Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.atheism > #1960935 > unrolled thread

Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science.

Started bytalishi <talishi@example.net>
First post2015-08-15 07:43 -0700
Last post2015-08-18 16:58 -0400
Articles 13 on this page of 73 — 10 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.atheism

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-15 07:43 -0700
    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-15 12:05 -0500
      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-15 18:36 -0500
        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 00:56 -0700
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 01:08 -0700
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 01:09 -0700
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 14:06 -0700
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 06:04 -0400
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 12:12 -0700
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-16 03:37 -0500
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 21:25 -0700
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 02:54 -0400
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 22:21 -0700
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-18 14:23 -0500
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:58 -0400
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 18:47 -0700
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:30 -0400
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-18 10:15 -0700
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 16:50 -0400
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-19 00:44 -0700
                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-19 04:43 -0400
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-19 09:45 -0700
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 05:06 -0400
                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-21 00:25 -0700
                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-21 04:52 -0400
                                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-21 13:19 -0700
                                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-21 17:29 -0400
                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-22 00:18 -0700
                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-22 03:39 -0400
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-22 12:23 -0700
                                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-23 03:57 -0400
                                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-23 15:14 -0700
                                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Mitchell Holman <noemail@att.net> - 2015-08-23 20:49 -0500
                                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-24 05:17 -0400
                                                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-24 12:45 -0700
                                                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-24 22:32 -0700
                                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 00:08 -0400
                                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-26 03:46 -0400
                                                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-26 00:43 -0700
      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-16 04:06 -0400
    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 10:28 +0800
      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-16 04:08 -0400
        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-16 20:04 +0800
          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 06:07 -0400
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-17 20:16 +0800
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 19:27 -0400
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-18 13:51 +0800
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:34 -0400
                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 07:55 +0800
                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-19 04:48 -0400
                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-19 20:59 +0800
                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 05:13 -0400
                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-20 22:30 +0800
                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 09:36 -0700
                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-21 04:58 -0400
                                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-21 19:58 +0800
                                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-21 17:31 -0400
                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-22 07:47 +0800
                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-22 03:40 -0400
                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-22 16:19 +0800
                                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-23 03:58 -0400
                                            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-23 21:20 +0800
                                              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-23 17:00 -0400
                                                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-24 23:49 +0800
                                                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-24 20:26 -0400
                                                    Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-26 08:02 +0800
                                                      Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-26 03:43 -0400
                                                        Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-27 00:44 +0800
                                                          Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-26 16:46 -0400
            Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-17 22:23 -0700
              Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 03:37 -0400
                Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-18 00:51 -0700
                  Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 16:58 -0400

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]


#1967469

FromAttila <<prochoice@here.now>
Date2015-08-23 03:58 -0400
Message-ID<o7vitad59prbn4i72eriufcs2ahk0q8ctt@4ax.com>
In reply to#1966386
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:19:15 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
alt.atheism with message-id <mr9b7t$mcu$1@dont-email.me> wrote:

>On 2015-08-22 03:40 PM, Attila < wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 07:47:40 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr8d8l$88g$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-08-22 05:31 AM, Attila < wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 19:58:24 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr73m0$1hr$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>
>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>> is.
>>>>
>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>
>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>> is universal to all people.
>>
>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>
>That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>
It fits.

--
Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent.

Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially 
those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass.

Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government 
guaranteed above average income for every person.

Every illegal alien is a criminal.
No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason.
Deportation upon identification as the only option.

If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly
before you run into me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1967643

Fromniunian <niunian@ymail.com>
Date2015-08-23 21:20 +0800
Message-ID<mrch7f$79g$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#1967469
On 2015-08-23 03:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:19:15 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
> alt.atheism with message-id <mr9b7t$mcu$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-08-22 03:40 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 07:47:40 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr8d8l$88g$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2015-08-22 05:31 AM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 19:58:24 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr73m0$1hr$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>>
>>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>>> is.
>>>>>
>>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>>
>>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>>> is universal to all people.
>>>
>>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>>
>> That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>>
> It fits.

