| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Poop Dogg" |
| Date: |
29 Sep 2003 11:04:30 PM |
| Object: |
American Atheists? |
I'm not really an atheist, but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state. I also believe
that the constitution be amended to guarantee freedom FROM religion, but
that's for another thread.
Anyway, is American Atheists, the group founded by Madilyn Murray O'Hair
still in operation since her murder several years ago? I heard that
the killer forced the O'Hairs to empty AA's treasury, converting it to
gold and silver coins.
If still in existence, what kind of resources and influence does it still
possess? Have other organizations taken over some of its functions? I
did come across the Freedom From Religion Foundation, it sounds like it
might have promise as a lobbying organization.
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity, particularly
Christianity and Islam.
.
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
01 Oct 2003 04:22:11 PM |
|
|
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> thought hard and said:
I'm not really an atheist, but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state. I also believe
that the constitution be amended to guarantee freedom FROM religion, but
that's for another thread.
Anyway, is American Atheists, the group founded by Madilyn Murray O'Hair
still in operation since her murder several years ago? I heard that
the killer forced the O'Hairs to empty AA's treasury, converting it to
gold and silver coins.
If still in existence, what kind of resources and influence does it still
possess? Have other organizations taken over some of its functions? I
did come across the Freedom From Religion Foundation, it sounds like it
might have promise as a lobbying organization.
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity, particularly
Christianity and Islam.
You are an dumbass and a fuckwit and you deserve to be shot, you
fucking teenager you.
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 15 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, and Gustav Mahler are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "randum_proser" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 06:46:15 AM |
|
|
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity,
particularly
Christianity and Islam.
Would you like to purchase some soma with that???
-
http://randomprose.journalspace.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Crazyalec" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 12:32:35 AM |
|
|
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by inquisition to
validate the con game of theism.
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a business. Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for a religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
I also believe
that the constitution be amended to guarantee freedom FROM religion, but
that's for another thread.
Anyway, is American Atheists, the group founded by Madilyn Murray O'Hair
still in operation since her murder several years ago? I heard that
the killer forced the O'Hairs to empty AA's treasury, converting it to
gold and silver coins.
www.americanatheists.org
If still in existence, what kind of resources and influence does it still
possess? Have other organizations taken over some of its functions? I
did come across the Freedom From Religion Foundation, it sounds like it
might have promise as a lobbying organization.
Almost nothing.The real organization has to be very active in fighting
religious hypocrisy. For example gays, blacks, theists are very organized
and pro active. I can give examples of at least 10 lawsuits that can be
filed by AA aganist religious discrimination.
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity,
particularly
Christianity and Islam.
How about "Anti-Religious Police". The purpose of the police is to catch bad
guys when a crime is commited.Our group will catch religious con artists
when they use religion as a money making machine and a tool to control
masses.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nikolaos D. Bougalis" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 04:00:03 AM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tz8eb.633844$YN5.480501@sccrnsc01...
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by inquisition to
validate the con game of theism.
All terms are invented. That does not make them invalid.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word "atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a business. Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
-n
.
|
|
|
| User: "Crazyalec" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 04:49:49 AM |
|
|
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:jCbeb.8859$Rd4.8562@fed1read07...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tz8eb.633844$YN5.480501@sccrnsc01...
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by inquisition
to
validate the con game of theism.
All terms are invented. That does not make them invalid.
Bogus terms are invalid.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word "atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a business. Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business, because that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
-n
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nikolaos D. Bougalis" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 10:15:45 AM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1lceb.639671$o%2.299731@sccrnsc02...
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:jCbeb.8859$Rd4.8562@fed1read07...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tz8eb.633844$YN5.480501@sccrnsc01...
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by
inquisition
to
validate the con game of theism.
All terms are invented. That does not make them invalid.
Bogus terms are invalid.
And what exactly is a "bogus term?"
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word "atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
Deity is a reference to a particular kind of entity. It existed long
before religion.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
We've had this discussion before. You gave the same argument. It was
wrong then, and it is wrong now. According to your reasoning why do we need
"apathetic" or "atrophic" or "amorphous?" Do you advocate the elimination
those terms from the English language? On what grounds?
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a business.
Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business, because
that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
So, let me get this staight. Religion is a business, and business can
get involved in politics, unless it's religion? You make no sense.
-n
.
|
|
|
| User: "Crazyalec" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 03:39:41 PM |
|
|
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:A6heb.8869$Rd4.1853@fed1read07...
