To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *22531 (-100)
  Re: The Ubiquitous Mr. Hop-Frog
 
(...) You know what Lar would say -- don't feed the frog! Purple frog delights scientists (URL) or printable version: (2 URLs) -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Ubiquitous Mr. Hop-Frog
 
(...) You know as weird as that glass? frog is this real one is even weirder. Fascinating really. (...) I mean its a purple frog! -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
(...) Just to keep it tidy -- he was not convicted of anything to do with drugs. He was convicted of selling rather common type pipes and water pipes. The fact that those items can be used to smoke an illegal substance is not an issue in my view. (...) (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Ubiquitous Mr. Hop-Frog
 
Ribbit! (URL) -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
(...) Well now don't be silly. If drugs were legal we wouldn't have near as much crime to blame other things on. -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  The Ubiquitous Mr. Hop-Frog
 
I am SO hogging the newsgroup, Babies! Anyway, I thought these articles might interest y'all: Bad grades for a voting-machine exam (URL) (if you arrive at a page that makes it look like you have to pay for the content, look for the links towards the (...) (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Hmm, so now state legislatures are practicing medicine...
 
(...) Personally I don't understand why they want to keep her body alive when all of the doctors agree she is brain dead. What good is the empty shell? (...) The interesting part is I was thinking this might actually happen eariler today. (...) Well (...) (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Iraq (was Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap)
 
(...) That's true, and more than once I went to great lengths to make the point crystal clear too, with lots of historical references: (URL) 2nd Amendment -- Bare Bones> And gee, that cite is not even that old...last year. I find it annoying when a (...) (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Hmm, so now state legislatures are practicing medicine...
 
(...) Rhetorically, you've come to the right place. You also slam-dunked it each time. I have nothing to add. Tragic story from every angle. -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: WARNING, VERY DISTURBING IMAGES (was Re: Holy crap! )
 
(...) Why should the horrors of real war be off-topic for off-topic? I couldn't willingly look extensively at that material right now, but a brief look at the front page told me enough. OBL? At large. People beyond the very small group in the U.S. (...) (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
(...) How did I know there would be a site about this? (URL) He's been convicted of selling smoking accessories online or something like that. Considering what I see for sale in Berkeley every time I'm there I was kind of astonished at his (...) (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Iraq (was Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap)
 
(...) Well, I'd have to say the recent (last 50-75 years) histories of many South American countries is also proof that not having guns makes a country ripe for a dictatorship. So yeah, if that's not proof I don't know what is... I think Kooties (...) (21 years ago, 22-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Hmm, so now state legislatures are practicing medicine...
 
So here's an interesting thought exercise related to this... Let's say the husband gets sick of this and brings a gun to the hospital to try and shoot his wife, but gets stopped by a nurse. So then, the state of Florida decides that that sounds like (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Hmm, so now state legislatures are practicing medicine...
 
(URL) case is pretty disturbing. It seems that folks want to go to no end of efforts to keep people alive. Are we headed for a future where we can't have our LEGO because someone feels that the energy that is spent to develop, purchase, and play (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Iraq (was Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap)
 
(...) Well, as Hop-Frog has pointed out numerous times, our founding fathers stated quite clearly when asked that a militia was anyone that is not a government offical. (...) Perhaps that is the modern day definition, but what does that have to do (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  WARNING, VERY DISTURBING IMAGES (was Re: Holy crap! )
 
(...) Perhaps the smoke you smell is the char of civilian Iraqi flesh. Take a look at these (URL) horrifying images> to see the real payoff of the oil war that Dubya has pushed so enthusiastically. Do not click this link if you are upset by graphic (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Iraq (was Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap)
 
(...) You didn't say anything new in there at all, Mike. Lets have a looksee-- " Are you joking? “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” What (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
(...) Uh... The Simpsons. Homer: "Hey Apu, you wanna join our Civil War re-enactment, we need plenty of Indians to shoot." Apu: "Mr. Simpson, I don't know which part of that sentance to correct first." Smallville is probably the best live action (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Iraq (was Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap)
 
