me, if only because aid after natural
disasters is a relatively modern invention, as is medicine that could
actually help those people.
Mike, if you have #2, natural evil, you run into all sorts of other
problems. The entire ecological system (food chains and such) would have
had to pop up over night. The same would be true of plate tectonics, air
and water circulation and countless other things. Can you really blame all
those on the moral choice of two humans? And, could the world exist without
those things? The world is dependent on those cycles in order to be able to
sustain life. Is that evil?
Bethany
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
wrote:
> You might have a point there, because even in great natural disasters, many
> more are killed when aid can't reach them. Sometimes (many/most times?) the
> aid is blocked because of politics and crime.
>
>
>
> …Bernie
>
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jun 18 11:37:58 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 18 2008 - 11:37:58 EDT