Religon and Homosexuality

BB Shockwave · Post by **BB Shockwave** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:04 am

I'm going to drop this discussion with you, Lynch. I brought up points of arguments, without any emotional 'filling'. I hoped we could discuss it without getting into flaming.

Yet you accuse me of being a homophobe (pardon me,but where did I sayI hate gays?) and that my attitude to life needs altering (where did I say that YOU need to change?) or that I thinkyou're a freak (again, I never said that.)

Frankly, I can understand why you are so riled up over this discussion, as you are homosexual yourself, while I'm not and thus I cannot understand the problems you face. Sorry if my cold and not caring attitude hurt you.

Dylan · Post by **Dylan** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:17 am

Armorwind wrote:my religion makes sense to me.

This may very well be the crux of the entire situation.

In my honest opinion, religion shouldn't make sense. Ratio has nothing to do with religion. You shouldn't be able to deduct any logic from it at all, and certainly not let it influence your dealings with others.

I say keep religion or lack there of to yourself, and the world would be a better place.

BB Shockwave · Post by **BB Shockwave** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:58 am

Agreed.

Religion and people's sexual behaviour should be private business.

That's why I have no problems with homosexuals, only homosexual celebrities. They are like Bludgeon... (

)

Yes, cause just like Bludgeon has to mention in every line of his that he's a master of Metallikato (

), many gay/lesbian celebs blabber on about their sexual life in every interview. Man, they should keep that to themselves...

Dylan · Post by **Dylan** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 10:06 am

BB Shockwave wrote:many gay/lesbian celebs blabber on about their sexual life in every interview. Man, they should keep that to themselves...

Not more so than heterosexuals, on both accounts, I'd say.

Most people find sex pretty interesting, so why not?

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:38 am

Armorwind wrote: Impactor, you're acting no better than these "so-called bigots" that make up Christianity. Also, you're generalizing Christianity just some people generalize homosexuality. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Impactor, the Bible hasn't been rewritten since about he mid third century. The Canon became official around 1546. We can't just change what it says, but we can interpret it differently. Also, my religion makes sense to me. If you wish, we can have another topic discussing this.

How can I generalize Christianity? - its got a rule book, the bible. says roughly no gay ppl.
I think thats wrong. and anyone who follows that and belives thats ok needs to seriously pull thier head out of thier arse.

As for changing it. maybe not directly, but the bit where you interpret it differently is as good as changing it to suit your needs.
or in the case of 'thou shalt not kill' you just ignore it when needs be.

Sorry but I really dislike some religons - I feel the sorry for the ppl who follow them.

BB Shockwave · Post by **BB Shockwave** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 1:01 pm

Dylan wrote:
BB Shockwave wrote:many gay/lesbian celebs blabber on about their sexual life in every interview. Man, they should keep that to themselves...
Not more so than heterosexuals, on both accounts, I'd say.

Most people find sex pretty interesting, so why not?

Heh...well I find it most interesting too! But would you tell everyone, to even people you don't know about your sexual life? I'm a bit conservative in these matters.

Dylan · Post by **Dylan** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 1:28 pm

Yes, me too, absolutely! More so because it often involves another person, and I wouldn't be confortable with telling all kinds of private things about others without them knowing / approving.

Post by **Kaylee** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 4:53 pm

BB Shockwave wrote:I'm going to drop this discussion with you, Lynch. I brought up points of arguments, without any emotional 'filling'. I hoped we could discuss it without getting into flaming.

If you wish. Though if you can point out where you've been flamed, I would be interested. I'm also curious why you've decided to do it now after having your say two or three times before this post before I could respond.

Yet you accuse me of being a homophobe (pardon me,but where did I sayI hate gays?)

You said that you believe I am a sinner because I am gay- a sin is an abomination, and a sinner is someone who is condemned through practicing that abomination.

I have explained to death that homosexuality is a phsychological feature of the person- to condemn the practice is to condemn me.

On the most fundamental level you believe I am lesser/condemnable/going to hell (depending on how one wants to interpret 'sinner') because I am gay. That is homophobia in essence.