(...) Crappy parents raise stupid kids. (...) Well throughout history we have yet to see a country prove otherwise. Oh wait, that's not proof?! (...) You know you still have not replied to (URL) this> -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
(...) I'll give you my list so you don't feel so bad. In addition to Survivor (which I only followed religiously the first time but it is on in our house so I tune in and out) the only shows I have actually sat through so far this season are two (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
 
  Re: And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
(...) My favotites are "The Fairly OddParents" and "Futurama". And that's the heavy intellectual stuff! I go rapidly downhill from there: Smallville, Jake 2.0, and the lowest of the low, Survivor (you had to be a Diplomacy player to get off on all (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
(...) Love '70's Show! The looks that Red gives... He's so much like my dad when i was growing up. Isn't Tommy Chong Canadian? ;) Those pot smoking socialist people! I put that modifier in there because I've been in a few discussions, not (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Iraq (was Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap)
 
(...) The cohesion is there. I think you're just blinded to it. It's an inherent factor in your culture--it's something I noticed when I was in Chicago last week. In one breath a guy I was in a meeting with spoke of 'socialism' as if it was dung on (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
Kooties: Hey, there's nothing wrong with television viewing -- just as long as it's not your whole life and primary source of information. Fair enough? Personally, I watch "That 70's Show," "Everwood," and "The Practice" with shocking regularity. (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) And Israel is always the oppressed party, no matter how many Palestinian civilians they "accidentally" kill. Again, your point is good. "Consistent foreign policy" is hard to address simply because there are so many variables from nation to (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  And now for some fluff after all the heavy conversations...
 
It's not a well kept secret that I like the West Wing. Now before this descends into a "I don't watch TV and therefore I'm intellectually superior to those that do" debate, I just want opinions and thoughts pertaining to 'what's on the tube', with (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Iraq (was Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap)
 
(...) See, this is the kind of cohesive backward and forward looking thinking that I don't see from you in other discussions, say about the gun issue. It's all well and good to pat ourselves on the back and say we overcame the witch trials, slavery, (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I'm not one to even remotely come close to throwing Dubya a life line, but which president in recent history wanted to develop a consistant foreign policy? Not even Bubba attempted that task. The Saudis are 'always good', for one example. I (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) That's a good example. There has been a tendency, thanks largely to Dubya's inane "with us or against us" mentality, to equate patriotism with blind faith in the righteous (some might say "God-given") infallibility of the Bush administration, (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) This I do not know but you have an appointed president tlaking all 'christian values' and letting ownership of endangeded and wild species pass into the hands of the average joe (good legislation there) and started a 'military campaign on (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Vietnam (and a whole bunch of other war/police actions) that America got involved in for selfish reasons would be a similar situation--we wish to distance ourselves from the wrongdoings of our ancestors, or even the wrongs we've done (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I'd like it shut down immediately. On the other side of things are people like John Neal. I think it would be fair to say that he and I are on completely opposite sides of this issue. And so far we haven't slipped completely into a (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) <snip> (...) Scary, ain't it? K, all religious debate aside, what do we do when generals and political appointees believe their 'god given mandate'? At what point do the citizens actually shut this fiasco down? Dave K (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
The problem with John and Justin's thinking here is that they want to be allowed to show that different kinds of Xtianity may exist and that some of these factions of Xtianity are not what they would really consider "properly" Xtian in terms of John (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Well sure, but that wouldn't have been as funny! 8^) (...) Let's stipulate that by "marriage" I refer to the contract of marriage between two or more willing parties, but I do not recognize any religious component as necessary or central to (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I caution that the use of this type of yardstick is called the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, or the fallacy of the receding target. Whatever our modern sensibilities may be, the Inquisition was *the essence* of Christianity in its day, so it's (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Thanks for the book suggestion--I'll see if I can track it down. As to the rest, I question your priorities when you put work and family before LEGO-related concerns! Dave! (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Editorial/Opinion bits on Iraq
 
