| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Bruce" |
| Date: |
29 Dec 2004 04:36:40 PM |
| Object: |
Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:59:00 -0900, "Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)"
<vgorilla@pobox.alaska.net> wrote in message
<erh4t0lfq60mj6jgpbua9n8hljo4hus31o@4ax.com>:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 23:55:32 GMT, "Douglas D. Anderson"
"Steven M (remove wax and invalid to reply)" <unspam@hal-pcwax.org.invalid> wrote
Je Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:56:03 -0600, <subscribe@KenFuny.com>(KenFuny)
skribis:
DID YOU KNOW...
The human heart creates enough pressure when
it pumps out to the body to squirt blood 30 feet.
(Oh My God!)
That can't be.
Try it. Get a big hypo needle and jam it into your heart.
If your blood has enough cholesterol in it, it doesn't really squirt
at all.
Leonardo da Vinci first observed cholesterol. At the time, he was dissecting
corpses while staying in Rome (in the Vatican state). The Pope considered
that what he was doing was heretical. All his medical writings were
confiscated and only rediscovered much later when others had already
duplicated his research efforts.
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
.
|
|
| User: "Jim07D4" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
29 Dec 2004 05:53:20 PM |
|
|
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
.......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
Jim07D4
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
29 Dec 2004 07:56:28 PM |
|
|
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
31 Dec 2004 04:21:20 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:56:28 -0700, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
If only.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DJ" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
29 Dec 2004 10:31:05 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:56:28 -0700, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
You make the assumption that atheists are always rational, but they
can be just as fanatical as fundimentalist Christians or Muslums.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 02:41:28 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:31:05 -0500, DJ <1@2.3> said in alt.atheism:
You make the assumption that atheists are always rational, but they
can be just as fanatical as fundimentalist Christians or Muslums.
How does not believing in one of many gods make one fanatical? VERY
FEW people believe in more than one (or one set of) god(s). Does that
mean that they're all fanatical DUE TO their lack of belief?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
29 Dec 2004 10:35:17 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:31:05 -0500, DJ <1@2.3> wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:56:28 -0700, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
You make the assumption that atheists are always rational, but they
can be just as fanatical as fundimentalist Christians or Muslums.
They've got nothing to be fanatical about.
But too many religious extremists can't live and let live, and lie
about the reaction to that being fanatical atheism.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D4" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 12:53:42 PM |
|
|
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
Those who step up to lead a people to utopia seem never to get around
to stepping back down, and the interregnum is often more oppressive
than what was being purged -- except to those in charge. At a minimum
I'd expect to see continuous policing against closet theists. Exactly
what actions would be declared impeachable offenses?
Jim07D4
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 02:50:52 PM |
|
|
In article <shi8t0h4fth4hjntko9aaruseunj6g2vhh@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
Those who step up to lead a people to utopia seem never to get around
to stepping back down, and the interregnum is often more oppressive
than what was being purged -- except to those in charge. At a minimum
I'd expect to see continuous policing against closet theists. Exactly
what actions would be declared impeachable offenses?
Then you can at least be equally suspicious of theocrats trying to
create their religious utopias and freepers trying to create their
libertarian wet-dream societies. I'd suggest that atheists are the only
ones who can liberate humanity of the severe excess baggage of
irrational superstition and that the rewards would be well worth the
risk. If a lot of religious zealots ended up dying in the process then
I suspect that this would make the world a better place anyway.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 04:06:59 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:50:52 -0700, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com>
said in alt.atheism:
I'd suggest that atheists are the only
ones who can liberate humanity of the severe excess baggage of
irrational superstition and that the rewards would be well worth the
risk. If a lot of religious zealots ended up dying in the process then
I suspect that this would make the world a better place anyway.
It would just be more support for the theory of survival of the
fittest. (Not that such an obvious truth needs support.) If the
religious zealots can't live without forcing their religion on others,
so be it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mel" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 09:15:51 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:50:52 -0700, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote
in message <MPG.1c3e181b75056118989b0d@news.individual.net>:
If a lot of religious zealots ended up dying in the process then
I suspect that this would make the world a better place anyway.
true. war between religions should be encouraged until all the religious are
dead.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
Cape Town news
http://adderleystreet.co.za/capetown/
.
|
|
|
| User: "G.P. of A.T.J." |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
31 Dec 2004 06:52:19 AM |
|
|
"Mel" <mel@atj.fag.com> wrote in message
news:4ng9t09vr0eo8b3raq7tvj0ujt1mk0umhk@4ax.com...