And what exactly is a "bogus term?"
A term, that is used by con artists to justify a con game.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word
"atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
Deity is a reference to a particular kind of entity. It existed long
before religion.
It was created by religion.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
We've had this discussion before. You gave the same argument. It was
wrong then, and it is wrong now.
Its always right.
According to your reasoning why do we need
"apathetic" or "atrophic" or "amorphous?" Do you advocate the elimination
those terms from the English language?
No
On what grounds?
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a
business.
Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business, because
that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
So, let me get this staight. Religion is a business, and business can
get involved in politics, unless it's religion? You make no sense.
Do you see in Always Coca Cola on a dollar bill?
-n
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nikolaos D. Bougalis" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 08:48:39 PM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hSleb.380016$2x.117244@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:A6heb.8869$Rd4.1853@fed1read07...
And what exactly is a "bogus term?"
A term, that is used by con artists to justify a con game.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word
"atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
Deity is a reference to a particular kind of entity. It existed long
before religion.
It was created by religion.
No. The term existed long before religion qua religion was established.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
We've had this discussion before. You gave the same argument. It was
wrong then, and it is wrong now.
Its always right.
Why would your baseless assertions about linguistics carry any weight?
And by the way, don't you mean "It's"? I thought you were infallible --
you had just finished telling us that. And you could not get it right.
According to your reasoning why do we need
"apathetic" or "atrophic" or "amorphous?" Do you advocate the
elimination
those terms from the English language?
No
Why not? Why is "atheism" invalid, and "apathy" or "astray" is not?
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a
business.
Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business,
because
that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
So, let me get this staight. Religion is a business, and business
can
get involved in politics, unless it's religion? You make no sense.
Do you see in Always Coca Cola on a dollar bill?
No, not that it matters.
-n
.
|
|
|
| User: "Crazyalec" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 09:58:16 PM |
|
|
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:Wnqeb.8962$Rd4.1588@fed1read07...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hSleb.380016$2x.117244@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:A6heb.8869$Rd4.1853@fed1read07...
And what exactly is a "bogus term?"
A term, that is used by con artists to justify a con game.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word
"atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
Deity is a reference to a particular kind of entity. It existed
long
before religion.
It was created by religion.
No. The term existed long before religion qua religion was
established.
How do you know.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there
are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
We've had this discussion before. You gave the same argument. It
was
wrong then, and it is wrong now.
Its always right.
Why would your baseless assertions about linguistics carry any weight?
Because I know better.
And by the way, don't you mean "It's"? I thought you were
infallible --
you had just finished telling us that. And you could not get it right.
So you ask.
According to your reasoning why do we need
"apathetic" or "atrophic" or "amorphous?" Do you advocate the
elimination
those terms from the English language?
No
Why not? Why is "atheism" invalid, and "apathy" or "astray" is not?
Because they have different meaning. If you said 'atheist' is the one who is
not a theist, I'd agree with that. But when you add a "diety" and a
"belief", it becomes a bogus term, because theism is not about a belief as
they claim it is.
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a
business.
Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for
a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business,
because
that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
So, let me get this staight. Religion is a business, and business
can
get involved in politics, unless it's religion? You make no sense.
Do you see in Always Coca Cola on a dollar bill?
No, not that it matters.
How is business (legally) gets involved in politics, justice system and
government?
-n
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nikolaos D. Bougalis" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 10:33:04 PM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cpreb.2050$%h1.2391@sccrnsc02...
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:Wnqeb.8962$Rd4.1588@fed1read07...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hSleb.380016$2x.117244@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:A6heb.8869$Rd4.1853@fed1read07...
And what exactly is a "bogus term?"
A term, that is used by con artists to justify a con game.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word
"atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
Deity is a reference to a particular kind of entity. It existed
long
before religion.
It was created by religion.
No. The term existed long before religion qua religion was
established.
How do you know.
Because it referred to something that was conceived before religion.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there
are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
We've had this discussion before. You gave the same argument. It
was
wrong then, and it is wrong now.
Its always right.
Why would your baseless assertions about linguistics carry any
weight?
Because I know better.
More baseless assertions...
And by the way, don't you mean "It's"? I thought you were
infallible --
you had just finished telling us that. And you could not get it right.
So you ask.
Ask? I was pointing out your inability to spell properly, in the very
same sentence in which you claim infallibility.
According to your reasoning why do we need
"apathetic" or "atrophic" or "amorphous?" Do you advocate the
elimination
those terms from the English language?