Nor is it justified because you then tack on 'well I'm a sinner too' it's still exactly the same prejudice: you are pre-judging me based on one aspect of my behaviour which you have arbitralily decided is bad.

I find that hurtful, yet I haven't flamed you or said anything bad about you. All I've done is question you.

I will question your beliefs on this matter for as long as you hold them because I see no rhyme or reason to them, find them hurtful and harmful. You're welcome to question mine any time.

and that my attitude to life needs altering (where did I say that YOU need to change?)

You need to go away and try to read what I wrote, because you've utterly misread it from the look of it.

or that I thinkyou're a freak (again, I never said that.)

You observed:

Hammering it into the kids heads in school that gays are normal people? (as they do it in some places?) That would be no better then teaching the kids to hate them.

That makes me a freak, does it not? Abnormal? Unusual? Despite the fact that even the most basic understanding of philosophy no matter your religious or psychological background will illustrated that 'normal' is an entirely subjective term which changes from one person, location and time to another.

Frankly, I can understand why you are so riled up over this discussion, as you are homosexual yourself, while I'm not and thus I cannot understand the problems you face. Sorry if my cold and not caring attitude hurt you.

I'm upset that you've decided to not take on board what I've said to you and that you're now running away because I questioned your beliefs and pointed out that they prejudice you towards homosexuals- making you a homophobe on the most fundamental level imo.

I find discussing the same religious statements exceedingly tiring, as I feel I have explained all of your points at least three times before in other discussions but I am trying to be patient and to teach people if nothing else to see the world through another person's eyes.

I'm perfectly willing to carry on this discussion but it will involve you opening your mind to the possibility that other people may have opinions differing to you- i.e. that your views are the substance of homophobia. Try living with the opinion that you are a sinner and going to hell being thrown at you from all directions and its various knock-on effects from society at large, it's almost as nice.

BB Shockwave · Post by **BB Shockwave** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 12:52 pm

Karl Lynch wrote:
Yet you accuse me of being a homophobe (pardon me,but where did I sayI hate gays?)
You said that you believe I am a sinner because I am gay- a sin is an abomination, and a sinner is someone who is condemned through practicing that abomination.

That's where. See? I never said I think you are a sinner... I never even talked about MY point of view, just how some religions view homosexuality.

You have a good talent for putting words into other people's mouths... You ought to become a journalist.

(Abomination, that's also a word I never used. Abominus, maybe.

)

Post by **Kaylee** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:05 pm

BB Shockwave wrote: That's where. See? I never said I think you are a sinner... I never even talked about MY point of view, just how some religions view homosexuality.

You have a good talent for putting words into other people's mouths... You ought to become a journalist.

You have an exceedingly good talent for saying something and then denying all knowledge of it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but here is what I glean from some of your choice tidbits:

some stuff MUST BE set in stone

we religious people

There are certain prequisites to belonging to a group, religious or otherwise. If you don't want to fullfill them, fine, find another.

a catholic tries to talk a gay off his 'way of error' - no harm in that, yes?

a religion can only be allowed to function in the boundaries of a state if it doesn't contradict the major, IMPORTANT national laws

Hammering it into the kids heads in school that gays are normal people? (as they do it in some places?) That would be no better then teaching the kids to hate them

Many religions condemn people for their sins

Otherwise, on a personal level, I prefer order of the law to the chaos

Allow me to summarise:

I am religious.
I belong to group X.
One of the rules of group X are that homosexuality is a sin.
There is nothing wrong with calling it a sin.
In any case saying its a sin is as bad as saying its ok.
And anyway it's not important.
And many other people are condemned, so it's alright.
Besides, I like it that way.

So, where precisely have I not followed this correctly? Or is homosexuality now alright in your book and you ignore that element of your religion?

(Abomination, that's also a word I never used. Abominus, maybe. )

I am using synonyms, it's what happens when people don't want to use the same words again and again or want to interpret something said by another.

Metal Vendetta · Post by **Metal Vendetta** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:18 pm

Sin doesn't exist except as a concept. Homosexuality does. Homosexuality wins by default.

