| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Carol" |
| Date: |
14 May 2004 01:34:58 PM |
| Object: |
My Conclusion... |
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
It seems instead to be more of a vague collective.
Although you all have reccolecting viewpoints, most of you think that
meat doesn't require a moment's thought -- it is there to benefit you,
the farmer, your family and is part of the background like the sea and
the moon.
You don't think it is worthy of considering if it is worthy of
justifying so you don't either way.
Ask yourselfs this question on abortion -- you say the difference
between a human and an animal is the brain and that is why you eat one
and not the other, but why wern't fetuses brang to the slaughter and
sold as meat?
Carol
.
|
|
| User: "Puck Greenman" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 03:44:19 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 15:57:03 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
Or maybe some chicken-fried steak from an *old* country cookbook: "Pound
as much flour as possible into thin round steaks,
Now there is a trick I'd like to see. (:-)
Puck Greenman
#162
BAAWA Knight.
Blesed is the self righteous xtian,
for his is the sure and certain knowledge
that no matter what load of tripe he
comes out with:
God told him to say it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 07:35:32 PM |
|
|
In article <37f3d936.0406110657.5b205ef8@posting.google.com>,
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk says...
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message news:<Xns94FF8D245575Bfstone69@207.69.154.204>...
Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote in
news:74nwc.5179$H4.250@www.newsranger.com:
In article <sho3c09pksbtv8uef0fcqk7rkrd20rscb2@4ax.com>, Spooked
says...
walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote:
walksalone who is fixing to set down to eggs, taters & a slab of ham,
juicy ham, with red eye gravy.
<slobber(2) - drool(1a) - pant(2)>
But, what the heck is "red eye" gravy? ;)
http://southernfood.about.com/library/rec03/bl30326s.htm
Ham And Red Eye Gravy
* 1/4 cup butter
* 4 slices of country ham, with a little fat around the edges, about
1/4-inch thick
* 1 cup strong freshly brewed black coffee
In a large, well-seasoned skillet, warm the butter over low heat. Slice
ham steaks around edges to keep them from curling while cooking. Place
ham steaks in the butter in the pan. Cook ham until the edges brown
slightly; turn to cook the other side. Add the brewed coffee, and raise
the heat to high, bringing it to a boil. Boil until the liquid is
reduced to about a quarter of its original amount and a nice glaze has
formed on the ham. Serve immediately, topped with a little of the red
eye gravy.
***
Never tried it but boiled coffee sounds horrible :(
Hand up who thinks we are drifting from the subject?
What was the subject? That eating meat is bad? That atheists eat meat?
That atheists don't or shouldn't eat meat? That Australian vegetarian
atheists living in Great Britain are nuts?
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
"Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for
everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections
are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence
to religious principles"
James D. Watson
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/watson-bio.html
"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that `You,' your joys and
your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your
sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no
more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells
and their associated molecules."
Francis Crick
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/crick-bio.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 10:49:35 AM |
|
|
In article <37f3d936.0406110657.5b205ef8@posting.google.com>, Carol says...
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message news:<Xns94FF8D245575Bfstone69@207.69.154.204>...
Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote in
news:74nwc.5179$H4.250@www.newsranger.com:
In article <sho3c09pksbtv8uef0fcqk7rkrd20rscb2@4ax.com>, Spooked
says...
walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote:
walksalone who is fixing to set down to eggs, taters & a slab of ham,
juicy ham, with red eye gravy.
<slobber(2) - drool(1a) - pant(2)>
But, what the heck is "red eye" gravy? ;)
http://southernfood.about.com/library/rec03/bl30326s.htm
Ham And Red Eye Gravy
* 1/4 cup butter
* 4 slices of country ham, with a little fat around the edges, about
1/4-inch thick
* 1 cup strong freshly brewed black coffee
In a large, well-seasoned skillet, warm the butter over low heat. Slice
ham steaks around edges to keep them from curling while cooking. Place
ham steaks in the butter in the pan. Cook ham until the edges brown
slightly; turn to cook the other side. Add the brewed coffee, and raise
the heat to high, bringing it to a boil. Boil until the liquid is
reduced to about a quarter of its original amount and a nice glaze has
formed on the ham. Serve immediately, topped with a little of the red
eye gravy.
