🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:14 -0600, "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li>
wrote:

>Not all are dangerous
>http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,00.html
>
>
>In his letter of Oct. 10, "Those with minds on afterlife pose threat," Scott Raney blamed
>the September tragedies on many religions' belief in an afterlife, saying that the
>highjackers wouldn't have suicidally attacked without their belief in heaven. A sound
>conclusion. However, it is one religion's belief in the hereafter, not all, that
>contributed to the actions of the terrorists. At least their idea of one. Not all
>religions are true. True Christians could never commit such an act.

Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
clinics and shoot the doctors?

>It's obvious that Raney's opinions stem from an atheistic viewpoint. He proposes to "cure
>us of our delusion of heaven with education in science." He must not know that our
>children have been taught the theory of evolution as fact for quite some time.

No, moron, they follow from a common sense viewpoint. It's a religion
with an afterlife belief, with a holy book that like the bible can
provide support for all sorts of things that normal people wouldn't
do. Couple that with feeling extremely strongly about something and
this gives them the justification they need.

>He seems to equate a person's belief in God with the average Joe's belief that the Broncos

No, moron. He knows exactly what it is. 

>will win this week. Some people, myself included, believe God exists more than they
>believe in their own existence. 

How sad.

>                                To us there is proof everywhere we look, from the light in
>the eyes of our children to the amazing complexity of the universe.

That's not proof, that's rationalisation in terms of a pre-existing
belief.

>Disbelief can never change the truth and the truth is God exists and his son Jesus Christ
>lives. 

Worthless bullshit.

>       I've seen him in my own changed life and in the lives of others. I do not dislike
>people of other religions. I do say they're wrong, but they're closer to being right than
>Scott Raney.

Only in your fevered imagination.

>Jim Precourt
>Boulder

Learn how to spell bleat, ignoramus...!

--
"Did you really think we want those laws observed? said Dr. Ferris.
We WANT them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's
not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against.... We're after power
and we mean it .... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only
power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Well, when there aren't enough criminals one MAKES them. One
declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible
for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law
abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass
the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or
objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers--
and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system Mr. Reardon,
that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier
to deal with." --Ayn Rand


"- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
news:QRIB7.358$yw4.260574@news.uswest.net...
> Not all are dangerous
>
http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,00.h
tml
>
>
> In his letter of Oct. 10, "Those with minds on afterlife pose threat,"
Scott Raney blamed
> the September tragedies on many religions' belief in an afterlife, saying
that the
> highjackers wouldn't have suicidally attacked without their belief in
heaven. A sound
> conclusion. However, it is one religion's belief in the hereafter, not
all, that
> contributed to the actions of the terrorists. At least their idea of one.
Not all
> religions are true. True Christians could never commit such an act.
>
> It's obvious that Raney's opinions stem from an atheistic viewpoint. He
proposes to "cure
> us of our delusion of heaven with education in science." He must not know
that our
> children have been taught the theory of evolution as fact for quite some
time.
>
> He seems to equate a person's belief in God with the average Joe's belief
that the Broncos
> will win this week. Some people, myself included, believe God exists more
than they
> believe in their own existence. To us there is proof everywhere we look,
from the light in
> the eyes of our children to the amazing complexity of the universe.
>
> Disbelief can never change the truth and the truth is God exists and his
son Jesus Christ
> lives. I've seen him in my own changed life and in the lives of others. I
do not dislike
> people of other religions. I do say they're wrong, but they're closer to
being right than
> Scott Raney.
>
> Jim Precourt
> Boulder
>
>
> --
> The very powerful and the very stupid
> have one thing in common. Instead
> of altering their views to fit the facts,
> they alter the facts to fit their  views
> ... which can be very uncomfortable
> if you happen to be one of the  facts
> that needs altering.
>              -- Doctor Who, Face of Evil
>
>
>
>
>

On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:14 -0600, "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li>
wrote:

>Not all are dangerous
>http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,00.html
>
>
>In his letter of Oct. 10, "Those with minds on afterlife pose threat," Scott Raney blamed
>the September tragedies on many religions' belief in an afterlife, saying that the
>highjackers wouldn't have suicidally attacked without their belief in heaven. A sound
>conclusion. However, it is one religion's belief in the hereafter, not all, that
>contributed to the actions of the terrorists. At least their idea of one. Not all
>religions are true. True Christians could never commit such an act.
>
I assume then that "pretend" Christians (even though they may believe
themselves to be "true" Chistians) *could* commit such an act?
>
>It's obvious that Raney's opinions stem from an atheistic viewpoint. He proposes to "cure
>us of our delusion of heaven with education in science." He must not know that our
>children have been taught the theory of evolution as fact for quite some time.
>
That's because evolution is a fact, although many aspects of
evolution, many of it's mechanisms are theoretical.
>
>He seems to equate a person's belief in God with the average Joe's belief that the Broncos
>will win this week. 
>
Well that's just plain silly. There's plenty of evidence that the
Bronco's may win their next game.
>
>Some people, myself included, believe God exists more than they
>believe in their own existence. To us there is proof everywhere we look, from the light in
>the eyes of our children to the amazing complexity of the universe.
>
That evidence certainly indicates that your children have eye's ant
the universe exists.
>
>Disbelief can never change the truth and the truth is God exists and his son Jesus Christ
>lives. I've seen him in my own changed life and in the lives of others. I do not dislike
>people of other religions. I do say they're wrong, but they're closer to being right than
>Scott Raney.
>
>Jim Precourt
>Boulder
>
I do not dislike people with a religious bent. I actually feel some
sympathy for their need to grasp at staws to allay their fears. 
>
>--
>The very powerful and the very stupid
>have one thing in common. Instead
>of altering their views to fit the facts,
>they alter the facts to fit their  views
>... which can be very uncomfortable
>if you happen to be one of the  facts
>that needs altering.
>             -- Doctor Who, Face of Evil
>
>
>
>

"SneakyPete" <grendlemonster@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3bd81c50.57561781@news.onvoy.net...
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:14 -0600, "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li>
> wrote:
>
> >Not all are dangerous
>
>http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,00.
html
[...]
> >He seems to equate a person's belief in God with the average Joe's belief
that the Broncos
> >will win this week.
> >
> Well that's just plain silly. There's plenty of evidence that the
> Bronco's may win their next game.
> >
The way the Broncos have been playing lately?  Not bloody likely...

(To all diehard Broncos fans- Kidding, kidding!  Put down your blunt
objects, it was just a joke!)

\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity") <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
message news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> :
> >
> > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")" <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > wrote in message
> >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
> >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> >>
> >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> >
> > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> >
> > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
>
> dear Denis,
>
>  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> all.  Nor very devout.  What I do know, is that someone who
> sincerely professes to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ doesn't
> go about committing pre-meditated, cold blooded murder.

Really? That's what *you* say ... those that commit those murders,
and other crimes,  claim to be doing so in the Name of the Lord !

Now how can an bystander tell the "true christian" who speaks to
gawd from the lying psychotic charlatan who speaks to his other
personalities?


>
> >
> > Come to think of it, it seems every Christian who posts here is a true
> > Christian, no matter how contradictory their claims are.
> >
> > Isn't that odd?
>
> There are many odd things in life.  It's good you take notice of
> them.

Must be gawd's will ...

>
> (snip)
>
> >

When you believe in things that you don't understand,
Then you suffer,
Superstition ain't the way, yeh, yeh.
             - Stevie Wonder

"- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
>
>
> \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
<"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> message
news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > :
> > >
> > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
<_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > wrote in message
> > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
> > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > >>
> > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > >
> > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > >
> > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> >
> > dear Denis,
> >
> >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > all.  Nor very devout.

Hmm, there's a word for that...

Oh yeah, I remember now:

Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should behave, but
you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.

Excellent!

> > What I do know, is that someone who
> > sincerely professes to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ doesn't
> > go about committing pre-meditated, cold blooded murder.

And I should trust the word of a self-professed hypocrite because...?

> Really? That's what *you* say ... those that commit those murders,
> and other crimes,  claim to be doing so in the Name of the Lord !
>
> Now how can an bystander tell the "true christian" who speaks to
> gawd from the lying psychotic charlatan who speaks to his other
> personalities?
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > Come to think of it, it seems every Christian who posts here is a true
> > > Christian, no matter how contradictory their claims are.
> > >
> > > Isn't that odd?
> >
> > There are many odd things in life.  It's good you take notice of
> > them.

Theists admitting their hypocrisy is one of them.

> Must be gawd's will ...

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:Aj_B7.6826$nj.109065@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
>
> "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> >
> >
> > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > message
> news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > :
> > > >
> > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > wrote in message
> > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
> > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > >>
> > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > >
> > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > >
> > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > >
> > > dear Denis,
> > >
> > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > all.  Nor very devout.
>
> Hmm, there's a word for that...
>
> Oh yeah, I remember now:
>
> Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should behave,
but
> you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
>
> Excellent!
>
> > > What I do know, is that someone who
> > > sincerely professes to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ doesn't
> > > go about committing pre-meditated, cold blooded murder.
>
> And I should trust the word of a self-professed hypocrite because...?
>
> > Really? That's what *you* say ... those that commit those murders,
> > and other crimes,  claim to be doing so in the Name of the Lord !
> >
> > Now how can an bystander tell the "true christian" who speaks to
> > gawd from the lying psychotic charlatan who speaks to his other
> > personalities?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Come to think of it, it seems every Christian who posts here is a
true
> > > > Christian, no matter how contradictory their claims are.
> > > >
> > > > Isn't that odd?
> > >
> > > There are many odd things in life.  It's good you take notice of
> > > them.
>
> Theists admitting their hypocrisy is one of them.
>
> > Must be gawd's will ...
>
> Denis Loubet
> dloubet@io.com
> http://www.io.com/~dloubet
>
>

Garsh, Dennis sounds like a bigot.  Do you hate Jews too or just Christians?
Counting the acts of one person who claims to be Christian against all
Christians is like counting the acts of one atheist against all atheists or
the acts of one Jew against all Jews or one man against all men.  (Muslims,
Homosexuals, Football Players, you pick the group.)

The fact is people have been using religion as an excuse for all kinds of
nastiness for thousands of years - but that doesn't mean they really believe
in anything except their cause.  It also doesn't mean that all (pick your
group) hold the same view.