Next!

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:24 pm

Metal Vendetta wrote:Sin doesn't exist except as a concept. Homosexuality does. Homosexuality wins by default.

Next!

Yup! More of a judgement based upon another persons value system. That is why forgiveness never works for other people, you can only forgive yourself.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:47 pm

Karl

Post by **Kaylee** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:09 pm

I actually feel quite bad about this as I feel like I'm telling someone off for not thinking out their thoughts properly. Far as I can see BBShock essentially said the first thing that came into his head and is now trying desperately to un-say it.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:31 pm

Karl Lynch wrote:I actually feel quite bad about this as I feel like I'm telling someone off for not thinking out their thoughts properly. Far as I can see BBShock essentially said the first thing that came into his head and is now trying desperately to un-say it.

It is hard to accept other peoples prejudices. Especially when called on it, most would assume a defensive position. My own Catholic grandparents have no problem with gays at all. However they are extremely prejudice against other races and cultures.

Dylan · Post by **Dylan** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:47 pm

Hey BB Shockwave, it's not likely you'll just give up on prior views. You are who you are, and your views are equally valid as anyone elses on this planet as far as I'm concerned.

In the specific case of homosexuality: if you condemn gay people, you are hurting them. Hurting isn't friendly. Would be cool if you would please stop.

Fair enough?

Thanks!

Post by **Kaylee** » Thu Dec 30, 2004 7:12 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Karl Lynch wrote:I actually feel quite bad about this as I feel like I'm telling someone off for not thinking out their thoughts properly. Far as I can see BBShock essentially said the first thing that came into his head and is now trying desperately to un-say it.
It is hard to accept other peoples prejudices. Especially when called on it, most would assume a defensive position. My own Catholic grandparents have no problem with gays at all. However they are extremely prejudice against other races and cultures.

In the end it has to come down to understanding what one's 'beliefs' equate to, in this case prejudice against homosexuals, and furthermore understanding that one has a choice in believing that prejudice. If BBShockers wants to prejudge gay people based upon Bible teachings or excuse others who do, then that's his/her own business. The problem I have are attempts to give justification to the prejudice through what I consider to be flawed arguments.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:41 am

Karl Lynch wrote:
Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Karl Lynch wrote:I actually feel quite bad about this as I feel like I'm telling someone off for not thinking out their thoughts properly. Far as I can see BBShock essentially said the first thing that came into his head and is now trying desperately to un-say it.
It is hard to accept other peoples prejudices. Especially when called on it, most would assume a defensive position. My own Catholic grandparents have no problem with gays at all. However they are extremely prejudice against other races and cultures.
In the end it has to come down to understanding what one's 'beliefs' equate to, in this case prejudice against homosexuals, and furthermore understanding that one has a choice in believing that prejudice. If BBShockers wants to prejudge gay people based upon Bible teachings or excuse others who do, then that's his/her own business. The problem I have are attempts to give justification to the prejudice through what I consider to be flawed arguments.

a·bom·i·na·tion

1. Abhorrence; disgust.
2. A cause of abhorrence or disgust.

The way I see you have nothing to worry about Karl. Looks like the Leviticans were easily shocked by sexual behaviour rather than any sort of condemnation by an act of sin, they were not. Whether people believe you are doomed to hellfire and fury is a matter of interpretation, not literal definition. Yay!

Post by **Kaylee** » Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:50 am

That's encouraging, I'd already guessed it was down to interpretation. I think someone wise once said "You tell me what this Bible passage means and I'll tell you some of your views on the world".

BB Shockwave · Post by **BB Shockwave** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 5:05 pm

Karl Lynch wrote:Allow me to summarise:

I am religious.
I belong to group X.
One of the rules of group X are that homosexuality is a sin.
There is nothing wrong with calling it a sin.
In any case saying its a sin is as bad as saying its ok.
And anyway it's not important.
And many other people are condemned, so it's alright.
Besides, I like it that way.

So...

I'm going to drop the post where you almost outright say I'm stupid, and get onto the above quote.