***
Never tried it but boiled coffee sounds horrible :(
Hand up who thinks we are drifting from the subject?
Nobody cares what you think.
Here, deary. Have a nice RARE steak. Yum!
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 10:37:21 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 15:49:35 GMT, Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com>
wrote:
Hand up who thinks we are drifting from the subject?
Nobody cares what you think.
Here, deary. Have a nice RARE steak. Yum!
MEDIC!!!!!
My steak is bleeding!!! (Or it is having its period?)
Auberge d'EAC
** menu du jour **
[Holy] Pigeon Coated with Mango Sauce - a divine dish!
Votre chef:# aa 1987.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spooked" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
05 Jun 2004 12:45:23 PM |
|
|
Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote:
In article <sho3c09pksbtv8uef0fcqk7rkrd20rscb2@4ax.com>, Spooked says...
walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote:
walksalone who is fixing to set down to eggs, taters & a slab of ham, juicy
ham, with red eye gravy.
<slobber(2) - drool(1a) - pant(2)>
But, what the heck is "red eye" gravy? ;)
All I know is that it's tasty!
Maybe it's a southern thing...
Yes, it's true! Looky:
http://www.grits.com/RedEye.htm
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
05 Jun 2004 08:19:08 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 17:38:00 GMT, Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com>,
Message ID: <Yr2wc.5126$H4.131@www.newsranger.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com>, Carol says...
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
You know, most people do make an effort to make sense once in a while. You
might want to try it.
BTW, I certainly hope you're bothering EVERYONE who eats meat and not just the
atheists that happen to do so. Or are you just prejudiced against meat-eating
atheists and everyone else that eats meat doesn't bother you?
It's a drooling troll
it's plain to see
It's liquid scat
has nothing to do with thee
so set yourself free
and out of the barrel
by shitcanning the brainless asswipe, Carol.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Carol" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 09:54:58 AM |
|
|
Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote in message news:<Yr2wc.5126$H4.131@www.newsranger.com>...
In article <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com>, Carol says...
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
BTW, I certainly hope you're bothering EVERYONE who eats meat and not just the
atheists that happen to do so.
How can there not be a 100% overlap? Are you saying there are millions
of people who would like to eat meat but don't?
Carol
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 10:48:47 AM |
|
|
In article <37f3d936.0406110654.692f941c@posting.google.com>, Carol says...
Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote in message news:<Yr2wc.5126$H4.131@www.newsranger.com>...
In article <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com>, Carol says...
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
BTW, I certainly hope you're bothering EVERYONE who eats meat and not just the
atheists that happen to do so.
How can there not be a 100% overlap? Are you saying there are millions
of people who would like to eat meat but don't?
How the hell did you get the above out of what I wrote. What I'm saying is that
I hope you're bothering EVERYONE that eats meat (i.e., christians, muslims,
jews, etc.), not just the atheists.
Comprehende?
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
04 Jun 2004 08:40:20 AM |
|
|
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol) wrote:
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
My sister and brother-in-law are atheist vegetarians, troll.
Carol
<plonk>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Watcher" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
04 Jun 2004 12:51:41 PM |
|
|
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol) wrote:
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
Now THAT's some confusion, mixing up atheism and being a carnivore. :/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
04 Jun 2004 09:02:35 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 17:51:41 +0000 in episode
<40c0b688.21864005@news.ritternet.com> we saw our hero don'tgo@there.com
(The Watcher):
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol) wrote:
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message
news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message
news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word. An
atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim
methods.
