| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"the Professor" |
| Date: |
14 Sep 2005 12:05:30 AM |
| Object: |
Abolishing Abstinence |
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic for
Atlantic Monthly cover stories and college seminars more than practical
applications. So here's another question: Can we keep our pants on?
Ironically, the group that often answers "yes" to the first question says
"no" to the second. And some believe that not only can't we stay chaste, but
we should not.
"An abstinence-until-marriage program is not only irresponsible," U.S. Rep.
Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said last year. "It's really inhumane."
South Dakota Planned Parenthood apparently agrees. Governor Mike Rounds last
summer complained about the state library's teen website link to Planned
Parenthood's hypersexual site TeenWire. So Planned Parenthood demanded that
the library board also remove a link to CT sister publication Campus Life
because it promotes abstinence. If you can't tell teens to have sex, Planned
Parenthood says, you can't tell them not to have sex. Not that TeenWire is
entirely against "abstinence." It includes such chaste advice as, "Some
straight couples use anal sex as a way to preserve the woman's virginity."
Then there's NARAL Pro-Choice Washington, which in mid-July held a "Screw
Abstinence" party. The event might be merely juvenile rather than creepy had
it not come from an abortion-rights group, notes Focus on the Family's Linda
Klepacki. "It's clear NARAL wants your kids to be sexually active because
it's good for business," she says.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the National Education Association, and
more than 100 other groups asked the Health and Human Services Department to
remove its 4Parents.gov website because it said, "Abstinence is the
healthiest choice for teens." The Associated Press said the groups
complained that the government was "dictating values."
Since 1998, the American Academy of Pediatrics had a policy that "abstinence
counseling is an important role for all pediatricians." No more.
"The evidence does not support abstinence-only interventions as the best way
to keep young people from unintended pregnancy," Jonathan Klein, chairman of
the committee that wrote the new recommendations, told the Associated Press.
As with the activist groups, the AAP apparently believes that pregnancy, not
underage sex, is the problem..
Facing opposition like this, is it any wonder that every teenage girl isn't
pregnant or carrying some STD?
.
|
|
| User: "Perpetual Confusion" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 11:30:33 AM |
|
|
"the Professor" <university@volcanomail.com> wrote in
news:47ednTRfqbeJLbreRVn-uQ@giganews.com:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a
topic for Atlantic Monthly cover stories and college seminars more
than practical applications. So here's another question: Can we keep
our pants on?
A strange intro to the abstinence question
Ironically, the group that often answers "yes" to the first question
says "no" to the second. And some believe that not only can't we stay
chaste, but we should not.
Of course we can be good without God, since we get to define goodness it
makes it pretty easy.
But, it moronic to say we can't be chaste. It's just not easy.
"An abstinence-until-marriage program is not only irresponsible," U.S.
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said last year. "It's really inhumane."
Gee. A california democrat thinks abstinence is bad? Somebody give me
CPR.
South Dakota Planned Parenthood apparently agrees. Governor Mike
Rounds last summer complained about the state library's teen website
link to Planned Parenthood's hypersexual site TeenWire. So Planned
Parenthood demanded that the library board also remove a link to CT
sister publication Campus Life because it promotes abstinence. If you
can't tell teens to have sex, Planned Parenthood says, you can't tell
them not to have sex. Not that TeenWire is entirely against
"abstinence." It includes such chaste advice as, "Some straight
couples use anal sex as a way to preserve the woman's virginity."
Chaste advise???? Anal sex is chastity? lol.
Hell. let's just stop telling teens ANYTHING. Since when does telling a
teen something register anyway?
Then there's NARAL Pro-Choice Washington, which in mid-July held a
"Screw Abstinence" party. The event might be merely juvenile rather
than creepy had it not come from an abortion-rights group, notes Focus
on the Family's Linda Klepacki. "It's clear NARAL wants your kids to
be sexually active because it's good for business," she says.
if true. that's very creepy.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the National Education
Association, and more than 100 other groups asked the Health and Human
Services Department to remove its 4Parents.gov website because it
said, "Abstinence is the healthiest choice for teens." The Associated
Press said the groups complained that the government was "dictating
values."
The government can't "dictate" values anyway. Unless there's an
abstinence bill before congress that I'm unaware of?
I'm not sure how you can dispute that abstinence isn't a healthy choice.
But hey, if the ACLU and NEA say it then it must be so... (puke).
Since 1998, the American Academy of Pediatrics had a policy that
"abstinence counseling is an important role for all pediatricians." No
more.
That's a bit meddlesome. Unless little jonny has aids or herpes. Then I
think it might be in line.
"The evidence does not support abstinence-only interventions as the
best way to keep young people from unintended pregnancy," Jonathan
Klein, chairman of the committee that wrote the new recommendations,
told the Associated Press. As with the activist groups, the AAP
apparently believes that pregnancy, not underage sex, is the problem..
LOL . Holy crap. How can abstinence NOT be the best way to avoid
unintended pregnancy? If someone "fails" to be abstinent, it's not
abstinences fault!
Facing opposition like this, is it any wonder that every teenage girl
isn't pregnant or carrying some STD?
It's cause a good number of them "wait" until later when they're
"smarter" before having sex. Something us males could learn from.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Ejercito" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
25 Sep 2005 08:24:21 PM |
|
|
Perpetual Confusion wrote:
"the Professor" <university@volcanomail.com> wrote in
news:47ednTRfqbeJLbreRVn-uQ@giganews.com:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a
topic for Atlantic Monthly cover stories and college seminars more
than practical applications. So here's another question: Can we keep
our pants on?
A strange intro to the abstinence question
Ironically, the group that often answers "yes" to the first question
says "no" to the second. And some believe that not only can't we stay
chaste, but we should not.
Of course we can be good without God, since we get to define goodness it
makes it pretty easy.
But, it moronic to say we can't be chaste. It's just not easy.
"An abstinence-until-marriage program is not only irresponsible," U.S.
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said last year. "It's really inhumane."
Gee. A california democrat thinks abstinence is bad? Somebody give me
CPR.
Teaching abstinence unbtil marriage IS bad. The average age of
marriage is twenty-seven years. Expecting people to abstain for sex for
much of their adult life is completely unrealistic and completely
stupid.
Michael
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perpetual Confusion" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
27 Sep 2005 07:53:12 AM |
|
|
Abstinance = No unwanted pregnancies and no STDs. Every single time.
This is simply a fact that can and should be stated. If it is unrealistic
for most then fine. To bury a truth because it doesn't fit into your
moral code (or lack there of) is criminal. From your point of view
abstaining from sex is completetly unattainable, this is clear. Others
who do have the self control should not be denied the truth about their
choice. Instead, you'd have them told that excercising their self control
is in its self a bad thing.
We might as well stop telling people not to smoke, not to eat junk food
and get some exercise. It's just unrealistic and stupid. riiiight?
pc
"Michael Ejercito" <mejercit@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1127697861.420899.57990@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Perpetual Confusion wrote:
"the Professor" <university@volcanomail.com> wrote in
news:47ednTRfqbeJLbreRVn-uQ@giganews.com:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a
topic for Atlantic Monthly cover stories and college seminars more
than practical applications. So here's another question: Can we keep
our pants on?
A strange intro to the abstinence question
Ironically, the group that often answers "yes" to the first question
says "no" to the second. And some believe that not only can't we
stay
chaste, but we should not.
Of course we can be good without God, since we get to define goodness
it
makes it pretty easy.
But, it moronic to say we can't be chaste. It's just not easy.
"An abstinence-until-marriage program is not only irresponsible,"
U.S.
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said last year. "It's really inhumane."
Gee. A california democrat thinks abstinence is bad? Somebody give me
CPR.
Teaching abstinence unbtil marriage IS bad. The average age of
marriage is twenty-seven years. Expecting people to abstain for sex for
much of their adult life is completely unrealistic and completely
stupid.
Michael
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
27 Sep 2005 09:19:16 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 07:53:12 -0500, Perpetual Confusion
<always@confused.net> wrote:
Abstinance = No unwanted pregnancies and no STDs. Every single time.
This is simply a fact that can and should be stated. If it is unrealistic
for most then fine. To bury a truth because it doesn't fit into your
moral code (or lack there of) is criminal. From your point of view
abstaining from sex is completetly unattainable, this is clear. Others
who do have the self control should not be denied the truth about their
choice. Instead, you'd have them told that excercising their self control
is in its self a bad thing.
We might as well stop telling people not to smoke, not to eat junk food
and get some exercise. It's just unrealistic and stupid. riiiight?
Sex is not comparable to any of the above. Sex is healthy. Yes,
having sex with another person exposes one to infection, but
people can also drown if they go swimming, so they take precautions.
snip
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Ejercito" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
27 Sep 2005 10:37:23 AM |
|
|
Perpetual Confusion wrote:
Abstinance = No unwanted pregnancies and no STDs. Every single time.
This is simply a fact that can and should be stated. If it is unrealistic
for most then fine. To bury a truth because it doesn't fit into your
moral code (or lack there of) is criminal. From your point of view
abstaining from sex is completetly unattainable, this is clear. Others
who do have the self control should not be denied the truth about their
choice. Instead, you'd have them told that excercising their self control
is in its self a bad thing.
Self-control about WHAT? Everyone IS doing it, in case you have not
noticed.
I am all for teaching children that they are too young to have sex.
I am absolutely opposed to teaching that they should continue to avoid
sex when they grow up.
Michael
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perpetual Confusion" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
27 Sep 2005 11:28:37 AM |
|
|
"Michael Ejercito" <mejercit@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1127835443.528026.134540@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Perpetual Confusion wrote:
Abstinance = No unwanted pregnancies and no STDs. Every single time.
This is simply a fact that can and should be stated. If it is
unrealistic for most then fine. To bury a truth because it doesn't
fit into your moral code (or lack there of) is criminal. From your
point of view abstaining from sex is completetly unattainable, this
is clear. Others who do have the self control should not be denied
the truth about their choice. Instead, you'd have them told that
excercising their self control is in its self a bad thing.
Self-control about WHAT? Everyone IS doing it, in case you have not
noticed.
Self control regarding who and when someone engages in sex. Everyone is
not doing it. Most of course are. But there are some who chose not to.
I am all for teaching children that they are too young to have sex.
That's a big admission in this group.
I am absolutely opposed to teaching that they should continue to avoid
sex when they grow up.
Of course. We're not talking about life long abstinance here. We're
talking about the possibility of absolute monogamy.
Michael
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jor-El" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
07 Nov 2005 06:16:36 AM |
|
|
"the Professor" <university@volcanomail.com> wrote in
news:47ednTRfqbeJLbreRVn-uQ@giganews.com:
Can we keep our pants on?
"Grommit, these are the wrong trousers!"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "abracadabra" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 08:09:32 AM |
|
|
"the Professor" <university@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:47ednTRfqbeJLbreRVn-uQ@giganews.com...
Can we be good without God?
Of course
The question seems somehow abstract, a topic for
Atlantic Monthly cover stories and college seminars more than practical
applications. So here's another question: Can we keep our pants on?
Nope - we have to wash, go to the bathroom, change clothes, etc.
Hope that helps!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 12:36:32 PM |
|
|
"the Professor" <university@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:47ednTRfqbeJLbreRVn-uQ@giganews.com...
Can we be good without God?
Well people seem to find it easy not to be with him
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 01:05:21 PM |
|
|
A troll calling himself "the Professor" <university@volcanomail.com>
crossposted his "opinion" all over Usenet in
message news:47ednTRfqbeJLbreRVn-uQ@giganews.com...
<A whole bunch of tripe dumped>
Facing opposition like this, is it any wonder that every teenage girl
isn't pregnant or carrying some STD?
Very. Lame. Troll.
LC~ Just another nutty "Professor".
"Everyday a different computer, everyday a different Id (those may have
to be repeated after I run out of names and numbers with my free
accounts with hotmail and yahoo and volcanomail and msn ect...) which
will render a killfile absolutely useless."
From: "simon sez" <simonsez@volcanomail.com> aka "J Young", et al.
Message-ID: <1124475530.860458.5110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
27 Sep 2005 11:54:07 AM |
|
|
If god was real, he'd be as horney as we are. Meanwhile, let's concern
ourselves with the here and now ...
= news release ===
"Night of the Living Nut"
Inmates Escape from Flooded Louisiana Mental Institution
By Boisfeuillet Smith, Holmwood Press Staff Writer
HOLMWOOD, La., Sept. 25 - Nearly 200 mental patients, many with a
history of violence, are missing from the Holmwood Institute after
rising flood waters inundated the facility. As of daybreak, none
had been accounted for.
"It seems the medical and management staff abandoned the place as
flooding from the hurricane rendered the dormitories uninhabitable,"
said Hargrove Bratfort, sherrif of this Gulf Coast community south of
Lake Charles.
The state-operated Holmwood Institute, known also as The Home, was
established in 1922. It provides treatment and secure housing for some
of the state's most mentally deviant criminals and sociopaths.
According to Dr, Rastus Wilkins, assistant Sorgum County director
of mental health, Holmwood is a 220-bed high-security facility. "We
consider it to be among the foremost institutions of its kind in the
Southeastern United States, " he said.
Sheriff Bratfort said his deputies and the State Police are
searching for the inmates throughout the county, a dank region of
swamps and bayous near Cacasieu Lake. "Of course, we want to talk to
the missing caretakers as well," Bratfort said.
"These inmates, or patients, are dangerous, by Jesus," Bratfort
added, "and we advise anyone who is still at home in this area not to
approach any strangers. And I would recommend our citizenry keep their
guns and knives at the ready."
Holmwood town's population of 800 received orders to evacuate in the
wake of the approach of Hurricane Rita. Approximately 40 citizens work
at the institute, according to Dr. Wilkins from his home in DeQuincy.
He said he understands the facility is mostly under water and the
whereabouts of employees and patients is unknown.
Bratfort, a native of Holmwood, said his staff would spare no effort
to capture the escaped mental patients.
"We are heavily armed and goddammit, we won't hesitate to shoot to
kill if we are confronted by any of these disturbed men," he said.
"The last time we had a break, back in 1989, we tracked 'em with our
dogs and had to shoot four of them, killed two."
The Sheriff added that he was confident all of the inmates would be
captured or otherwise "taken care of," since each of his 11 deputies is
deadly accurate with rifles and shotguns.
"They're all lifetime hunting boys, and they can hit a
squirrel's ***** at 100 yards," he said. "And around here, we kind of
make a sport of hunting crazies that're loose from the Home. We done
even set up a cash award for the fellow who nails the most of these
dangerous animals. Ahmen, brother, and all praise to Jesus!"
http://www.theholmwoodnews.html
-- end --
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 08:48:58 AM |
|
|
In our last episode,
<47ednTRfqbeJLbreRVn-uQ@giganews.com>,
the lovely and talented the Professor
broadcast on alt.politics:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow
abstract, a topic for Atlantic Monthly cover stories and
college seminars more than practical applications. So here's
another question: Can we keep our pants on?
Ironically, the group that often answers "yes" to the first
question says "no" to the second. And some believe that not
only can't we stay chaste, but we should not.
That's a lie.
"An abstinence-until-marriage program is not only
irresponsible," U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said last
year. "It's really inhumane."
Because it doesn't work and it keeps people ignorant.
--
Lars Eighner http://www.larseighner.com/
I don't see posts from or threads started from googlegroups.
"Imagine all the people living life in peace.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.
I hope someday you'll join us, and the world will be as one."
-- John Lennon
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 12:20:53 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0400, "the Professor"
<university@volcanomail.com> wrote:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic for
It's a stupid, droolingly nasty question posed by sociopathic bigots
projecting their own amoral need for an imaginary alpha male to tell
them how to behave towards others, onto everybody else.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 12:58:26 AM |
|
|
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:0lcfi1tfrgavmsnk014pt6mmqo846e9ppl@4ax.com...
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0400, "the Professor"
<university@volcanomail.com> wrote:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic
for
It's a stupid, droolingly nasty question posed by sociopathic bigots
projecting their own amoral need for an imaginary alpha male to tell
them how to behave towards others, onto everybody else.
Well put!
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 01:12:31 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:58:26 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:0lcfi1tfrgavmsnk014pt6mmqo846e9ppl@4ax.com...
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0400, "the Professor"
<university@volcanomail.com> wrote:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic
for
It's a stupid, droolingly nasty question posed by sociopathic bigots
projecting their own amoral need for an imaginary alpha male to tell
them how to behave towards others, onto everybody else.
Well put!
Thanks
.
|
|
|
| User: "abracadabra" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 08:12:32 AM |
|
|
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:0qffi1hnmanuu9ombrtrfij5kbdefvt5il@4ax.com...
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:58:26 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:0lcfi1tfrgavmsnk014pt6mmqo846e9ppl@4ax.com...
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0400, "the Professor"
<university@volcanomail.com> wrote:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic
for
It's a stupid, droolingly nasty question posed by sociopathic bigots
projecting their own amoral need for an imaginary alpha male to tell
them how to behave towards others, onto everybody else.
Well put!
Thanks
"Being good" is a moral choice - something according to the bible we all
have the freedom to make on our own. Sadly cons cannot "be good" without
having the constant threat of eternam damnation and torment hanging over
their heads, and frankly, that doesn't do the job. Your average "Christian
Conservative" does whatever he wants, and at the end of the day knows he'll
"be forgiven". Bush is a great example - whatever evil he does, to cons it's
justified and he'll be forgiven (unlike say.... a *****)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 09:29:13 AM |
|
|
so are you barely enjoyin sex
.
|
|
|
| User: "abracadabra" |
|
| Title: Re: Abolishing Abstinence |
14 Sep 2005 10:35:14 AM |
|
|
<mimenosmal@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1126708153.230873.258660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
so are you barely enjoyin sex
Huh?
You might want to elaborate on your unique viewpoint - it's a bit confusing
at the moment.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Day" |
|
| Title: AQOTM nomination |
14 Sep 2005 09:21:02 AM |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070201030201000307000001
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0400, "the Professor"
<university@volcanomail.com> wrote:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic for
begin nominated quote
It's a stupid, droolingly nasty question posed by sociopathic bigots
projecting their own amoral need for an imaginary alpha male to tell
them how to behave towards others, onto everybody else.
end nominated quote
Colin Day aa #1500
--------------070201030201000307000001
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid0lcfi1tfrgavmsnk014pt6mmqo846e9ppl@4ax.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0400, "the Professor"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:university@volcanomail.com"><university@volcanomail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic for
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
begin nominated quote<br>
<blockquote cite="mid0lcfi1tfrgavmsnk014pt6mmqo846e9ppl@4ax.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It's a stupid, droolingly nasty question posed by sociopathic bigots
projecting their own amoral need for an imaginary alpha male to tell
them how to behave towards others, onto everybody else.
</pre>
</blockquote>
end nominated quote<br>
<br>
Colin Day aa #1500<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------070201030201000307000001--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tink" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM nomination |
15 Sep 2005 09:43:39 AM |
|
|
Colin Day wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0400, "the Professor"
<university@volcanomail.com> wrote:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic for
begin nominated quote
It's a stupid, droolingly nasty question posed by sociopathic bigots
projecting their own amoral need for an imaginary alpha male to tell
them how to behave towards others, onto everybody else.
end nominated quote
Colin Day aa #1500
Seconded
--
Skydivers don't knock on death's door; they ring the bell and run
away... It really pisses him off.
The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS# 8808
EAC Chairman, Division of Skydiving and Sushi consumption.
.
|
|
|
| User: "*nemo*" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM nomination |
16 Sep 2005 03:07:04 AM |
|
|
In article <9LmdnQIcCf0CFbTenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
Tink <kjgrish@comcast.net.spamno.ccom> wrote:
Colin Day wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0400, "the Professor"
<university@volcanomail.com> wrote:
Can we be good without God? The question seems somehow abstract, a topic
for
begin nominated quote
It's a stupid, droolingly nasty question posed by sociopathic bigots
projecting their own amoral need for an imaginary alpha male to tell
them how to behave towards others, onto everybody else.
end nominated quote
Colin Day aa #1500
Seconded
Recorded.
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