Soldiers ripe to resist? (URL) PRESIDENT BUSH is busily trying to convince Americans that the war in Iraq is a phenomenal success. Meanwhile, a recent survey conducted by the military newspaper Stars and Stripes found that half of the troops (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: <snip> (...) On that we both agree! :) And the rest nicely stated. Dave K (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) As if on cue... American Jihad (URL) Recently NBC News broadcast footage of Army Lt. General William Boykin, a deputy undersecretary of defense, equating our campaigns in the Middle East to a religious war. Among his arguments: that Islam is (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I think I'm going to require more proof than your say so -- esp. when practically everything you communicate here is a deeply slanted, bigotted statement. As a matter of fact, I'd like an analysis of statements I have made and how they show me (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Hmmm, and what shall I use as a model for critical thinking? The way you critically dismiss the poll? (...) Maybe if only to expose your character (or lack thereof) (...) You mean like this guy: (URL) And standing in a garage and saying (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) None are so blind as those that will not see. Sick and offensive? Take a long look in the mirror, John. (...) How about a SINGLE cite from you worth a damn?! Everything you ever cite is the most slanted, venomous bile ever to spring off the (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)  
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) HELLO, BRAINDAMAGED!!! You did not site a poll stating that the majority of the Palestinian population advocates the murder of innocent women and children. You sited a poll stating that the majority of Palestinians support suicide bombers. (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) This is in Genesis also. Is Jesus the same God as in the Old Testament? How about the Book of the Conquest? How about a god that redeems the world only at the sacrifice of his own son or self in some psycho lamb-as-sacrifice-suicide pact? (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) The usual pro-Israel crap, John. Get a life. Are you able to think critically at all? (...) Um, no there is not. Again another statement so outrageous that it is false on the face of it. When will the lies end, John? Do you think some purpose (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Dude, your equivocations are sick and offensive! Americans would never support Bush if he advocated the slaughter of innocent women and children! What are you smoking? (...) HELLO, MCFLY???!!! Is there anyone home, Mike? I just got done (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Ahem-- speaking of Relevant Difference, I think it was a little unfair to choose a rather unique family in history:-) Anyway, I referred to Jesus' teaching: "He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'for this (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) That is becuase most Palestinians only know what their 'government' tells them. Just as when Bush says country X is a threat and most Americans support him, when Palestinian leaders say their 'country' is being attacked by 'evil Jews', people (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I think from your equivocation of "Christianity" with "Christians". Christianity as a religion doesn't breed violence and death. Wackos calling themselves "Christians" might. There is a distinction there. (...) This is what worries me: (URL) (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) And where exactly did you pull that notion from? I was simply pointing out that Christianity has just as many wacko extremists as other religions. (...) No that would be you at the bottom of this (URL) post> (...) -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
The poblem is not in my or Dave!'s logic, it lies possibly in the language or words we are using to express our ideas. Obviously, it is easier to talk about things in the positive rather than negative because in the negative you have to conjure an (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Again, as a believer you are trying to frame the issue as circling around the issue of belief or faith -- and it is just not so. I am not saying that God doesn't exist. I am saying that there is no evidence of that possibility. Crying about (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Hi Dave, As requested here's a book for you...It's scope is highly scientific. "Darwin's Leap of Faith" by John Ankerberg and John Weldon. I'll try to pick up the book you suggested as well. If you get this book and would like to comment (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I'll see what I can come up with for you. (...) It is ONE central requirement, yet Random House and I are stating that "adhering to the teachings of Christ" is also an essential requirement to be catagorized as a "Christian." (...) I'll check (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I think that you and I went down this road (URL) before.> Bear in mind that the thread took place before you and I made peace, so it might come across with more bitterness than is now the case. (...) Perhaps not, but it definitely eliminates (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Right, but by that same token, consider this: In statement A, the conditional thing that does or does not exist is God. In statement B, the conditional thing that does or does not exist is belief. (...) I disagree, believe it or not! 8^) I (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> Double D'oh!!!! Grr!!! 'Twas suppose to be 2 + not 2 = 5 and 2 + 2 = not 5 !!!!!! Grr!!! crazy kid doesn't know what the h-e double hockey sicks he's talking about!! Grr!! Going (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: <snip> (...) Now that was a tremendous ST:TNG ep when Jean Luc was being tortured by the Cardassian--can't remember the quote right now, but when I heard it, it was a "Wow!" moment. And I concur with (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I also like the point of his tirade--Bible thumping Christians who think they have all the answers and like to force their POV down the throats of others is contemptable. (...) You wrote it below--is computer geek for the word 'not' 2 + not 2 (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) If you can recommend any such books I would be greatly interested to explore them. I would steer you away from such authors as William Lane Craig, William Dembski, or Michael Denton, all of whom commit grievous logical and statistical errors. (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Understood and agreed...Using Atheism was a bad example...most everything else I said has been snipped. Again I refute Richard's statement that merely calling yourself a Christian makes you a Christian and refer you to the 2 definitions for (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Well Hoppy, I see that you're on a tirade, and, for the most part, a perfectly understandable one. However, your little rant above is not called for. I didn't mention at all my convictions, but am pointing out what may be a reasonably (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote: Richard has put his finger exactly on the problem, but I was interested in the underlying logic of the questaion and decided to go ahead anyway for clarity's sake. (...) I'm afraid that this notation (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