Now THAT's some confusion, mixing up atheism and being a carnivore. :/
Talk about.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"I think it's the worst kept secret in Washington.
That everybody - everybody I talk to in Washington
has known and fully knows what [the neo-conservative]
agenda was and what they were trying to do."
[Retired General Anthony Zinni]
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
05 Jun 2004 08:16:38 AM |
|
|
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol), Message
ID: <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
*****, you're an embarrasment to England.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
| User: "Carol" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 09:50:25 AM |
|
|
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<nsh3c0l0m81ppldo8phkp2r20ql4e8bp0m@4ax.com>...
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol), Message
ID: <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
*****, you're an embarrasment to England.
I'm sorry you find me embarassing. I'm sorry also that you think I'm
English. But Australian living in Britain.
Insult is not an excuse from answering.
Carol
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
12 Jun 2004 08:26:30 AM |
|
|
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0406110650.4394c945@posting.google.com>...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<nsh3c0l0m81ppldo8phkp2r20ql4e8bp0m@4ax.com>...
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol), Message
ID: <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
*****, you're an embarrasment to England.
I'm sorry you find me embarassing. I'm sorry also that you think I'm
English. But Australian living in Britain.
Okay then: you're an embarrasment to Australia.
By the way Stoney, assuming a co.uk address is English is a
medium-sized assumption; there is no ".eng".
~Iain
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 07:29:42 PM |
|
|
In article <37f3d936.0406110650.4394c945@posting.google.com>,
says...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<nsh3c0l0m81ppldo8phkp2r20ql4e8bp0m@4ax.com>...
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol), Message
ID: <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
*****, you're an embarrasment to England.
I'm sorry you find me embarassing. I'm sorry also that you think I'm
English. But Australian living in Britain.
Insult is not an excuse from answering.
Your post was bizarre. There was nothing to answer.
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
"Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for
everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections
are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence
to religious principles"
James D. Watson
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/watson-bio.html
"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that `You,' your joys and
your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your
sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no
more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells
and their associated molecules."
Francis Crick
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/crick-bio.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
06 Jun 2004 03:52:06 AM |
|
|
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<nsh3c0l0m81ppldo8phkp2r20ql4e8bp0m@4ax.com>...
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol), Message
ID: <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
*****, you're an embarrasment to England.
Just goes to show - not all the nut cases are in the US after all. Thank God :)
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
06 Jun 2004 03:57:20 PM |
|
|
On 6 Jun 2004 01:52:06 -0700, (jwk), Message ID:
<c6f5ba32.0406060052.3c5033e7@posting.google.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<nsh3c0l0m81ppldo8phkp2r20ql4e8bp0m@4ax.com>...
On 4 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700, (Carol), Message
ID: <37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
(Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim methods.
*****, you're an embarrasment to England.
Just goes to show - not all the nut cases are in the US after all. Thank God :)
Just most of them. :\
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
04 Jun 2004 09:02:25 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700 in episode
<37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> we saw our hero
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol):
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message
news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol) wrote in message
news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word. An
atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim
methods.
Atheism means no such thing.
And what the *hell are "Indian reasons" and "Muslim methods?"
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"I think it's the worst kept secret in Washington.
That everybody - everybody I talk to in Washington
has known and fully knows what [the neo-conservative]
agenda was and what they were trying to do."
[Retired General Anthony Zinni]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Carol" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 09:52:38 AM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <y@hoo.com-amikchi> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.06.05.02.02.24.659376@hoo.com-amikchi>...
On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700 in episode
<37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> we saw our hero
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol):
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message
news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol) wrote in message
news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word. An
atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim
methods.
Atheism means no such thing.
And what the *hell are "Indian reasons" and "Muslim methods?"
Muslim methods are cut the throught from ear to ear, and then Indian
reasons are don't eat cows.
Carol
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
11 Jun 2004 10:50:17 AM |
|
|
In article <37f3d936.0406110652.1eade14f@posting.google.com>, Carol says...
