Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.atheism > #2167371 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-11 12:43 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-09-15 23:22 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 475 — 42 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.atheism
Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-11 12:43 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Davej <galt_57@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-11 13:06 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft WeHang FagZ And Jews Too <macabbeus@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 13:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-11 23:44 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 16:14 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-24 18:18 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 16:41 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-09-25 08:45 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 12:22 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-09-26 15:58 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-26 19:07 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-27 06:10 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-27 18:42 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-27 17:14 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 09:44 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 00:26 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-28 17:41 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-26 17:17 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-26 19:09 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> - 2016-09-11 16:43 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 23:20 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-12 00:38 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 14:13 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Normal Human <NH@....> - 2016-09-12 08:01 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-11 15:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-11 16:28 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-09-12 00:06 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-12 07:31 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-12 12:57 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-12 08:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-12 14:26 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-12 19:18 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-12 12:37 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-12 22:43 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:14 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-12 22:18 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 06:45 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-12 23:56 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 08:16 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 00:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 22:00 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 20:53 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-14 20:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 01:34 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 08:23 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 03:33 -0400
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-15 11:29 -0600
Re: Theism is Witchcraft John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-09-15 11:14 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 20:44 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-16 06:34 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 20:02 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-15 19:05 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 10:25 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 22:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 19:25 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-16 06:20 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 22:57 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 08:16 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-17 07:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-17 11:54 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-18 09:55 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 04:26 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 16:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 11:29 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 09:59 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 03:25 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-18 20:56 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-19 00:37 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 00:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 16:11 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 15:28 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-20 11:37 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 23:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 12:12 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 03:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 19:14 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 10:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 09:28 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-22 00:12 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 03:50 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 18:17 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 02:19 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 10:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 12:37 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-23 14:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-24 10:35 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 05:55 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 05:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 19:20 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 17:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-26 06:44 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-25 22:40 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-26 17:56 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-26 23:09 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-27 19:02 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-27 20:23 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 10:18 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-28 03:34 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 11:41 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-28 20:34 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-28 04:48 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-28 18:10 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-29 10:07 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-29 08:04 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-27 06:43 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-27 19:06 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-27 05:08 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-27 20:28 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-28 01:17 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 23:55 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-28 15:04 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-29 00:03 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 00:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 00:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-29 15:48 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 23:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 11:50 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-27 22:30 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-28 14:58 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:07 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Dreamer In Colore <dreamerincolore@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:02 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-27 10:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-27 18:10 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 16:08 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 08:53 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 15:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-20 17:27 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 10:33 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-20 09:40 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 03:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 12:05 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 04:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-19 20:31 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 23:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 00:15 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-20 11:51 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 23:14 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-20 23:38 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 22:31 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-21 01:20 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-21 05:43 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-21 14:27 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-21 10:09 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-21 11:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 04:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-21 21:42 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-21 16:22 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 10:11 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-22 08:34 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-21 23:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-22 17:50 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 17:37 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-22 22:23 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 12:38 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 06:20 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 02:28 