I do belong to a religious group. I do follow their teachings, and yes, I do know what is considered as a sin in the catholic church. That doesn't mean I problem myself with sorting out people as sinners or non-sinners. That's something God ought to do, not me. After all, the Bible says "do not judge others".

My point is, why do you care about what a religion thinks about a specific groups of people?

I'm a catholic, and I'm Hungarian. I know very well that many sects think we catholics are the spawn of devils and the Pope is the Anti-Christ, and that many Rumanians wish we Hungarians would be gone so that they could reclaim part of our country they think is rightfully theirs.

I just don't trouble myself with it.

Tell me, you ever found yourself in a situation where catholic people openly called you a sinner because you are gay?

As long as people/groups have some opinion/view about another groups that doesn't goes into open violence/discrimination, I don't see why you should be concerned. I know a few gay people, some who are openly gay and others who aren't, but I haven't seen any prejudice done against them that was more then simple gossip-spreading.

As for if I think homosexuality is alright...

As I said in an older topic, I think it's not. That, however, doesn't mean I say it should be stopped or anything else you think I said. I said it before, I say it again: Gay people have the right to live as they like as long as they don't force their views onto others. The same should go for religion, too. I'm well aware the catholic church had its decades of violent convinction, and (as any sane person) I know it was wrong.

So, where precisely have I not followed this correctly? Or is homosexuality now alright in your book and you ignore that element of your religion?

And what I believe and I ignore from the teachings of the Bible is my own buisness. Surely as a biologist, I don't belive the world was created in 7 days...

And if you think we are taught on the theology lessons to abhor homosexuality and such then you are waaay off the mark.

Another thing, I feel from the emotion of your posts that you think I hate homosexuals. You forget an important part of christianity: "Hate the sin, not the sinner. " But again, I'm in no position to tell you what's right and wrong. I'm only human, after all.

BB Shockwave · Post by **BB Shockwave** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 5:09 pm

Dylan wrote:Hey BB Shockwave, it's not likely you'll just give up on prior views. You are who you are, and your views are equally valid as anyone elses on this planet as far as I'm concerned.

In the specific case of homosexuality: if you condemn gay people, you are hurting them. Hurting isn't friendly. Would be cool if you would please stop.

Fair enough?

Thanks!

Read my last post, I think I told everyone what I think about this matter. (and that I do not condemn anyone - I'm not in any position to do that. I was merely saying my opinion - not that it would matter in this huge universe...)

Thanks for the fair post, btw!

Tired Tracks · Post by **Tired Tracks** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 6:08 pm

I've only read this third page of this thread so forgive me if I unknowingly repeat something.

BB Shockwave wrote: My point is, why do you care about what a religion thinks about a specific groups of people?

Those specific groups of people can have a pretty hefty effect on every day lives in many ways. I'm not sure about this last month, but in October it was hard to watch a news program and not have gay rights mentioned in one light or another. Looking from Karl's point of view, it is bound to hurt seeing your lifestyle debated, over publisized, and generalized in the scope of mass media and the government.

On November 3rd 2004 , 11 US states banned same sex marriages. Now, I don't have the voter statisitics, but I'm willing to bet a good chunk of the demographic are either religious, or influenced by the mass media coverage.

What I'm getting at is, religion is part of humanity. Mass media and goverment come from that humanity, so what a religious group thinks about a specific group of people can have quite a big effect on those people, even if its 'only' in a round about way. So what if its not direct? A slap in the face hurts just as much from someone you can or can't see.

BB Shockwave · Post by **BB Shockwave** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 7:22 pm

That's new to me... I'm sorry if I don't keep up with US news. So this means same sex marriages were allowed so far, and now Bush banned them?

I heard that US people still keep marriage in high regard whether they are religious or not... that's different here in Europe. In most countries, life companions (whether same or different sex) have almost the same rights as a spouse.

Of course I understand how to many homosexual couples marriage is emotionally important. I myself think that same-sex marriages should be allowed (non-religious marriages I mean, since this would contradict the very concept of christian marriage) as these people have the right to live together (they already do) and I see no reason why this shouldn't be legalised.