"Mark K. Bilbo" <y@hoo.com-amikchi> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.06.05.02.02.24.659376@hoo.com-amikchi>...
On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 05:47:21 -0700 in episode
<37f3d936.0406040447.448feeff@posting.google.com> we saw our hero
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol):
kitg@thegrid.net (Kit Gautier) wrote in message
news:<a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com>...
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol) wrote in message
news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word. An
atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Atheism means you eat meat, even if it's for Indian reasons or Muslim
methods.
Atheism means no such thing.
And what the *hell are "Indian reasons" and "Muslim methods?"
Muslim methods are cut the throught from ear to ear, and then Indian
reasons are don't eat cows.
So what? What's your point?
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
26 May 2004 10:33:37 AM |
|
|
On 25 May 2004 14:44:00 -0700, (Kit Gautier), Message
ID: <a5f16cf7.0405251344.37fbce40@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk (Carol) wrote in message news:<37f3d936.0405141034.2864ecb8@posting.google.com>...
It seems to me after having read what most of you have to say, that
atheism is not much of a commitment.
Carol, what do you believe the word "atheism" means?
What would you use as a definition of the word "atheist"?
It seems to me that you are confusing "atheism" for some other word.
An atheist is simply someone who is not a theist, and a theist is someone
that believes in god(s).
Her grasp of that concept, like many others, lacks opposible thumbs.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Graham Kennedy" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
14 May 2004 04:06:56 PM |
|
|
Carol wrote:
Ask yourselfs this question on abortion -- you say the difference
between a human and an animal is the brain and that is why you eat one
and not the other, but why wern't fetuses brang to the slaughter and
sold as meat?
I have a question for you. Why don't we sell amputated
limbs as meat?
Think about it carefully. When you answer my question,
you will have answered your own.
--
Graham Kennedy
Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Carol" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
15 May 2004 08:13:22 AM |
|
|
Graham Kennedy <graham@ditl.org> wrote in message news:<1084568719.22155.0@echo.uk.clara.net>...
Carol wrote:
Ask yourselfs this question on abortion -- you say the difference
between a human and an animal is the brain and that is why you eat one
and not the other, but why wern't fetuses brang to the slaughter and
sold as meat?
I have a question for you. Why don't we sell amputated
limbs as meat?
Think about it carefully. When you answer my question,
you will have answered your own.
Whatever reason it is, it is the reason why human body parts arn't
sold and why live pigs are killed for that purpose.
Atheists like eating animals killed just to be eaten but they don't
like eating parts of other people's bodies that NEEDED to be removed.
Nowdays, flesh and organs can even be grown. There is no excuse for
farming, except hypocracy of the atheist community.
Carol
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
16 May 2004 07:45:52 AM |
|
|
"Carol" <carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:37f3d936.0405150513.21d93da3@posting.google.com...
Graham Kennedy <graham@ditl.org> wrote in message
news:<1084568719.22155.0@echo.uk.clara.net>...
Carol wrote:
Ask yourselfs this question on abortion -- you say the difference
between a human and an animal is the brain and that is why you eat one
and not the other, but why wern't fetuses brang to the slaughter and
sold as meat?
I have a question for you. Why don't we sell amputated
limbs as meat?
Think about it carefully. When you answer my question,
you will have answered your own.
Whatever reason it is, it is the reason why human body parts arn't
sold and why live pigs are killed for that purpose.
Atheists like eating animals killed just to be eaten but they don't
like eating parts of other people's bodies that NEEDED to be removed.
Nowdays, flesh and organs can even be grown. There is no excuse for
farming, except hypocracy of the atheist community.
I've said it before, but I'll say it again. Let this be a lesson, kids. Just
say 'no' to drugs.
Carol
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
16 May 2004 08:23:51 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 16 May 2004 12:45:52 GMT, "John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net>,
Message ID: <4oJpc.22853$sA.15096@fe2.columbus.rr.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
"Carol" <carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:37f3d936.0405150513.21d93da3@posting.google.com...