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-22 22:11 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-09-22 22:25 +0100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-23 04:36 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 16:18 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 02:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 18:20 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-23 09:30 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 18:17 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-23 02:31 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-24 10:47 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-23 18:43 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-24 04:29 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-24 17:29 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-23 23:20 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-23 16:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-23 15:05 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-24 02:22 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-24 16:26 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-25 05:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-25 15:50 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-25 21:42 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-26 01:05 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 15:30 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-22 18:14 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-21 17:36 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2016-09-21 17:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-22 01:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 04:02 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 17:41 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 10:18 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 11:26 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-23 04:51 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 22:53 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-23 16:35 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-24 02:22 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 17:08 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-24 18:33 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 19:39 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-22 22:52 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-23 09:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-09-23 12:52 +0100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-23 21:49 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 09:30 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-20 20:12 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2016-09-21 21:47 +0100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 04:18 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 04:18 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 04:19 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2016-09-17 10:21 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-17 16:28 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 18:52 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2016-09-17 13:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-18 09:57 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 00:20 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 06:20 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 23:36 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 15:26 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 20:06 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-19 20:19 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 23:22 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-19 23:56 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ted&Alice <sam.m.tedesco@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 00:18 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 12:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-21 05:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-21 14:15 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-22 10:13 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 04:03 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2016-09-22 11:51 -0500
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-22 11:04 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-22 14:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-22 17:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2016-09-20 17:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-21 01:03 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 04:33 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 16:04 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 15:31 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 11:31 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-19 00:28 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Hot-Text" <hot-text@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-01 20:26 -0500
To A Atheism The Science Of Language Is Rrelativity "Hot-Text" <hot-text@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-19 15:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 20:19 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 15:31 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:13 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 07:01 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-12 22:29 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 08:21 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 00:05 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 18:59 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 00:23 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-19 17:48 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-20 08:00 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 12:56 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-13 07:49 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-13 18:03 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 21:00 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 06:27 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 02:45 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 11:14 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 06:44 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 12:31 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 07:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 15:02 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 03:02 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-15 15:38 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 03:00 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-15 15:29 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 02:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-15 14:57 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-09-15 19:37 +0100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-14 01:34 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-14 11:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-14 19:45 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 14:43 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-16 07:01 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 22:58 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 23:13 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-16 03:49 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-16 08:00 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 06:40 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Hot-Text" <hot-text@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-16 18:57 -0500
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-16 22:06 -0600
"Wisely Non-Theist" "Billy_Ray_Ferrell_USA-VP_2016" <billyrferrell@minpin.mshome.net> - 2016-09-17 00:32 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2016-09-12 17:55 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> - 2016-09-11 19:08 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-09-11 15:40 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-09-11 15:26 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft default <default@defaulter.net> - 2016-09-12 07:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 00:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 00:34 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 09:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 09:21 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 09:42 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-14 10:21 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-14 14:37 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-14 12:06 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-09-16 22:42 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-09-13 10:15 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-13 11:45 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-09-16 22:57 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-14 09:10 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-13 17:21 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 19:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-14 03:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-13 20:33 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 22:09 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-13 20:55 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-14 20:47 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> - 2016-09-14 00:26 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-14 01:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 22:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-13 21:12 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-15 09:32 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-14 17:38 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 23:32 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-14 23:15 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 17:50 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 03:33 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 13:04 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 23:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 08:52 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-15 18:01 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 02:50 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-15 22:48 +0200