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:50:52 -0700, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote
in message <MPG.1c3e181b75056118989b0d@news.individual.net>:
If a lot of religious zealots ended up dying in the process then
I suspect that this would make the world a better place anyway.
true. war between religions should be encouraged until all the religious
are
dead.
that'd just about leave you all by youself wouldn't it fag boy.
Long But Silent
A guy is sitting all alone at a bar, the bartender looks at him and laughs.
The man shrugs it off... The bartender looks at him and laughs again, the
barteneder finnaly went over to the man and said "I'm sorry but you have to
be the ugliest man that I have ever seen." The man replied by saying I dont
think so. I can get any lady that I want. The bartender looks around and
sees a hot big titted blond sitting at the table with her huge boyfriend,
and tells the ugly man that he bet $50 that he couldnt get the woman to even
talk to him. The ugly man agrees and says "I'll bet another $50 that I can
walk straight out the door with her. The bartender accepted. The ugly man
walked over the girl jumped into his arms and they walked out the door. The
bartender went over to the boyfriend and said, "damn that sucks but what
happened?" The man replied with "I dont know. He just stood there licking
his eyebrows."
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfag.com
http://www.atjfag.com/
Fag Town news
http://adderleystreet.co.za/capetown/
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D4" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 03:25:20 PM |
|
|
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <shi8t0h4fth4hjntko9aaruseunj6g2vhh@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
Those who step up to lead a people to utopia seem never to get around
to stepping back down, and the interregnum is often more oppressive
than what was being purged -- except to those in charge. At a minimum
I'd expect to see continuous policing against closet theists. Exactly
what actions would be declared impeachable offenses?
Then you can at least be equally suspicious of theocrats trying to
create their religious utopias and freepers trying to create their
libertarian wet-dream societies.
Utopianism in general, if fanatically pursued or used as window
dressing for totalitarianism.
I'd suggest that *atheists* are the only
ones who can liberate humanity of the severe excess baggage of
*irrational superstition* and that the rewards would be well worth the
risk. If a lot of *religious zealots* ended up dying in the process then
I suspect that this would make the world a better place anyway.
I have placed ** around the words in the above that could be taken out
and replaced with certain others, like:
Christians ... secular humanism ... atheists.
Muslims .... imperialistic capitalism ... infidels.
Anarchists ... government interference ... welfare statists.
The danger is in the sentiment.
Jim07D4
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 04:38:16 PM |
|
|
In article <ijr8t05poj2d96kq66vgoah0eac17oq8ls@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <shi8t0h4fth4hjntko9aaruseunj6g2vhh@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
Those who step up to lead a people to utopia seem never to get around
to stepping back down, and the interregnum is often more oppressive
than what was being purged -- except to those in charge. At a minimum
I'd expect to see continuous policing against closet theists. Exactly
what actions would be declared impeachable offenses?
Then you can at least be equally suspicious of theocrats trying to
create their religious utopias and freepers trying to create their
libertarian wet-dream societies.
Utopianism in general, if fanatically pursued or used as window
dressing for totalitarianism.
I'd suggest that *atheists* are the only
ones who can liberate humanity of the severe excess baggage of
*irrational superstition* and that the rewards would be well worth the
risk. If a lot of *religious zealots* ended up dying in the process then
I suspect that this would make the world a better place anyway.
I have placed ** around the words in the above that could be taken out
and replaced with certain others, like:
Christians ... secular humanism ... atheists.
You incorrectly assume that because you recognize a pattern where other
people have made similar arguments with different variables that somehow
my claim cannot be true either. The specific variables are what makes
all the difference. The claims of the various theists, for example,
were made with delusional and magical assumptions about the world.
Atheists do not have these delusional or magical assumptions. Forcing
people to be atheists and rely on science would actually benefit them,
whereas forcing everyone to be bible-thumpers would get them nowhere.