Graham Kennedy <graham@ditl.org> wrote in message
news:<1084568719.22155.0@echo.uk.clara.net>...
Carol wrote:
Ask yourselfs this question on abortion -- you say the difference
between a human and an animal is the brain and that is why you eat one
and not the other, but why wern't fetuses brang to the slaughter and
sold as meat?
I have a question for you. Why don't we sell amputated
limbs as meat?
Think about it carefully. When you answer my question,
you will have answered your own.
Whatever reason it is, it is the reason why human body parts arn't
sold and why live pigs are killed for that purpose.
Atheists like eating animals killed just to be eaten but they don't
like eating parts of other people's bodies that NEEDED to be removed.
Nowdays, flesh and organs can even be grown. There is no excuse for
farming, except hypocracy of the atheist community.
I've said it before, but I'll say it again. Let this be a lesson, kids. Just
say 'no' to drugs.
Including the Jesus wafers.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
15 May 2004 08:38:39 AM |
|
|
"Carol" <carollondon5@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:37f3d936.0405150513.21d93da3@posting.google.com...
Graham Kennedy <graham@ditl.org> wrote in message
news:<1084568719.22155.0@echo.uk.clara.net>...
Carol wrote:
Ask yourselfs this question on abortion -- you say the difference
between a human and an animal is the brain and that is why you eat one
and not the other, but why wern't fetuses brang to the slaughter and
sold as meat?
I have a question for you. Why don't we sell amputated
limbs as meat?
Think about it carefully. When you answer my question,
you will have answered your own.
Whatever reason it is, it is the reason why human body parts arn't
sold and why live pigs are killed for that purpose.
Atheists like eating animals killed just to be eaten but they don't
like eating parts of other people's bodies that NEEDED to be removed.
Nowdays, flesh and organs can even be grown. There is no excuse for
farming, except hypocracy of the atheist community.
So all 'belivers' are meat-free farmers eh ???
--
Jez
"The condition of alienation, of being asleep, of being unconscious,
of being out of one's mind, is the condition of the normal man. Society
highly values its normal man.It educates children to lose themselves
and to become absurd,and thus to be normal. Normal men have killed
perhaps 100,000,000 of their fellow normal men in the last fifty years."
R.D. Laing
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Graham Kennedy" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
15 May 2004 08:58:14 AM |
|
|
Carol wrote:
Graham Kennedy <graham@ditl.org> wrote in message news:<1084568719.22155.0@echo.uk.clara.net>...
Carol wrote:
Ask yourselfs this question on abortion -- you say the difference
between a human and an animal is the brain and that is why you eat one
and not the other, but why wern't fetuses brang to the slaughter and
sold as meat?
I have a question for you. Why don't we sell amputated
limbs as meat?
Think about it carefully. When you answer my question,
you will have answered your own.
Whatever reason it is, it is the reason why human body parts arn't
sold and why live pigs are killed for that purpose.
Atheists like eating animals killed just to be eaten but they don't
like eating parts of other people's bodies that NEEDED to be removed.
Nowdays, flesh and organs can even be grown. There is no excuse for
farming, except hypocracy of the atheist community.
Wow. As an atheist I've been blamed for a lot of the
world's troubles before, but this is the first time
anybody has ever claimed that I'm responsible for
the ongoing existence of the meat industry. That's
a pretty amazing viewpoint you have there.
You do realise that plenty of thesists eat meat,
right? That many Christians expressly state that
god intended the very purpose of animals is to be
a resource for Humans to use however they want?
In fact theists commonly accuse atheists and
"evolutionists" of putting Humans on the same level
with animals. They usually mean it to indicate that
atheists think humans are no better than animals,
but in fact it more often means that atheists are
if anything more likely to give the animals a bit
more credit than the theists to.