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-09-15 15:02 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-15 19:23 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-09-16 02:58 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-16 08:16 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-16 01:15 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2016-09-16 12:50 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-17 01:38 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2016-09-17 10:21 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-17 16:42 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-15 23:41 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-18 13:26 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-18 21:01 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 00:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-19 17:31 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 23:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-19 21:38 -0700
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-19 23:37 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-19 23:58 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-20 01:04 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 10:36 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 09:59 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 15:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-20 18:12 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 22:28 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-21 01:16 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-20 00:58 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 10:34 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 18:38 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-20 15:14 -0400
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-20 13:46 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-20 20:46 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-19 00:33 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-15 22:52 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 17:45 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-15 17:15 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 21:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 04:23 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 17:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-16 16:11 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 21:51 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 21:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-17 01:56 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 08:30 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-17 07:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 04:14 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 16:25 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 16:44 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-17 19:42 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 06:50 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 23:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 20:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 15:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-30 06:33 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-29 23:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 02:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-30 00:43 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 07:41 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 11:39 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 23:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 14:53 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-01 04:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-02 10:40 +1100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-01 20:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-10-02 13:46 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-10-02 23:14 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-03 12:15 +1100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-02 21:25 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-03 13:43 +1100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-30 11:48 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-01 10:10 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-01 10:42 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-10-01 19:09 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 02:54 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-30 02:06 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-30 11:17 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-30 14:07 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 23:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-01 08:52 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-01 05:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 07:39 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-02 02:24 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 11:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-02 09:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 18:02 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-02 11:02 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 19:33 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-17 12:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-17 17:26 +0000
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-17 11:48 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-17 12:54 -0500
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-17 12:47 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 20:50 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-17 17:31 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-18 00:41 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 15:36 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-17 12:00 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-17 19:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-17 17:25 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-18 00:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-17 22:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-18 06:35 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-18 07:49 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-18 06:35 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 03:46 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 00:53 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-19 08:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-19 15:43 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-20 01:02 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-20 08:21 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-20 20:04 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-21 04:56 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-22 01:16 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-23 05:03 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-24 02:42 +0000
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-09-23 23:17 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-24 17:25 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> - 2016-09-24 15:03 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-25 00:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-24 22:06 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-25 00:36 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 05:18 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 13:56 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-25 16:02 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-25 11:04 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ted&Alice <sam.m.tedesco@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 16:23 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 18:54 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-26 09:59 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-26 07:35 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-26 15:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-27 06:27 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-27 06:10 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-25 12:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-25 21:42 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-26 01:14 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-26 15:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 00:39 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-25 14:07 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-18 00:50 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 20:44 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-16 17:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 21:51 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-16 02:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-16 03:47 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-16 05:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 17:12 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-16 16:22 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-17 19:00 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> - 2016-09-14 00:25 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 00:28 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-09-14 20:08 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-14 15:13 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-14 18:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-14 03:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft tirebiter <dontspamme666@bigfoot.com> - 2016-09-14 18:51 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-15 23:22 -0700
Page 4 of 24 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 24 Next page →
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 09:55 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e463fjF6edaU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2169664 |
On 17/09/2016 21:01, Attila wrote: > On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:16:16 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e445djFmdedU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> Am 16.09.2016 07:57, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >> >>>> Actually I had similar ideas earlier after reading a German version of >>>> the Koran in a 19th century translation. >>>> >>>> I found it interesting, that the Koran apparently speaks to people which >>>> are called 'Children of Israel', which Allah helped to flee from the >>>> Pharao by splitting apart the Red Sea. >>> >>> So what you're saying is that the Koran has the same stupid myths as the >>> Bible. So fucking what? >>> >>> >>>> Common Muslims cannot read this, since the Koran is written in ancient >>>> Arabic. >>>> >>>> Arabic has a difficult system of writing, since the vowels are not >>>> written. This allows to interpret the words in up to 30 different >>>> meanings. And that could allow different translations. >>>> >>>> Since German 19th century historians have no obvious bias towards any >>>> interpretation, they are kind of 'objective' source for a valid >>>> translation, while especially the Egyptians have a bias. >>>> >>>> So my - naive - question was, if Jews and Muslims have something in common. >>>> >>>> Actually there are a few things, that both religions share. >>>> >>>> For instance they share the bizarre habit called 'circumcision'. >>> >>> So what? >>> >>> >>>> Also the set of holy scripts is somehow similar. >>> >>> So what? >> >> Well, history is a science and somehow similar to crime scene >> investigation. > > History is not a science and CSI is a profession involving a number of > different sciences among other things. History is very much a science. Just because it is not a material science does not mean it is not a science. Historians are utterly reliant on hard evidence. They use all manner of scientific techniques, from carbon dating to statistics. > >> >> If there are no written records, you need to make (educated) guesses and >> try to figure out, what was going on, by analysing minuscule hints. > > But those deductions are never presented as being factual. > >> >> The Islam and the Jews have both a set of scripts, they regard as holy. > > That is common to most religions. As is the fact that they disagree -- often violently -- on the exact composition and meaning of their sacred scripts. > >> The overall structure of this set is quite similar, only the names and >> the content is different. > > Again, quite common to a lot of religions. > >> >>> >>>> They both forbid the consume of pig and both have the obscure punishment >>>> called 'stoning'. > > Unless properly prepared pork can cause more disease than beef or > mutton. Stoning is a common primitive punishment, being both cheap > and easy. And communal. Executing a transgressor is one thing, but making the entire community participate takes it to a whole other level. Concerning pork, while there is a risk of disease, the same applies to all foodstuffs. Unlike other domesticated animals, though, pigs do have the serious advantage that they turn refuse into meat. > >>> >>> How is stoning "obsure"? >>> >> >> 'Stoning' as an extremely brutal way of execution. > > No more than many others that have been used. > >> It has also the >> disadvantage to include bystanders in the process of a killing, what >> makes the members of such a crowd literally murderers. > > If it is legal in the society that uses it how can it be murder? > Murder requires an illegal component. People so often fail to understand this...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 04:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dmjstbpt66t87pmllk6g9h03ubdab48eik@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2169992 |
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:55:28 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e463fjF6edaU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 17/09/2016 21:01, Attila wrote: >> On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:16:16 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e445djFmdedU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> Am 16.09.2016 07:57, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >>> >>>>> Actually I had similar ideas earlier after reading a German version of >>>>> the Koran in a 19th century translation. >>>>> >>>>> I found it interesting, that the Koran apparently speaks to people which >>>>> are called 'Children of Israel', which Allah helped to flee from the >>>>> Pharao by splitting apart the Red Sea. >>>> >>>> So what you're saying is that the Koran has the same stupid myths as the >>>> Bible. So fucking what? >>>> >>>> >>>>> Common Muslims cannot read this, since the Koran is written in ancient >>>>> Arabic. >>>>> >>>>> Arabic has a difficult system of writing, since the vowels are not >>>>> written. This allows to interpret the words in up to 30 different >>>>> meanings. And that could allow different translations. >>>>> >>>>> Since German 19th century historians have no obvious bias towards any >>>>> interpretation, they are kind of 'objective' source for a valid >>>>> translation, while especially the Egyptians have a bias. >>>>> >>>>> So my - naive - question was, if Jews and Muslims have something in common. >>>>> >>>>> Actually there are a few things, that both religions share. >>>>> >>>>> For instance they share the bizarre habit called 'circumcision'. >>>> >>>> So what? >>>> >>>> >>>>> Also the set of holy scripts is somehow similar. >>>> >>>> So what? >>> >>> Well, history is a science and somehow similar to crime scene >>> investigation. >> >> History is not a science and CSI is a profession involving a number of >> different sciences among other things. > >History is very much a science. That is debatable. In fact, it is frequently debated. > >Just because it is not a material science does not mean it is not a >science. Historians are utterly reliant on hard evidence. They use all >manner of scientific techniques, from carbon dating to statistics. > > > > >> >>> >>> If there are no written records, you need to make (educated) guesses and >>> try to figure out, what was going on, by analysing minuscule hints. >> >> But those deductions are never presented as being factual. >> >>> >>> The Islam and the Jews have both a set of scripts, they regard as holy. >> >> That is common to most religions. > >As is the fact that they disagree -- often violently -- on the exact >composition and meaning of their sacred scripts. > > >> >>> The overall structure of this set is quite similar, only the names and >>> the content is different. >> >> Again, quite common to a lot of religions. >> >>> >>>> >>>>> They both forbid the consume of pig and both have the obscure punishment >>>>> called 'stoning'. >> >> Unless properly prepared pork can cause more disease than beef or >> mutton. Stoning is a common primitive punishment, being both cheap >> and easy. > >And communal. Executing a transgressor is one thing, but making the >entire community participate takes it to a whole other level. > >Concerning pork, while there is a risk of disease, the same applies to >all foodstuffs. Unlike other domesticated animals, though, pigs do have >the serious advantage that they turn refuse into meat. Physiologically pigs are closer to humans than most other animals, especially food animals. That is one reason it has always been necessary to cook pork to a greater degree than beef or mutton. It is easier to transmit a disease in pork than in other meats. > > >> >>>> >>>> How is stoning "obsure"? >>>> >>> >>> 'Stoning' as an extremely brutal way of execution. >> >> No more than many others that have been used. >> >>> It has also the >>> disadvantage to include bystanders in the process of a killing, what >>> makes the members of such a crowd literally murderers. >> >> If it is legal in the society that uses it how can it be murder? >> Murder requires an illegal component. > >People so often fail to understand this... > Some people think any killing they don't like is murder. They are wrong. -- 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 OBastard. 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]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 16:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e47lsgFi1umU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170146 |
Am 18.09.2016 10:26, schrieb Attila <: >>>>> How is stoning "obsure"? >>>>> >>>> >>>> 'Stoning' as an extremely brutal way of execution. >>> >>> No more than many others that have been used. >>> >>>> It has also the >>>> disadvantage to include bystanders in the process of a killing, what >>>> makes the members of such a crowd literally murderers. >>> >>> If it is legal in the society that uses it how can it be murder? >>> Murder requires an illegal component. >> >> People so often fail to understand this... >> > > Some people think any killing they don't like is murder. They are > wrong. Intentional killing of a human being without justification is murder. If someone is guilty of something and sentenced to death, than this would be a legal punishment. Death penalty is questionable, but somehow such a courts decision is legal. This does not include the allowance for bystanders to take part in the execution. Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did not kill. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 11:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <efcttb9hd7jsd0nurqfb4dre8s4mks43f5@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2170258 |
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:15:39 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in alt.atheism with message-id <e47lsgFi1umU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >Am 18.09.2016 10:26, schrieb Attila <: > >>>>>> How is stoning "obsure"? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 'Stoning' as an extremely brutal way of execution. >>>> >>>> No more than many others that have been used. >>>> >>>>> It has also the >>>>> disadvantage to include bystanders in the process of a killing, what >>>>> makes the members of such a crowd literally murderers. >>>> >>>> If it is legal in the society that uses it how can it be murder? >>>> Murder requires an illegal component. >>> >>> People so often fail to understand this... >>> >> >> Some people think any killing they don't like is murder. They are >> wrong. > >Intentional killing of a human being without justification is murder. That is a lot different from action taken that is not within the legal system. Stoning can easily be legal. > >If someone is guilty of something and sentenced to death, than this >would be a legal punishment. >Death penalty is questionable, but somehow such a courts decision is legal. > >This does not include the allowance for bystanders to take part in the >execution. That depends on the laws involved doesn't it? > >Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. If there is a crime, yes. > >Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >not kill. > You are assuming there was no legal justification under local law. Why do you think that is the case? -- 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 OBastard. 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]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-19 09:59 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e48o3lFq3qsU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170258 |
On 19/09/2016 00:15, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 18.09.2016 10:26, schrieb Attila <: > >>>>>> How is stoning "obsure"? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 'Stoning' as an extremely brutal way of execution. >>>> >>>> No more than many others that have been used. >>>> >>>>> It has also the >>>>> disadvantage to include bystanders in the process of a killing, what >>>>> makes the members of such a crowd literally murderers. >>>> >>>> If it is legal in the society that uses it how can it be murder? >>>> Murder requires an illegal component. >>> >>> People so often fail to understand this... >>> >> >> Some people think any killing they don't like is murder. They are >> wrong. > > Intentional killing of a human being without justification is murder. Not justification -- legitimisation. To kill an abusive spouse or a predatory paedophile may have justification, but it does not have legitimisation. The killer will be charged with murder, and rightly so, because the law of the land does not permit us to do so. Conversely, the moment the law does permit the killing of certain people, it no longer is murder, however abhorrent and unjustifiable the act may be. In slave-owning societies, it is commonly quite permissible by law for an owner to kill any of his slaves at any time and for any reason. > > If someone is guilty of something and sentenced to death, than this > would be a legal punishment. And would no longer be murder. The sixth commandment squarely puts the decision of what is and is not murder into human hands, and human courts. God washed his hands of that particular dilemma. > > Death penalty is questionable, but somehow such a courts decision is > legal. > > This does not include the allowance for bystanders to take part in the > execution. Not here, and not now. But if and when the law does allow for it, or even mandate such a participation, then that is the law and therefore any such act by the community is legal. > > Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, > all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. > > Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are > actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did > not kill. If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-19 03:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170511 |
Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >> >> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >> >> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >> not kill. > > If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the > community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. > > To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY > dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. No! It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an execution. And usual people may not take part, even if the state allows this. To demand participation makes matters worse, since it demands from innocent people to commit a crime. In case the state (illegally) demands it, the participant acts against certain ethical principles and is only committing a sin. I can also be the case, that someone was actually innocent, but is sentenced to death. This would be 'murder by law'. In case someone would take part in this execution, he would also become a murderer. This is so because guilt is not 'thinned out', if many people take part in a murder. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 20:56 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <aaa-A8595D.20563718092016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #2170544 |
> > To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY > > dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. The SIN of murder may be defined by some religion, but the CRIME of murder is defined by law!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hhyapster@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-19 00:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <92b38825-5457-4035-8767-537e08002cde@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2170573 |
On Monday, September 19, 2016 at 10:56:45 AM UTC+8, Wisely Non-Theist wrote: > > > To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY > > > dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. > > The SIN of murder may be defined by some religion, > but the CRIME of murder is defined by law! Human live with laws of nature or laws of mankind. Religion has no say.....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-19 00:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <s7rutbhl1f82i9kene4onhkbj08aoppue6@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2170544 |
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>> >>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>> >>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>> not kill. >> >> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >> >> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. > >No! > >It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >execution. There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more powerful state. > >And usual people may not take part, even if the state allows this. Of course they can. Whoever 'usual people' are. > >To demand participation makes matters worse, since it demands from >innocent people to commit a crime. What crime? The action is legal, remember? > >In case the state (illegally) demands it, the participant acts against >certain ethical principles and is only committing a sin. The state decides what is legal and what is illegal and 'sin' is a religious term and has no meaning in the real world. > >I can also be the case, that someone was actually innocent, but is >sentenced to death. This would be 'murder by law'. Nope. If it is legal it cannot be murder. "Murder by law" is impossible. Murder, being illegal, cannot be legal. > >In case someone would take part in this execution, he would also become >a murderer. Nope, for all of the reasons previously given. > >This is so because guilt is not 'thinned out', if many people take part >in a murder. > Irrelevant, especially if no murder occurs. -- 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 OBastard. 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]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-19 16:11 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e49dsdF296U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170609 |
On 19/09/2016 14:48, Attila wrote: > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>>> >>>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>>> >>>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>>> not kill. >>> >>> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >>> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >>> >>> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >>> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. >> >> No! >> >> It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >> execution. > > There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more > powerful state. I would dispute that. States can and do act in breach of their own laws. History knows ample precedent.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-19 15:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lte0ub1ic8a84n6oiabau1igo7d30hve8d@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2170622 |
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:11:25 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e49dsdF296U2@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 19/09/2016 14:48, Attila wrote: >> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>>>> >>>>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>>>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>>>> >>>>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>>>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>>>> not kill. >>>> >>>> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >>>> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >>>> >>>> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >>>> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. >>> >>> No! >>> >>> It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >>> execution. >> >> There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more >> powerful state. > >I would dispute that. >States can and do act in breach of their own laws. History knows ample >precedent. > > Sure they do. But there is no recourse other than a successful war. Nazi Germany is an excellent example. -- 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 OBastard. 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]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-20 11:37 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e4bi74Fg9rgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170807 |
On 20/09/2016 05:28, Attila wrote: > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:11:25 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e49dsdF296U2@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 19/09/2016 14:48, Attila wrote: >>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>>>>> >>>>>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>>>>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>>>>> >>>>>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>>>>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>>>>> not kill. >>>>> >>>>> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >>>>> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >>>>> >>>>> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >>>>> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. >>>> >>>> No! >>>> >>>> It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >>>> execution. >>> >>> There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more >>> powerful state. >> >> I would dispute that. >> States can and do act in breach of their own laws. History knows ample >> precedent. >> >> > > Sure they do. But there is no recourse other than a successful war. > > Nazi Germany is an excellent example. Sanctions do sometimes work. And quite often, such states collapse under the strains of their internal incoherence and contradictions. Outside "interference" is then only required to pick up the pieces. Note also that these days, most nations have signed up to a raft of international laws, treaties and agreements (Geneva Conventions on Warfare, the Human Rights Conventions etc). This puts them squarely under the rule of law (both national and international) with all its attendant range of means of enforcement.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-19 23:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n4a1ublv2hu8a4r3m90t07af846a6ifotf@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2170941 |
On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 11:37:37 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e4bi74Fg9rgU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 20/09/2016 05:28, Attila wrote: >> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:11:25 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e49dsdF296U2@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 19/09/2016 14:48, Attila wrote: >>>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>>>>>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>>>>>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>>>>>> not kill. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >>>>>> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >>>>>> >>>>>> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >>>>>> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. >>>>> >>>>> No! >>>>> >>>>> It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >>>>> execution. >>>> >>>> There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more >>>> powerful state. >>> >>> I would dispute that. >>> States can and do act in breach of their own laws. History knows ample >>> precedent. >>> >>> >> >> Sure they do. But there is no recourse other than a successful war. >> >> Nazi Germany is an excellent example. > >Sanctions do sometimes work. Not often. > >And quite often, such states collapse under the strains of their >internal incoherence and contradictions. Outside "interference" is then >only required to pick up the pieces. > >Note also that these days, most nations have signed up to a raft of >international laws, treaties and agreements (Geneva Conventions on >Warfare, the Human Rights Conventions etc). This puts them squarely >under the rule of law (both national and international) with all its >attendant range of means of enforcement. Enforcement? By who? The UN has no enforcement. -- 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 OBastard. 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]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-21 12:12 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e4e8jnF5jvvU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170979 |
On 20/09/2016 13:11, Attila wrote: > On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 11:37:37 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e4bi74Fg9rgU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 20/09/2016 05:28, Attila wrote: >>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:11:25 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <e49dsdF296U2@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 19/09/2016 14:48, Attila wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>>>>>>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>>>>>>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>>>>>>> not kill. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >>>>>>> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >>>>>>> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. >>>>>> >>>>>> No! >>>>>> >>>>>> It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >>>>>> execution. >>>>> >>>>> There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more >>>>> powerful state. >>>> >>>> I would dispute that. >>>> States can and do act in breach of their own laws. History knows ample >>>> precedent. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Sure they do. But there is no recourse other than a successful war. >>> >>> Nazi Germany is an excellent example. >> >> Sanctions do sometimes work. > > Not often. Rather often, in fact. Their problem is that they tend not to work very fast, which can make them a frustrating and tedious exercise. > >> >> And quite often, such states collapse under the strains of their >> internal incoherence and contradictions. Outside "interference" is then >> only required to pick up the pieces. >> >> Note also that these days, most nations have signed up to a raft of >> international laws, treaties and agreements (Geneva Conventions on >> Warfare, the Human Rights Conventions etc). This puts them squarely >> under the rule of law (both national and international) with all its >> attendant range of means of enforcement. > > Enforcement? By who? The UN has no enforcement. By obliging signatory nations to take action. This may be the exercise of an international arrest warrant on specific members of a regime, or the impositions of sanctions (including the freezing or expropriation of the offending nation's assets within their jurisdiction), or to suspend cultural, sporting, business, political ties with the offending country, right up to military intervention subject to an international mandate. Is it infallible? Hell, no. But short of a world government, it is probably the best we can do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-21 03:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <i7f4ub9phcfoq36h6njvmrlo12sua1o3so@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2171453 |
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:12:05 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e4e8jnF5jvvU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 20/09/2016 13:11, Attila wrote: >> On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 11:37:37 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e4bi74Fg9rgU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 20/09/2016 05:28, Attila wrote: >>>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:11:25 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e49dsdF296U2@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 19/09/2016 14:48, Attila wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>>>>>>>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>>>>>>>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>>>>>>>> not kill. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >>>>>>>> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >>>>>>>> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >>>>>>> execution. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more >>>>>> powerful state. >>>>> >>>>> I would dispute that. >>>>> States can and do act in breach of their own laws. History knows ample >>>>> precedent. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Sure they do. But there is no recourse other than a successful war. >>>> >>>> Nazi Germany is an excellent example. >>> >>> Sanctions do sometimes work. >> >> Not often. > >Rather often, in fact. > >Their problem is that they tend not to work very fast, which can make >them a frustrating and tedious exercise. If they are ignored there isn't much anyone can do about it. > > >> >>> >>> And quite often, such states collapse under the strains of their >>> internal incoherence and contradictions. Outside "interference" is then >>> only required to pick up the pieces. >>> >>> Note also that these days, most nations have signed up to a raft of >>> international laws, treaties and agreements (Geneva Conventions on >>> Warfare, the Human Rights Conventions etc). This puts them squarely >>> under the rule of law (both national and international) with all its >>> attendant range of means of enforcement. >> >> Enforcement? By who? The UN has no enforcement. > >By obliging signatory nations to take action. If they choose to do so. > >This may be the exercise of an international arrest warrant on specific >members of a regime, or the impositions of sanctions (including the >freezing or expropriation of the offending nation's assets within their >jurisdiction), or to suspend cultural, sporting, business, political >ties with the offending country, right up to military intervention >subject to an international mandate. > >Is it infallible? > >Hell, no. > >But short of a world government, it is probably the best we can do. Every bit of that is voluntary and can easily be ignored. -- 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 OBastard. 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]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-21 19:14 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e4f1b6Fav71U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2171577 |