--
"an agnostic has yet to find God, an atheist has found God and is mad he
did"

"Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Ff1C7.1288$Mw.214615@news.uswest.net...
>
>
> "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> news:Aj_B7.6826$nj.109065@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >
> > "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> > news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> > <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > > message
> > news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > > :
> > > > >
> > > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> > <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > > wrote in message
> > > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb
abortion
> > > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > > >
> > > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > > >
> > > > dear Denis,
> > > >
> > > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > > all.  Nor very devout.
> >
> > Hmm, there's a word for that...
> >
> > Oh yeah, I remember now:
> >
> > Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should behave,
> but
> > you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
> >
> > Excellent!
> >
> > > > What I do know, is that someone who
> > > > sincerely professes to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ doesn't
> > > > go about committing pre-meditated, cold blooded murder.
> >
> > And I should trust the word of a self-professed hypocrite because...?
> >
> > > Really? That's what *you* say ... those that commit those murders,
> > > and other crimes,  claim to be doing so in the Name of the Lord !
> > >
> > > Now how can an bystander tell the "true christian" who speaks to
> > > gawd from the lying psychotic charlatan who speaks to his other
> > > personalities?
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Come to think of it, it seems every Christian who posts here is a
> true
> > > > > Christian, no matter how contradictory their claims are.
> > > > >
> > > > > Isn't that odd?
> > > >
> > > > There are many odd things in life.  It's good you take notice of
> > > > them.
> >
> > Theists admitting their hypocrisy is one of them.
> >
> > > Must be gawd's will ...
> >
> > Denis Loubet
> > dloubet@io.com
> > http://www.io.com/~dloubet
> >
> >
>
> Garsh, Dennis sounds like a bigot.

That's Denis, with one "n". It's right there 6 lines above your mispelling.

Am I a bigot? Probably. But not about what I've written above. Please point
out my bigotry.

Why are you so touchy anyway? I wasn't even talking about you, unless you
profess one standard of behavior, but live by another.

Well?

> Do you hate Jews too or just Christians?

I don't hate either as a group. Where did you get the impression I did?

> Counting the acts of one person who claims to be Christian against all
> Christians is like counting the acts of one atheist against all atheists
or
> the acts of one Jew against all Jews or one man against all men.
(Muslims,
> Homosexuals, Football Players, you pick the group.)

Where did I do that? I thought my comments were well targeted at theists
that post to alt.atheism. It has been my observation that as a class, they
all seem to think they are a true member of their religion because they say
that anyone who differs from them on interpretation of scripture is not a
true Christian, Muslim, or whatever.

> The fact is people have been using religion as an excuse for all kinds of
> nastiness for thousands of years - but that doesn't mean they really
believe
> in anything except their cause.

And, of course, you're doing the same right now. You're using your religious
interpretation as an excuse to hold religion blameless for the atrocities
done in its name. So, is judging someone else as a bigot a nastiness that
your religion encourages, or is it the only cause that you believe in?

> It also doesn't mean that all (pick your
> group) hold the same view.

Never suggested they did.

> "an agnostic has yet to find God, an atheist has found God and is mad he
> did"

Whoever said that doesn't know what atheism is.

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:wH3C7.937$7m.33897@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
>
> "Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Ff1C7.1288$Mw.214615@news.uswest.net...
> >
> >
> > "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> > news:Aj_B7.6826$nj.109065@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > >
> > > "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> > > news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> > > <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > > > message
> > > news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > > > :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> > > <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb
> abortion
> > > > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > > > >
> > > > > dear Denis,
> > > > >
> > > > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > > > all.  Nor very devout.
> > >
> > > Hmm, there's a word for that...
> > >
> > > Oh yeah, I remember now:
> > >
> > > Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should
behave,
> > but
> > > you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
> > >
> > > Excellent!
> > >
> > > > > What I do know, is that someone who
> > > > > sincerely professes to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ
doesn't
> > > > > go about committing pre-meditated, cold blooded murder.
> > >
> > > And I should trust the word of a self-professed hypocrite because...?
> > >
> > > > Really? That's what *you* say ... those that commit those murders,
> > > > and other crimes,  claim to be doing so in the Name of the Lord !
> > > >
> > > > Now how can an bystander tell the "true christian" who speaks to
> > > > gawd from the lying psychotic charlatan who speaks to his other
> > > > personalities?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Come to think of it, it seems every Christian who posts here is
a
> > true
> > > > > > Christian, no matter how contradictory their claims are.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Isn't that odd?
> > > > >
> > > > > There are many odd things in life.  It's good you take notice of
> > > > > them.
> > >
> > > Theists admitting their hypocrisy is one of them.
> > >
> > > > Must be gawd's will ...
> > >
> > > Denis Loubet
> > > dloubet@io.com
> > > http://www.io.com/~dloubet
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Garsh, Dennis sounds like a bigot.
>
> That's Denis, with one "n". It's right there 6 lines above your
mispelling.
>
> Am I a bigot? Probably. But not about what I've written above. Please
point
> out my bigotry.
>

you just did that yourself.

> Why are you so touchy anyway? I wasn't even talking about you, unless you
> profess one standard of behavior, but live by another.

I'm not touchy.  I am responding to a post, that was crossposted to two
Colorado newsgroups as well as the religeon and anti religeon groups.
You have been hitting reply, just as I have so these go to all the groups
the origonal poster sent them to.

>
> Well?
>
> > Do you hate Jews too or just Christians?
>
> I don't hate either as a group. Where did you get the impression I did?

you seem to call an entire group hipocrites.  do you like hipocrites?  How
about I just ask - are their practicing Christians or practicing Jews that
you do like?

>
> > Counting the acts of one person who claims to be Christian against all
> > Christians is like counting the acts of one atheist against all atheists
> or
> > the acts of one Jew against all Jews or one man against all men.
> (Muslims,
> > Homosexuals, Football Players, you pick the group.)
>
> Where did I do that? I thought my comments were well targeted at theists
> that post to alt.atheism. It has been my observation that as a class, they
> all seem to think they are a true member of their religion because they
say
> that anyone who differs from them on interpretation of scripture is not a
> true Christian, Muslim, or whatever.
>

"every christian..."
But I must admit, I read the thread and confused some of what you wrote with
Chris Lee's post.  My appologies. I guess what bothers me is there are many
millions of people that practice their faith who get lumped into a pile with
a few nut cases that pull some stupid shit.  This is why Muslims are
becoming victems of a crime comitted by a nutcase in the name of Allah and
Christians are hated because a couple nutcases commit acts of violence
against abortion clinics/doctors and Jews have been taking it on the chin
for millenia.

> > The fact is people have been using religion as an excuse for all kinds
of
> > nastiness for thousands of years - but that doesn't mean they really
> believe
> > in anything except their cause.
>
> And, of course, you're doing the same right now. You're using your
religious
> interpretation as an excuse to hold religion blameless for the atrocities
> done in its name. So, is judging someone else as a bigot a nastiness that
> your religion encourages, or is it the only cause that you believe in?
>

I didn't mention my religeon nor did I offer a religeous interpretation.

> > It also doesn't mean that all (pick your
> > group) hold the same view.
>
> Never suggested they did.
>
> > "an agnostic has yet to find God, an atheist has found God and is mad he
> > did"
>
> Whoever said that doesn't know what atheism is.
>
> Denis Loubet
> dloubet@io.com
> http://www.io.com/~dloubet
>
>

Paul

--------------038220D6C5E3E434A5CB8A9C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit



"Christopher A. Lee" wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:14 -0600, "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li>
> wrote:
>
> >Not all are dangerous
> >http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,00.html
> >
> >
> >In his letter of Oct. 10, "Those with minds on afterlife pose threat," Scott Raney blamed
> >the September tragedies on many religions' belief in an afterlife, saying that the
> >highjackers wouldn't have suicidally attacked without their belief in heaven. A sound
> >conclusion. However, it is one religion's belief in the hereafter, not all, that
> >contributed to the actions of the terrorists. At least their idea of one. Not all
> >religions are true. True Christians could never commit such an act.
>
> Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
> clinics and shoot the doctors?

The functional difference is that Christian terrorists, if you will, target individuals whom
they regard as murderers. They do not pose a general public safety threat. Islamic terrorists,
on the other hand, kill indiscriminantly and by the thousands.

>
>
> >It's obvious that Raney's opinions stem from an atheistic viewpoint. He proposes to "cure
> >us of our delusion of heaven with education in science." He must not know that our
> >children have been taught the theory of evolution as fact for quite some time.
>
> No, moron, they follow from a common sense viewpoint. It's a religion
> with an afterlife belief, with a holy book that like the bible can
> provide support for all sorts of things that normal people wouldn't
> do. Couple that with feeling extremely strongly about something and
> this gives them the justification they need.
>
> >He seems to equate a person's belief in God with the average Joe's belief that the Broncos
>
> No, moron. He knows exactly what it is.
>
> >will win this week. Some people, myself included, believe God exists more than they
> >believe in their own existence.
>
> How sad.
>
> >                                To us there is proof everywhere we look, from the light in
> >the eyes of our children to the amazing complexity of the universe.
>
> That's not proof, that's rationalisation in terms of a pre-existing
> belief.
>
> >Disbelief can never change the truth and the truth is God exists and his son Jesus Christ
> >lives.
>
> Worthless bullshit.
>
> >       I've seen him in my own changed life and in the lives of others. I do not dislike
> >people of other religions. I do say they're wrong, but they're closer to being right than
> >Scott Raney.
>
> Only in your fevered imagination.
>
> >Jim Precourt
> >Boulder

--------------038220D6C5E3E434A5CB8A9C
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
&nbsp;
<p>"Christopher A. Lee" wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:14 -0600, "- Vox Populi
&copy;" &lt;vox@popu.li>
<br>wrote:
<p>>Not all are dangerous
<br>><a href="http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,00.html">http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,00.html</a>
<br>>
<br>>
<br>>In his letter of Oct. 10, "Those with minds on afterlife pose threat,"
Scott Raney blamed
<br>>the September tragedies on many religions' belief in an afterlife,
saying that the
<br>>highjackers wouldn't have suicidally attacked without their belief
in heaven. A sound
<br>>conclusion. However, it is one religion's belief in the hereafter,
not all, that
<br>>contributed to the actions of the terrorists. At least their idea
of one. Not all
<br>>religions are true. True Christians could never commit such an act.
<p>Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
<br>clinics and shoot the doctors?</blockquote>
The functional difference is that Christian terrorists, if you will, target
<i>individuals</i> whom they regard as murderers. They do not pose a general
public safety threat. Islamic terrorists, on the other hand, kill indiscriminantly
and by the thousands.
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>&nbsp;
<p>>It's obvious that Raney's opinions stem from an atheistic viewpoint.
He proposes to "cure
<br>>us of our delusion of heaven with education in science." He must not
know that our
<br>>children have been taught the theory of evolution as fact for quite
some time.
<p>No, moron, they follow from a common sense viewpoint. It's a religion
<br>with an afterlife belief, with a holy book that like the bible can
<br>provide support for all sorts of things that normal people wouldn't
<br>do. Couple that with feeling extremely strongly about something and
<br>this gives them the justification they need.
<p>>He seems to equate a person's belief in God with the average Joe's
belief that the Broncos
<p>No, moron. He knows exactly what it is.
<p>>will win this week. Some people, myself included, believe God exists
more than they
<br>>believe in their own existence.
<p>How sad.
<p>>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
To us there is proof everywhere we look, from the light in
<br>>the eyes of our children to the amazing complexity of the universe.
<p>That's not proof, that's rationalisation in terms of a pre-existing
<br>belief.
<p>>Disbelief can never change the truth and the truth is God exists and
his son Jesus Christ
<br>>lives.
<p>Worthless bullshit.
<p>>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I've seen him in my own changed
life and in the lives of others. I do not dislike
<br>>people of other religions. I do say they're wrong, but they're closer
to being right than
<br>>Scott Raney.
<p>Only in your fevered imagination.
<p>>Jim Precourt
<br>>Boulder</blockquote>
</html>

--------------038220D6C5E3E434A5CB8A9C--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C15DB7.B80024A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


  "Voice O'Reason" <thecommish@hotbot.com> wrote in message =
news:3BD8DBFF.894D6C7@hotbot.com...
   =20
  "Christopher A. Lee" wrote:=20

    On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:14 -0600, "- Vox Populi =A9" <vox@popu.li> =

    wrote:=20
    >Not all are dangerous=20
    =
>http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,=
00.html=20
    >=20
    >=20
    >In his letter of Oct. 10, "Those with minds on afterlife pose =
threat," Scott Raney blamed=20
    >the September tragedies on many religions' belief in an afterlife, =
saying that the=20
    >highjackers wouldn't have suicidally attacked without their belief =
in heaven. A sound=20
    >conclusion. However, it is one religion's belief in the hereafter, =
not all, that=20
    >contributed to the actions of the terrorists. At least their idea =
of one. Not all=20
    >religions are true. True Christians could never commit such an act. =


    Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion=20
    clinics and shoot the doctors?