What the ****?! Belief has nothing to do with anything. Get it through your thick skulls. The existence or non-existence of a possible god is not so far an observed phenomena. End of story. If you want to believe in the bogeyman in the sky, go right (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
The family: myth and reality (URL) Families in the real world are often not what the policy makers think. And 'the family' everywhere is under immense stress from rapid economic, social and environmental changes. In this Year of the Family Jodi (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) <snip> (...) Are they inherently different? Saying 2 + !2 = 5 or 2 + 2 = !5 Both equations are superfluously different, but inherently they are stating the same thing. Whether you say "I believe that God does not exist" or "I don't believe (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Justin, your comment betrays a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of atheism. Consider the following statements: A: I believe that God does not exist. B: I do not believe that God exists. Do you see that these two statements are (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Let's see: 1. Mary, unemployed, but that's okay 2. Joseph, employed, but later disappears from all record 3. James, child by marriage 4. Jesus, child by a contemporaneous extramarital union who grows up to be executed for sedition Doesn't (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) This is because it takes "faith" to NOT believe in God because you have to have faith in such fatally flawed teachings as evolution,etc. or regarding whatever other theories you have about what got us here. (...) I don't know what dictionary (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) When a conservative uses the term "traditional family", I believe that they are referring to a 1 male, 1 women married household. This model can be traced all the way back to the teaching of Jesus. Number of kids is inconsequential; (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Fair enough. How about this: The idea of a happy, non-dysfunctional, financially secure, single-income, white, Christian family with at least one son and one daughter, and often with a grandparent in residence. If you look at almost any (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Clarification on what you mean exactly by the term "traditional family" would be appreciated, Dave! JOHN (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I would suggest that the common (in the US) notion of the "traditional family" hardly ever existed at all except on TV and in the blurry nostalgia of the people. And I agree that we'd all be a lot better off if that insidious fiction were (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Atheism is not a religion, although I know Xtians like to think that it is. However we are looking at dictionary definitions here -- my dictionary says that being a Xtian can be defined as simply as "one who professes a belief in Jesus." All (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
Sorry to all for the typos in my replies within this forum...(just noticed after a little nap). I've been quite ill lately and will sign off from this debate until I can concentrate good enough to at least proof my own posts correctly :o) Justin (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) If that is your perception, then I guess it is so, but I have to say that it is very easy to be misunderstood in a forum such as this. (...) Hmmm. Really insane, or just not inline with what you believe? :-) (...) That is what is known as a (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) In any religion there are certain core values that one must adhere too to be considered part of the group. If your line of thinking were valid, I could call myself an atheist and still claim to believe in God and you would be powerless to (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) The Revelation to John is a letter to a persecuted Christian Church-- it is about as metaphorical as it gets. As for Hell, I simply believe that Hell is separation from God. (...) I don't think God punishes us for not accepting His perfect (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
Once again, in the category of "Why Bother?"... (...) You do not get to decide that -- they do! I am pretty sure a Xtian is anyone calling themselves a Xtian, however misguided you may think their beliefs may be. For example, President Shrub thinks (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I disagree that this is not possible. How do you feel about the book of Revelation or Hell in general...don't you see these as God's justice in anger? I agree completely that He loves all equally- put the Bible also says He punishes those who (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Neo-Nazi's and the KKK are not Christians at all! The term means one that follows Christ and His teachings. There is no evidence in any of Christ's teaching that He would suppport the actions of these groups, in fact their actions are entirely (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) Okay, you are toying with me, but to be honest, you have to start somewhere to logically explain stuff. At the beginning of any one of those theories must be faith, because something from nothing is not scientific. (...) The problem is that (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) In person, no. But the bigotry you continuously spout in here shows Pride in yourself and your chosen religion. (...) In person, you are. But some of the things you say in here border on insanity sometimes. (...) In THEORY, maybe not. But if (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) God is indeed just and worthy to judge, but I think we must be very careful when trying to ascertain God's Will in certain situations. The tendency is to anthropomorphize God, because God is so behind the confines of our limited understanding. (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Ah, I see. So you are willing to define a group by the few extremists in it. I guess then that you wouldn't have a problem calling Islam a religion that breeds violence and death, either. JOHN (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  WW III: The Information War
 
I thought y'all could use an update... Wilson adds ammo to hit war credibility gap (URL) edit: more importantly: (6 URLs) Gee, who do these guys work for? The Rendon Group (URL) EmpowerPeace (URL) "Empower Peace was born from the genesis of a (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Search for Saddam
 
(...) Don't be silly, 50 years ago they didn't need a scapegoat to keep you in fear and under the belief that you need the government to protect you by taking away your rights. -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Hmmm... let's see, the KKK, neo-Nazis, yep no Christians breeding violence and death at all. (...) Are you serious? (Personally I think you are being sarcastic but I don't know) I mean granted many living in dictatorships can't publicly decry (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I second that! (...) aren't perfect, and to expect Christians to act perfectly is a little over the (...) Which (in a world wide perspective) is certainly not the case with some other religions. Further, the above statement shows a complete (...) (21 years ago, 19-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Come on, Tom. I have a lot of faults, but I wouldn't say "pride" is one of them. In practice I am a pretty tolerant person, and in theory it shouldn't matter what I believe. As far as Christianity breeding violence and death, I don't see it. (...) (21 years ago, 18-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! And Hoppy thought he was the chief pagan :-)
 
Oh, and my Spiritual Type score was 37, on a scale of 25 to 100. 30 - 39 Spiritual Dabbler -- Open to spiritual matters but far from impressed Who picks a scale of 25-100? I was really surprised I didn't get Hardcore Skeptic - I guess it's my (...) (21 years ago, 18-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! And Hoppy thought he was the chief pagan :-)
 
Here's my results, answering all as accurately as I could, considering many of the flawed answer choices: 1. Secular Humanism (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (99%) 3. Liberal Quakers (90%) 4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (86%) 5. (...) (21 years ago, 18-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
But you'll never GET such an apology. John is such a PRIDEful Xtian (oops, that's a sin, innit), that he'll never admit that his religion started out of (i.e., is based on), and continues to breed, violence and death. He's a Xtian Bigot, and nothing (...) (21 years ago, 18-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Who is responsible for your actions?
 
(...) egregiously pro-corporate logic. The laws of tort need no reforming, despite the increasingly popular conclusion that they do. In fact, contrary to the implied meaning of the article, any possible tort reform would in my view mean less "common (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Search for Saddam
 
Is it just me or has the search for Saddam quietly dissappeared from the headlines? I can't believe that they could identify the remains of Hitler 50 years ago in a pile of rubble, but can't find anything to prove that Saddam is dead or alive? (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Who is responsible for your actions?
 
(URL) of posting this refers to the Oct. 8th article. -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Just so no one misses out on my righteous indignation, (URL) here's> my stupendouslyly witty literary swipe at this very same issue. (...) As Al Franken has rightly pointed out, it wasn't God who selected Dubya; it was Clarence Thomas. (URL) (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Perhaps not the only ones. I guess it depends on one's perspective... General Casts War in Religious Terms (URL) Yet the former commander and 13-year veteran of the Army's top-secret Delta Force is also an outspoken evangelical Christian who (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  But see, it was never about the oil...
 
(URL) Republican senator Lindsey Graham, who backed the loan, said: "It's very hard for me to go home and explain that we have to give $20bn to a country sitting on £1 trillion worth of oil." " Sure I understand the premise that "why would you give (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more | 100 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR