Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #392061 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-11 12:43 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-09-14 03:58 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 416 — 33 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-11 12:43 -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 "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 05:59 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-12 08:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 07:04 -0700
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: 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 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 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-22 02:35 -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 "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 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 "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 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 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-23 03:04 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-23 21:08 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-09-24 12:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-24 16:28 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-09-25 11:59 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-25 13:58 +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 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-25 23:23 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 10:46 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-26 04:15 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 14:17 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-26 23:23 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-27 10:32 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-27 04:57 -0700
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 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 "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 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 "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 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
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:15 -0700
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:33 -0700
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:37 -0700
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:05 -0700
Atheism is Witchcraft "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:27 -0700
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 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 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 Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-15 03:33 -0400
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 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 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 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 22:28 -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 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 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 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 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-09 05:52 +0200
Re: Theism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-10-09 00:09 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Hello Thomas <tsp2opt@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 07:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-08 07:15 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Wisely Non-Theist <aaa@bbb.ccc> - 2016-10-08 12:36 -0600
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-08 22:56 +0200
Re: Atheism is NOT Witchcraft Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-10-08 15:33 -0600
Re: Atheism is NOT Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-09 05:42 +0200
Re: Atheism is NOT Witchcraft A Nony Mouse <abc@cef.ghi> - 2016-10-09 00:14 -0600
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 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 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 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-20 13:09 -0700
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 Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-14 03:58 -0400
Page 9 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 21 Next page →
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-23 11:26 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e4jem6FcvgeU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #393336 |
On 23/09/2016 00:18, Attila wrote: > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 17:41:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e4hg8dFsqs5U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 21/09/2016 18:16, Attila wrote: >> >>> We have no parliament. Judges are a part of the Judicial branch of >>> the government. >> >> Yes, you do. >> You just have a different name for it. > > Agreed, but we have nothing with that name. "Parliament" with a small "p" is a common term used for the legislative chamber. > >> A parliament is the legislative >> body composed of elected representatives of the people. Whether you >> call it a Congress or a Chambre des Deputes or an Allthing or a >> Bundestag or a Duma or the House of Commons is only a labelling issue. > > >> >> >>> >>> Our system is a representative republic, not a democracy. >> >> Which is still a democracy, one of a fair number of variants on the >> principle. >> > > No, it isn't. In a democracy the citizens vote directly on issues. > Here we elect representatives who do that voting. > > A referendum which is not binding can be held but it is not legal for > the citizens to directly vote for or against a law. A referendum is merely a specific mechanism within a democracy. "Democracy" is any political system where government is chosen by popular vote. This certainly includes the American system.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-23 04:51 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e4jjlcFdvh4U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #393435 |
Am 23.09.2016 03:26, schrieb Alex W.: >>> A parliament is the legislative >>> body composed of elected representatives of the people. Whether you >>> call it a Congress or a Chambre des Deputes or an Allthing or a >>> Bundestag or a Duma or the House of Commons is only a labelling issue. >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Our system is a representative republic, not a democracy. >>> >>> Which is still a democracy, one of a fair number of variants on the >>> principle. >>> >> >> No, it isn't. In a democracy the citizens vote directly on issues. >> Here we elect representatives who do that voting. >> >> A referendum which is not binding can be held but it is not legal for >> the citizens to directly vote for or against a law. > > A referendum is merely a specific mechanism within a democracy. > > "Democracy" is any political system where government is chosen by > popular vote. This certainly includes the American system. > Yes, I would agree. But the question is, if the elected representatives have at least some power. I would say no: neither the president nor any other elected representative has any real power. Those are mere puppets, which could not change a iota. E.g. Obama is allegedly an Indonesian actor named 'Barry Soetoro'. But why should someone like this be used as representative, if this office had any power? From how the office is organised I think, the president is actually a prisoner and can do absolutely nothing without allowance. Same with laws and the congress. This entire system of laws and regulations is so dubious, that the real powers must be somewhere else - unelected and unknown to the public. To this would fit the system called 'common law'. This system is actually British and controlled by the Guilds of the Barristers. But it's also a ridiculously stupid form of legislative. It is beyond imagination complicated. Which leads to immense coast for jurisdiction (what is regarded as positive by the guilds). And last but not least we have the banks. Astonishingly the FED is also a private bank (and controlled somewhere from the City of London). I would assume, this entire system is way to twisted to last forever. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-22 22:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <hlwdjsd2-7BA89C.22533422092016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #393440 |
In article <e4jjlcFdvh4U1@mid.individual.net>, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > Am 23.09.2016 03:26, schrieb Alex W.: > > >>> A parliament is the legislative > >>> body composed of elected representatives of the people. Whether you > >>> call it a Congress or a Chambre des Deputes or an Allthing or a > >>> Bundestag or a Duma or the House of Commons is only a labelling issue. > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Our system is a representative republic, not a democracy. > >>> > >>> Which is still a democracy, one of a fair number of variants on the > >>> principle. > >>> > >> > >> No, it isn't. In a democracy the citizens vote directly on issues. > >> Here we elect representatives who do that voting. > >> > >> A referendum which is not binding can be held but it is not legal for > >> the citizens to directly vote for or against a law. > > > > A referendum is merely a specific mechanism within a democracy. > > > > "Democracy" is any political system where government is chosen by > > popular vote. This certainly includes the American system. > > > > > Yes, I would agree. > > But the question is, if the elected representatives have at least some > power. > > I would say no: neither the president nor any other elected > representative has any real power. > > Those are mere puppets, which could not change a iota. > > E.g. Obama is allegedly an Indonesian actor named 'Barry Soetoro'. That's the end for you, pushing an even more idiotic racist meme than the ordinary birther crap. -- JD Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-23 16:35 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e4k0opFglm7U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #393440 |
On 23/09/2016 12:51, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 23.09.2016 03:26, schrieb Alex W.: > >>>> A parliament is the legislative >>>> body composed of elected representatives of the people. Whether you >>>> call it a Congress or a Chambre des Deputes or an Allthing or a >>>> Bundestag or a Duma or the House of Commons is only a labelling issue. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Our system is a representative republic, not a democracy. >>>> >>>> Which is still a democracy, one of a fair number of variants on the >>>> principle. >>>> >>> >>> No, it isn't. In a democracy the citizens vote directly on issues. >>> Here we elect representatives who do that voting. >>> >>> A referendum which is not binding can be held but it is not legal for >>> the citizens to directly vote for or against a law. >> >> A referendum is merely a specific mechanism within a democracy. >> >> "Democracy" is any political system where government is chosen by >> popular vote. This certainly includes the American system. >> > > > Yes, I would agree. > > But the question is, if the elected representatives have at least some > power. > > I would say no: neither the president nor any other elected > representative has any real power. > > Those are mere puppets, which could not change a iota. The US president can introduce legislation to Congress. He can veto legislation passed by Congress. And he can unilaterally issue Executive Orders. This amounts to some very considerable legislative power. > > E.g. Obama is allegedly an Indonesian actor named 'Barry Soetoro'. But > why should someone like this be used as representative, if this office > had any power? > > From how the office is organised I think, the president is actually a > prisoner and can do absolutely nothing without allowance. > > Same with laws and the congress. > > This entire system of laws and regulations is so dubious, that the real > powers must be somewhere else - unelected and unknown to the public. > > To this would fit the system called 'common law'. This system is > actually British and controlled by the Guilds of the Barristers. > > But it's also a ridiculously stupid form of legislative. > > It is beyond imagination complicated. Which leads to immense coast for > jurisdiction (what is regarded as positive by the guilds). > > And last but not least we have the banks. > > Astonishingly the FED is also a private bank (and controlled somewhere > from the City of London). > > > I would assume, this entire system is way to twisted to last forever. You really are a refugee from alt.conspiracy, aren't you? Got any views on the Rosicrucians, the Bavarian Illuminati, the Freemasons, lizard aliens dressed in human skin suits, the Zionist Occupation Government and who actually killed JFK?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Officer <no_email@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-24 02:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9o1dir.ak7.19.2@news.alt.net> |
| In reply to | #393440 |
Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > Am 23.09.2016 03:26, schrieb Alex W.: > >>>> A parliament is the legislative >>>> body composed of elected representatives of the people. Whether you >>>> call it a Congress or a Chambre des Deputes or an Allthing or a >>>> Bundestag or a Duma or the House of Commons is only a labelling issue. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Our system is a representative republic, not a democracy. >>>> >>>> Which is still a democracy, one of a fair number of variants on the >>>> principle. >>>> >>> >>> No, it isn't. In a democracy the citizens vote directly on issues. >>> Here we elect representatives who do that voting. >>> >>> A referendum which is not binding can be held but it is not legal for >>> the citizens to directly vote for or against a law. >> >> A referendum is merely a specific mechanism within a democracy. >> >> "Democracy" is any political system where government is chosen by >> popular vote. This certainly includes the American system. >> > > > Yes, I would agree. > > But the question is, if the elected representatives have at least some > power. > > I would say no: neither the president nor any other elected > representative has any real power. > > Those are mere puppets, which could not change a iota. > > E.g. Obama is allegedly an Indonesian actor named 'Barry Soetoro'. But > why should someone like this be used as representative, if this office > had any power? Did you take some more idiocy pils this morning? > From how the office is organised I think, the president is actually a > prisoner and can do absolutely nothing without allowance. > > Same with laws and the congress. > > This entire system of laws and regulations is so dubious, that the real > powers must be somewhere else - unelected and unknown to the public. > > To this would fit the system called 'common law'. This system is > actually British and controlled by the Guilds of the Barristers. And you have already show to be wrong. > But it's also a ridiculously stupid form of legislative. Say the person that nearly went broke operating a tavern. Tell us how that happened again? Some of really understand how business and the economy work. > It is beyond imagination complicated. Which leads to immense coast for > jurisdiction (what is regarded as positive by the guilds). > > And last but not least we have the banks. > > Astonishingly the FED is also a private bank (and controlled somewhere > from the City of London). Are you talking about the US federal reserve board, aka the FED. > I would assume, this entire system is way to twisted to last forever. You would rather see chaos and anarchy? -- Dunning's work explained in clear, concise and simple terms. John Cleese on Stupidity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvVPdyYeaQU
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-22 22:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <hlwdjsd2-C11648.22523222092016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #393435 |
In article <e4jem6FcvgeU1@mid.individual.net>, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 23/09/2016 00:18, Attila wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 17:41:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > > alt.atheism with message-id <e4hg8dFsqs5U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > > > >> On 21/09/2016 18:16, Attila wrote: > >> > >>> We have no parliament. Judges are a part of the Judicial branch of > >>> the government. > >> > >> Yes, you do. > >> You just have a different name for it. > > > > Agreed, but we have nothing with that name. > > "Parliament" with a small "p" is a common term used for the legislative > chamber. > > > > > >> A parliament is the legislative > >> body composed of elected representatives of the people. Whether you > >> call it a Congress or a Chambre des Deputes or an Allthing or a > >> Bundestag or a Duma or the House of Commons is only a labelling issue. > > > > > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Our system is a representative republic, not a democracy. > >> > >> Which is still a democracy, one of a fair number of variants on the > >> principle. > >> > > > > No, it isn't. In a democracy the citizens vote directly on issues. > > Here we elect representatives who do that voting. > > > > A referendum which is not binding can be held but it is not legal for > > the citizens to directly vote for or against a law. > > A referendum is merely a specific mechanism within a democracy. > > "Democracy" is any political system where government is chosen by > popular vote. This certainly includes the American system. Except for the President. -- JD Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-23 09:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnu9ut6.dg5.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #393443 |
Jeanne Douglas wrote: > Alex W. wrote: ----snip---- > > "Democracy" is any political system where government is chosen by > > popular vote. False. That is merely an elective method of choosing government. "Democracy" means "the people rule"; it does *not* mean that the people get to choose which faction of the establishment *will be their rulers* for the next term of office. That is called "electibe oligarchy". > > This certainly includes the American system. Wrong. The US sytem is a combination of elective oligarchy and elective monarchy. > Except for the President. That's the elective monarchy part. Med
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-23 03:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7eb8dd54-d700-4743-bcbb-c469eef7042b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393464 |
W dniu piątek, 23 września 2016 11:53:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Ned Latham napisał: > > Except for the President. > > That's the elective monarchy part. We had elective monarchy in Poland. More, than 200 years. The elected king was the king until he died. Well, usually. Electing the president is just that: electing the president.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-23 21:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnub6et.vdn.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #393466 |
mlwozniak wrote:
> Ned Latham napisa??:
> > >
> > > Except for the President.
> >
> > That's the elective monarchy part.
>
> We had elective monarchy in Poland. More, than 200 years.
> The elected king was the king until he died. Well, usually.
> Electing the president is just that: electing the president.
Learn the technical terms. There are three types of government:
1. Monarchy: Government by one person.
King is only one form of monarchy.
President and Dictator are others.
2. Oligarchy: Government by a minority group.
Thocracy is usually, but not always, oligarchy
(the Pope is a monarch).
Aristocracy, meritocracy, and plutarchy are all
forms of oligarchy.
3. Polyarchy: Government by the majority of the populace.
Democracy and mob rule are the two best-known
forms of polyarchy.
Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-24 12:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ns5jnh$ked$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #393523 |
Użytkownik "Ned Latham" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:slrnnub6et.vdn.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz... mlwozniak wrote: > Ned Latham napisa??: > > > > > > Except for the President. > > > > That's the elective monarchy part. > > We had elective monarchy in Poland. More, than 200 years. > The elected king was the king until he died. Well, usually. > Electing the president is just that: electing the president. |Learn the technical terms. Government and monarchy are no way technical terms. |There are three types of government: |1. Monarchy: Government by one person. UK, Denmark, Spain and Sweden are good examples.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-24 16:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnudadf.t5q.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #393574 |
Maciej Wozniak wrote: > Ned Latham wrote: > mlwozniak wrote: > > Ned Latham napisa??: > > > > > > > > Except for the President. > > > > > > That's the elective monarchy part. > > > > We had elective monarchy in Poland. More, than 200 years. > > The elected king was the king until he died. Well, usually. > > Electing the president is just that: electing the president. > > Learn the technical terms. > > Government and monarchy are no way technical terms. "Monarchy" is. The fact that it's also a vernacular term is irrelevant. > There are three types of government: > 1. Monarchy: Government by one person. > > UK, Denmark, Spain and Sweden are good examples. So is North Korea. Unless whatsisname is merely a figurehead for the party. In that case it's an oligarchy. Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-25 11:59 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ns8769$7i3$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #393605 |
Użytkownik "Ned Latham" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:slrnnudadf.t5q.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz... > Learn the technical terms. > > Government and monarchy are no way technical terms. |"Monarchy" is. The fact that it's also a vernacular term |is irrelevant. I've already learnt. When I talk to a self-appointed guru, anything not matching what he say is always irrelevant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-25 13:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnufm0i.rv7.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #393714 |
Maciej Wozniak wrote: > Ned Latham Wrote: Attributions and context restored. > * Maciej Wozniak wrote: > * > Ned Latham Wrote: > * > > > * > > Learn the technical terms. > * > > * > Government and monarchy are no way technical terms. > * > * "Monarchy" is. The fact that it's also a vernacular > * term is irrelevant. > > I've already learnt. No, you haven't. You're too pig-headed. > When I talk to a self-appointed guru, I don't claim to be a guru. Unlike you, though, I am a native English speaker, and understand it quite well. > anything not matching what he say is always irrelevant. THat's a pathetic excuse for refusing to learn. Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-23 12:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <liv9ubll68fpu8nmtcvj93nkciv5fheack@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #393464 |
On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 09:53:42 GMT, Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> wrote: >Jeanne Douglas wrote: >> Alex W. wrote: > >----snip---- > >> > "Democracy" is any political system where government is chosen by >> > popular vote. > >False. That is merely an elective method of choosing government. Actually our election chooses our representive to our parliament though people usually vote on party politcal lines. It is from the majority party that our goverment is formed. The leader of the majorty party is appointed Prime Minster by the head of state and he/she choosed the minsters under her. They answer both to the PM and parliament and are called to account once a week whilst parliament is sitting. Parliament can remove them from office as it wishes either by a vote of no confidence in the Prime minster or a vote to reduce the salary of an unwanted minister. > >"Democracy" means "the people rule"; it does *not* mean that the >people get to choose which faction of the establishment *will be >their rulers* for the next term of office. > >That is called "electibe oligarchy". > >> > This certainly includes the American system. > >Wrong. The US sytem is a combination of elective oligarchy and >elective monarchy. > >> Except for the President. > >That's the elective monarchy part. The US system is quite rare in modern democratic government as it combines the head of state with the executive. Most other systems follow the British pattern where the Head of State (President or Monarch) is separate to the executive which is led by a Prime Minister. Our Prime Minister is directly responsible to Parliament and is called to account once a week whilst parliament is sitting. France for example has a president and a Prime Minister as does India the worlds most populous democracy. Les Hellawell Greetings from: YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County Martin Luther wrote: "Faith must trample underfoot all sense, reason and understanding Which means that if Luther practised what he preached nothing he ever said made any sense