I'm not suggesting that I would advocate forcing people, but it
illustrates the point that the content of ones cause matters. Do you
think that all causes are somehow the same? If not then it doesn't
follow that using the same strategy to advance a different result will
be doomed to failure, even if previous people have failed in similar
efforts.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D4" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 05:35:52 PM |
|
|
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <ijr8t05poj2d96kq66vgoah0eac17oq8ls@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <shi8t0h4fth4hjntko9aaruseunj6g2vhh@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
In article <nqg6t0996bdfjf2f5u35t9q37t1eniqbvm@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
......
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
No, actually, it would make the world a utopia of rationalism.
Those who step up to lead a people to utopia seem never to get around
to stepping back down, and the interregnum is often more oppressive
than what was being purged -- except to those in charge. At a minimum
I'd expect to see continuous policing against closet theists. Exactly
what actions would be declared impeachable offenses?
Then you can at least be equally suspicious of theocrats trying to
create their religious utopias and freepers trying to create their
libertarian wet-dream societies.
Utopianism in general, if fanatically pursued or used as window
dressing for totalitarianism.
I'd suggest that *atheists* are the only
ones who can liberate humanity of the severe excess baggage of
*irrational superstition* and that the rewards would be well worth the
risk. If a lot of *religious zealots* ended up dying in the process then
I suspect that this would make the world a better place anyway.
I have placed ** around the words in the above that could be taken out
and replaced with certain others, like:
Christians ... secular humanism ... atheists.
You incorrectly assume that because you recognize a pattern where other
people have made similar arguments with different variables that somehow
my claim cannot be true either.
I reject the sentiment expressed starting with "I'd suggest that..."
and ending with "a better place anyway" because allowing people to act
on that sentiment is disgusting to me.
The specific variables are what makes
all the difference. The claims of the various theists, for example,
were made with delusional and magical assumptions about the world.
Atheists do not have these delusional or magical assumptions. Forcing
people to be atheists and rely on science would actually benefit them,
whereas forcing everyone to be bible-thumpers would get them nowhere.
Not forcing them to be either would be better for them in my opinion.
I'm not suggesting that I would advocate forcing people, but it
illustrates the point that the content of ones cause matters. Do you
think that all causes are somehow the same? If not then it doesn't
follow that using the same strategy to advance a different result will
be doomed to failure, even if previous people have failed in similar
efforts.
I disapprove of the strategy, period.
Jim07D4
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Burns" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 05:49:55 PM |
|
|
quibbler wrote:
In article <ijr8t05poj2d96kq66vgoah0eac17oq8ls@4ax.com>,
Jim07D4@nospam.net says...
quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> said:
I'd suggest that *atheists* are the only
ones who can liberate humanity of the severe excess baggage
of *irrational superstition* and that the rewards would be
well worth the risk. If a lot of *religious zealots* ended up
dying in the process then I suspect that this would make the
world a better place anyway.
I have placed ** around the words in the above that could be
taken out and replaced with certain others, like:
Christians ... secular humanism ... atheists.
You incorrectly assume that because you recognize a pattern
where other people have made similar arguments with different
variables that somehow my claim cannot be true either. The
specific variables are what makes all the difference. The claims
of the various theists, for example, were made with delusional
and magical assumptions about the world. Atheists do not have
these delusional or magical assumptions. Forcing people to be
atheists and rely on science would actually benefit them, whereas
forcing everyone to be bible-thumpers would get them nowhere.
I'm not suggesting that I would advocate forcing people,
Then, I think you should clarify what you mean by "If a lot of
*religious zealots* ended up dying in the process then I suspect
that this would make the world a better place anyway." Perhaps
you envision these zealots volunteering to die?
but it
illustrates the point that the content of ones cause matters. Do
you think that all causes are somehow the same? If not then it
doesn't follow that using the same strategy to advance a
different result will be doomed to failure, even if previous
people have failed in similar efforts.
The content of one's cause matters, more than you seem to realize.
Some causes cannot be won by certain means. The means destroy
the cause in the process of "winning" it. The point to rationalism,
perhaps the only point to rationalism, is that it substitutes
the force of arguments for the force of arms. "Our theories
die in place of ourselves," as I believe Karl Popper said.
I'm not suggesting that, if the day comes that the fundies come for
you and your family, you should just non-violently explain why
their concept of God is ridiculous. Shoot back! Hell, yes!
But don't think you're striking a blow for rationality. You're
fighting to stay alive. Rationality would have died earlier,
anyway.