No
Why not? Why is "atheism" invalid, and "apathy" or "astray" is not?
Because they have different meaning. If you said 'atheist' is the one who
is
not a theist, I'd agree with that. But when you add a "diety" and a
"belief", it becomes a bogus term, because theism is not about a belief as
they claim it is.
Wait... up until now, you said religion is not about belief. Now you're
changing, and attack theism in general?
Atheism the doctrine that there are no deities. It's a perfectly valid,
perfectly acceptable definition. That you don't agree with it means
absolutely nothing at all.
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a
business.
Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal
for
a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business,
because
that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a
profit.
A perfect con game.
So, let me get this staight. Religion is a business, and
business
can
get involved in politics, unless it's religion? You make no sense.
Do you see in Always Coca Cola on a dollar bill?
No, not that it matters.
How is business (legally) gets involved in politics, justice system and
government?
I don't see it as involvement of business. The "In God we trust" was
added around 1846 by an act of Congress.
-n
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kermit" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
01 Oct 2003 07:14:48 AM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<cpreb.2050$%h1.2391@sccrnsc02>...
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:Wnqeb.8962$Rd4.1588@fed1read07...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hSleb.380016$2x.117244@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:A6heb.8869$Rd4.1853@fed1read07...
And what exactly is a "bogus term?"
A term, that is used by con artists to justify a con game.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word
"atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
Deity is a reference to a particular kind of entity. It existed
long
before religion.
It was created by religion.
No. The term existed long before religion qua religion was
established.
How do you know.
Some of us read. Nor merely the dictionary, but also history books,
fiction, anthropology, science, and even relgious texts. Newspapers
and news groups, too! There is all sorts of material out there. The
voices in your head are *not a reliable source of information.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there
are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
We've had this discussion before. You gave the same argument. It
was
wrong then, and it is wrong now.
Its always right.
Why would your baseless assertions about linguistics carry any weight?
Because I know better.
And yet... and yet...
You have convinced noone that you even have an idea that can be
disagreed with. You make so little sense that that it is rather like
trying to disagree with a square circle.
You say "religion is a con game". who is being conned? Not you! But
who, then? The congregations of the world? If so, then most theists
are victims, and believers. If not, how can 85% of the world be con
men? Whom are they fooling? You cannot have all sharks and no prey. If
the victims of the con are *not believers, how can they be victims?
And how can a word mean something other than how it is used?
Usually, if anyone here says a word (like "Atheist, for example) is
being misued, they claim either that the misuser is *not using the
standard definition, or that there is a more technical definition
which the majority of people get wrong (like "theory" in science).
You are neither the majority of people, nor a technical expert in
religious philosophy. Other than a bald assertion which is difficult
or impossible to parse, why should we accept your claims?
And by the way, don't you mean "It's"? I thought you were
infallible --
you had just finished telling us that. And you could not get it right.
So you ask.
And yet again, ou fail to answer.
According to your reasoning why do we need
"apathetic" or "atrophic" or "amorphous?" Do you advocate the
elimination
those terms from the English language?
No
Why not? Why is "atheism" invalid, and "apathy" or "astray" is not?
Because they have different meaning. If you said 'atheist' is the one who is
not a theist, I'd agree with that. But when you add a "diety" and a
"belief", it becomes a bogus term, because theism is not about a belief as
they claim it is.
I assure you that nearly all self-proclaimed theists are believers.
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a
business.
Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for
a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business,
because
that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
So, let me get this staight. Religion is a business, and business
can
get involved in politics, unless it's religion? You make no sense.
Do you see in Always Coca Cola on a dollar bill?
No, not that it matters.
How is business (legally) gets involved in politics, justice system and
government?
Do you mean:
How does business get legally involved in politics, the justice
system, and government?
Why wouldn't it? If you are worried about it becoming inappropriately
involved, could you please be a little more specific?
-n
--- Kermit
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dan Baldwin" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 04:40:22 PM |
|
|
Crazyalec wrote:
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:A6heb.8869$Rd4.1853@fed1read07...
And what exactly is a "bogus term?"
A term, that is used by con artists to justify a con game.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word
"atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
Deity is a reference to a particular kind of entity. It existed long
before religion.
It was created by religion.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
We've had this discussion before. You gave the same argument. It was
wrong then, and it is wrong now.
Its always right.
According to your reasoning why do we need
"apathetic" or "atrophic" or "amorphous?" Do you advocate the elimination
those terms from the English language?