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-23 21:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnub8rt.vdn.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #393470 |
Les Hellawell wrote: > Ned Latham wrote: > > Jeanne Douglas wrote: > > > Alex W. wrote: ----snip---- > > The US sytem is a combination of elective oligarchy and > > elective monarchy. > > > > > Except for the President. > > > > That's the elective monarchy part. > > The US system is quite rare in modern democratic government There is no such thing as "modern democratic government". Even Switzerlabd, with its mandated five referenda per annum, is not a democracy. The so-called democracies are all, one way or another, monarchies or oligarchies (some elective), and all of them are tyrannies. In every government on the planet, and except for irregular referenda and those five annual referenda in Switzerland, the powers of legislative initative and legislative assent are effectively in the same hands (sometimes theoretically separated, but never in practice); IUW, the people who propose the laws also enact them. In the UK, for example, the ruling party propose legislation, read a Bill and send it to the monarch, who signs it into Law. Theoretically she can reject it, but in practice, she's a rubber stamp. > as it combines the head of state with the executive. Most > other systems follow the British pattern where the Head of > State (President or Monarch) "Monarchy" does not mean "kingship" is means "the rule of one". Kings, presidents and dictators are all monarchs. > is separate to the executive > which is led by a Prime Minister. Our Prime Minister is > directly responsible to Parliament and is called to account > once a week whilst parliament is sitting. France for > example has a president and a Prime Minister as does India > the worlds most populous democracy. It is not a democracy: it is an elective oligachy. > Les Hellawell > Greetings from: > YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County "King Richard, late mercifully reigning over us, was through the great treason of the Duke of Norfolk piteously slain and murdered, to the great heaviness of this City." > Martin Luther wrote: > "Faith must trample underfoot all sense, reason and understanding > > Which means that if Luther practised what he preached > nothing he ever said made any sense I read it rather differently: it means that in common with all other monotheists, he considers it acceptable to "debate" with force; even deadly force. Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-25 23:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <462efa27-313b-41f6-a994-f56419be0600@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393538 |
W dniu piątek, 23 września 2016 23:49:55 UTC+2 użytkownik Ned Latham napisał: > Les Hellawell wrote: > > Ned Latham wrote: > > > Jeanne Douglas wrote: > > > > Alex W. wrote: > > ----snip---- > > > > The US sytem is a combination of elective oligarchy and > > > elective monarchy. > > > > > > > Except for the President. > > > > > > That's the elective monarchy part. > > > > The US system is quite rare in modern democratic government > > There is no such thing as "modern democratic government". > Even Switzerlabd, with its mandated five referenda per > annum, is not a democracy. There is such thing. It's just that your theory of governments has nothing in common with reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-26 10:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnuhv3m.sru.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #393815 |
mlwozniak wrote: > > Les Hellawell wrote: > > > Ned Latham wrote: > > > > Jeanne Douglas wrote: > > > > > Alex W. wrote: > > > > ----snip---- > > > > > > The US sytem is a combination of elective oligarchy and > > > > elective monarchy. > > > > > > > > > Except for the President. > > > > > > > > That's the elective monarchy part. > > > > > > The US system is quite rare in modern democratic government > > > > There is no such thing as "modern democratic government". > > Even Switzerlabd, with its mandated five referenda per > > annum, is not a democracy. > > There is such thing. You're wrong again, Woz. (And the expression is "such a thing".) > It's just that your theory of governments That's "theory of government", Woz. > has nothing in common with reality. Nothing in common with your delusion, actually. Again, learn the technical terms: "democracy" means (literally!) "the people rule", and that definition does not aqpply in practise anywhere in the world. It does *not* mean "the people choose which faction of the establishment *will be their rulers* for the next term of office"; that definition, which applies in practise to every country in the world that runs elections for office is of "elective oligarchy". Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-26 04:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <22720e0a-22a6-4b49-a97b-1af7417d606a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393842 |
W dniu poniedziałek, 26 września 2016 12:46:20 UTC+2 użytkownik Ned Latham napisał: > mlwozniak wrote: > > > Les Hellawell wrote: > > > > Ned Latham wrote: > > > > > Jeanne Douglas wrote: > > > > > > Alex W. wrote: > > > > > > ----snip---- > > > > > > > > The US sytem is a combination of elective oligarchy and > > > > > elective monarchy. > > > > > > > > > > > Except for the President. > > > > > > > > > > That's the elective monarchy part. > > > > > > > > The US system is quite rare in modern democratic government > > > > > > There is no such thing as "modern democratic government". > > > Even Switzerlabd, with its mandated five referenda per > > > annum, is not a democracy. > > > > There is such thing. > > You're wrong again, Woz. No, I'm not. > (And the expression is "such a thing".) Thanks. > > > It's just that your theory of governments > > That's "theory of government", Woz. There is no real difference. > > has nothing in common with reality. > > Nothing in common with your delusion, actually. > > Again, learn the technical terms: "democracy" means > (literally!) "the people rule", and that definition > does not aqpply in practise anywhere in the world. Wrong. "Democracy" literally means democracy, it does apply (not aqpply) to many countries. We can argue whether these countries have really the people rule or not. But if they don't - it only means that "democracy" doesn't have to mean "the people rule". And I'm not Woz, Lat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-26 14:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnuibfh.255.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #393846 |
mlwozniak wrote: > Ned Latham wrote: > > mlwozniak wrote: ----snip---- > > > It's just that your theory of governments > > > > That's "theory of government", Woz. > > There is no real difference. There is. It's a matter of English expression. This particular type of expression is difficult because it's inconsistent, but generally the rule is: when talking about the study of something or the theory of something or even an appreciation of something, the "something" is stated in the singlular, not the plural. The inconsistency comes in when the name of the something is plural in form, as with "politics" and "physics", for example. > > > has nothing in common with reality. > > > > Nothing in common with your delusion, actually. > > > > Again, learn the technical terms: "democracy" means > > (literally!) "the people rule", and that definition > > does not aqpply in practise anywhere in the world. > > Wrong. "Democracy" literally means democracy, Wrong. Repeating a word isn't definition, it's tautology. And "literally" in this context means "according to the exact meaning of every word". The word "democracy" was coined in Athens sometime in the decade or so before 510 BCE, when Solon imposed democracy on the City. It derives from "demos", which means "the people", and "kratio", which means "rule". IOW, according to the exact meaning of every word it derives from, "democracy" means "the people rule". The ancient Greeks used it that way and Political Science departments in Universities where the teaching langyage is English use it that way. It's a technical term. > it does > apply (not aqpply) Don't be petty. > to many countries. We can argue > whether these countries have really the people rule > or not. But if they don't - it only means that > "democracy" doesn't have to mean "the people rule". People use it in many ways; not only to reference elective methods of choosing government, but also to reference such legalisms as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Its meaning becomes eroded if you insist on allowing all of its vernacular meanings to operate when you use it. And if you don't, where do you draw the line? The general answer is this: if the word is a technical term in any subject, then when you're speaking on that subject, you should use the word in its technical sense, if for no other reason than that if you don't misunderstandings occur. > And I'm not Woz, Lat. It's a typical English-language contraction of the surname you're using in both of the nyms I've seen you posting under. If you want to be addressed differently, state it. Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-26 23:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <254cdecd-a421-44d4-a3e2-e9a82fd3751f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393868 |
W dniu poniedziałek, 26 września 2016 16:17:24 UTC+2 użytkownik Ned Latham napisał: > The word "democracy" was coined in Athens sometime in > the decade or so before 510 BCE, when Solon imposed > democracy on the City. It derives from "demos", which > means "the people", and "kratio", which means "rule". The word "geometry" derives from words "Earth" and "measure", but you don't insist geometry and geodesy is technically the same thing, do you? > Science departments in Universities where the teaching > langyage is English use it that way. I don't use it that way. Real people don't use it that way. The same thing as with relativity - some crazy theoreticians are imagining they rule. No, they don't rule. They are enchanting the reality. > The general answer is this: if the word is a technical > term in any subject, then when you're speaking on that > subject, you should use the word in its technical > sense, if for no other reason than that if you don't > misunderstandings occur. Wrong. The general answer is this: words are not toys for theoretician's fun. The theoreticians should keep their definitions close to real, common meaning, if for no other reason than that if they don't misunderstandings occur.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web