Back on the topic we started this discussion, again I must say that a religion has its basic rules. Since most christian (and muslim) religions don't allow same-sex marriages, people who nonetheless would like to marry that way should find a way outside the boundaries of their religion.

Post by **Kaylee** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 7:47 pm

BB Shockwave wrote: So...

I'm going to drop the post where you almost outright say I'm stupid, and get onto the above quote.

I haven't said you are stupid at any point. I've said you haven't thought through in the slightest some of your previous posts and now you are trying to undo them.

I do belong to a religious group. I do follow their teachings, and yes, I do know what is considered as a sin in the catholic church. That doesn't mean I problem myself with sorting out people as sinners or non-sinners. That's something God ought to do, not me. After all, the Bible says "do not judge others".

Absolutely grand. Unfortunately that hasn't been particularly well carried through by most of your earlier observations, in fact you only seem to have developed this line when you saw what your prior statements equated to.

Not judging people is wonderful- that's the whole point. I'm trying to make the observation that a great many don't do that, despite your numerous defences of them, and that there is a decided downside to that. More on this later.

My point is, why do you care about what a religion thinks about a specific groups of people?

I care about it because I feel hurt to be judged as being a sinner in such a fashion when there is no logical reason for me to be labelled as such.

As Dickens put it:

"Mankind should have been my business!"

And I am doing my best to meet what I consider to be ignorance with illumination, to try and make you see my side of the argument. All I seem to be achieving however is cementing your apparent attitude to viewing yourself as a victim and rather hard-doneby because I won't give you my blessing that your views make sense to me. They don't, and I will continue to question them.

I'm a catholic, and I'm Hungarian. I know very well that many sects think we catholics are the spawn of devils and the Pope is the Anti-Christ, and that many Rumanians wish we Hungarians would be gone so that they could reclaim part of our country they think is rightfully theirs.

That doesn't hurt you? If somebody started relating how they believed this was true on this board, you wouldn't question their beliefs at all?

I just don't trouble myself with it.

imo apathy has never made the world a better place and never will- it doesn't share experiences or knowledge and doesn't illuminate others to situations and affects which they may not realise they are emitting to others.

Also it is not true, patently imo, that you 'don't trouble yourself' with things that hurt you. More on this later.

Tell me, you ever found yourself in a situation where catholic people openly called you a sinner because you are gay?

Yes. You live this close to Ireland you hear quite a few of those views through various mediums.

As long as people/groups have some opinion/view about another groups that doesn't goes into open violence/discrimination, I don't see why you should be concerned. I know a few gay people, some who are openly gay and others who aren't, but I haven't seen any prejudice done against them that was more then simple gossip-spreading.

I observe that you consider so long as there is no direct symptom of the problems of homophobia (in this case violence) then there is no problem. I disagree- people prejudging on the basis of 'you are a sinner because...' I would argue inately biases one against another.

Moreso merely because you have seen no prejudice, which I'm afraid I don't believe, that does not mean it does not exist. Although apparently you don't consider gossip-spreading a prejudice, not that I'm entirely sure what you mean by it.

It was a very foolish man who said that "Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me". Names DO hurt, as can gossip.

As for if I think homosexuality is alright...

As I said in an older topic, I think it's not. That, however, doesn't mean I say it should be stopped or anything else you think I said. I said it before, I say it again: Gay people have the right to live as they like as long as they don't force their views onto others. The same should go for religion, too. I'm well aware the catholic church had its decades of violent convinction, and (as any sane person) I know it was wrong.

When have I stopped you thinking it? As far as I'm aware I have not so far said "You will not be allowed to think..." and neither have you.

There seems to be some monumental confusion/victim mentality here that because I don't say 'Okay, fair enough' that I am stopping you holding your views. I am questioning you. If you're opinions and beliefs are so indefatigible then they should have no problems rebuffing the questions of some random person on the internet.

Or is it possible that the views of others do actually matter, and in fact we have found some cause that you will bother over? Welcome to my world.