No
On what grounds?
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a
business.
Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business, because
that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
So, let me get this staight. Religion is a business, and business can
get involved in politics, unless it's religion? You make no sense.
Do you see in Always Coca Cola on a dollar bill?
What a dull, repetitive fucktard you are. At least you picked an
appropriate 'nym to post with.
--
Dan Baldwin
Hail the un-alive
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kermit" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
01 Oct 2003 06:58:04 AM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<1lceb.639671$o%2.299731@sccrnsc02>...
"Nikolaos D. Bougalis" <nikb@webmaster.com> wrote in message
news:jCbeb.8859$Rd4.8562@fed1read07...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tz8eb.633844$YN5.480501@sccrnsc01...
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by inquisition
to
validate the con game of theism.
All terms are invented. That does not make them invalid.
Bogus terms are invalid.
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you before, the word "atheism"
refers to the doctrine that there are no deities
"Diety" is a religious terminology, created to justify a con game.
and "atheist" refer to
people that adhere to that doctrine.
There is no doctrine, just somebody else's idea. For example there are
people who believe in aliens. Do we need aalienist? What about
acommunists,afascists,astupids,amuslims and so on.
but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state.
Church should be separated from state because religion is a business. Th
eonly way to stop religious hypocrisy is to make it illegal for a
religious
involvement in government, politics and justice system.
Businesses get involved in politics all the time.
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business, because that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
-n
Alec, just because people are wrong doesn't mean they don't believe
something. I assure you that the vast majority of Christians believe
just what they say they believe.
I do not believe in gods, therefore I am an atheist. That's what the
word means. Look it up in a dictionary. Dictionaries tell how a word
is used. How can a word not mean what people (either most people, or
the experts in a field) think it means?
You never answer my questions: If Christianity is "just" a business,
then who are the customers, and what are they buying?
--- Kermit
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Poop Dogg" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
01 Oct 2003 12:08:58 PM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message...
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business, because that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
I agree that religion is a business. I consider religion to be nothing more
than entertainment. A 20-screen movie theater complex has to pay taxes on
its operation, so why not a crystal cathedral?
The American constitution won't allow it, but you all should look at Mexico's
constitution. Although Mexico is rarely a model for anything, its
constitution prohibits religious involvement in the government or political
process. It essentially denies priests, bishops, etc. the right to vote and
also prohibits them from endorsing or condemning candidates or government
policies from the pulpit. Religious publications are also prohibited from
commenting on political subjects.
I don't know if America is ready for these kinds of restrictions. In Mexico
the anti-church restrictions are quite understandable given the Catholic
church's role in Mexican history. The Church condoned the prior system of
wealthy landowners exploiting the people, and also owned huge tracts of land
itself which were worked by serfs. In fact, the Mexican constitution also
prohibits the Church from owning any property other than the physical church
building.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Crazyalec" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
02 Oct 2003 02:34:53 AM |
|
|
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:LrKdndq2XLO2l-aiRTvUqA@bravo.net...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message...
I know that. But religion doesn't want to admit its a business, because
that
would make god a product, that they sell to customers for a profit.
A perfect con game.
I agree that religion is a business.
Good. But what is a product.What is that they sell and advertise?
I consider religion to be nothing more
than entertainment.
Well, when millions of people die because of religious wars and terrorism,
its hardly entertainment.
A 20-screen movie theater complex has to pay taxes on
its operation, so why not a crystal cathedral?
Its not just cathedral. Its an industry, that has to be taxable, and
separated from politics.
The American constitution won't allow it, but you all should look at
Mexico's
constitution. Although Mexico is rarely a model for anything, its
constitution prohibits religious involvement in the government or
political
process. It essentially denies priests, bishops, etc. the right to vote
and
also prohibits them from endorsing or condemning candidates or government
policies from the pulpit. Religious publications are also prohibited from
commenting on political subjects.
Nice.
I don't know if America is ready for these kinds of restrictions.
No. America run by Christian Coalition. Why do you think "God" motto is
still on a dollar bill?
In Mexico
the anti-church restrictions are quite understandable given the Catholic
church's role in Mexican history. The Church condoned the prior system of
wealthy landowners exploiting the people, and also owned huge tracts of
land
itself which were worked by serfs. In fact, the Mexican constitution also
prohibits the Church from owning any property other than the physical
church
building.
Interesting....
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 07:34:16 AM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<Tz8eb.633844$YN5.480501@sccrnsc01>...