  The functional difference is that Christian terrorists, if you will, =
target individuals whom they regard as murderers.=20

  .........or anyone that works in the same building they work in.

  When John Salvi shot up the Planned Parenthood clinics in MA a few =
years ago, he didn't kill any doctors.
  He killed receptionists and security guards, working in a building =
that does a lot more than provide
  abortions.

  Frank



  =20

------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C15DB7.B80024A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>"Voice O'Reason" &lt;<A=20
  href=3D"mailto:thecommish@hotbot.com">thecommish@hotbot.com</A>&gt; =
wrote in=20
  message <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:3BD8DBFF.894D6C7@hotbot.com">news:3BD8DBFF.894D6C7@hotbot.co=
m</A>...</DIV>&nbsp;=20

  <P>"Christopher A. Lee" wrote:=20
  <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3D"CITE">On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:14 -0600, "- Vox =
Populi =A9"=20
    &lt;vox@popu.li&gt; <BR>wrote:=20
    <P>&gt;Not all are dangerous <BR>&gt;<A=20
    =
href=3D"http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_=
856862,00.html">http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,=
DRMN_38_856862,00.html</A>=20
    <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt;In his letter of Oct. 10, "Those with =
minds on=20
    afterlife pose threat," Scott Raney blamed <BR>&gt;the September =
tragedies=20
    on many religions' belief in an afterlife, saying that the=20
    <BR>&gt;highjackers wouldn't have suicidally attacked without their =
belief=20
    in heaven. A sound <BR>&gt;conclusion. However, it is one religion's =
belief=20
    in the hereafter, not all, that <BR>&gt;contributed to the actions =
of the=20
    terrorists. At least their idea of one. Not all <BR>&gt;religions =
are true.=20
    True Christians could never commit such an act.=20
    <P>Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion=20
    <BR>clinics and shoot the doctors?</P></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV>The functional difference is that Christian terrorists, if you =
will,=20
  target <I>individuals</I> whom they regard as murderers. </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>.........or anyone that works in the same building =
they work=20
  in.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>When John Salvi shot up the&nbsp;Planned=20
  Parenthood&nbsp;clinics in MA a few years ago, he didn't kill any=20
  doctors.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>He killed receptionists and security guards, =
working in a=20
  building that does a lot more than provide</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>abortions.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Frank</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;</FONT><FONT=20
size=3D2></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C15DB7.B80024A0--

"Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tg4C7.1775$Mw.295508@news.uswest.net...
>
> "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> news:wH3C7.937$7m.33897@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >
> > "Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:Ff1C7.1288$Mw.214615@news.uswest.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> > > news:Aj_B7.6826$nj.109065@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > > >
> > > > "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> > > > news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> > > > <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > > > > message
> > > >
news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > > > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > > > > :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> > > > <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb
> > abortion
> > > > > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > dear Denis,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > > > > all.  Nor very devout.
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, there's a word for that...
> > > >
> > > > Oh yeah, I remember now:
> > > >
> > > > Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should
> behave,
> > > but
> > > > you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
> > > >
> > > > Excellent!
> > > >
> > > > > > What I do know, is that someone who
> > > > > > sincerely professes to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ
> doesn't
> > > > > > go about committing pre-meditated, cold blooded murder.
> > > >
> > > > And I should trust the word of a self-professed hypocrite
because...?
> > > >
> > > > > Really? That's what *you* say ... those that commit those murders,
> > > > > and other crimes,  claim to be doing so in the Name of the Lord !
> > > > >
> > > > > Now how can an bystander tell the "true christian" who speaks to
> > > > > gawd from the lying psychotic charlatan who speaks to his other
> > > > > personalities?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Come to think of it, it seems every Christian who posts here
is
> a
> > > true
> > > > > > > Christian, no matter how contradictory their claims are.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Isn't that odd?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are many odd things in life.  It's good you take notice of
> > > > > > them.
> > > >
> > > > Theists admitting their hypocrisy is one of them.
> > > >
> > > > > Must be gawd's will ...
> > > >
> > > > Denis Loubet
> > > > dloubet@io.com
> > > > http://www.io.com/~dloubet
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Garsh, Dennis sounds like a bigot.
> >
> > That's Denis, with one "n". It's right there 6 lines above your
> mispelling.
> >
> > Am I a bigot? Probably. But not about what I've written above. Please
> point
> > out my bigotry.
> >
>
> you just did that yourself.

No. I did not point out my bigotry. I just admitted that I might have some.

But you are attempting to dodge the question. Please point out in my
original post where I am bigoted.

> > Why are you so touchy anyway? I wasn't even talking about you, unless
you
> > profess one standard of behavior, but live by another.
>
> I'm not touchy.  I am responding to a post, that was crossposted to two
> Colorado newsgroups as well as the religeon and anti religeon groups.
> You have been hitting reply, just as I have so these go to all the groups
> the origonal poster sent them to.

So? I called someone who exhibited hypocritical behavior a hypocrite. Why
did you come to his defense?

> > Well?
> >
> > > Do you hate Jews too or just Christians?
> >
> > I don't hate either as a group. Where did you get the impression I did?
>
> you seem to call an entire group hipocrites.

Where the hell did I do that? Please provide a quote or retract your
accusation. I accused Mr. Praise the Lord of being a hypocrite. Unless he
has multiple personalities, I really wouldn't call him a "group".

> do you like hipocrites?

No. It's not a quality to be cherished. Why do you ask?

> How
> about I just ask - are their practicing Christians or practicing Jews that
> you do like?

Sure! I have friends that are practicing Jews and Christians. I'm sure the
vast majority of Jews and Christians are fine people.

I like the Jews particularly because they don't feel it's their duty to
their god to get in my face and try to convert me.

Why do you ask?

> > > Counting the acts of one person who claims to be Christian against all
> > > Christians is like counting the acts of one atheist against all
atheists
> > or
> > > the acts of one Jew against all Jews or one man against all men.
> > (Muslims,
> > > Homosexuals, Football Players, you pick the group.)
> >
> > Where did I do that? I thought my comments were well targeted at theists
> > that post to alt.atheism. It has been my observation that as a class,
they
> > all seem to think they are a true member of their religion because they
> say
> > that anyone who differs from them on interpretation of scripture is not
a
> > true Christian, Muslim, or whatever.
> >
>
> "every christian..."

Deliberate out of context editing noted. The proper quote is "it seems every
Christian who posts here". That is a MUCH smaller and more specific group,
and they all do seem to think they are true Christians. Are you saying they
don't think they're true Christians?

> But I must admit, I read the thread and confused some of what you wrote
with
> Chris Lee's post.  My appologies. I guess what bothers me is there are
many
> millions of people that practice their faith who get lumped into a pile
with
> a few nut cases that pull some stupid shit.  This is why Muslims are
> becoming victems of a crime comitted by a nutcase in the name of Allah and
> Christians are hated because a couple nutcases commit acts of violence
> against abortion clinics/doctors and Jews have been taking it on the chin
> for millenia.

You do realize that you are catagorizing a group of people as nutcases
because their interpretation of their religion is different from yours. You
are, in effect, calling the "nutcases" not true members of their religions,
and by implication, stating that you know what the true interpretations of
those religions are.

Do you really consider yourself qualified to do that?

> > > The fact is people have been using religion as an excuse for all kinds
> of
> > > nastiness for thousands of years - but that doesn't mean they really
> > believe
> > > in anything except their cause.
> >
> > And, of course, you're doing the same right now. You're using your
> religious
> > interpretation as an excuse to hold religion blameless for the
atrocities
> > done in its name. So, is judging someone else as a bigot a nastiness
that
> > your religion encourages, or is it the only cause that you believe in?
>
> I didn't mention my religeon nor did I offer a religeous interpretation.

Really? Where did you get the idea that nasty religious people didn't
believe in anything except their cause? That sounds like something a
religious leader would tell you. (I've heard this described by religious
people.) Is this not another way of saying they weren't true members of
their religion as interpreted by you? How can you possibly say you offered
no religious interpretation if your whole point rests on your interpretation
of what constitutes correct actions according to their religion?

Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion. Maybe
religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The scriptures sure
seem to promote that view.

> > > It also doesn't mean that all (pick your
> > > group) hold the same view.
> >
> > Never suggested they did.
> >
> > > "an agnostic has yet to find God, an atheist has found God and is mad
he
> > > did"
> >
> > Whoever said that doesn't know what atheism is.