On 21/09/2016 17:57, Attila wrote: > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:12:05 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e4e8jnF5jvvU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 20/09/2016 13:11, Attila wrote: >>> On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 11:37:37 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <e4bi74Fg9rgU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 20/09/2016 05:28, Attila wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:11:25 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e49dsdF296U2@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 19/09/2016 14:48, Attila wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>>>>>>>>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>>>>>>>>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>>>>>>>>> not kill. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >>>>>>>>> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >>>>>>>>> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >>>>>>>> execution. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more >>>>>>> powerful state. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would dispute that. >>>>>> States can and do act in breach of their own laws. History knows ample >>>>>> precedent. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sure they do. But there is no recourse other than a successful war. >>>>> >>>>> Nazi Germany is an excellent example. >>>> >>>> Sanctions do sometimes work. >>> >>> Not often. >> >> Rather often, in fact. >> >> Their problem is that they tend not to work very fast, which can make >> them a frustrating and tedious exercise. > > If they are ignored there isn't much anyone can do about it. > >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> And quite often, such states collapse under the strains of their >>>> internal incoherence and contradictions. Outside "interference" is then >>>> only required to pick up the pieces. >>>> >>>> Note also that these days, most nations have signed up to a raft of >>>> international laws, treaties and agreements (Geneva Conventions on >>>> Warfare, the Human Rights Conventions etc). This puts them squarely >>>> under the rule of law (both national and international) with all its >>>> attendant range of means of enforcement. >>> >>> Enforcement? By who? The UN has no enforcement. >> >> By obliging signatory nations to take action. > > If they choose to do so. Depending on the specific terms of the treaties and agreements which they ratified, yes. For any number of reasons, nations may be more or less willing to satisfy their obligations, and alas, those treaties are usually quite lacking in provisions to enforce compliance when they are less than enthusiastic. > >> >> This may be the exercise of an international arrest warrant on specific >> members of a regime, or the impositions of sanctions (including the >> freezing or expropriation of the offending nation's assets within their >> jurisdiction), or to suspend cultural, sporting, business, political >> ties with the offending country, right up to military intervention >> subject to an international mandate. >> >> Is it infallible? >> >> Hell, no. >> >> But short of a world government, it is probably the best we can do. > > Every bit of that is voluntary and can easily be ignored. Except that ignoring it is the only alternative that is worse. Ignore one failing or outlaw state, and sooner or later the contagion will spread. So now we have to ignore not just one scenic hellhole, but one or more of its neighbours, making it a regional issue and exponentially harder to deal with. And in this day and age, even if our own national interests in this one criminal state are negligible, the chances that this applies to a larger regional hotspot are pretty slim. It's a small world. And even if the poison does not spread, it can still jump. Illiterate peasant fanatics in Afghanistan are half a world away, but it is all too damn easy for them to reach out and touch us in seriously unpleasant and un-ignorable ways. As I said: it's a small world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-21 10:37 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <3j65ub9a7bfma2mv2h3nar39aiu2f3tc4q@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2171609 |
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:14:08 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e4f1b6Fav71U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 21/09/2016 17:57, Attila wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:12:05 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e4e8jnF5jvvU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 20/09/2016 13:11, Attila wrote: >>>> On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 11:37:37 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e4bi74Fg9rgU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 20/09/2016 05:28, Attila wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:11:25 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e49dsdF296U2@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 19/09/2016 14:48, Attila wrote: >>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:25:54 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in >>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e48t57Fr5voU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Am 19.09.2016 01:59, schrieb Alex W.: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Since in a collective crime, where there is more than one participant, >>>>>>>>>>> all members of the group of people that took part are also guilty. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Since those bystanders had no justification to kill somebody, they are >>>>>>>>>>> actually murderers, even if the particular stone they have thrown did >>>>>>>>>>> not kill. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If the law of the land deems it necessary to actively involve the >>>>>>>>>> community in the punishment of a crime, no participant is a murderer. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To repeat myself: what is and is not murder is ALWAYS and EXCLUSIVELY >>>>>>>>>> dependent on the law. Nothing more, nothing less. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It would be 'state crime', if you allow usual people to take part in an >>>>>>>>> execution. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is no 'state crime' except something forded on a state by a more >>>>>>>> powerful state. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would dispute that. >>>>>>> States can and do act in breach of their own laws. History knows ample >>>>>>> precedent. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sure they do. But there is no recourse other than a successful war. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nazi Germany is an excellent example. >>>>> >>>>> Sanctions do sometimes work. >>>> >>>> Not often. >>> >>> Rather often, in fact. >>> >>> Their problem is that they tend not to work very fast, which can make >>> them a frustrating and tedious exercise. >> >> If they are ignored there isn't much anyone can do about it. >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> And quite often, such states collapse under the strains of their >>>>> internal incoherence and contradictions. Outside "interference" is then >>>>> only required to pick up the pieces. >>>>> >>>>> Note also that these days, most nations have signed up to a raft of >>>>> international laws, treaties and agreements (Geneva Conventions on >>>>> Warfare, the Human Rights Conventions etc). This puts them squarely >>>>> under the rule of law (both national and international) with all its >>>>> attendant range of means of enforcement. >>>> >>>> Enforcement? By who? The UN has no enforcement. >>> >>> By obliging signatory nations to take action. >> >> If they choose to do so. > >Depending on the specific terms of the treaties and agreements which >they ratified, yes. In any case. If a country ignores the 'action' just who is going to force them to comply? > For any number of reasons, nations may be more or >less willing to satisfy their obligations, and alas, those treaties are >usually quite lacking in provisions to enforce compliance when they are >less than enthusiastic. > > >> >>> >>> This may be the exercise of an international arrest warrant on specific >>> members of a regime, or the impositions of sanctions (including the >>> freezing or expropriation of the offending nation's assets within their >>> jurisdiction), or to suspend cultural, sporting, business, political >>> ties with the offending country, right up to military intervention >>> subject to an international mandate. >>> >>> Is it infallible? >>> >>> Hell, no. >>> >>> But short of a world government, it is probably the best we can do. >> >> Every bit of that is voluntary and can easily be ignored. > >Except that ignoring it is the only alternative that is worse. Perhaps. > >Ignore one failing or outlaw state, and sooner or later the contagion >will spread. So now we have to ignore not just one scenic hellhole, but >one or more of its neighbours, making it a regional issue and >exponentially harder to deal with. And in this day and age, even if our >own national interests in this one criminal state are negligible, the >chances that this applies to a larger regional hotspot are pretty slim. >It's a small world. I would still hate to paint it. > >And even if the poison does not spread, it can still jump. Illiterate >peasant fanatics in Afghanistan are half a world away, but it is all too >damn easy for them to reach out and touch us in seriously unpleasant and >un-ignorable ways. As I said: it's a small world. In which case we should slap them down - hard. -- 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 OBastard. 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]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-22 09:28 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e4gjdjFmqmcU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2171686 |