Yes. It best reflects your mental condition, but I'm not really 
discriminating. It's quite natural and normal.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1968031

FromAttila <<prochoice@here.now>
Date2015-08-23 17:00 -0400
Message-ID<s1dkta5qg41a9shskmpbae4crqgn7alghp@4ax.com>
In reply to#1967643
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 21:20:23 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
alt.atheism with message-id <mrch7f$79g$2@dont-email.me> wrote:

>On 2015-08-23 03:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:19:15 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr9b7t$mcu$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-08-22 03:40 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 07:47:40 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr8d8l$88g$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-08-22 05:31 AM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 19:58:24 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr73m0$1hr$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>>>> is universal to all people.
>>>>
>>>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>>>
>>> That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>>>
>> It fits.
>
>Yes. It best reflects your mental condition, but I'm not really 
>discriminating. It's quite natural and normal.

I will leave it to the observer to decide who is batshit crazy and
dogshit dumb here,

--
Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent.

Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially 
those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass.

Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government 
guaranteed above average income for every person.

Every illegal alien is a criminal.
No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason.
Deportation upon identification as the only option.

If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly
before you run into me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1968722

Fromniunian <niunian@ymail.com>
Date2015-08-24 23:49 +0800
Message-ID<mrfirs$rkc$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#1968031
On 2015-08-24 05:00 AM, Attila < wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 21:20:23 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
> alt.atheism with message-id <mrch7f$79g$2@dont-email.me> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-08-23 03:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:19:15 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr9b7t$mcu$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2015-08-22 03:40 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 07:47:40 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr8d8l$88g$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2015-08-22 05:31 AM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 19:58:24 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr73m0$1hr$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>>>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>>>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>>>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>>>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>>>>> is universal to all people.
>>>>>
>>>>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>>>>
>>>> That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>>>>
>>> It fits.
>>
>> Yes. It best reflects your mental condition, but I'm not really
>> discriminating. It's quite natural and normal.
>
> I will leave it to the observer to decide who is batshit crazy and
> dogshit dumb here,

Don't worry. I'm sure one day you will understand what I'm talking 
about. It's really quite simple. There is nothing fancy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1969206

FromAttila <<prochoice@here.now>
Date2015-08-24 20:26 -0400
Message-ID<lhdntad9frqndkjurndf6ilqhd3pj8ltf1@4ax.com>
In reply to#1968722
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 23:49:20 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
alt.atheism with message-id <mrfirs$rkc$1@dont-email.me> wrote:

>On 2015-08-24 05:00 AM, Attila < wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 21:20:23 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>> alt.atheism with message-id <mrch7f$79g$2@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-08-23 03:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:19:15 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr9b7t$mcu$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-08-22 03:40 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 07:47:40 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr8d8l$88g$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2015-08-22 05:31 AM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 19:58:24 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr73m0$1hr$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>>>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>>>>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>>>>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>>>>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>>>>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>>>>>> is universal to all people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>>>>>
>>>> It fits.
>>>
>>> Yes. It best reflects your mental condition, but I'm not really
>>> discriminating. It's quite natural and normal.
>>
>> I will leave it to the observer to decide who is batshit crazy and
>> dogshit dumb here,
>
>Don't worry. I'm sure one day you will understand what I'm talking 
>about. It's really quite simple. There is nothing fancy.

There is nothing there.

--
Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent.

Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially 
those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass.

Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government 
guaranteed above average income for every person.

Every illegal alien is a criminal.
No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason.
Deportation upon identification as the only option.

If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly
before you run into me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1970025

Fromniunian <niunian@ymail.com>
Date2015-08-26 08:02 +0800
Message-ID<mrivk3$l6u$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#1969206
On 2015-08-25 08:26 AM, Attila < wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 23:49:20 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
> alt.atheism with message-id <mrfirs$rkc$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-08-24 05:00 AM, Attila < wrote:
>>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 21:20:23 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mrch7f$79g$2@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2015-08-23 03:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:19:15 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr9b7t$mcu$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2015-08-22 03:40 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 07:47:40 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr8d8l$88g$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-22 05:31 AM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 19:58:24 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <mr73m0$1hr$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>>>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>>>>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>>>>>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>>>>>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>>>>>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>>>>>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>>>>>>> is universal to all people.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It fits.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. It best reflects your mental condition, but I'm not really
>>>> discriminating. It's quite natural and normal.
>>>
>>> I will leave it to the observer to decide who is batshit crazy and
>>> dogshit dumb here,
>>
>> Don't worry. I'm sure one day you will understand what I'm talking
>> about. It's really quite simple. There is nothing fancy.
>
> There is nothing there.