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:43:59 -0600, Voice O'Reason
<thecommish@hotbot.com> wrote:

>
>--------------038220D6C5E3E434A5CB8A9C
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
>
>
>"Christopher A. Lee" wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:14 -0600, "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Not all are dangerous
>> >http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_856862,00.html
>> >
>> >
>> >In his letter of Oct. 10, "Those with minds on afterlife pose threat," Scott Raney blamed
>> >the September tragedies on many religions' belief in an afterlife, saying that the
>> >highjackers wouldn't have suicidally attacked without their belief in heaven. A sound
>> >conclusion. However, it is one religion's belief in the hereafter, not all, that
>> >contributed to the actions of the terrorists. At least their idea of one. Not all
>> >religions are true. True Christians could never commit such an act.
>>
>> Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
>> clinics and shoot the doctors?
>
>The functional difference is that Christian terrorists, if you will, target individuals whom
>they regard as murderers. They do not pose a general public safety threat. Islamic terrorists,
>on the other hand, kill indiscriminantly and by the thousands.
>
Blowing up an occupied building in a populated urban area does not
constitute a threat to public safety? Riiiiight, whatever you say.
[snipo]

"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:Q26C7.1097$jx1.53915@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
>
> "Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Tg4C7.1775$Mw.295508@news.uswest.net...
> >
> > "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> > news:wH3C7.937$7m.33897@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > >
> > > "Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:Ff1C7.1288$Mw.214615@news.uswest.net...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:Aj_B7.6826$nj.109065@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> > > > > news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> > > > > <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > > > > > message
> > > > >
> news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > > > > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > > > > > :
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> > > > > <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > > > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb
> > > abortion
> > > > > > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true
Christian.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > dear Denis,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian
at
> > > > > > > all.  Nor very devout.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmm, there's a word for that...
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh yeah, I remember now:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should
> > behave,
> > > > but
> > > > > you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
> > > > >
> > > > > Excellent!
> > > > >
> > > > > > > What I do know, is that someone who
> > > > > > > sincerely professes to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ
> > doesn't
> > > > > > > go about committing pre-meditated, cold blooded murder.
> > > > >
> > > > > And I should trust the word of a self-professed hypocrite
> because...?
> > > > >
> > > > > > Really? That's what *you* say ... those that commit those
murders,
> > > > > > and other crimes,  claim to be doing so in the Name of the Lord
!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now how can an bystander tell the "true christian" who speaks to
> > > > > > gawd from the lying psychotic charlatan who speaks to his other
> > > > > > personalities?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Come to think of it, it seems every Christian who posts here
> is
> > a
> > > > true
> > > > > > > > Christian, no matter how contradictory their claims are.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Isn't that odd?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are many odd things in life.  It's good you take notice
of
> > > > > > > them.
> > > > >
> > > > > Theists admitting their hypocrisy is one of them.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Must be gawd's will ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Denis Loubet
> > > > > dloubet@io.com
> > > > > http://www.io.com/~dloubet
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Garsh, Dennis sounds like a bigot.
> > >
> > > That's Denis, with one "n". It's right there 6 lines above your
> > mispelling.
> > >
> > > Am I a bigot? Probably. But not about what I've written above. Please
> > point
> > > out my bigotry.
> > >
> >
> > you just did that yourself.
>
> No. I did not point out my bigotry. I just admitted that I might have
some.
>
> But you are attempting to dodge the question. Please point out in my
> original post where I am bigoted.
>
> > > Why are you so touchy anyway? I wasn't even talking about you, unless
> you
> > > profess one standard of behavior, but live by another.
> >
> > I'm not touchy.  I am responding to a post, that was crossposted to two
> > Colorado newsgroups as well as the religeon and anti religeon groups.
> > You have been hitting reply, just as I have so these go to all the
groups
> > the origonal poster sent them to.
>
> So? I called someone who exhibited hypocritical behavior a hypocrite. Why
> did you come to his defense?
>
> > > Well?
> > >
> > > > Do you hate Jews too or just Christians?
> > >
> > > I don't hate either as a group. Where did you get the impression I
did?
> >
> > you seem to call an entire group hipocrites.
>
> Where the hell did I do that? Please provide a quote or retract your
> accusation. I accused Mr. Praise the Lord of being a hypocrite. Unless he
> has multiple personalities, I really wouldn't call him a "group".
>
> > do you like hipocrites?
>
> No. It's not a quality to be cherished. Why do you ask?

do you think anyone that isn't _devout_ or "well formulated" a hipocrite?
So if someone calls themself a parent, but admits they aren't perfect does
that make them a hipocrite?  Could someone who is not the perfect golfer
call themself a golfer even though their skills aren't well formulated?
Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they are making no
claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?  I don't think many folks
involved in many religeons consider themselves perfcect at all.  It is when
someone claims to be perfect that you can get away with calling them a
hipocrite.

>
> > How
> > about I just ask - are their practicing Christians or practicing Jews
that
> > you do like?
>
> Sure! I have friends that are practicing Jews and Christians. I'm sure the
> vast majority of Jews and Christians are fine people.
>
> I like the Jews particularly because they don't feel it's their duty to
> their god to get in my face and try to convert me.
>
> Why do you ask?

just curious.

> > > > Counting the acts of one person who claims to be Christian against
all
> > > > Christians is like counting the acts of one atheist against all
> atheists
> > > or
> > > > the acts of one Jew against all Jews or one man against all men.
> > > (Muslims,
> > > > Homosexuals, Football Players, you pick the group.)
> > >
> > > Where did I do that? I thought my comments were well targeted at
theists
> > > that post to alt.atheism. It has been my observation that as a class,
> they
> > > all seem to think they are a true member of their religion because
they
> > say
> > > that anyone who differs from them on interpretation of scripture is
not
> a
> > > true Christian, Muslim, or whatever.
> > >
> >
> > "every christian..."
>
> Deliberate out of context editing noted. The proper quote is "it seems
every
> Christian who posts here". That is a MUCH smaller and more specific group,
> and they all do seem to think they are true Christians. Are you saying
they
> don't think they're true Christians?
>

exception noted, but see above - if you are calling everyone who isn't
devout or well formulated a hipocrite you include a rather large group.

> > But I must admit, I read the thread and confused some of what you wrote
> with
> > Chris Lee's post.  My appologies. I guess what bothers me is there are
> many
> > millions of people that practice their faith who get lumped into a pile
> with
> > a few nut cases that pull some stupid shit.  This is why Muslims are
> > becoming victems of a crime comitted by a nutcase in the name of Allah
and
> > Christians are hated because a couple nutcases commit acts of violence
> > against abortion clinics/doctors and Jews have been taking it on the
chin
> > for millenia.
>
> You do realize that you are catagorizing a group of people as nutcases
> because their interpretation of their religion is different from yours.
You
> are, in effect, calling the "nutcases" not true members of their
religions,
> and by implication, stating that you know what the true interpretations of
> those religions are.

anyone that kills 5000 people in the name of their religeon is a nutcase.
you call it whatever you like, I suppose I am making an interpretation on
that level - and yes - on something this big I do feel worthy of making that
observation/interpretation.  I am also drawing from what I have heard other
Muslims say about Islam.

>
> Do you really consider yourself qualified to do that?

in this case, yes.  I also feel qualified to say abortion bombers are
nutcases.  I won't make an arguement that they are or aren't christians, but
I will say they are nuts.  Surely mental illness effects people from all
religeons.


> > > > The fact is people have been using religion as an excuse for all
kinds
> > of
> > > > nastiness for thousands of years - but that doesn't mean they really
> > > believe
> > > > in anything except their cause.
> > >
> > > And, of course, you're doing the same right now. You're using your
> > religious
> > > interpretation as an excuse to hold religion blameless for the
> atrocities
> > > done in its name. So, is judging someone else as a bigot a nastiness
> that
> > > your religion encourages, or is it the only cause that you believe in?
> >
> > I didn't mention my religeon nor did I offer a religeous interpretation.
>
> Really? Where did you get the idea that nasty religious people didn't
> believe in anything except their cause? That sounds like something a
> religious leader would tell you. (I've heard this described by religious
> people.) Is this not another way of saying they weren't true members of
> their religion as interpreted by you? How can you possibly say you offered
> no religious interpretation if your whole point rests on your
interpretation
> of what constitutes correct actions according to their religion?
>
> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion. Maybe
> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The scriptures
sure
> seem to promote that view.

the nastiness is part and parcel of being human.

>
> > > > It also doesn't mean that all (pick your
> > > > group) hold the same view.
> > >
> > > Never suggested they did.
> > >
> > > > "an agnostic has yet to find God, an atheist has found God and is
mad
> he
> > > > did"
> > >
> > > Whoever said that doesn't know what atheism is.
>
> Denis Loubet
> dloubet@io.com
> http://www.io.com/~dloubet
>
>
>

-Paul

\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity") <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
message news:slrn9tjb1p.cpv.Usenet.Uber.Alles@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> Paul transmogrified :
> >
> > "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> > news:Q26C7.1097$jx1.53915@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >>
> [...]
> >>
> >> Where the hell did I do that? Please provide a quote or retract your
> >> accusation. I accused Mr. Praise the Lord of being a hypocrite. Unless he
> >> has multiple personalities, I really wouldn't call him a "group".
> >>
> >> > do you like hipocrites?
> >>
> >> No. It's not a quality to be cherished. Why do you ask?
> >
> > do you think anyone that isn't _devout_ or "well formulated" a hipocrite?
> > So if someone calls themself a parent, but admits they aren't perfect does
> > that make them a hipocrite?  Could someone who is not the perfect golfer
> > call themself a golfer even though their skills aren't well formulated?
> > Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they are making no
> > claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?  I don't think many folks
> > involved in many religeons consider themselves perfcect at all.  It is when
> > someone claims to be perfect that you can get away with calling them a
> > hipocrite.
>
> Thank you, Paul.  I replied earlier to Denis, but stopped crosspointing,
>  so my reply wasn't responded to...  anyway, what I said to Denis
> was..

A good reason why you should leave the xposts intact ...


>
> I know to what ideals I attain, however I know that I fall short.
> I was trying to be honest with you in regards to my self-assessment.
>
> Now, Denis, what are your problems?  I apparently triggered something
> in you...
>
> >
> >>
> >> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion. Maybe
> >> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The scriptures
> > sure
> >> seem to promote that view.
>
> hhhmm.  Could you enlighten me which scriptures you are referring to ?
>
>
> --


"The path of the righteous man is beset
on all sides by the inequities of the selfish
and the tyranny of evil men.

Blessed is he who, in the name of charity
and good will, shepherds the weak through
the valley of darkness. For he is truly his
brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.

"And I will strike down upon thee with great
vengeance and furious anger those who
attempt to poison and destroy my brothers.

And you will know I am the Lord when
I lay my vengeance upon thee."

                            - Yechezkel

"\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")" <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
wrote in message
news:slrn9tjb1p.cpv.Usenet.Uber.Alles@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> Paul transmogrified :
> >
> > "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> > news:Q26C7.1097$jx1.53915@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >>
> [...]
> >>
> >> Where the hell did I do that? Please provide a quote or retract your
> >> accusation. I accused Mr. Praise the Lord of being a hypocrite. Unless
he
> >> has multiple personalities, I really wouldn't call him a "group".
> >>
> >> > do you like hipocrites?
> >>
> >> No. It's not a quality to be cherished. Why do you ask?
> >
> > do you think anyone that isn't _devout_ or "well formulated" a
hipocrite?
> > So if someone calls themself a parent, but admits they aren't perfect
does
> > that make them a hipocrite?  Could someone who is not the perfect golfer
> > call themself a golfer even though their skills aren't well formulated?
> > Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they are making
no
> > claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?  I don't think many
folks
> > involved in many religeons consider themselves perfcect at all.  It is
when
> > someone claims to be perfect that you can get away with calling them a
> > hipocrite.
>
> Thank you, Paul.  I replied earlier to Denis, but stopped crosspointing,
>  so my reply wasn't responded to...  anyway, what I said to Denis
> was..
>
> I know to what ideals I attain, however I know that I fall short.
> I was trying to be honest with you in regards to my self-assessment.
>
> Now, Denis, what are your problems?  I apparently triggered something
> in you...
>
> >
> >>
> >> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion. Maybe
> >> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The scriptures
> > sure
> >> seem to promote that view.
>
> hhhmm.  Could you enlighten me which scriptures you are referring to ?
>
>
> --
> While you are wasting your time on your enemies
>   Engulfed in a fever of spite
> Beyond your tunnel vision reality fades
>   Like shadows into the night .... Pink Floyd, Lost for Words, Division
Bell

"\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")" <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
wrote in message
news:slrn9tjb1p.cpv.Usenet.Uber.Alles@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> Paul transmogrified :
> >
> > "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> > news:Q26C7.1097$jx1.53915@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >>
> [...]
> >>
> >> Where the hell did I do that? Please provide a quote or retract your
> >> accusation. I accused Mr. Praise the Lord of being a hypocrite. Unless
he
> >> has multiple personalities, I really wouldn't call him a "group".
> >>
> >> > do you like hipocrites?
> >>
> >> No. It's not a quality to be cherished. Why do you ask?
> >
> > do you think anyone that isn't _devout_ or "well formulated" a
> > hipocrite?