Jim "Not Jim07D4" Burns
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 07:09:50 PM |
|
|
In article <41D49423.15BA1212@osu.edu>, says...
Perhaps you envision these zealots volunteering to die?
Religious zealots often volunteer to die or engage in similarly
irresponsible and self-destructive behavior. What I'm saying is that
hypothetically speaking I believe the world would be a better place
without them. That doesn't mean that I would try to eliminate them,
however. Do you understand what a counterfactual scenario is?
but it
illustrates the point that the content of ones cause matters. Do
you think that all causes are somehow the same? If not then it
doesn't follow that using the same strategy to advance a
different result will be doomed to failure, even if previous
people have failed in similar efforts.
The content of one's cause matters, more than you seem to realize.
Some causes cannot be won by certain means. The means destroy
the cause in the process of "winning" it. The point to rationalism,
perhaps the only point to rationalism, is that it substitutes
the force of arguments for the force of arms.
Force of arms is separate issue. But the fact that it is separate does
not mean that it could never have an effect which advanced rationalist
causes. What if your opponent is completely irrational and prone to
violence. By defending yourself from this persons attack you have have
to use violence. In the process you make the world a more rational
place for your opponents absence.
"Our theories
die in place of ourselves," as I believe Karl Popper said.
Which is fine, but not the point. Our arguments may not even get a
hearing, despite their merits. In other words your scenario is far from
comprehensive.
I'm not suggesting that, if the day comes that the fundies come for
you and your family, you should just non-violently explain why
their concept of God is ridiculous. Shoot back! Hell, yes!
But don't think you're striking a blow for rationality.
But it can have that effect, at least indirectly, because rational
people will hopefully be preserved and irrational ones eliminated.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vanilla Gorilla Monkey Boy" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 10:40:46 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:49:55 -0500, Jim Burns <burns.87@osu.edu> wrote
in message <41D49423.15BA1212@osu.edu>:
hen, I think you should clarify
Yes, in a newsgroup that GIVES A *****, might be a great place to
start.
--
V.G.
Change pobox dot alaska to gci.
"Actually the Law of Conservation of Energy proves there's free energy." - Professor Alexa connects some brand new dots.
Sarcasm is my sword, Apathy is my shield.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bruce" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
31 Dec 2004 05:25:53 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:49:55 -0500, Jim Burns <burns.87@osu.edu> wrote in
message <41D49423.15BA1212@osu.edu>:
I'm not suggesting that, if the day comes that the fundies come for
you and your family, you should just non-violently explain why
their concept of God is ridiculous. Shoot back! Hell, yes!
But don't think you're striking a blow for rationality. You're
fighting to stay alive. Rationality would have died earlier,
anyway.
Jim "Not Jim07D4" Burns
Fundamentalists are not interested in any discussion. They are convinced
that they are right.
I feel sorry most for those who are unable to entertain doubts.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas D. Anderson" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
31 Dec 2004 09:12:59 AM |
|
|
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> wrote
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:49:55 -0500, Jim Burns <burns.87@osu.edu> wrote in
message <41D49423.15BA1212@osu.edu>:
I'm not suggesting that, if the day comes that the fundies come for
you and your family, you should just non-violently explain why
their concept of God is ridiculous. Shoot back! Hell, yes!
But don't think you're striking a blow for rationality. You're
fighting to stay alive. Rationality would have died earlier,
anyway.
Jim "Not Jim07D4" Burns
Fundamentalists are not interested in any discussion. They are convinced
that they are right.
In a course in systems analysis I took quite a few years ago, a golden truth
was brought out that still stands true. If a system is basically working and
you think you've got a better idea, don't shut everything down, implement
your "better" idea and watch the new and improved system in all its glory...
because chances are it won't work at all. It's best to develop your "better"
system in a small controlled environment until it works perfectly, then try
implementing it in a small area of the real world to evaluate its impact and
real world operation. Then if its broke, you can back off and return to the
drawing board, without irrecoverably fucking everything up including the
lives of everyone involved.
Well imagine that! that should be obvious to anyone with common sense,
you might say...
But isn't that exactly what the idiots in government love to do, just run into
some foreign culture with a half baked imaginary plan and then start
shooting locals when it doesn't work?