I also again return to the point- you believe that homosexuality is bad. That was what I said originally before you attempted to convince me otherwise, at which point I had to regurgitate your own posts back to you.

Homosexuality is a part of the person, to say it is bad is to make a judgement and to make a judgement against that person. Hence pre-judging, therefore prejudice.

As I've said above essentially if you want to believe that I can't stop you and can't argue with it- I will argue, however, with your attempts to legitimise, rationalise and trivialise it as I fundamentally disagree with them. As far as I can see you've so far tried all three.

And what I believe and I ignore from the teachings of the Bible is my own buisness. Surely as a biologist, I don't belive the world was created in 7 days...

And if you think we are taught on the theology lessons to abhor homosexuality and such then you are waaay off the mark.

I thought you were taught to follow the teachings of the Bible, which is rather clear in this matter.

{sigh}

Or is this going to be another exericse in "No it isn't!" "Yes it is, look." "Oh ok... maybe it is... but anyway..."?

Another thing, I feel from the emotion of your posts that you think I hate homosexuals. You forget an important part of christianity: "Hate the sin, not the sinner. " But again, I'm in no position to tell you what's right and wrong. I'm only human, after all.

Believe it or not I haven't got emotional in the slightest except for the one point where you wanted to back away from the topic, which I did find irritating but did my best to control.

I've spoken, as far as I am able, clearly, calmly and concisely and labelled all such things 'imo' where appropriate.

Furthermore:

Imo you cannot separate homosexuality from homosexual, my reasoning is as follows.

'Homosexuality' does not exist- it is a pigeonhole, a convenient phrase used to categorise human beings. Homosexuality is actually many different aspects of a person's psychological nature, not one, and all are intrinsic to the nature of the person; some of which are present at birth and some of which develop over time.

There is no 'choice' as such to condemn, there is no single 'sin'.

You are talking about a man-made convenience which does not exist.

Various cultures in America (including some Native American tribes) and in Africa recognise up to 16 different sexualities, not 3. There are almost an infinite number as human psychology is academically defined as existing on various spectrums and human beings can exist at any point upon them psychologically speaking.

To lump people together as 'homosexual', 'heterosexual' and 'bisexual' is in fact utterly incorrect as is my understanding.

Hence this, what I consider to be whitewash, business of "I hate the sin not the sinner". There is no 'sin', you are talking about multiple aspects of that person's psychology- you are talking about that person. Hence you are in fact hating the person because they are one and the same, imo.

You are entitled not to believe that as is your whim, however I will continue to question your rationalisations etc. wherever they come up as I consider them to be damaging. I have some vague hope that I might at least be showing you something you've not encountered before and that we might be able to learn from it.

Nebbie · Post by **Nebbie** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:44 am

Karl Lynch wrote:It was a very foolish man who said that "Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me". Names DO hurt, as can gossip.

Personally, I like the phrase I read in a book once. "Sticks and stones will break the bones. Words can shatter the spirit."

Karl Lynch wrote:To lump people together as 'homosexual', 'heterosexual' and 'bisexual' is in fact utterly incorrect as is my understanding.

Kinsey's sexuality scale makes a lot more sense to me.

I'm reminded of a book I read as a kid called 'My Teacher Flunked the Planet'. The quote comes from Peter's alien teacher Broxholm (I think that's his name) 'We rejoice because it doesn't occur to us to fear. You fear because it doesn't occur to you to rejoice.'

I really wish we didn't automatically fear anything different. It makes for a very sad life.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 2:05 am

my GF and I managed to match-make two guys over xmass. they are the perfect couple I think.

Do i go to hell?

BB Shockwave · Post by **BB Shockwave** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:08 am

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:my GF and I managed to match-make two guys over xmass. they are the perfect couple I think.

Do i go to hell?

I got to consult Hades to see they have any vacancy down there....

Post by **Best First** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 12:57 pm

Karl Lynch wrote: I feel like I'm telling someone off for not thinking out their thoughts properly.

and bravo for doing it. Too many people don't bother to try and understand why they think what they think - its one of humainties greatest flaws.

"Make explicit the assumptions you hold"