However, all that is beside the point. To answer your
original question and my own...
Amputated limbs clearly are not Human beings. Obviously
they have no rights of their own - they are indeed
just meat. Logically, there would be no real problem
in eating the things.
The reason that people don't sell amputated limbs as
meat is very, very simple - it's because people think
it would be really, really gross and icky. Their emotional
disgust is so great that it simply over-rules any logical
conclusion.
Much of our morality is determined this way; there is
no logical reason for it, people just feel that certain
things shouldn't be allowed.
(And I don't separate myself from this by the way; I
think eating a person's amputated leg would be a horrific
thing to do.)
Same with a foetus. I regard removing a foetus as being
fundamentally no different to removing a tumour or a
finger. But no, I most emphatically would not eat one
any more than I would eat that finger or tumour.
--
Graham Kennedy
Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Carol" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
17 May 2004 10:14:18 AM |
|
|
Graham Kennedy <graham@ditl.org> wrote in message news:<1084629333.29055.0@damia.uk.clara.net>...
Carol wrote:
Graham Kennedy <graham@ditl.org> wrote in message news:<1084568719.22155.0@echo.uk.clara.net>...
Carol wrote:
Ask yourselfs this question on abortion -- you say the difference
between a human and an animal is the brain and that is why you eat one
and not the other, but why wern't fetuses brang to the slaughter and
sold as meat?
I have a question for you. Why don't we sell amputated
limbs as meat?
Think about it carefully. When you answer my question,
you will have answered your own.
Whatever reason it is, it is the reason why human body parts arn't
sold and why live pigs are killed for that purpose.
Atheists like eating animals killed just to be eaten but they don't
like eating parts of other people's bodies that NEEDED to be removed.
Nowdays, flesh and organs can even be grown. There is no excuse for
farming, except hypocracy of the atheist community.
Wow. As an atheist I've been blamed for a lot of the
world's troubles before
Atheism is useful for one thing only: crazy racist milk signs(that
nobody pays attention to).
, but this is the first time
anybody has ever claimed that I'm responsible for
the ongoing existence of the meat industry. That's
a pretty amazing viewpoint you have there.
You do realise that plenty of thesists eat meat,
right? That many Christians expressly state that
god intended the very purpose of animals is to be
a resource for Humans to use however they want?
If you mean theists, isn't that a contradiction in terms?
In fact theists commonly accuse atheists and
"evolutionists" of putting Humans on the same level
with animals. They usually mean it to indicate that
atheists think humans are no better than animals,
but in fact it more often means that atheists are
if anything more likely to give the animals a bit
more credit than the theists to.
You kill them for the purpose of eating them, when there are
alternatives available. How is that a bit more credit?
However, all that is beside the point. To answer your
original question and my own...
Amputated limbs clearly are not Human beings. Obviously
they have no rights of their own - they are indeed
just meat. Logically, there would be no real problem
in eating the things.
Except that you are poinsoning your body and your concious each time
you eat meat, no matter what the limb.
The reason that people don't sell amputated limbs as
meat is very, very simple - it's because people think
it would be really, really gross and icky. Their emotional
disgust is so great that it simply over-rules any logical
conclusion.
So far, so good...
Much of our morality is determined this way; there is
no logical reason for it, people just feel that certain
things shouldn't be allowed.
(And I don't separate myself from this by the way; I
think eating a person's amputated leg would be a horrific
thing to do.)
Admission of immoral hypocracy noted.
Same with a foetus. I regard removing a foetus as being
fundamentally no different to removing a tumour or a
finger. But no, I most emphatically would not eat one
any more than I would eat that finger or tumour.
Yes, but a tremor isn't eadable.
Carol
.
|
|
|
| User: "Graham Kennedy" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
17 May 2004 11:05:48 AM |
|
|
Carol wrote:
Nowdays, flesh and organs can even be grown. There is no excuse for
farming, except hypocracy of the atheist community.