There is nothing there for you to see, but there is something within for 
you to realize. People spend their entire life by staring into a blank 
wall, hoping one day something will rise from the within, so they can 
call themselves the Sages.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1970268

FromAttila <<prochoice@here.now>
Date2015-08-26 03:43 -0400
Message-ID<bdrqta9glln9ivae8gv68ni9m47e71gn4c@4ax.com>
In reply to#1970025
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:02:51 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
alt.atheism with message-id <mrivk3$l6u$1@dont-email.me> wrote:


>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>>>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>>>>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>>>>>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>>>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>>>>>>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>>>>>>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>>>>>>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>>>>>>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>>>>>>>> is universal to all people.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It fits.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. It best reflects your mental condition, but I'm not really
>>>>> discriminating. It's quite natural and normal.
>>>>
>>>> I will leave it to the observer to decide who is batshit crazy and
>>>> dogshit dumb here,
>>>
>>> Don't worry. I'm sure one day you will understand what I'm talking
>>> about. It's really quite simple. There is nothing fancy.
>>
>> There is nothing there.
>
>There is nothing there for you to see, but there is something within for 
>you to realize. People spend their entire life by staring into a blank 
>wall, hoping one day something will rise from the within, so they can 
>call themselves the Sages.

In their cases drugs and strong drink usually produce the desired
results.  

--
Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent.

Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially 
those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass.

Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government 
guaranteed above average income for every person.

Every illegal alien is a criminal.
No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason.
Deportation upon identification as the only option.

If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly
before you run into me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1970521

Fromniunian <niunian@ymail.com>
Date2015-08-27 00:44 +0800
Message-ID<mrkq9c$c1u$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#1970268
On 2015-08-26 03:43 PM, Attila < wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:02:51 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
> alt.atheism with message-id <mrivk3$l6u$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>>>>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>>>>>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>>>>>>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>>>>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>>>>>>>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>>>>>>>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>>>>>>>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>>>>>>>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>>>>>>>>> is universal to all people.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It fits.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. It best reflects your mental condition, but I'm not really
>>>>>> discriminating. It's quite natural and normal.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will leave it to the observer to decide who is batshit crazy and
>>>>> dogshit dumb here,
>>>>
>>>> Don't worry. I'm sure one day you will understand what I'm talking
>>>> about. It's really quite simple. There is nothing fancy.
>>>
>>> There is nothing there.
>>
>> There is nothing there for you to see, but there is something within for
>> you to realize. People spend their entire life by staring into a blank
>> wall, hoping one day something will rise from the within, so they can
>> call themselves the Sages.
>
> In their cases drugs and strong drink usually produce the desired
> results.

I tend to give them the credit if their story is true and their effort 
is genuine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1970655

FromAttila <<prochoice@here.now>
Date2015-08-26 16:46 -0400
Message-ID<ub9sta135hr8j9rsmj056vdl3drq6rne8k@4ax.com>
In reply to#1970521
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 00:44:03 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
alt.atheism with message-id <mrkq9c$c1u$1@dont-email.me> wrote:

>On 2015-08-26 03:43 PM, Attila < wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:02:51 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
>> alt.atheism with message-id <mrivk3$l6u$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-21 04:58 PM, Attila < wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's based on the knowledge of truth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is universal. Anyone who possesses such knowledge will understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. Anyone who doesn't yet know such knowledge needs to learn from it. A
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> philosophical book doesn't need to be scientifically accurate. It only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs to reveal the truth it's trying to teach in its own way. It can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talk about bullshit, or make up a story, as long as it helps to explain
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I suspect we have entirely different definitions of truth, because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your's sounds nothing like mine.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right. I'm talking about the metaphysical truth other than the empirical
>>>>>>>>>>>>> truth of scientific theory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> IOW, a 'truth' you can make up as you go along and which has no
>>>>>>>>>>>> relationship to the real world.  It is a 'truth' because you say it
>>>>>>>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How convenient for you.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not at all. I can never describe what the truth is. No one can. I can
>>>>>>>>>>> only point you to the truth for you to find out yourself. The truth is
>>>>>>>>>>> always self-evident and self-sufficient. The description of the truth
>>>>>>>>>>> serves no purpose and is often misleading. People who find the truth
>>>>>>>>>>> will know and understand the truth all by themselves because the truth
>>>>>>>>>>> is universal to all people.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Batshit crazy and dogshit dumb.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's about the right response you should have, I'm sure.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It fits.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes. It best reflects your mental condition, but I'm not really
>>>>>>> discriminating. It's quite natural and normal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will leave it to the observer to decide who is batshit crazy and
>>>>>> dogshit dumb here,
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't worry. I'm sure one day you will understand what I'm talking
>>>>> about. It's really quite simple. There is nothing fancy.
>>>>
>>>> There is nothing there.
>>>
>>> There is nothing there for you to see, but there is something within for
>>> you to realize. People spend their entire life by staring into a blank
>>> wall, hoping one day something will rise from the within, so they can
>>> call themselves the Sages.
>>
>> In their cases drugs and strong drink usually produce the desired
>> results.
>
>I tend to give them the credit if their story is true and their effort 
>is genuine.


How do you know if their story is true, and who cares about their
effort?

--
Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent.

Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially 
those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass.

Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government 
guaranteed above average income for every person.

Every illegal alien is a criminal.
No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason.
Deportation upon identification as the only option.

If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly
before you run into me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1963134

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2015-08-17 22:23 -0700
Message-ID<55D2C157.314D@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#1962402
Attila < wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 20:04:37 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
> alt.atheism with message-id <mqpu6g$mgr$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
> 
> >On 2015-08-16 04:08 PM, Attila < wrote:
> >> On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:28:51 +0800, niunian <niunian@ymail.com> in
> >> alt.atheism with message-id <mqouen$fsa$1@dont-email.me> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 2015-08-15 10:43 PM, talishi wrote:
> >>>> niunian wrote:
> >>>>> On 2015-08-15 06:36 PM, talishi wrote:
> >>>>>> niunian wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The Old Testament has at least two Gods. The first God is the God
> >>>>>>> of creation who is the God of Eden. The second God is the God of
> >>>>>>> Adam and Eve after they have sinned. The first God is the God of
> >>>>>>> living, the giver of life who is always good. The second God is the
> >>>>>>> God of sin who is always vengeful and evil. They are not the same
> >>>>>>> God. The sin has introduced or manufactured another God in the
> >>>>>>> place of the previous creation God.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It turns out the previous creation God was manufactured as well.
> >>>>>> Humans have manufactured at least 5,000 of them.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Are we talking about philosophy or are we talking about science? Make up
> >>>>> your mind.
> >>>>
> >>>> We are talking about a unique form of literature that historically (and
> >>>> even in the present day) translated to terrible physical action such as
> >>>> war and beheadings.  Certainly no one ever took "Dune" as scripture and
> >>>> went out trying to kill "Harkonnens".
> >>>
> >>> The Bible is a spiritual teaching that explains the philosophy of life.
> >>> If you are not interested in that, there is no point to talk about the
> >>> Bible at all. Go back to your science class and stay away from
> >>> philosophy, then you will not be bothered by what's in the Bible.
> >>
> >> The problem is not what is in that book of myth, it is the way so many
> >> people not only insist it is true but demand everyone else must accept
> >> it as true also.
> >>
> >> There is no reason to fear any god but many reasons to fear your
> >> god-fearing neighbors.
> >
> >Then, it's the people you have a problem with, so why blame a book?
> 
> A book is nothing more than a repository of words.  It isn't to blame
> for anything.
> 
> Just because something is written down has nothing to do with whether
> it contains any truth or not, and it's age does the same.



There was no Attila the Hun, was there...he's gay.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1963173

FromAttila <<prochoice@here.now>
Date2015-08-18 03:37 -0400
Message-ID<p0o5ta1rl56e1f8qjgsre0hc9d6jaellvu@4ax.com>
In reply to#1963134
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 22:23:35 -0700, The Starmaker
<starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
<55D2C157.314D@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>> >> The problem is not what is in that book of myth, it is the way so many
>> >> people not only insist it is true but demand everyone else must accept
>> >> it as true also.
>> >>
>> >> There is no reason to fear any god but many reasons to fear your
>> >> god-fearing neighbors.
>> >
>> >Then, it's the people you have a problem with, so why blame a book?
>> 
>> A book is nothing more than a repository of words.  It isn't to blame
>> for anything.
>> 
>> Just because something is written down has nothing to do with whether
>> it contains any truth or not, and it's age does the same.
>
>
>
>There was no Attila the Hun, was there...he's gay.

The existence of Attila the Hun is verified by a number of historical
accounts written by different people from different points of view and
with no particular agenda to present or support.  I have no idea if he
was gay or not - that is irrelevant.

I chose the name because of his alternate nickname - The Scourge of
God.

--
Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent.

Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially 
those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass.

Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government 
guaranteed above average income for every person.

Every illegal alien is a criminal.
No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason.
Deportation upon identification as the only option.

If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly
before you run into me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1963178

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2015-08-18 00:51 -0700
Message-ID<55D2E3FC.478B@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#1963173
Attila < wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 22:23:35 -0700, The Starmaker
> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
> <55D2C157.314D@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> 
> >> >> The problem is not what is in that book of myth, it is the way so many
> >> >> people not only insist it is true but demand everyone else must accept
> >> >> it as true also.
> >> >>
> >> >> There is no reason to fear any god but many reasons to fear your
> >> >> god-fearing neighbors.
> >> >
> >> >Then, it's the people you have a problem with, so why blame a book?
> >>
> >> A book is nothing more than a repository of words.  It isn't to blame
> >> for anything.
> >>
> >> Just because something is written down has nothing to do with whether
> >> it contains any truth or not, and it's age does the same.
> >
> >
> >
> >There was no Attila the Hun, was there...he's gay.
> 
> The existence of Attila the Hun is verified by a number of historical
> accounts written by different people from different points of view and
> with no particular agenda to present or support.  

But you wrote:

"Just because something is written down has nothing to do with whether
it contains any truth or not,.."


So how do you know what accounts written by different people about
Attila the Hun is true or not?

Or Jesus Christ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1963582

FromAttila <<prochoice@here.now>
Date2015-08-18 16:58 -0400
Message-ID<9l67ta1kibsl723sv01e4t4uojbk2tket6@4ax.com>
In reply to#1963178
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 00:51:24 -0700, The Starmaker
<starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
<55D2E3FC.478B@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>Attila < wrote:
>> 
>> On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 22:23:35 -0700, The Starmaker
>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
>> <55D2C157.314D@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >> >> The problem is not what is in that book of myth, it is the way so many
>> >> >> people not only insist it is true but demand everyone else must accept
>> >> >> it as true also.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> There is no reason to fear any god but many reasons to fear your
>> >> >> god-fearing neighbors.
>> >> >
>> >> >Then, it's the people you have a problem with, so why blame a book?
>> >>
>> >> A book is nothing more than a repository of words.  It isn't to blame
>> >> for anything.
>> >>
>> >> Just because something is written down has nothing to do with whether
>> >> it contains any truth or not, and it's age does the same.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >There was no Attila the Hun, was there...he's gay.
>> 
>> The existence of Attila the Hun is verified by a number of historical
>> accounts written by different people from different points of view and
>> with no particular agenda to present or support.  
>
>But you wrote:
>
>"Just because something is written down has nothing to do with whether
>it contains any truth or not,.."

Correct.  It requires verification by other unrelated sources, as many
as possible.

>
>
>So how do you know what accounts written by different people about
>Attila the Hun is true or not?

They are numerous, agree in detail, are by a variety of people from
both his supporters and his enemies, and the people involved had no
agenda to support.

>
>Or Jesus Christ?

No evidence he ever existed, one single source commonly used that is
not independently verified anywhere, the exact author or authors are
unknown (or at least unverified), are hardly independent, all support
the statements and claims made, and definitely have an agenda to
support.  Not to mention being translated numerous times into various
other languages and having been edited as to content to insure
conformity.


A total failure in every respect.  There is as much support for the
existence of the Tooth Fairy.

--
Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent.

Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially 
those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass.

Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government 
guaranteed above average income for every person.

Every illegal alien is a criminal.
No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason.
Deportation upon identification as the only option.

If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly
before you run into me.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

Back to top | Article view | alt.atheism


csiph-web