On 22/09/2016 00:37, Attila wrote: > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:14:08 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e4f1b6Fav71U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >>>>>> >>>>>> Note also that these days, most nations have signed up to a raft of >>>>>> international laws, treaties and agreements (Geneva Conventions on >>>>>> Warfare, the Human Rights Conventions etc). This puts them squarely >>>>>> under the rule of law (both national and international) with all its >>>>>> attendant range of means of enforcement. >>>>> >>>>> Enforcement? By who? The UN has no enforcement. >>>> >>>> By obliging signatory nations to take action. >>> >>> If they choose to do so. >> >> Depending on the specific terms of the treaties and agreements which >> they ratified, yes. > > In any case. If a country ignores the 'action' just who is going to > force them to comply? Force them? Nobody. But usually, fellow nations will exert diplomatic and political pressure to do so. Everybody in the street mows their front lawn but you, nobody can force you ... but your neighbours will make sure that your life is just that little bit less pleasant and friendly-like. > > >> For any number of reasons, nations may be more or >> less willing to satisfy their obligations, and alas, those treaties are >> usually quite lacking in provisions to enforce compliance when they are >> less than enthusiastic. >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> This may be the exercise of an international arrest warrant on specific >>>> members of a regime, or the impositions of sanctions (including the >>>> freezing or expropriation of the offending nation's assets within their >>>> jurisdiction), or to suspend cultural, sporting, business, political >>>> ties with the offending country, right up to military intervention >>>> subject to an international mandate. >>>> >>>> Is it infallible? >>>> >>>> Hell, no. >>>> >>>> But short of a world government, it is probably the best we can do. >>> >>> Every bit of that is voluntary and can easily be ignored. >> >> Except that ignoring it is the only alternative that is worse. > > Perhaps. Take Somalia. They slid downhill, we ignored it. Their state went into meltdown, we still ignored it. It was taken over by hardcore Islamists, we still did our best to ignore it. Then they started to hijack our shipping, expand their violence to neighbouring countries and serve as a refuge and launchpad for terror aimed at us. So now, instead of dealing with a small contained problem, we have a credible (and costly) threat to global trade requiring a permanent (and costly) naval presence, constant low-level military action in the region, terrorist attacks on tourists and our own nations, and a strategically important piece of real estate that will need a full-scale occupation and re-building from first principles if it is ever going to stop being an un-ignorable (and costly) problem. > >> >> Ignore one failing or outlaw state, and sooner or later the contagion >> will spread. So now we have to ignore not just one scenic hellhole, but >> one or more of its neighbours, making it a regional issue and >> exponentially harder to deal with. And in this day and age, even if our >> own national interests in this one criminal state are negligible, the >> chances that this applies to a larger regional hotspot are pretty slim. >> It's a small world. > > I would still hate to paint it. Let alone three coats.... > >> >> And even if the poison does not spread, it can still jump. Illiterate >> peasant fanatics in Afghanistan are half a world away, but it is all too >> damn easy for them to reach out and touch us in seriously unpleasant and >> un-ignorable ways. As I said: it's a small world. > > In which case we should slap them down - hard. Which is what we usually end up having to do. And it's a waste. It's expensive. It causes all sorts of international excitement and ructions. Politics and diplomacy are slow, tedious, frustrating, and do not deliver the quick positive feelgood results we may want. But it does help, and it's a hell of a lot less trouble than the alternative.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-22 00:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nrv7lg$10cc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #2171878 |
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:28:47 +1000, Alex W. wrote: > On 22/09/2016 00:37, Attila wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:14:08 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e4f1b6Fav71U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: <snip> >>> It's a small world. >> >> I would still hate to paint it. > > Let alone three coats.... And with no numbers to help you. -- Smiler, The godless one. aa #2279 Gods are all tailored to order. They are made to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-22 03:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pu27ubd004ris8p4ob9cdtjg2g0g1j02a9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2171878 |
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:28:47 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e4gjdjFmqmcU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 22/09/2016 00:37, Attila wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:14:08 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e4f1b6Fav71U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Note also that these days, most nations have signed up to a raft of >>>>>>> international laws, treaties and agreements (Geneva Conventions on >>>>>>> Warfare, the Human Rights Conventions etc). This puts them squarely >>>>>>> under the rule of law (both national and international) with all its >>>>>>> attendant range of means of enforcement. >>>>>> >>>>>> Enforcement? By who? The UN has no enforcement. >>>>> >>>>> By obliging signatory nations to take action. >>>> >>>> If they choose to do so. >>> >>> Depending on the specific terms of the treaties and agreements which >>> they ratified, yes. >> >> In any case. If a country ignores the 'action' just who is going to >> force them to comply? > >Force them? Nobody. But usually, fellow nations will exert diplomatic >and political pressure to do so. Everybody in the street mows their >front lawn but you, nobody can force you ... but your neighbours will >make sure that your life is just that little bit less pleasant and >friendly-like. Compliance is voluntary. I wonder how that would work with Idi Amine or Stalin. > > >> >> >>> For any number of reasons, nations may be more or >>> less willing to satisfy their obligations, and alas, those treaties are >>> usually quite lacking in provisions to enforce compliance when they are >>> less than enthusiastic. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> This may be the exercise of an international arrest warrant on specific >>>>> members of a regime, or the impositions of sanctions (including the >>>>> freezing or expropriation of the offending nation's assets within their >>>>> jurisdiction), or to suspend cultural, sporting, business, political >>>>> ties with the offending country, right up to military intervention >>>>> subject to an international mandate. >>>>> >>>>> Is it infallible? >>>>> >>>>> Hell, no. >>>>> >>>>> But short of a world government, it is probably the best we can do. >>>> >>>> Every bit of that is voluntary and can easily be ignored. >>> >>> Except that ignoring it is the only alternative that is worse. >> >> Perhaps. > >Take Somalia. They slid downhill, we ignored it. Their state went into >meltdown, we still ignored it. It was taken over by hardcore Islamists, >we still did our best to ignore it. Then they started to hijack our >shipping, expand their violence to neighbouring countries and serve as a >refuge and launchpad for terror aimed at us. So now, instead of dealing >with a small contained problem, we have a credible (and costly) threat >to global trade requiring a permanent (and costly) naval presence, >constant low-level military action in the region, terrorist attacks on >tourists and our own nations, and a strategically important piece of >real estate that will need a full-scale occupation and re-building from >first principles if it is ever going to stop being an un-ignorable (and >costly) problem. Yet we cannot solve all the problems everywhere with the currently PC diplomacy. > > >> >>> >>> Ignore one failing or outlaw state, and sooner or later the contagion >>> will spread. So now we have to ignore not just one scenic hellhole, but >>> one or more of its neighbours, making it a regional issue and >>> exponentially harder to deal with. And in this day and age, even if our >>> own national interests in this one criminal state are negligible, the >>> chances that this applies to a larger regional hotspot are pretty slim. >>> It's a small world. >> >> I would still hate to paint it. > >Let alone three coats.... > > >> >>> >>> And even if the poison does not spread, it can still jump. Illiterate >>> peasant fanatics in Afghanistan are half a world away, but it is all too >>> damn easy for them to reach out and touch us in seriously unpleasant and >>> un-ignorable ways. As I said: it's a small world. >> >> In which case we should slap them down - hard. > >Which is what we usually end up having to do. And it's a waste. It's >expensive. It causes all sorts of international excitement and >ructions. Politics and diplomacy are slow, tedious, frustrating, and do >not deliver the quick positive feelgood results we may want. But it >does help, and it's a hell of a lot less trouble than the alternative. Sometimes. -- 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 OBastard. 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]
Page 4 of 24 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 24 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.atheism
csiph-web