Wow. As an atheist I've been blamed for a lot of the
world's troubles before
Atheism is useful for one thing only: crazy racist milk signs(that
nobody pays attention to).
I don't even know what a "milk sign" is, I'm afraid.
Is it an American thing?
, but this is the first time
anybody has ever claimed that I'm responsible for
the ongoing existence of the meat industry. That's
a pretty amazing viewpoint you have there.
You do realise that plenty of thesists eat meat,
right? That many Christians expressly state that
god intended the very purpose of animals is to be
a resource for Humans to use however they want?
If you mean theists, isn't that a contradiction in terms?
I did mean theists, and no it isn't.
In fact theists commonly accuse atheists and
"evolutionists" of putting Humans on the same level
with animals. They usually mean it to indicate that
atheists think humans are no better than animals,
but in fact it more often means that atheists are
if anything more likely to give the animals a bit
more credit than the theists to.
You kill them for the purpose of eating them, when there are
alternatives available. How is that a bit more credit?
I consider animals my equal in some respects. Yes I am perfectly
willing to kill and eat a cow - or at least, I'm willing to pay
someone to kill a cow for me. In this respect I am similar to a
theist.
But I also have no problem with the idea that a lioness might
try to kill and eat a Human, for exactly the same reason. We're
all part of the food chain, and the lioness has as much right to
try and eat me as I do to eat that cow. As I understand the
"animals are bio-robots for our pleasure" belief that some
Christians hold, they would not agree with this.
This isn't to say that I would *let* a lioness kill a person,
by the way. She has the right to try but I have the right to
stop her, just as the cow has every right to fight back against
the farmer just as hard as it can.
However, all that is beside the point. To answer your
original question and my own...
Amputated limbs clearly are not Human beings. Obviously
they have no rights of their own - they are indeed
just meat. Logically, there would be no real problem
in eating the things.
Except that you are poinsoning your body and your concious each time
you eat meat, no matter what the limb.
Well, you may believe that but I do not.
The reason that people don't sell amputated limbs as
meat is very, very simple - it's because people think
it would be really, really gross and icky. Their emotional
disgust is so great that it simply over-rules any logical
conclusion.
So far, so good...
Much of our morality is determined this way; there is
no logical reason for it, people just feel that certain
things shouldn't be allowed.
(And I don't separate myself from this by the way; I
think eating a person's amputated leg would be a horrific
thing to do.)
Admission of immoral hypocracy noted.
I don't know that I'd label it immoral.
It certainly is not hypocritical; hypocrisy lies in
acting in a way that contradicts ones claimed beliefs. I
believe it would be very icky to eat an amputated limb, so
I do not do it; my actions are perfectly consistent with
my beliefs.
It just so happens that in this particular case my beliefs
arise from emotion rather than rationality. If you want a
negative label to apply, you can correctly call my actions
illogical and/or irrational. But not hypocritical or immoral.
Same with a foetus. I regard removing a foetus as being
fundamentally no different to removing a tumour or a
finger. But no, I most emphatically would not eat one
any more than I would eat that finger or tumour.
Yes, but a tremor isn't eadable.
Tumours are perfectly edible. I don't know that you'd get
much nutrition from it, or that it would be very healthy,
but you could certainly chomp down on one if you felt like.
--
Graham Kennedy
Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: My Conclusion... |
17 May 2004 07:32:03 PM |
|
|
"Graham Kennedy" <graham@ditl.org> wrote in message
news:1084809830.34712.0@*****.uk.clara.net...
Carol wrote:
Nowdays, flesh and organs can even be grown. There is no excuse for
farming, except hypocracy of the atheist community.
Wow. As an atheist I've been blamed for a lot of the
world's troubles before
Atheism is useful for one thing only: crazy racist milk signs(that
nobody pays attention to).
I don't even know what a "milk sign" is, I'm afraid.
Is it an American thing?
No, it's a Carol thing. The woman is a complete loon.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
