 | | Re: New Web Page
|
|
Christopher L. Weeks wrote in message <373C485D.E0DE68AA@c...ri.edu>... (...) Probably so, but less traumatic than being shot or worse, killed. Thats the how I feel about it - I don't want to be killed or even shot. Anyone want to argue with that? (...) (26 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Web Page
|
|
John DiRienzo wrote: <snip> (...) Well said and very libertarian, thank you. (26 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) So, should we assume that taxation, in any form other than optional user fees, by your definition is evil? (If so, we agree.) (26 years ago, 17-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Web Page
|
|
Christopher L. Weeks wrote in message <37402D13.FE6DEC19@c...ri.edu>... (...) a (...) Well, obviously! And to think the evil man Jesus said, "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's!" This may be good advice which can be worded in other ways - obey your (...) (26 years ago, 18-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Web Page
|
|
Wow, you lost me there. Please clarify the "evil man Jesus" and "better fictitious god" statements. -John (...) (26 years ago, 20-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) Under his analysis Jesus was evil, not just misguided, and was a man, not the Son of God. Further, God is fictitious, and there exist better fictions, for example the one he gave. Seems clear to me. Try to keep up, eh? I confess I hadn't taken (...) (26 years ago, 20-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Jesus is OK (was Re: New Web Page)
|
|
(...) Analysis?! Based on what? Not facts. For "rational folk", y'all seem pretty confident in things about which you know nothing, which to me sounds irrational. Further, you hold God is fictitious because you have no proof, which *certainly* (...) (26 years ago, 20-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Jesus is OK (was Re: New Web Page)
|
|
(...) Here we go again. History does have a way of repeating itself. (26 years ago, 20-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Jesus is OK (was Re: New Web Page)
|
|
(...) **I'M** certainly not going to plow this ground again. This has been talked about here ad nauseum and I haven't the bandwidth to get into a debate about the existence of god. Suffice it to say that I'm as satisfied of his non existance as (...) (26 years ago, 21-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Jesus is OK (was Re: New Web Page)
|
|
(...) I've heard that before;-) (...) The Inquisition moved to Michigan??! What a terrible imposition;-) (...) Don't look at me. **I'M** not the troll who trolled out "evil Jesus" and "fictitious god". I have no intentions of cramming anything down (...) (26 years ago, 21-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Jesus is OK (was Re: New Web Page)
|
|
(...) Tell me about it. I spend all day dodging the inquisitor. Steve (26 years ago, 21-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Web Page
|
|
On Fri, 14 May 1999 21:58:19 GMT, John DiRienzo uttered the following profundities... (...) There's that word, Constitutionally, again. Used as though it was without flaw, without error, a holy scripture as though written by god(s) (...) (25 years ago, 31-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