If they criticize others for not being devout or well formulated enough for
them, then yes,
of course. Do you have an alternative definition of hypocrite that I am not
aware of?

> > So if someone calls themself a parent, but admits they aren't perfect
does
> > that make them a hipocrite?

No. But then calling another parent who isn't perfect NOT a parent IS
hypocrisy.

> >Could someone who is not the perfect golfer
> > call themself a golfer even though their skills aren't well formulated?

Yes. But if they said that anyone else that is not a perfect golfer is not a
golfer, they would be hypocrites.

> > Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they are making
no
> > claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?

Hypocrisy is not about claiming that you're perfect. It's about applying a
double standard. YOU'RE not a perfect Christian, yet YOU'RE still a
Christian, but THEY'RE not a perfect Christian, so THEY'RE not Christian.

That's what you're claiming.

Get it?

> > I don't think many folks
> > involved in many religeons consider themselves perfcect at all.  It is
when
> > someone claims to be perfect that you can get away with calling them a
> > hipocrite.

Not at all, that would be called delusions of grandure. It's when those
imperfect folks claim that other imperfect folks can't be a member of their
religion because they're imperfect, THAT constitutes hypocrisy. The
application of one standard to yourself and another standard for others is
hypocrisy.

> Thank you, Paul.  I replied earlier to Denis, but stopped crosspointing,
>  so my reply wasn't responded to...  anyway, what I said to Denis
> was..
>
> I know to what ideals I attain, however I know that I fall short.
> I was trying to be honest with you in regards to my self-assessment.
>
> Now, Denis, what are your problems?  I apparently triggered something
> in you...

A disgust of arrogance.

You guys don't even see it, do you? You apply one standard and criticize a
guy for falling short by bombing a clinic, and say he can't be a Christian,
yet you apply your other standard to yourselves so that you can fall short
and still somehow be a Christian. This arrogant application of a double
standard is called hypocrisy. And you have it in large quantities. I just
pointed that fact out.

Deal with it.

> >> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion. Maybe
> >> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The scriptures
> > sure
> >> seem to promote that view.
>
> hhhmm.  Could you enlighten me which scriptures you are referring to ?

I could, but what would be the point? No matter how clear the wording, you
will interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean.

For instance, the whole NT is all about making sure that the Jesus character
dies. I don't consider that sweetness and light. But of course, you will
have an alternate interpretation of the NT, and my interpretation, as an
atheist, will automatically be invalid.

You worship a god that will supposedly throw me into hell for all eternity
for the crime of not believing in it. What's worse is that you're ok with
that. I call that nastiness.

(By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general. That
screwed things up royal.)

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

<snippage>
>
> Yes. But if they said that anyone else that is not a perfect golfer is not
a
> golfer, they would be hypocrites.
>
> > > Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they are
making
> no
> > > claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?
>
> Hypocrisy is not about claiming that you're perfect. It's about applying a
> double standard. YOU'RE not a perfect Christian, yet YOU'RE still a
> Christian, but THEY'RE not a perfect Christian, so THEY'RE not Christian.
>
> That's what you're claiming.
>
> Get it?

uhhh... no.  There is a big difference and it takes just a bit of thinking
to notice the difference between someone who admits he/she is not a perfect
/whatever/ and someone who kills people in the name of god.  Philisophically
you could (and are trying to) make a paralell here, but the difference
between someone who is killing people in the name of god and another not
being a perfect or "well formulated" or whatever is profound... but again -
at least I am not claiming anyone is or isn't a muslum, or christian or a
jew.  Just that they are nuts, and yes that I don't think the majority of
christians/jews/muslums think that killing innocent people in the name of
god is in line with their beliefs.



>
> > > I don't think many folks
> > > involved in many religeons consider themselves perfcect at all.  It is
> when
> > > someone claims to be perfect that you can get away with calling them a
> > > hipocrite.
>
> Not at all, that would be called delusions of grandure. It's when those
> imperfect folks claim that other imperfect folks can't be a member of
their
> religion because they're imperfect, THAT constitutes hypocrisy. The
> application of one standard to yourself and another standard for others is
> hypocrisy.

their is a difference, see above.


> > Thank you, Paul.  I replied earlier to Denis, but stopped crosspointing,
> >  so my reply wasn't responded to...  anyway, what I said to Denis
> > was..
> >
> > I know to what ideals I attain, however I know that I fall short.
> > I was trying to be honest with you in regards to my self-assessment.
> >
> > Now, Denis, what are your problems?  I apparently triggered something
> > in you...
>
> A disgust of arrogance.
>
> You guys don't even see it, do you? You apply one standard and criticize a
> guy for falling short by bombing a clinic, and say he can't be a
Christian,
> yet you apply your other standard to yourselves so that you can fall short
> and still somehow be a Christian. This arrogant application of a double
> standard is called hypocrisy. And you have it in large quantities. I just
> pointed that fact out.



well I wont venture a guess as to who is or isn't a christian.  I will say
that the suicide bombers and the clinic bombers are nut cases.  you would
equate missdemenor with murder if you could, but nobody is buying this
arguement.


>
> Deal with it.
>
> > >> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion. Maybe
> > >> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The
scriptures
> > > sure
> > >> seem to promote that view.
> >
> > hhhmm.  Could you enlighten me which scriptures you are referring to ?
>
> I could, but what would be the point? No matter how clear the wording, you
> will interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean.
>
> For instance, the whole NT is all about making sure that the Jesus
character
> dies. I don't consider that sweetness and light. But of course, you will
> have an alternate interpretation of the NT, and my interpretation, as an
> atheist, will automatically be invalid.

what does this have to do with clinic bombers or suicide pilots?

> You worship a god that will supposedly throw me into hell for all eternity
> for the crime of not believing in it. What's worse is that you're ok with
> that. I call that nastiness.
>

who here said anything about anyone going to hell?


> (By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general. That
> screwed things up royal.)
>
> Denis Loubet
> dloubet@io.com
> http://www.io.com/~dloubet

"Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2kqC7.616$rQ3.294320@news.uswest.net...
> <snippage>
> >
> > Yes. But if they said that anyone else that is not a perfect golfer is
not
> a
> > golfer, they would be hypocrites.
> >
> > > > Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they are
> making
> > no
> > > > claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?
> >
> > Hypocrisy is not about claiming that you're perfect. It's about applying
a
> > double standard. YOU'RE not a perfect Christian, yet YOU'RE still a
> > Christian, but THEY'RE not a perfect Christian, so THEY'RE not
Christian.
> >
> > That's what you're claiming.
> >
> > Get it?
>
> uhhh... no.  There is a big difference and it takes just a bit of thinking
> to notice the difference between someone who admits he/she is not a
perfect
> /whatever/ and someone who kills people in the name of god.

Quantitative only. Who are you to set priority? Are the ten commandments
listed in order of importance? Is it ok to break the one about stealing, but
not the one about killing? The commandments seem to be all equally absolute.
The kind of absolutism you get from a supposed divine lawgiver with a
penchant for setting ambiguous rules.

> Philisophically
> you could (and are trying to) make a paralell here, but the difference
> between someone who is killing people in the name of god and another not
> being a perfect or "well formulated" or whatever is profound...

Really? Because you say so? Is that the god's viewpoint? Does the god agree
with you on that?

No, it's only your interpretation, isn't it? And for some reason other
interpretations are invalid.

> but again -
> at least I am not claiming anyone is or isn't a muslum, or christian or a
> jew.

That's because I was talking to Mr. Praise the Lord. He did claim that.

> Just that they are nuts, and yes that I don't think the majority of
> christians/jews/muslums think that killing innocent people in the name of
> god is in line with their beliefs.

I agree. I have already said that the majority of theists are fine people.

But you seem to be saying that any theist who kills is killing because
they're nuts, and not for valid religious reasons. Why?

> > > > I don't think many folks
> > > > involved in many religeons consider themselves perfcect at all.  It
is
> > when
> > > > someone claims to be perfect that you can get away with calling them
a
> > > > hipocrite.
> >
> > Not at all, that would be called delusions of grandure. It's when those
> > imperfect folks claim that other imperfect folks can't be a member of
> their
> > religion because they're imperfect, THAT constitutes hypocrisy. The
> > application of one standard to yourself and another standard for others
is
> > hypocrisy.
>
> their is a difference, see above.

All I see is you arbitrarily setting priorities.

> > > Thank you, Paul.  I replied earlier to Denis, but stopped
crosspointing,
> > >  so my reply wasn't responded to...  anyway, what I said to Denis
> > > was..
> > >
> > > I know to what ideals I attain, however I know that I fall short.
> > > I was trying to be honest with you in regards to my self-assessment.
> > >
> > > Now, Denis, what are your problems?  I apparently triggered something
> > > in you...
> >
> > A disgust of arrogance.
> >
> > You guys don't even see it, do you? You apply one standard and criticize
a
> > guy for falling short by bombing a clinic, and say he can't be a
> Christian,
> > yet you apply your other standard to yourselves so that you can fall
short
> > and still somehow be a Christian. This arrogant application of a double
> > standard is called hypocrisy. And you have it in large quantities. I
just
> > pointed that fact out.
>
>
>
> well I wont venture a guess as to who is or isn't a christian.  I will say
> that the suicide bombers and the clinic bombers are nut cases.

Again you excuse religion without any explanation. You automatically assume
they're nuts instead of obedient servants of their god.

How do you make these astounding distinctions? For example, Christians have
a big history of their god supposedly commanding people to kill other
people, so why would another similar command be considered unusual enough to
deny its divine inspiration?

> you would
> equate missdemenor with murder if you could, but nobody is buying this
> arguement.

No, the ten commandments equate things like coveting with killing. I'm just
following that logic to make you feel at home.

> > Deal with it.
> >
> > > >> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion.
Maybe
> > > >> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The
> scriptures
> > > > sure
> > > >> seem to promote that view.
> > >
> > > hhhmm.  Could you enlighten me which scriptures you are referring to ?
> >
> > I could, but what would be the point? No matter how clear the wording,
you
> > will interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean.
> >
> > For instance, the whole NT is all about making sure that the Jesus
> character
> > dies. I don't consider that sweetness and light. But of course, you will
> > have an alternate interpretation of the NT, and my interpretation, as an
> > atheist, will automatically be invalid.
>
> what does this have to do with clinic bombers or suicide pilots?