The fundamentalist reaction is a perfectly valid resistance to that sort of
idiocy, the fundamentalist knows that most new ideas suck and just make
things worse. What has survived for thousands of years is probably more
likely to work into the future than what some crack head politicians just
thought up yesterday.
I feel sorry most for those who are unable to entertain doubts.
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
31 Dec 2004 01:18:14 PM |
|
|
In article <%%dBd.51132$DQ3.19384@twister.nyroc.rr.com>,
dda@rr.rochester.com says...
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> wrote
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:49:55 -0500, Jim Burns <burns.87@osu.edu> wrote in
message <41D49423.15BA1212@osu.edu>:
I'm not suggesting that, if the day comes that the fundies come for
you and your family, you should just non-violently explain why
their concept of God is ridiculous. Shoot back! Hell, yes!
But don't think you're striking a blow for rationality. You're
fighting to stay alive. Rationality would have died earlier,
anyway.
Jim "Not Jim07D4" Burns
Fundamentalists are not interested in any discussion. They are convinced
that they are right.
In a course in systems analysis I took quite a few years ago, a golden truth
was brought out that still stands true. If a system is basically working and
you think you've got a better idea, don't shut everything down,
Nobody said you have to "shut everything down". It's only your straw
man argument that suggests that doubt is equivalent to shutting
everything down. Many people can still believe that some of the
teachings attributed to jesus in the gospels are good ideas, even though
they doubt that he was divine, or perhaps doubt that he was ever more
than a fictional character. Thus, it's easy to show that you don't need
to shut everything down if the doubt the veracity of one premise or
another.
implement
your "better" idea and watch the new and improved system in all its glory...
because chances are it won't work at all. It's best to develop your "better"
system in a small controlled environment until it works perfectly, then try
implementing it in a small area of the real world to evaluate its impact and
real world operation.
That's what most skeptics do. They test the system by challenging
certain small, particular area and see if it improves anything. If it
doesn't help then they can easily go back to the default assumption
about the one variable they tried to modify.
But isn't that exactly what the idiots in government love to do,
Not all governments and, in any event, you need to have some
alternative. Especially when things aren't going so great to start
with, it's often worth the risk to make intelligent tweaks and hope it
will improve things. These changes are not necessarily irrevocable, if
they end up not helping or making things worse.
The fundamentalist reaction is a perfectly valid resistance to that sort of
idiocy,
No, it is not perfectly legitimate because there was often never any
evidence that the system worked well to begin with. They created a
bunch of superstition and intimidated others into going along with it.
Eventually all the lies accumulate and become a serious handicap upon
all parties involved. But the fundies continue to thump their bible,
which has been discredited repeatedly just about every time science
advances and claim that it's not broke or in need of fixing. They're
simply wrong and if they want to cast aside reasoned discourse in favor
of a game of smashface then I'm not above bashing them before they bash
me.
the fundamentalist knows that most new ideas suck and just make
things worse.
That is truly the most moronic, medieval drivel on the planet. You can
speak for yourself, but there are lots of new ideas all the time that
are good. Again, you assume that we can afford to be finicky because
we've got a good thing going and don't want to break it. But actually,
the wolves are nipping at our heels, just like they did with our caveman
ancestors. It might seem a bit more comfortable in the modern world,
but overpopulation, dwindling fuel supplies, global warming, evolving
diseases, etc are real problem and need real, original thinking to
solve. Just praying for god to kiss the boo-boo and make it better
hasn't worked well before and it won't work now. We can't afford to
rest on our laurels or attempt to return to some fantasy golden era that
never was.
What has survived for thousands of years is probably more
likely to work into the future
Not true. Perhaps hundreds or thousands of years ago you could rely
upon things not changing much and therefore old solutions and traditions
seemed to work pretty well. But the modern world is changing
exponentially and we can't just ignore it or rail about we want to get
off the merry-go-round and stop all scientific progress. If we retreat
from the cutting edge then our competitors will overtake us and eat our
lunch for us. In a dynamic world the stone age traditions of thousands
of years ago often are too overly-simplistic to be relevant for many
modern contexts. Traditions that helped in the past can now be
millstones around our necks.
Xenophobia, for example, worked well in the past, because the risks of
trusting outsiders were greater than the rewards. Now, for the most
part, the opposite is true. We can function and thrive in isolation.
Traditions like purdah, burkahs, dietary restrictions, male or female
circumcision, etc might have worked well in tribal society, but they are
a positive harm today.
than what some crack head politicians just
thought up yesterday.
One day someone might ask you to go to the halls of government and use
all your vast wisdom to help solve problems. Then you'll be one of
those vilified crackhead politicians that know-nothings love to hate.
We can diss on politicians and lawyers and bureaucrats all we want, but
unless we really have a way of getting along in a society of laws
without them, then it's just useless sound and fury for people to whine
about.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Zoogar, ruler of the Zerg" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
29 Dec 2004 09:18:18 PM |
|
|
Jim07D4 wrote:
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That
is why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political
opinion fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to
ensure separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold
political office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
Jim07D4
cool. i vote for that.
--
zoogar
http://www.atjfaq.com/
http://adderleystreet.co.za/capetown/
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.806 / Virus Database: 548 - Release Date: 05/12/04
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D4" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 12:56:40 PM |
|
|
"Zoogar, ruler of the Zerg" <zoogar@mailinator.com> said:
Jim07D4 wrote:
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That
is why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political
opinion fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to
ensure separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold
political office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
Jim07D4
cool. i vote for that.
TV Announcer: The following is a public service announcement:
Excessive alcohol consumption can cause liver damage and cancer of the
rectum.
Homer: Mmmm.... beer.
Jim07D4
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mel" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 08:22:16 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:56:40 GMT, Jim07D4 <Jim07D4@nospam.net> wrote in
message <slj8t0p8tedqnvjhcvqudfcvee6bo2ukeu@4ax.com>:
"Zoogar, ruler of the Zerg" <zoogar@mailinator.com> said:
Jim07D4 wrote:
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That
is why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political
opinion fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to
ensure separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold
political office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
Jim07D4
cool. i vote for that.
TV Announcer: The following is a public service announcement:
Excessive alcohol consumption can cause liver damage and cancer of the
rectum.
Homer: Mmmm.... beer.
Jim07D4
Zoogar is nuts. he'd vote for eating his own mother if she was still alive.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
Cape Town news
http://adderleystreet.co.za/capetown/
.
|
|
|
| User: "G.P. of A.T.J." |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
31 Dec 2004 06:51:04 AM |
|
|
"Mel" <mel@atj.fag.com> wrote in message
news:7a59t058f47k8j5782f1g7ahqfdrhcbf2g@4ax.com...
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:56:40 GMT, Jim07D4 <Jim07D4@nospam.net> wrote in
message <slj8t0p8tedqnvjhcvqudfcvee6bo2ukeu@4ax.com>:
"Zoogar, ruler of the Zerg" <zoogar@mailinator.com> said:
Jim07D4 wrote:
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science.
That
is why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political
opinion fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to
ensure separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to
hold
political office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
Jim07D4
cool. i vote for that.
TV Announcer: The following is a public service announcement:
Excessive alcohol consumption can cause liver damage and cancer of the
rectum.
Homer: Mmmm.... beer.
Jim07D4
Zoogar is nuts. he'd vote for eating his own mother if she was still
alive.
you'd eat anything that didn't eat you first fag boy.
Long But Silent
A guy is sitting all alone at a bar, the bartender looks at him and laughs.
The man shrugs it off... The bartender looks at him and laughs again, the
barteneder finnaly went over to the man and said "I'm sorry but you have to
be the ugliest man that I have ever seen." The man replied by saying I dont
think so. I can get any lady that I want. The bartender looks around and
sees a hot big titted blond sitting at the table with her huge boyfriend,
and tells the ugly man that he bet $50 that he couldnt get the woman to even
talk to him. The ugly man agrees and says "I'll bet another $50 that I can
walk straight out the door with her. The bartender accepted. The ugly man
walked over the girl jumped into his arms and they walked out the door. The
bartender went over to the boyfriend and said, "damn that sucks but what
happened?" The man replied with "I dont know. He just stood there licking
his eyebrows."
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfag.com
http://www.atjfag.com/
Fag Town news
http://adderleystreet.co.za/capetown/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas D. Anderson" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 08:31:37 PM |
|
|
"Mel" <mel@atj.faq.com> wrote
Zoogar is nuts. he'd vote for eating his own mother if she was still alive.
SRPOTY
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mel" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
31 Dec 2004 09:39:27 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:31:37 GMT, "Douglas D. Anderson"
<dda@rr.rochester.com> wrote in message
<dS2Bd.108045$AL5.56276@twister.nyroc.rr.com>:
"Mel" <mel@atj.faq.com> wrote
Zoogar is nuts. he'd vote for eating his own mother if she was still alive.
SRPOTY
no, Zoogar. that's Z-o-o-g-a-r.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
Cape Town news
http://adderleystreet.co.za/capetown/
.
|
|
|
| User: "G.P. of A.T.J." |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
31 Dec 2004 10:37:18 AM |
|
|
"Mel" <mel@atj.fag.com> wrote in message
news:tjfat0he71312pj24pjauhq7il3o80pd2o@4ax.com...
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:31:37 GMT, "Douglas D. Anderson"
<dda@rr.rochester.com> wrote in message
<dS2Bd.108045$AL5.56276@twister.nyroc.rr.com>:
"Mel" <mel@atj.fag.com> wrote
Zoogar is nuts. he'd vote for eating his own mother if she was still
alive.
SRPOTY
no, Zoogar. that's Z-o-o-g-a-r.
it's really fag boy mel fag boy.
Long But Silent
A guy is sitting all alone at a bar, the bartender looks at him and laughs.
The man shrugs it off... The bartender looks at him and laughs again, the
barteneder finnaly went over to the man and said "I'm sorry but you have to
be the ugliest man that I have ever seen." The man replied by saying I dont
think so. I can get any lady that I want. The bartender looks around and
sees a hot big titted blond sitting at the table with her huge boyfriend,
and tells the ugly man that he bet $50 that he couldnt get the woman to even
talk to him. The ugly man agrees and says "I'll bet another $50 that I can
walk straight out the door with her. The bartender accepted. The ugly man
walked over the girl jumped into his arms and they walked out the door. The
bartender went over to the boyfriend and said, "damn that sucks but what
happened?" The man replied with "I dont know. He just stood there licking
his eyebrows."
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfag.com
http://www.atjfag.com/
Fag Town news
http://adderleystreet.co.za/capetown/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "G.P. of A.T.J." |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
04 Jan 2005 01:00:52 PM |
|
|
"Zoogar, ruler of the Zerg" <zoogar@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:33habcF41297aU1@individual.net...
Jim07D4 wrote:
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That
is why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political
opinion fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to
ensure separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold
political office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
Jim07D4
cool. i vote for that.
why don't you vote for your execution fag boy.
Scott and Glenn were out hunting. They decided to separate to get a better
chance of catching something.
Scott said to Glenn, "If you get lost, fire three shots into the air every
hour. That way I can locate you."
After about 3 hours, Glenn found that he was really lost. He decided to fire
three shots into the air like Scott told him. He then waited an hour and did
it again. He repeated this until he was out of ammo.
The next morning, Scott found him with the help of forest rangers. He asked
Glenn if he had followed the instructions.
Glenn answered, "Yes, I fired three shots into the air every hour on the
hour until I ran out of arrows."
--
zoogar
http://www.atjfag.com/
http://adderleystreet.co.za/capetown/
---
Outgoing mail is certified not to be Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.806 / Virus Database: 548 - Release Date: 05/12/04
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 02:42:25 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:53:20 GMT, Jim07D4 <Jim07D4@nospam.net> said in
alt.atheism:
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
How would lack of belief in one more god destroy anything other than
religion itself?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D4" |
|
| Title: Re: Leonardo da Vinci and the Pope |
30 Dec 2004 03:47:16 PM |
|
|
Al Klein <CellPhones@optonline.com> said:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:53:20 GMT, Jim07D4 <Jim07D4@nospam.net> said in
alt.atheism:
"Bruce" <bruce@bruce.com> said:
Religion has always interposed itself between mankind and science. That is
why it must be silenced and sidelined in this modern age. Political opinion
fueled by religion must be reduced to nothing. The only way to ensure
separation of state and church is to allow only atheists to hold political
office.
And bringing that about would destroy the village in order to save it.
How would lack of belief in one more god destroy anything other than
religion itself?
I think what Bruce put forward would bring about either:
1. A permanent version of the worst of current Iraq, or
2. A permanent version of Nazi Germany, complete with camps.
Or some combination of them.
Jim07D4
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
