 | | lugnet.religion.flame —Jim Baker
|
| | | I just want to say how disappointed I am to see this conversation show up here. It happens in general discussion groups all over usenet; one crusader who won't hush until he makes everyone bow to his creator. Those of you who thought that lugnet (...) (26 years ago, 12-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | (...) The various religious debates hold no interest for me, but I actually do read them some time. And I must say, I'd rather see them here than in a general discussion area. In fact, since people will inevitably have these sorts of discussions, (...) (26 years ago, 12-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | (...) Idea -- don't subscribe to lugnet.off-topic.debate. (26 years ago, 12-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Jim Baker
|
| | | | | | Also sprach Matthew Miller: : Idea -- don't subscribe to lugnet.off-topic.debate. You misunderstand ... I am disappointed that even lugnet has gotten dragged into this perenial usenet flamewar ... I'm not complaining that it's off topic; I realize (...) (26 years ago, 12-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Sarah Heacock
|
| | | | | | (...) Uh. But your certain type of personality statement is exactly the kind of comment that KEEPS such arguments running, "a crusader who won't hush until he makes everyone bow to his creator" Don't you see a very definite amount of bile in the way (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Michael Huffman
|
| | | | | | | (...) What do you mean Clinton shouldn't be impeached [1]? :) --Mike. [1] Impeached, Impaired... how about Imappled or Imgraped? Aren't these words a little unfair to the rest of the fruit community? (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Richard Dee
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Unlikely now.... Whenever the going gets tough, he bombs someone to take attention away. :o) And of course, our Foreign Office continues to phallate (sp?) American foreign policy. (deliberate pun) Though I do believe Saddam should be stopped, (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Saddam should have been assasinated a long time ago, whether by us directly or some group we put on the job. Clinton should have bombed Iraq long before now. Amazingly convenient how he timed it, though. (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Chris Moseley
|
| | | | | | | | | Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) Actually, the terrorist leader should have been tortured to death long ago. Moz (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Richard Dee
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Well....probably. (...) Depends if you wish to take everything on faith regarding "weopans of mass destruction" from just *one* inspector. Sure there is a lot of stalling and attempts to block their legitimate work.... The timing is the only (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Selçuk Göre
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Those are real missiles, and could hurt many innocent as well, not some sort of "cigars" which causes only one person (the woman) crying [with pleasure] Selçuk (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Collateral damage is unfortunate, admittedly. I've always felt that a country's people have at least some responsibility for their leadership, though. (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Richard Dee
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) sort of (...) Not always true. Saddam was not democratically elected. He has ruthlessly oppressed the people and opposition has been crushed. Those films we see of people fervently supporting Saddam have long been discounted, as they have been (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Wouter van Wageningen
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Now I don't think that he's a great guy or anything, but who are you to pass judgement on him. People living in Bagdad will probably say the same about Clinton. We cannot say that he is a good or bad leader, the people in his country are the (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Oh goody, I thought you only e-mailed this to me. Saddam is an evil tyrant who poses a threat not only to his own people but to those of neighboring countries. He and seemingly his entire regime are a bunch of lying maniacal bastards and I (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Wouter van Wageningen
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I found that out by accident aswel. Apperently, Free Agent emails when I reply to the newsgroup. Some option I played with, I'm sure. But which one.... (...) <snip> (...) I won't argue with you about that, for they sum up my feelings pretty (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.foreign.policy (was: lugnet.religion.flame) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I happen to know that some people in the US would agree. and later wrote again: (...) Wrong. I think it is up to us. I think this because as a society we have taken on the burden of opposing tyranny world-wide. I support this stance, but (...) (26 years ago, 21-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Jim Baker
|
| | | | | | | Also sprach Perhaps a Princess...: : "a crusader who won't hush until he makes everyone bow to his creator" : Don't you see a very definite amount of bile in the way you phrased : this? And why it might get on people's back like fingernails on a : (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) It really doesn't to me. I have my faith and my father-in-law, the minister, would probably lament to hear me say it, but I don't accept that your faith or your soul or anyone else's is my responsibility. Makes no difference to me what (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) You're in the minority, or so it would seem. Either that or the people that are obviously believers are a bit less tolerant of non believers but the quiet faith types (who I appreciate more anyway) are a bit more and aren't obviously beleivers (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I've always been in the minority in one way or another. :) With this as with other things it is usually something to be proud of, or at least something to not be ashamed of. (...) I don't think I'm very obvious about a lot of confrontational (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Maybe it's just that there are a lot of hypocritical loudmouths who like to hide their intolerance and hate in the cloak of respectable Christianity. This is not meant to make generalizations about Christians, loudmouths or Hypocrates. Steve (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Jim Baker
|
| | | | | | | | | | Also sprach Mike Stanley: : Makes no difference to me what everyone else believes. Not my : business unless they try to tell me what to believe. ... and notably, you and I have never gotten into an argument about religion and faith. That's my point. (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Richard Dee
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Unfortunately it is a tenant of many religions to convert the non-believers. (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Selçuk Göre
|
| | | | | | | | | | how about talking the hitler or nazizm some?.. (anybody remeber the great rule saying all usenet threads has an end virtually..:-D) Selçuk (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Richard Dee
|
| | | | | | | | | | It is unfortunate, but from time to time one meets the occassional, ultra-right wing religeous nut, who is comparable to Hitler. I have met one or two in my time, and call them god-Nazis. There. Hope that kills it off for good. Too much bad feeling (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —James Brown
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I agree - sort of. My experience has also been that there are more 'believers'(1) who start these flame wars, however, I've noticed that once they start, the majority of the participents (and the bulk of the volume) are from 'non-believers' (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | (...) Works with the boxers vs briefs subject as well. (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Which is a much more revealing debate anyway. (G, D & R) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: lugnet.religion.flame —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) It's an old rule of etiquette: don't bring up religion and politics in general conversation. The inverse of this is: if you want to talk about God, expect a fight. So these perennial brushfires aren't some artifact of usenet; they are a (...) (26 years ago, 15-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