Mr. Praise the Lord asked for scripture that promoted nastiness. Do try to
keep up.

> > You worship a god that will supposedly throw me into hell for all
eternity
> > for the crime of not believing in it. What's worse is that you're ok
with
> > that. I call that nastiness.
> >
>
> who here said anything about anyone going to hell?

I'm answering Mr. Praise the Lord. Neither my posts, nor the world, revolve
around you exclusively.

> > (By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general.
That
> > screwed things up royal.)

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

Denis Loubet wrote:

> "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> >
> >
> > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > message
> news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > :
> > > >
> > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > wrote in message
> > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
> > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > >>
> > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > >
> > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > >
> > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > >
> > > dear Denis,
> > >
> > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > all.  Nor very devout.
>
> Hmm, there's a word for that...
>
> Oh yeah, I remember now:
>
> Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should behave, but
> you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
>
> Excellent!
>

    Dude, you have a some unresolved issues, including an searingly obvious
resentment towards organized religion.  Try not to let it ruin your life too
much more.




Remove the obvious anti-spam to reply.

"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:U_tC7.5409$ai7.166924@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
>
> "Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:2kqC7.616$rQ3.294320@news.uswest.net...
> > <snippage>
> > >
> > > Yes. But if they said that anyone else that is not a perfect golfer is
> not
> > a
> > > golfer, they would be hypocrites.
> > >
> > > > > Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they are
> > making
> > > no
> > > > > claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?
> > >
> > > Hypocrisy is not about claiming that you're perfect. It's about
applying
> a
> > > double standard. YOU'RE not a perfect Christian, yet YOU'RE still a
> > > Christian, but THEY'RE not a perfect Christian, so THEY'RE not
> Christian.
> > >
> > > That's what you're claiming.
> > >
> > > Get it?
> >
> > uhhh... no.  There is a big difference and it takes just a bit of
thinking
> > to notice the difference between someone who admits he/she is not a
> perfect
> > /whatever/ and someone who kills people in the name of god.
>
> Quantitative only. Who are you to set priority? Are the ten commandments
> listed in order of importance? Is it ok to break the one about stealing,
but
> not the one about killing? The commandments seem to be all equally
absolute.
> The kind of absolutism you get from a supposed divine lawgiver with a
> penchant for setting ambiguous rules.

did I say I was a fundy?  what did I say I was?

> > Philisophically
> > you could (and are trying to) make a paralell here, but the difference
> > between someone who is killing people in the name of god and another not
> > being a perfect or "well formulated" or whatever is profound...
>
> Really? Because you say so? Is that the god's viewpoint? Does the god
agree
> with you on that?

what god are you talking about?

>
> No, it's only your interpretation, isn't it? And for some reason other
> interpretations are invalid.

I suppose there are various interpretations of just about everything - but
you are the one being rediculous.

> > but again -
> > at least I am not claiming anyone is or isn't a muslum, or christian or
a
> > jew.
>
> That's because I was talking to Mr. Praise the Lord. He did claim that.
>
> > Just that they are nuts, and yes that I don't think the majority of
> > christians/jews/muslums think that killing innocent people in the name
of
> > god is in line with their beliefs.
>
> I agree. I have already said that the majority of theists are fine people.
>
> But you seem to be saying that any theist who kills is killing because
> they're nuts, and not for valid religious reasons. Why?

common sense *should* come into play here, something you are avoiding
wholeheartedly,  You also seem to be projecting a value system onto me that
is held by a minority of christians while I have made no claims about any
belief set greater than:

1.  there is a big difference between bombing clinics and the WTC in the
name of god and not being a perfect christian/jew/muslum.
2   folks who kill in the name of god are nuts.

dont project your hate onto me by making other assumptions about what I
believe because you don't have a clue who I am or what I think beyond that.


> > > > > I don't think many folks
> > > > > involved in many religeons consider themselves perfcect at all.
It
> is
> > > when
> > > > > someone claims to be perfect that you can get away with calling
them
> a
> > > > > hipocrite.
> > >
> > > Not at all, that would be called delusions of grandure. It's when
those
> > > imperfect folks claim that other imperfect folks can't be a member of
> > their
> > > religion because they're imperfect, THAT constitutes hypocrisy. The
> > > application of one standard to yourself and another standard for
others
> is
> > > hypocrisy.
> >
> > their is a difference, see above.
>
> All I see is you arbitrarily setting priorities.

no, common sense.

> > > > Thank you, Paul.  I replied earlier to Denis, but stopped
> crosspointing,
> > > >  so my reply wasn't responded to...  anyway, what I said to Denis
> > > > was..
> > > >
> > > > I know to what ideals I attain, however I know that I fall short.
> > > > I was trying to be honest with you in regards to my self-assessment.
> > > >
> > > > Now, Denis, what are your problems?  I apparently triggered
something
> > > > in you...
> > >
> > > A disgust of arrogance.
> > >
> > > You guys don't even see it, do you? You apply one standard and
criticize
> a
> > > guy for falling short by bombing a clinic, and say he can't be a
> > Christian,
> > > yet you apply your other standard to yourselves so that you can fall
> short
> > > and still somehow be a Christian. This arrogant application of a
double
> > > standard is called hypocrisy. And you have it in large quantities. I
> just
> > > pointed that fact out.
> >
> >
> >
> > well I wont venture a guess as to who is or isn't a christian.  I will
say
> > that the suicide bombers and the clinic bombers are nut cases.
>
> Again you excuse religion without any explanation. You automatically
assume
> they're nuts instead of obedient servants of their god.
>
> How do you make these astounding distinctions? For example, Christians
have
> a big history of their god supposedly commanding people to kill other
> people, so why would another similar command be considered unusual enough
to
> deny its divine inspiration?
>
> > you would
> > equate missdemenor with murder if you could, but nobody is buying this
> > arguement.
>
> No, the ten commandments equate things like coveting with killing. I'm
just
> following that logic to make you feel at home.

I didn't bring up the ten comandments, but where does it say coveting is the
same as murder?

> > > Deal with it.
> > >
> > > > >> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion.
> Maybe
> > > > >> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The
> > scriptures
> > > > > sure
> > > > >> seem to promote that view.
> > > >
> > > > hhhmm.  Could you enlighten me which scriptures you are referring to
?
> > >
> > > I could, but what would be the point? No matter how clear the wording,
> you
> > > will interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean.
> > >
> > > For instance, the whole NT is all about making sure that the Jesus
> > character
> > > dies. I don't consider that sweetness and light. But of course, you
will
> > > have an alternate interpretation of the NT, and my interpretation, as
an
> > > atheist, will automatically be invalid.
> >
> > what does this have to do with clinic bombers or suicide pilots?
>
> Mr. Praise the Lord asked for scripture that promoted nastiness. Do try to
> keep up.
>
> > > You worship a god that will supposedly throw me into hell for all
> eternity
> > > for the crime of not believing in it. What's worse is that you're ok
> with
> > > that. I call that nastiness.
> > >
> >
> > who here said anything about anyone going to hell?
>
> I'm answering Mr. Praise the Lord. Neither my posts, nor the world,
revolve
> around you exclusively.

where have I or mr. PTL discussed what our particular beliefs on how someone
earns a ticket to hell?  I haven't but maybe I missed PTLs remark.

> > > (By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general.
> That
> > > screwed things up royal.)
>
> Denis Loubet
> dloubet@io.com
> http://www.io.com/~dloubet
>
>
>

you seem awfully angry and you also seem to make some rather blind
generalizations about large groups of people based on some past experience
you have had.  I'm sorry that you are in such turmoil about someone
somewhere telling you that you are going to a hell you don't believe in, but
you aren't pinning that one on me.  If you don't believe in god, that's your
choice - but if you don't believe in god how can what anyone does believe in
do anything more than amuse you?

And since you are putting someone else's "sins" on me here, I don't think
there is any sense in debating you about this any further.

peace - out - Paul

Paul <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:tOCC7.339$Ju6.130616@news.uswest.net...
>
> "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> news:U_tC7.5409$ai7.166924@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >
> > "Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:2kqC7.616$rQ3.294320@news.uswest.net...
> > > <snippage>
> > > >
> > > > Yes. But if they said that anyone else that is not a perfect golfer is
> > not
> > > a
> > > > golfer, they would be hypocrites.
> > > >
> > > > > > Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they are
> > > making
> > > > no
> > > > > > claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?
> > > >
> > > > Hypocrisy is not about claiming that you're perfect. It's about
> applying
> > a
> > > > double standard. YOU'RE not a perfect Christian, yet YOU'RE still a
> > > > Christian, but THEY'RE not a perfect Christian, so THEY'RE not
> > Christian.
> > > >
> > > > That's what you're claiming.
> > > >
> > > > Get it?
> > >
> > > uhhh... no.  There is a big difference and it takes just a bit of
> thinking
> > > to notice the difference between someone who admits he/she is not a
> > perfect
> > > /whatever/ and someone who kills people in the name of god.
> >
> > Quantitative only. Who are you to set priority? Are the ten commandments
> > listed in order of importance? Is it ok to break the one about stealing,
> but
> > not the one about killing? The commandments seem to be all equally
> absolute.
> > The kind of absolutism you get from a supposed divine lawgiver with a
> > penchant for setting ambiguous rules.
>
> did I say I was a fundy?  what did I say I was?
>
> > > Philisophically
> > > you could (and are trying to) make a paralell here, but the difference
> > > between someone who is killing people in the name of god and another not
> > > being a perfect or "well formulated" or whatever is profound...
> >
> > Really? Because you say so? Is that the god's viewpoint? Does the god
> agree
> > with you on that?
>
> what god are you talking about?
>
> >
> > No, it's only your interpretation, isn't it? And for some reason other
> > interpretations are invalid.
>
> I suppose there are various interpretations of just about everything - but
> you are the one being rediculous.
>
> > > but again -
> > > at least I am not claiming anyone is or isn't a muslum, or christian or
> a
> > > jew.
> >
> > That's because I was talking to Mr. Praise the Lord. He did claim that.
> >
> > > Just that they are nuts, and yes that I don't think the majority of
> > > christians/jews/muslums think that killing innocent people in the name
> of
> > > god is in line with their beliefs.
> >
> > I agree. I have already said that the majority of theists are fine people.
> >
> > But you seem to be saying that any theist who kills is killing because
> > they're nuts, and not for valid religious reasons. Why?
>
> common sense *should* come into play here, something you are avoiding
> wholeheartedly,  You also seem to be projecting a value system onto me that
> is held by a minority of christians while I have made no claims about any
> belief set greater than:
>
> 1.  there is a big difference between bombing clinics and the WTC in the
> name of god and not being a perfect christian/jew/muslum.
> 2   folks who kill in the name of god are nuts


Correction: People who do anything in the name of some imaginary skyfairy
are nuts, always have been, always will be.



--

"Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just"
                       - Thomas Jefferson Notes from Virginia

\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity") <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
message news:slrn9tl9tg.rmu.rm.-rf.bin.laden@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> Denis Loubet correctly transmogrified :
> >
> > (By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general. That
> > screwed things up royal.)
>
> I apologize for doing that.

Why'd you do it is the more salient question ...?

Same reason(s) you "believe" in some mythical gawd?


>
> >
> > Denis Loubet
> > dloubet@io.com
> > http://www.io.com/~dloubet

PS: You did it again with your followup settings ...

Denis Loubet <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:JpCC7.6161$7m.185446@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
>
> "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")" <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> wrote in message news:slrn9tl9tg.rmu.rm.-rf.bin.laden@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > Denis Loubet correctly transmogrified :
> > >
> > > (By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general.
> That
> > > screwed things up royal.)
> >
> > I apologize for doing that.
>
> No sweat.
>
> I just wanted to make sure it wasn't deliberate.


Obviously it was, as he and you did it again ...

Do try and grab a clue as they fly by ...


>
> Denis Loubet
> dloubet@io.com
> http://www.io.com/~dloubet
>
>
>

pt <mnemotronic@mind\no-spam/spring.com> wrote in message
news:3BDAD6C6.3D01955C@mindspring.com...
>
>
> Denis Loubet wrote:
>
> > "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> > news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> > <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > > message
> > news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > > :
> > > > >
> > > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> > <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > > wrote in message
> > > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb abortion
> > > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > > >
> > > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > > >
> > > > dear Denis,
> > > >
> > > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > > all.  Nor very devout.
> >
> > Hmm, there's a word for that...
> >
> > Oh yeah, I remember now:
> >
> > Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should behave, but
> > you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
> >
> > Excellent!
> >
>
>     Dude, you have a some unresolved issues, including an searingly obvious
> resentment towards organized religion.

And what's with your obvious slight against dis-organized religion?


> Try not to let it ruin your life too
> much more.

Now that's an ironic laugher if there ever was one, someone who
believes in myths and superstitions, claiming those who don't suffer
from the same delusions are in worse shape ...

Even a Blind Man can see more than you ...

When you believe in things that you don't understand,
Then you suffer,
Superstition ain't the way, yeh, yeh.
                              - Stevie Wonder

\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity") <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
message news:slrn9tmfjn.4b7.cats.RULE@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> - Vox Populi � mistakenly transmogrified
> :
> >
> > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity") <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > message news:slrn9tl9tg.rmu.rm.-rf.bin.laden@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> >> Denis Loubet correctly transmogrified :
> >> >
> >> > (By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general. That
> >> > screwed things up royal.)
> >>
> >> I apologize for doing that.
> >
> > Why'd you do it is the more salient question ...?
> >
> > Same reason(s) you "believe" in some mythical gawd?
>
> I use slrn as my newsreader.  It complains about massive cross-posting.

One man's massive is another's miniscule ...

What do your girlfriends think?

> In the blind belief that I was contributing to bad netiquette, I
> chomped the newsgroup list.  I regret the confuzzlement I caused.

Many newbies fall for the same propaganda and urban myth.
In reality, xposting, even "massive", is far more efficient for
the nntp/usenet systems to handle than multiple individually posted
copies.

<followups set back>


> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Denis Loubet
> >> > dloubet@io.com
> >> > http://www.io.com/~dloubet
> >
> > PS: You did it again with your followup settings ...
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> While you are wasting your time on your enemies
>   Engulfed in a fever of spite
> Beyond your tunnel vision reality fades
>   Like shadows into the night .... Pink Floyd, Lost for Words, Division Bell

"- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
news:V%CC7.677$%Q.121962@news.uswest.net...
>
>
> Denis Loubet <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> news:JpCC7.6161$7m.185446@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >
> > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
<_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > wrote in message
news:slrn9tl9tg.rmu.rm.-rf.bin.laden@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > Denis Loubet correctly transmogrified :
> > > >
> > > > (By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general.
> > That
> > > > screwed things up royal.)
> > >
> > > I apologize for doing that.
> >
> > No sweat.
> >
> > I just wanted to make sure it wasn't deliberate.
>
>
> Obviously it was, as he and you did it again ...
>
> Do try and grab a clue as they fly by ...

That's weird. When I responded all the groups were listed, but I don't see
my post on alt.atheism.

Aargh.

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

"Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:tOCC7.339$Ju6.130616@news.uswest.net...
>
> "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
> news:U_tC7.5409$ai7.166924@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >
> > "Paul" <ultimatespamcatcher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:2kqC7.616$rQ3.294320@news.uswest.net...
> > > <snippage>
> > > >
> > > > Yes. But if they said that anyone else that is not a perfect golfer
is
> > not
> > > a
> > > > golfer, they would be hypocrites.
> > > >
> > > > > > Admitting one is not perfect makes them the opposite and they
are
> > > making
> > > > no
> > > > > > claims to perfection so where is the hipocracy?
> > > >
> > > > Hypocrisy is not about claiming that you're perfect. It's about
> applying
> > a
> > > > double standard. YOU'RE not a perfect Christian, yet YOU'RE still a
> > > > Christian, but THEY'RE not a perfect Christian, so THEY'RE not
> > Christian.
> > > >
> > > > That's what you're claiming.
> > > >
> > > > Get it?
> > >
> > > uhhh... no.  There is a big difference and it takes just a bit of
> thinking
> > > to notice the difference between someone who admits he/she is not a
> > perfect
> > > /whatever/ and someone who kills people in the name of god.
> >
> > Quantitative only. Who are you to set priority? Are the ten commandments
> > listed in order of importance? Is it ok to break the one about stealing,
> but
> > not the one about killing? The commandments seem to be all equally
> absolute.
> > The kind of absolutism you get from a supposed divine lawgiver with a
> > penchant for setting ambiguous rules.
>
> did I say I was a fundy?  what did I say I was?

No, you didn't say you were a fundy. Are you suggesting the bible is not to
be trusted? Personally I agree.

> > > Philisophically
> > > you could (and are trying to) make a paralell here, but the difference
> > > between someone who is killing people in the name of god and another
not
> > > being a perfect or "well formulated" or whatever is profound...
> >
> > Really? Because you say so? Is that the god's viewpoint? Does the god
> agree
> > with you on that?
>
> what god are you talking about?

Whatever god you worship, mister Dodge-the-Question.

> > No, it's only your interpretation, isn't it? And for some reason other
> > interpretations are invalid.
>
> I suppose there are various interpretations of just about everything - but
> you are the one being rediculous.

Yet for some reason you can't demonstrate that I'm "rediculous".

> > > but again -
> > > at least I am not claiming anyone is or isn't a muslum, or christian
or
> a
> > > jew.
> >
> > That's because I was talking to Mr. Praise the Lord. He did claim that.
> >
> > > Just that they are nuts, and yes that I don't think the majority of
> > > christians/jews/muslums think that killing innocent people in the name
> of
> > > god is in line with their beliefs.
> >
> > I agree. I have already said that the majority of theists are fine
people.
> >
> > But you seem to be saying that any theist who kills is killing because
> > they're nuts, and not for valid religious reasons. Why?
>
> common sense *should* come into play here, something you are avoiding
> wholeheartedly,

Oh, the irony. Common Sense *should* tell you that gods are mythological.

> You also seem to be projecting a value system onto me that
> is held by a minority of christians while I have made no claims about any
> belief set greater than:
>
> 1.  there is a big difference between bombing clinics and the WTC in the
> name of god and not being a perfect christian/jew/muslum.

Aren't the people who bomb the clinics not perfect C/J/Ms? I'll certainly
grant that the severity of their actions is drastically different, but what
has that got to do with whether they're good members of their religion or
not?

> 2   folks who kill in the name of god are nuts.

Can you resolve that view with all the god commanded killing in the Old
Testiment? Were god's chosen people all nuts?

> dont project your hate onto me by making other assumptions about what I
> believe because you don't have a clue who I am or what I think beyond
that.

Granted, claiming belief in the bible has nothing whatsoever to do with
one's beliefs, does it. The bible is a big smorgasboard that you can pick
and choose from to justify any belief you like.

But you are not worthy of hate, I just think you're wrong.

> > > > > > I don't think many folks
> > > > > > involved in many religeons consider themselves perfcect at all.
> It
> > is
> > > > when
> > > > > > someone claims to be perfect that you can get away with calling
> them
> > a
> > > > > > hipocrite.
> > > >
> > > > Not at all, that would be called delusions of grandure. It's when
> those
> > > > imperfect folks claim that other imperfect folks can't be a member
of
> > > their
> > > > religion because they're imperfect, THAT constitutes hypocrisy. The
> > > > application of one standard to yourself and another standard for
> others
> > is
> > > > hypocrisy.
> > >
> > > their is a difference, see above.
> >
> > All I see is you arbitrarily setting priorities.
>
> no, common sense.

Explain the common sense that dictates whether one is a Christian/Jew/Muslim
by whether one has killed anyone or not. Then use common sense to point out
why theft or covetessness is not a criteria for the same.

That should be interesting.

> > > > > Thank you, Paul.  I replied earlier to Denis, but stopped
> > crosspointing,
> > > > >  so my reply wasn't responded to...  anyway, what I said to Denis
> > > > > was..
> > > > >
> > > > > I know to what ideals I attain, however I know that I fall short.
> > > > > I was trying to be honest with you in regards to my
self-assessment.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, Denis, what are your problems?  I apparently triggered
> something
> > > > > in you...
> > > >
> > > > A disgust of arrogance.
> > > >
> > > > You guys don't even see it, do you? You apply one standard and
> criticize
> > a
> > > > guy for falling short by bombing a clinic, and say he can't be a
> > > Christian,
> > > > yet you apply your other standard to yourselves so that you can fall
> > short
> > > > and still somehow be a Christian. This arrogant application of a
> double
> > > > standard is called hypocrisy. And you have it in large quantities. I
> > just
> > > > pointed that fact out.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > well I wont venture a guess as to who is or isn't a christian.  I will
> say
> > > that the suicide bombers and the clinic bombers are nut cases.
> >
> > Again you excuse religion without any explanation. You automatically
> assume
> > they're nuts instead of obedient servants of their god.
> >
> > How do you make these astounding distinctions? For example, Christians
> have
> > a big history of their god supposedly commanding people to kill other
> > people, so why would another similar command be considered unusual
enough
> to
> > deny its divine inspiration?
> >
> > > you would
> > > equate missdemenor with murder if you could, but nobody is buying this
> > > arguement.
> >
> > No, the ten commandments equate things like coveting with killing. I'm
> just
> > following that logic to make you feel at home.
>
> I didn't bring up the ten comandments, but where does it say coveting is
the
> same as murder?

Mr. Praise the Lord brought it up, and I don't have to show that coveting is
the same priority as murder because there is clearly no distinction drawn
between them in what most Christians call the ten commandments. Seeing as
there is no declaired distinction, YOU have to prove that there IS one.