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by inquisition to
validate the con game of theism.
Would you just shut up and go away already? What are you? A poorly
programmed bot? Do you think posting this crap as a response to any
and all statements, over and over, will convince anyone? We are the
guys who rejected the religious nutters, remember? What makes you
think using the same techniques will make us we'll accept your
rantings?
jwk
BAAWA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Crazyalec" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 09:59:02 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c6f5ba32.0309300434.597de64f@posting.google.com...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<Tz8eb.633844$YN5.480501@sccrnsc01>...
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by inquisition
to
validate the con game of theism.
Would you just shut up and go away already?
Why do you care? I wasn't talking to you
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
01 Oct 2003 08:47:18 AM |
|
|
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<Wpreb.640917$YN5.491450@sccrnsc01>...
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c6f5ba32.0309300434.597de64f@posting.google.com...
"Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<Tz8eb.633844$YN5.480501@sccrnsc01>...
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by inquisition
to
validate the con game of theism.
Would you just shut up and go away already?
Why do you care? I wasn't talking to you
I really wonder at a mentality that interrupts every conversation to
spew the same thing over and over. Regardless of whether it is
relevant to what is being discussed. All you do is make people sick
of hearing it. You may even be right, but you are just so annoying
that no one cares any more. So I'm curious about how a mind evolves
to work against itself as yours has.
jwk
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 01:52:20 AM |
|
|
9/30/2003, around 07:32:35 AM, Crazyalec wrote:
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by
inquisition to validate the con game of theism.
Yes there is. The term may have been invented as you say, but that only
means that it does indeed exist. Or did they invent a non-existing term?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Crazyalec" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 04:42:49 AM |
|
|
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:EK9eb.3299$d1.1766@nntpserver.swip.net...
9/30/2003, around 07:32:35 AM, Crazyalec wrote:
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by
inquisition to validate the con game of theism.
Yes there is. The term may have been invented as you say, but that only
means that it does indeed exist. Or did they invent a non-existing term?
Yes, they did. Creating a term, that indicates a "non-belief" is bogus,
because a term "theism" is not about a belief, as they claim it is. Its a
con game.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Richardson" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
01 Oct 2003 09:10:52 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:42:49 GMT, "Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com>
wrote:
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:EK9eb.3299$d1.1766@nntpserver.swip.net...
9/30/2003, around 07:32:35 AM, Crazyalec wrote:
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist". A term was invented by
inquisition to validate the con game of theism.
Yes there is. The term may have been invented as you say, but that only
means that it does indeed exist. Or did they invent a non-existing term?
Yes, they did. Creating a term, that indicates a "non-belief" is bogus,
because a term "theism" is not about a belief, as they claim it is. Its a
con game.
And something cant be two things at once.
For example an orange cannot be simultaneously a fruit and a
collection of organic molecules.
Right?
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle aged Atheists with a Sense of Humour)
-----------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Richardson" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 01:40:40 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 05:32:35 GMT, "Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com>
wrote:
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist".
Every single human being on the planet worships a god of some kind -
no exceptions?
You are a bloody lunatic.
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle aged Atheists with a Sense of Humour)
-----------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Crazyalec" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 04:40:25 AM |
|
|
"Mark Richardson" <mark.richardson@die.spammers.die> wrote in message
news:pb9invgm2f3fl3ccn2aecq9n1fi049dgl6@4ax.com...
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 05:32:35 GMT, "Crazyalec" <oleka2000@yahoo.com>
wrote:
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist,
There is no such thing as "atheist".
Every single human being on the planet worships a god of some kind -
no exceptions?
Whats that got to do with a fact, that a term "atheist" is bogus?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 01:55:31 AM |
|
|
Apparently religious atheists did contribute a LOT of money to mm ohair.
ohair took these gullible atheists for all she could - various reports are
that
she had stashed away 1/2 million in gold coins and maxed out numerous
credit cards and on and on.... her atheist former office manager - who knew
all about mm ohairs money and stashes wanted it for himself - he then
chopped
up her and her atheist son and his wife and stuffed em in barrels. She had
another son who became a Christian minister and he of course survived -
he was not really speaking to 'mom' :) . bob
"Poop Dogg" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DeidnXgVPLBNneSiRTvUqg@bravo.net...
I'm not really an atheist, but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state. I also believe
that the constitution be amended to guarantee freedom FROM religion, but
that's for another thread.
Anyway, is American Atheists, the group founded by Madilyn Murray O'Hair
still in operation since her murder several years ago? I heard that
the killer forced the O'Hairs to empty AA's treasury, converting it to
gold and silver coins.
If still in existence, what kind of resources and influence does it still
possess? Have other organizations taken over some of its functions? I
did come across the Freedom From Religion Foundation, it sounds like it
might have promise as a lobbying organization.
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity,
particularly
Christianity and Islam.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 11:46:25 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:55:31 -0700, "bob" <nowave@speakeasy.net>
posted in alt.atheism:
Apparently religious atheists did contribute a LOT of money to mm ohair.
ohair took these gullible atheists for all she could - various reports are
that
she had stashed away 1/2 million in gold coins and maxed out numerous
credit cards and on and on.... her atheist former office manager
Except that he wasn't an atheist.
--
"I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be under-
stood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can
comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of
humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism."
- 1954 or 1955; quoted in Dukas and Hoffman _Albert Einstein the Human Side_, p. 39
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Guest Pest" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 03:53:26 AM |
|
|
On 09/30/2003 12:04 AM, Poop Dogg previously said:
I'm not really an atheist, but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state. I also believe
that the constitution be amended to guarantee freedom FROM religion, but
that's for another thread.
Anyway, is American Atheists, the group founded by Madilyn Murray O'Hair
still in operation since her murder several years ago? I heard that
the killer forced the O'Hairs to empty AA's treasury, converting it to
gold and silver coins.
These links may answer most of your questions.
American Atheists website: http://www.atheists.org/
An Introduction to the O'Hair Family (from June, 2000):
http://www.atheists.org/visitors.center/OHairFamily/
My San Antonio: Extras: The O'Hair Case:
http://www.mysa.com/mysanantonio/extras/ohair/
If still in existence, what kind of resources and influence does it still
possess? Have other organizations taken over some of its functions? I
did come across the Freedom From Religion Foundation, it sounds like it
might have promise as a lobbying organization.
Yes, that would be here: http://www.ffrf.org/
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity, particularly
Christianity and Islam.
OK, Don Quixote. ;-)
--
_T o m_
/a/./a/#1253
guestpest /at/ yahoo /dot/ com
_____________________________________________________________
"Mysticism is a disease of the mind."
-- Stix (alt.atheism)
_____________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 07:30:17 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:53:26 +0000, Guest Pest wrote:
On 09/30/2003 12:04 AM, Poop Dogg previously said:
I'm not really an atheist, but I am extremely anti-religious and support
the atheist goal of total separation of church and state. I also believe
that the constitution be amended to guarantee freedom FROM religion, but
that's for another thread.
Anyway, is American Atheists, the group founded by Madilyn Murray O'Hair
still in operation since her murder several years ago? I heard that
the killer forced the O'Hairs to empty AA's treasury, converting it to
gold and silver coins.
These links may answer most of your questions.
American Atheists website: http://www.atheists.org/
An Introduction to the O'Hair Family (from June, 2000):
http://www.atheists.org/visitors.center/OHairFamily/
My San Antonio: Extras: The O'Hair Case:
http://www.mysa.com/mysanantonio/extras/ohair/
If still in existence, what kind of resources and influence does it still
possess? Have other organizations taken over some of its functions? I
did come across the Freedom From Religion Foundation, it sounds like it
might have promise as a lobbying organization.
Yes, that would be here: http://www.ffrf.org/
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity, particularly
Christianity and Islam.
OK, Don Quixote. ;-)
Yeah, rather...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
From alt.atheism only
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 07:29:03 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:04:30 -0500, Poop Dogg wrote:
Anyway, is American Atheists, the group founded by Madilyn Murray O'Hair
still in operation since her murder several years ago?
Yes. I'm a member in fact. They're over here:
http://www.atheists.org/
--
Mark K. Bilbo
From alt.atheism only
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
30 Sep 2003 07:29:44 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:04:30 -0500, Poop Dogg wrote:
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity, particularly
Christianity and Islam.
How?
--
Mark K. Bilbo
From alt.atheism only
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: American Atheists? |
01 Oct 2003 04:23:28 PM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <iskanipa-y@hoo.com> thought hard and said:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:04:30 -0500, Poop Dogg wrote:
I'd like to start my own group, perhaps called the "Anti-Religion League,"
which would be devoted to stamping out ALL religious activity, particularly
Christianity and Islam.
How?
Do you not support freedom of religion, Mark?
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 15 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, and Gustav Mahler are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