> > > > Deal with it.
> > > >
> > > > > >> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion.
> > Maybe
> > > > > >> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The
> > > scriptures
> > > > > > sure
> > > > > >> seem to promote that view.
> > > > >
> > > > > hhhmm.  Could you enlighten me which scriptures you are referring
to
> ?
> > > >
> > > > I could, but what would be the point? No matter how clear the
wording,
> > you
> > > > will interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean.
> > > >
> > > > For instance, the whole NT is all about making sure that the Jesus
> > > character
> > > > dies. I don't consider that sweetness and light. But of course, you
> will
> > > > have an alternate interpretation of the NT, and my interpretation,
as
> an
> > > > atheist, will automatically be invalid.
> > >
> > > what does this have to do with clinic bombers or suicide pilots?
> >
> > Mr. Praise the Lord asked for scripture that promoted nastiness. Do try
to
> > keep up.
> >
> > > > You worship a god that will supposedly throw me into hell for all
> > eternity
> > > > for the crime of not believing in it. What's worse is that you're ok
> > with
> > > > that. I call that nastiness.
> > > >
> > >
> > > who here said anything about anyone going to hell?
> >
> > I'm answering Mr. Praise the Lord. Neither my posts, nor the world,
> revolve
> > around you exclusively.
>
> where have I or mr. PTL discussed what our particular beliefs on how
someone
> earns a ticket to hell?  I haven't but maybe I missed PTLs remark.

Of course you and mister PTL are welcome to arbitrarily pick and choose
whatever you wish to believe from the bible. I just have to go with what I
see most Christians in alt.atheism agreeing with to speed up the
discussions.

> > > > (By the way, thanks for limiting the groups to just boulder.general.
> > That
> > > > screwed things up royal.)
> >
> > Denis Loubet
> > dloubet@io.com
> > http://www.io.com/~dloubet
> >
> >
> >
>
> you seem awfully angry and you also seem to make some rather blind
> generalizations about large groups of people based on some past experience
> you have had.

Well, sorry if I come to unfortunate conclusions about a group of people
that claim to follow a big book that makes very intolerant statements
concerning "large groups of people" of which I am one. What am I supposed to
think about people like that?

If, however, you don't agree with the bible, I can quite understand. The god
it describes is quite a horrible invention.

But then why do you call yourself a Christian? (Assuming that you do. I can
understand if you want to keep your beliefs a secret.)

> I'm sorry that you are in such turmoil about someone
> somewhere telling you that you are going to a hell you don't believe in,
but
> you aren't pinning that one on me.

We get told that we are going to hell quite frequently on alt.atheism by
self professed True Christians. Can you wonder why I am forced to draw
certain assumptions?

> If you don't believe in god, that's your
> choice - but if you don't believe in god how can what anyone does believe
in
> do anything more than amuse you?

September 11th did more than amuse me, I assure you. Those Muslims were some
pretty strong believers, don't you think?

I do not have a beef with this god characters, they're fiction, but I do
have a beef with the believers in the god characters because their actions,
which are based on their beliefs, have objective physical effects.

> And since you are putting someone else's "sins" on me here, I don't think
> there is any sense in debating you about this any further.

I am so happy that you have found a pretense that will allow you to escape
this discussion.

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

"pt" <mnemotronic@mind\no-spam/spring.com> wrote in message
news:3BDAD6C6.3D01955C@mindspring.com...
>
>
> Denis Loubet wrote:
>
> > "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> > news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> > <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > > message
> > news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > > :
> > > > >
> > > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> > <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > > wrote in message
> > > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb
abortion
> > > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > > >
> > > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > > >
> > > > dear Denis,
> > > >
> > > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > > all.  Nor very devout.
> >
> > Hmm, there's a word for that...
> >
> > Oh yeah, I remember now:
> >
> > Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should behave,
but
> > you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
> >
> > Excellent!
> >
>
>     Dude, you have a some unresolved issues, including an searingly
obvious
> resentment towards organized religion.  Try not to let it ruin your life
too
> much more.

Man! Hand a believer a bible, and he thinks he's fuckin' Freud.

Are all theists psychiatrists, or just you?

(Am I wrong about the hypocrite thing? Show me where.)

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

Denis Loubet wrote:

> "pt" <mnemotronic@mind\no-spam/spring.com> wrote in message
> news:3BDAD6C6.3D01955C@mindspring.com...
> >
> >
> > Denis Loubet wrote:
> >
> > > "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> > > news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> > > <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > > > message
> > > news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > > > :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> > > <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb
> abortion
> > > > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > > > >
> > > > > dear Denis,
> > > > >
> > > > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > > > all.  Nor very devout.
> > >
> > > Hmm, there's a word for that...
> > >
> > > Oh yeah, I remember now:
> > >
> > > Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should behave,
> but
> > > you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
> > >
> > > Excellent!
> > >
> >
> >     Dude, you have a some unresolved issues, including an searingly
> obvious
> > resentment towards organized religion.  Try not to let it ruin your life
> too
> > much more.
>
> Man! Hand a believer a bible, and he thinks he's fuckin' Freud.
>

    That would be not one, but several mistakes on your part.


>
> Are all theists psychiatrists, or just you?
>

    That would be another.

>
> (Am I wrong about the hypocrite thing? Show me where.)
>

    Why bother?  When you need some perspective, you'll go looking for it.  When
you tire of a life of bitterness, hostility, and hatred, you'll seek serenity.
Tranquility can't be force-feed.


>
> Denis Loubet
> dloubet@io.com
> http://www.io.com/~dloubet


Remove the obvious anti-spam to reply.

"pt" <mnemotronic@mind\no-spam/spring.com> wrote in message
news:3BDC381C.F1361FF4@mindspring.com...
>
>
> Denis Loubet wrote:
>
> > "pt" <mnemotronic@mind\no-spam/spring.com> wrote in message
> > news:3BDAD6C6.3D01955C@mindspring.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > Denis Loubet wrote:
> > >
> > > > "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
> > > > news:i1YB7.614$Tt3.115988@news.uswest.net...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > \_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")
> > > > <"\_0_/"@eta.carinae.star.net> wrote in
> > > > > message
> > > >
news:slrn9tfpcd.6cs.does.the.SSSCA.suck.or.what@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> > > > > > Denis Loubet mistakenly transmogrified
> > > > > > :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")"
> > > > <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
> > > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > > > >> > Bullshit. I suppose it's not "true Christians" who bomb
> > abortion
> > > > > > >> > clinics and shoot the doctors?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> No. They are not. The sixth commandment, for starters.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hey, everyone, we have another true Christian here!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I need to introduce you to Kyle, he's another true Christian.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > dear Denis,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  Actually I don't think I'm a very well-formulated Christian at
> > > > > > all.  Nor very devout.
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, there's a word for that...
> > > >
> > > > Oh yeah, I remember now:
> > > >
> > > > Hypocrite. You say that there's a certain way a Christian should
behave,
> > but
> > > > you, as a Christian, don't behave that way.
> > > >
> > > > Excellent!
> > > >
> > >
> > >     Dude, you have a some unresolved issues, including an searingly
> > obvious
> > > resentment towards organized religion.  Try not to let it ruin your
life
> > too
> > > much more.
> >
> > Man! Hand a believer a bible, and he thinks he's fuckin' Freud.
> >
>
>     That would be not one, but several mistakes on your part.

So you're not Freud? Ok, that's fine. Why did you behave like you were?

> > Are all theists psychiatrists, or just you?
> >
>
>     That would be another.

An error based on your deliberate misrepresentation of yourself as someone
able to dispense pop psychological advise.

> > (Am I wrong about the hypocrite thing? Show me where.)

>     Why bother?  When you need some perspective, you'll go looking for it.
When
> you tire of a life of bitterness, hostility, and hatred, you'll seek
serenity.
> Tranquility can't be force-feed.

There you go again. A pop psychological reading courtesy of Dr. pt.

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

"\_0_/ ("Praise The Lord, and pray for sanity")" <_0_/@eta.carinae.star.net>
wrote in message news:slrn9toiv4.rj1.cats.RULE@carinae.tenagra.edu...
> Denis Loubet challengingly transmogrified :
> >
> > Hypocrisy is not about claiming that you're perfect. It's about applying
a
> > double standard. YOU'RE not a perfect Christian, yet YOU'RE still a
> > Christian, but THEY'RE not a perfect Christian, so THEY'RE not
Christian.
> >
> > Get it?
>
> Got it, finally.  Point taken.  Thank you for your persistence.
>
> >> >> Maybe the nastiness of religion is part and parcel of religion.
Maybe
> >> >> religion is nothing more than a means to control people. The
scriptures
> >> > sure
> >> >> seem to promote that view.
> >>
> >> hhhmm.  Could you enlighten me which scriptures you are referring to ?
> >
> > I could, but what would be the point? No matter how clear the wording,
you
> > will interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean.
>
> I am curious as to which scriptures you are referring to and how
> *you* are interpreting them.  You honor me by making me think about
> my beliefs.

Ok, first question to avoid confusion: is the Old Testiment "invalid"?

> > For instance, the whole NT is all about making sure that the Jesus
character
> > dies. I don't consider that sweetness and light. But of course, you will
> > have an alternate interpretation of the NT, and my interpretation, as an
> > atheist, will automatically be invalid.
> >
> > You worship a god that will supposedly throw me into hell for all
eternity
> > for the crime of not believing in it.
>
> > What's worse is that you're ok with
> > that. I call that nastiness.
>
> I'm NOT okay with that.  Nor is my God.

Then why did the god set it up that way? Was it something that the
omnipotent god could not avoid?

Other Christians say that part of heaven is listening to the screams of the
damned.

> 2 Peter 3:9b (NIV) "He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to
> perish, but everyone to come to repentence."

Then why not show itself, explain itself, and allow me to come to a
repentance if I deem it necessary?

> Christ died to reconcile you to God.

Why? Why did some guy have to die for that to happen? Why not simply
reconcile us?

And reconcile us for what? For the sins we've supposedly committed? Doesn't
that short circuit the purpose of sin? The idea of some guy dying for my
actions is repugnant to me. My sins are mine. If that means I'm not good
enough to enter a supposed heaven, then so be it.

Christ dying to reconcile us is an example of a god demanding a human
sacrifice. Why is this a good thing?

> God gave you free will to
> accept that or not.

But zero information by which to arrive at an educated choice.

Why did the god supposedly give us brains and then keep us ignorant?

> God will grant your request to refuse
> Christ's reconcilition and your desire not to acknowledge Him.

No. I have no desire, nor made any request, to refuse to acknowledge
anything. If the god choses to reveal itself, I will be forced to
acknowledge it. Until then, the god is deliberately hiding from me. Wouldn't
you consider it against your god's wishes for me to attempt to find the god
when it so obviously does not want to be found?

> Denis, if I didn't care, I wouldn't even be trying to converse
> with you.  I appreciate your thoughts, intelligence, and skepticism.

I appreciate your efforts to that effect.

I suspect that we will both be trying to support our sides while under the
pretense of listening to the other. At least that is how these things
usually go.

(Disclaimer: I do not believe in the existance of gods, heavens, or hells.
All references to them by me are for the purpose of discussion only.)

Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet