| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Andres64" |
| Date: |
13 Jan 2005 09:17:48 PM |
| Object: |
OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
Judge: Evolution stickers unconstitutional
Markers in science textbooks violated church-state separation
Thursday, January 13, 2005 Posted: 3:36 PM EST (2036 GMT)
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- A federal judge in Atlanta, Georgia, has
ruled that a suburban county school district's textbook stickers
referring to evolution as "a theory not a fact" are unconstitutional.
In ruling that the stickers violate the constitutionally mandated
separation between church and state, U.S. District Judge Clarence
Cooper ruled that labeling evolution a "theory" played on the popular
definition of the word as a "hunch" and could confuse students.
The stickers read, "This textbook contains material on evolution.
Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living
things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied
carefully and critically considered."
The disclaimers were put in the books by school officials in 2002.
"Due to the manner in which the sticker refers to evolution as a
theory, the sticker also has the effect of undermining evolution
education to the benefit of those Cobb County citizens who would prefer
that students maintain their religious beliefs regarding the origin of
life," Cooper wrote in his ruling.
Cooper said he was ruling on the "narrow issue" of the case, brought
against the Cobb County School District and Board of Education by four
parents of district students, was whether the district's stickers
violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
His conclusion, he said, "is not that the school board should not have
called evolution a theory or that the school board should have called
evolution a fact."
"Rather, the distinction of evolution as a theory rather than a fact is
the distinction that religiously motivated individuals have
specifically asked school boards to make in the most recent
anti-evolution movement, and that was exactly what parents in Cobb
County did in this case," he wrote.
"By adopting this specific language, even if at the direction of
counsel, the Cobb County School Board appears to have sided with these
religiously motivated individuals."
The sticker, he said, sends "a message that the school board agrees
with the beliefs of Christian fundamentalists and creationists."
"The school board has effectively improperly entangled itself with
religion by appearing to take a position," Cooper wrote. "Therefore,
the sticker must be removed from all of the textbooks into which it has
been placed."
Five parents of students and the American Civil Liberties Union had
challenged the stickers in court, arguing they violated the
constitutional separation of church and state.
The case was heard in federal court last November. The school system
defended the warning stickers as a show of tolerance, not religious
activism as some parents claimed.
"The Cobb County school board is doing more than accommodating
religion," Michael Manely, an attorney for the parents, argued during
the trial, according to a report from The Associated Press. "They are
promoting religious dogma to all students."
Lawyers for Cobb County, however, argued in court that the school board
had made a good-faith effort to address questions that inevitably arise
during the teaching of evolution.
"Science and religion are related and they're not mutually exclusive,"
school district attorney Linwood Gunn said in an AP report. "This
sticker was an effort to get past that conflict and to teach good
science."
According to the AP, the schools placed the stickers after more than
2,000 parents complained the textbooks presented evolution as fact,
without mentioning rival ideas about the beginnings of life.
________________________________________
Copyright 2005 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be
published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press
contributed to this report.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/13/evolution.textbooks.ruling/index.html
.
|
|
| User: "Rally" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
13 Jan 2005 09:59:40 PM |
|
|
"Andres64" <andresc64@excite.com> wrote in message
news:1105651068.465117.57530@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Judge: Evolution stickers unconstitutional
Markers in science textbooks violated church-state separation
Thursday, January 13, 2005 Posted: 3:36 PM EST (2036 GMT)
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- A federal judge in Atlanta, Georgia, has
ruled that a suburban county school district's textbook stickers
referring to evolution as "a theory not a fact" are unconstitutional.
In ruling that the stickers violate the constitutionally mandated
separation between church and state, U.S. District Judge Clarence
Cooper ruled that labeling evolution a "theory" played on the popular
definition of the word as a "hunch" and could confuse students.
I have a hunch... That hunch is that the christers want Evolution
lowered to the same level of hogwash their religion is. The bastards
can't stand the fact that while Evolution, called a theory, is actually
a fact - and their religion, called a thoery, ( uhg...) is actually
*****!
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
14 Jan 2005 02:38:42 AM |
|
|
On 13 Jan 2005, Rally dropped trou, farted, whirled, then shouted:
"Andres64" <andresc64@excite.com> wrote in message
news:1105651068.465117.57530@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Judge: Evolution stickers unconstitutional
Markers in science textbooks violated church-state separation
Thursday, January 13, 2005 Posted: 3:36 PM EST (2036 GMT)
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- A federal judge in Atlanta, Georgia, has
ruled that a suburban county school district's textbook stickers
referring to evolution as "a theory not a fact" are unconstitutional.
In ruling that the stickers violate the constitutionally mandated
separation between church and state, U.S. District Judge Clarence
Cooper ruled that labeling evolution a "theory" played on the popular
definition of the word as a "hunch" and could confuse students.
I have a hunch... That hunch is that the christers want Evolution
lowered to the same level of hogwash their religion is. The bastards
can't stand the fact that while Evolution, called a theory, is actually
a fact - and their religion, called a thoery, ( uhg...) is actually
*****!
The problem is they cannot separate fact from fantasy. Belief in gods
and devils pollutes the thinking process so much that they cannot
determine why their beliefs are not held as fact worldwide. They can't
differentiate between the observable reality of evolution and the
dreamland of religion, thus they believe creation actually competes with
evolution.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
--------
Why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you
wouldn't want to ***** in the first place?
--George Carlin
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
13 Jan 2005 10:48:25 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:59:40 -0600, "Rally"
<Rally_Round@mail.removethis.newsfeeds.com> said in alt.atheism:
I have a hunch... That hunch is that the christers want Evolution
lowered to the same level of hogwash their religion is. The bastards
can't stand the fact that while Evolution, called a theory, is actually
a fact - and their religion, called a thoery, ( uhg...) is actually
*****!
You can't really say that. Since they believe that their religion is
as given them by their god, they can't be against its being *****.
Even if you could prove to them, beyond any possible doubt, that it IS
*****, they would find a way to have faith that it's the truth.
--
"A truly unselfish act would be a Christian volunteering to have his soul take your
soul's place in hell, so yours could go to Heaven. Don't hold your breath."
- John Popelish
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
14 Jan 2005 02:29:27 AM |
|
|
On 13 Jan 2005, Al Klein dropped trou, farted, whirled, then shouted:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:59:40 -0600, "Rally"
<Rally_Round@mail.removethis.newsfeeds.com> said in alt.atheism:
I have a hunch... That hunch is that the christers want Evolution
lowered to the same level of hogwash their religion is. The bastards
can't stand the fact that while Evolution, called a theory, is actually
a fact - and their religion, called a thoery, ( uhg...) is actually
*****!
You can't really say that. Since they believe that their religion is
as given them by their god, they can't be against its being *****.
Even if you could prove to them, beyond any possible doubt, that it IS
*****, they would find a way to have faith that it's the truth.
Damn it, now the room is spinning.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
--------
Why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you
wouldn't want to ***** in the first place?
--George Carlin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
14 Jan 2005 03:41:46 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:29:27 -0600, Vic Sagerquist
<address@withheld.com> said in alt.atheism:
On 13 Jan 2005, Al Klein dropped trou, farted, whirled, then shouted:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:59:40 -0600, "Rally"
<Rally_Round@mail.removethis.newsfeeds.com> said in alt.atheism:
I have a hunch... That hunch is that the christers want Evolution
lowered to the same level of hogwash their religion is. The bastards
can't stand the fact that while Evolution, called a theory, is actually
a fact - and their religion, called a thoery, ( uhg...) is actually
*****!
You can't really say that. Since they believe that their religion is
as given them by their god, they can't be against its being *****.
Even if you could prove to them, beyond any possible doubt, that it IS
*****, they would find a way to have faith that it's the truth.
Damn it, now the room is spinning.
Here, let me give it a little push:
A god that had to sacrifice itself to itself to forgive us for doing
exactly what it designed us to do, and knew we were going to do.
(Dramamine is in the little cabinet to the left - if you can still
find "left".)
--
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but
not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."
-A. Einstein (1929 -- Einstein Archive 33-272)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
14 Jan 2005 10:14:45 PM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:29:27 -0600, Vic Sagerquist
<address@withheld.com> said in alt.atheism:
On 13 Jan 2005, Al Klein dropped trou, farted, whirled, then shouted:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:59:40 -0600, "Rally"
<Rally_Round@mail.removethis.newsfeeds.com> said in alt.atheism:
I have a hunch... That hunch is that the christers want Evolution
lowered to the same level of hogwash their religion is. The bastards
can't stand the fact that while Evolution, called a theory, is actually
a fact - and their religion, called a thoery, ( uhg...) is actually
*****!
You can't really say that. Since they believe that their religion is
as given them by their god, they can't be against its being *****.
Even if you could prove to them, beyond any possible doubt, that it IS
*****, they would find a way to have faith that it's the truth.
Damn it, now the room is spinning.
Here, let me give it a little push:
A god that had to sacrifice itself to itself to forgive us for doing
exactly what it designed us to do, and knew we were going to do.
How would you have done it?
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian E. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
18 Jan 2005 03:16:52 AM |
|
|
In article <41E84455.4F02442@backpacker.com>, Bill Bonde ( ''The
chamber was in confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )
said...
How would you have done it?
I'd just forgive my children. No blood required.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
19 Jan 2005 01:10:59 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:16:52 -0500, Brian E. Clark
<reply@newsgroup.only.please> wrote:
In article <41E84455.4F02442@backpacker.com>, Bill Bonde ( ''The
chamber was in confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )
said...
How would you have done it?
I'd just forgive my children. No blood required.
Nothing to forgive when there's no choice but to follow the script.
--
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: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
15 Jan 2005 12:43:49 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 14:14:45 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
A god that had to sacrifice itself to itself to forgive us for doing
exactly what it designed us to do, and knew we were going to do.
How would you have done it?
Created a universe in which sin wasn't possible.
But, then, I'm not a petulant little child who needs vastly inferior
little creatures worshipping me.
--
"Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom. Atheism is human
concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind cannot
begin to understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an old
religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and never has
been, a religion at all. The definition of Atheism is magnificent in its
simplicity: Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
[Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields]
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
15 Jan 2005 06:36:53 AM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 14:14:45 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
A god that had to sacrifice itself to itself to forgive us for doing
exactly what it designed us to do, and knew we were going to do.
How would you have done it?
Created a universe in which sin wasn't possible.
You mean a place without free will?
But, then, I'm not a petulant little child who needs vastly inferior
little creatures worshipping me.
Maybe it benefits the inferior little creatures more than it benefits
you.
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
19 Jan 2005 08:58:32 AM |
|
|
Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shouting
loud'' ) wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 14:14:45 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was
in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
A god that had to sacrifice itself to itself to forgive us for
doing
exactly what it designed us to do, and knew we were going to do.
How would you have done it?
Created a universe in which sin wasn't possible.
You mean a place without free will?
According to Christian mythology, Heaven will be a place without sin
and it is somewhere they all seem rather keen to be. Therefore either
they are not overly keen on freewill in the first place, or it IS
possible to have free will without sin.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
19 Jan 2005 06:33:17 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shouting
loud'' ) wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 14:14:45 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was
in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
A god that had to sacrifice itself to itself to forgive us for
doing
exactly what it designed us to do, and knew we were going to do.
How would you have done it?
Created a universe in which sin wasn't possible.
You mean a place without free will?
According to Christian mythology, Heaven will be a place without sin
and it is somewhere they all seem rather keen to be. Therefore either
they are not overly keen on freewill in the first place, or it IS
possible to have free will without sin.
Only if you define nothing as a sin or you choose by your free will not
to do whatever it is that is defined as sin.
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
20 Jan 2005 08:44:33 AM |
|
|
Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shouting
loud'' ) wrote:
Donalbain@gmail.com wrote:
Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in confusion, all the voices
shouting
loud'' ) wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 14:14:45 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber
was
in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
A god that had to sacrifice itself to itself to forgive us
for
doing
exactly what it designed us to do, and knew we were going to
do.
How would you have done it?
Created a universe in which sin wasn't possible.
You mean a place without free will?
According to Christian mythology, Heaven will be a place without
sin
and it is somewhere they all seem rather keen to be. Therefore
either
they are not overly keen on freewill in the first place, or it IS
possible to have free will without sin.
Only if you define nothing as a sin or you choose by your free will
not
to do whatever it is that is defined as sin.
So which is it? Will there be sin in Heaven or will there be no free
will. Or is it possible to have both?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
20 Jan 2005 05:53:01 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shouting
loud'' ) wrote:
wrote:
Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in confusion, all the voices
shouting
loud'' ) wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 14:14:45 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber
was
in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
A god that had to sacrifice itself to itself to forgive us
for
doing
exactly what it designed us to do, and knew we were going to
do.
How would you have done it?
Created a universe in which sin wasn't possible.
You mean a place without free will?
According to Christian mythology, Heaven will be a place without
sin
and it is somewhere they all seem rather keen to be. Therefore
either
they are not overly keen on freewill in the first place, or it IS
possible to have free will without sin.
Only if you define nothing as a sin or you choose by your free will
not
to do whatever it is that is defined as sin.
So which is it? Will there be sin in Heaven or will there be no free
will. Or is it possible to have both?
I've already explained this: Only if you define nothing as a sin or you
choose by your free will not to do whatever it is that is defined as
sin.
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
20 Jan 2005 10:02:51 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:53:01 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
Which, aside from being grossly illegal, is the exact opposite of
democracy.
--
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious
conviction."
- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
20 Jan 2005 10:01:47 PM |
|
|
On 20 Jan 2005 00:44:33 -0800, said in
alt.atheism:
So which is it? Will there be sin in Heaven or will there be no free
will. Or is it possible to have both?
According to Bill, no one will freely choose to sin in heaven. Some
of these Christians can torture words to the point that they're
meaningless.
--
"I can't activate two neurons simultaneously, and I vote"
- The theistic majority
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
21 Jan 2005 03:32:34 AM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On 20 Jan 2005 00:44:33 -0800, said in
alt.atheism:
So which is it? Will there be sin in Heaven or will there be no free
will. Or is it possible to have both?
According to Bill, no one will freely choose to sin in heaven.
I didn't claim that. I said that was one way to not have sin in heave
and preserve free will in the sphere of what is defined as sin.
Some
of these Christians can torture words to the point that they're
meaningless.
You are the worst example of such a thing so far.
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
21 Jan 2005 09:53:05 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:32:34 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On 20 Jan 2005 00:44:33 -0800, said in
alt.atheism:
So which is it? Will there be sin in Heaven or will there be no free
will. Or is it possible to have both?
According to Bill, no one will freely choose to sin in heaven.
I didn't claim that. I said that was one way to not have sin in heave
and preserve free will in the sphere of what is defined as sin.
So you're saying that people CAN choose to sin in heaven.
--
"Damn. Looks like all of usenet agrees that you don't have the logical
faculties to prove the statement 'dogshit is not peanut butter' if we
gave you a jar of each and a box of crackers" - John Hattan to Tichy
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
21 Jan 2005 11:50:10 PM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:32:34 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On 20 Jan 2005 00:44:33 -0800, said in
alt.atheism:
So which is it? Will there be sin in Heaven or will there be no free
will. Or is it possible to have both?
According to Bill, no one will freely choose to sin in heaven.
I didn't claim that. I said that was one way to not have sin in heave
and preserve free will in the sphere of what is defined as sin.
So you're saying that people CAN choose to sin in heaven.
How would I know? I gave you two possibilities and you want to make
something more out of them than was intended.
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
22 Jan 2005 02:51:00 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:50:10 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
So you're saying that people CAN choose to sin in heaven.
How would I know? I gave you two possibilities and you want to make
something more out of them than was intended.
The two 'possibilities':
1) People can't sin in heaven. This means that there's no free will
in heaven. If there's no free will in heaven, why does there have to
be free will on Earth?
1a) Free will is possible in heaven even if people don't have the free
will to choose to sin. If so in heaven, why not on Earth?
2) People CAN sin in heaven. Since the Christian god can't be in the
presence of sin, the Christian god can't be in heaven, destroying most
of Christianity in one sentence.
Some day someone will invent a religion that has arguments that
actually hold together. No one has done it yet, and some religions
fall apart more readily than others. Some come fallen apart - like
the revealed religions of the desert.
--
"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid
consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and
ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who
works on the basis of reward and punishment. "
- Letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950; Einstein Archive 59-215
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
22 Jan 2005 05:11:55 AM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:50:10 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
So you're saying that people CAN choose to sin in heaven.
How would I know? I gave you two possibilities and you want to make
something more out of them than was intended.
The two 'possibilities':
1) People can't sin in heaven. This means that there's no free will
in heaven. If there's no free will in heaven, why does there have to
be free will on Earth?
What is free will?
1a) Free will is possible in heaven even if people don't have the free
will to choose to sin. If so in heaven, why not on Earth?
Again, what is free will? If you don't have a rigours definition, you
can go on and on about this.
2) People CAN sin in heaven. Since the Christian god can't be in the
presence of sin, the Christian god can't be in heaven, destroying most
of Christianity in one sentence.
What? Maybe heaven is a big place.
Some day someone will invent a religion that has arguments that
actually hold together. No one has done it yet, and some religions
fall apart more readily than others. Some come fallen apart - like
the revealed religions of the desert.
You just don't have enough faith.
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
22 Jan 2005 06:56:06 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:11:55 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:50:10 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
So you're saying that people CAN choose to sin in heaven.
How would I know? I gave you two possibilities and you want to make
something more out of them than was intended.
The two 'possibilities':
1) People can't sin in heaven. This means that there's no free will
in heaven. If there's no free will in heaven, why does there have to
be free will on Earth?
What is free will?
Uh, no, you already know the rules about redefining things.
1a) Free will is possible in heaven even if people don't have the free
will to choose to sin. If so in heaven, why not on Earth?
Again, what is free will?
Again, no.
Now address the actual issue.
2) People CAN sin in heaven. Since the Christian god can't be in the
presence of sin, the Christian god can't be in heaven, destroying most
of Christianity in one sentence.
What? Maybe heaven is a big place.
That's counter to Christian claims, so it won't wash. (Actually the
pertinent Christian claims, that he's omnipresent, and that he can't
exist in the presence of evil, define him out of possibility.)
Try actually sticking to Christianity if you want to argue the
Christian side. You can't claim the Christian god, then change his
properties to fit your argument.
Some day someone will invent a religion that has arguments that
actually hold together. No one has done it yet, and some religions
fall apart more readily than others. Some come fallen apart - like
the revealed religions of the desert.
You just don't have enough faith.
In religion? I have no religious faith at all. Why should I? I've
never seen any evidence of any god and, in the case of Christianity,
I've seen evidence that it's all *****. Why would I have faith
that ***** is truth?
--
"To assume the existence of an unperceivable being ... does not facilitate understanding
the orderliness we find in the perceivable world."
- Letter to an Iowa student who asked, What is God? July, 1953; Einstein Archive 59-085
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
22 Jan 2005 07:23:41 AM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:11:55 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:50:10 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
So you're saying that people CAN choose to sin in heaven.
How would I know? I gave you two possibilities and you want to make
something more out of them than was intended.
The two 'possibilities':
1) People can't sin in heaven. This means that there's no free will
in heaven. If there's no free will in heaven, why does there have to
be free will on Earth?
What is free will?
Uh, no, you already know the rules about redefining things.
Asking a question isn't redefining things.
1a) Free will is possible in heaven even if people don't have the free
will to choose to sin. If so in heaven, why not on Earth?
Again, what is free will?
Again, no.
Now address the actual issue.
2) People CAN sin in heaven. Since the Christian god can't be in the
presence of sin, the Christian god can't be in heaven, destroying most
of Christianity in one sentence.
What? Maybe heaven is a big place.
That's counter to Christian claims, so it won't wash. (Actually the
I don't know what you are referring to.
pertinent Christian claims, that he's omnipresent, and that he can't
exist in the presence of evil, define him out of possibility.)
I need some evidence for these claims.
Try actually sticking to Christianity if you want to argue the
Christian side.
You asked me a question. I don't claim to know whatever you are defining
as 'Christian'.
You can't claim the Christian god, then change his
properties to fit your argument.
Some day someone will invent a religion that has arguments that
actually hold together. No one has done it yet, and some religions
fall apart more readily than others. Some come fallen apart - like
the revealed religions of the desert.
You just don't have enough faith.
In religion? I have no religious faith at all. Why should I? I've
never seen any evidence of any god and, in the case of Christianity,
I've seen evidence that it's all *****. Why would I have faith
that ***** is truth?
You asked.
--
Even though the world knows that these areas are susceptible to this
sort of thing, there apparently are no warning systems in place to
attempt to mitigate a disaster like this even for those areas literally
a 1000 km away, a distance that puts the inundation, I think, a couple
of hours from the original seismic event. It is simply unconscionable
that I could find out here in America about this threat before people
who are actually at grave risk could.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
22 Jan 2005 09:59:36 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:23:41 -0800, Bill Bonde <stderr@mail.com> said
in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:11:55 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
What is free will?
Uh, no, you already know the rules about redefining things.
Asking a question isn't redefining things.
Free will is already defined in Christianity. Either use that
definition or admit that you don't know enough about Christianity to
participate in this discussion.
2) People CAN sin in heaven. Since the Christian god can't be in the
presence of sin, the Christian god can't be in heaven, destroying most
of Christianity in one sentence.
What? Maybe heaven is a big place.
That's counter to Christian claims, so it won't wash. (Actually the
I don't know what you are referring to.
Regardless of how large heaven is, the Christian god is omnipresent,
so "Maybe heaven is a big place" has nothing to do with the Christian
god not being able to be in heaven if people can sin there.
Don't you even read the arguments you post?
pertinent Christian claims, that he's omnipresent, and that he can't
exist in the presence of evil, define him out of possibility.)
I need some evidence for these claims.
Christianity is all the evidence you need. It's the Christian claim
that the Christian god can't be in the presence of evil and that he's
omnipresent.
Try actually sticking to Christianity if you want to argue the
Christian side.
You asked me a question. I don't claim to know whatever you are defining
as 'Christian'.
Then why are you engaged in a discussion about Christian claims?
Some day someone will invent a religion that has arguments that
actually hold together. No one has done it yet, and some religions
fall apart more readily than others. Some come fallen apart - like
the revealed religions of the desert.
You just don't have enough faith.
In religion? I have no religious faith at all. Why should I? I've
never seen any evidence of any god and, in the case of Christianity,
I've seen evidence that it's all *****. Why would I have faith
that ***** is truth?
You asked.
The paragraph you responded to had no question in it.
Try actually reading the posts you respond to, and your own responses.
Even if you don't want the intellectual exercise, do it as a courtesy
to those who actually read your posts before responding to them.
--
"Damn. Looks like all of usenet agrees that you don't have the logical
faculties to prove the statement 'dogshit is not peanut butter' if we
gave you a jar of each and a box of crackers" - John Hattan to Tichy
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
23 Jan 2005 12:00:14 AM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:23:41 -0800, Bill Bonde <stderr@mail.com> said
in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:11:55 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
What is free will?
Uh, no, you already know the rules about redefining things.
Asking a question isn't redefining things.
Free will is already defined in Christianity. Either use that
definition or admit that you don't know enough about Christianity to
participate in this discussion.
I've provided the dictionary definition of free will. You don't like and
seem to be using some other definition.
2) People CAN sin in heaven. Since the Christian god can't be in the
presence of sin, the Christian god can't be in heaven, destroying most
of Christianity in one sentence.
What? Maybe heaven is a big place.
That's counter to Christian claims, so it won't wash. (Actually the
I don't know what you are referring to.
Regardless of how large heaven is, the Christian god is omnipresent,
so "Maybe heaven is a big place" has nothing to do with the Christian
god not being able to be in heaven if people can sin there.
Don't you even read the arguments you post?
If this god is omnipresent, he's everywhere in the universe right now
too and there is sin in the universe by definition, therefore your claim
doesn't hold up.
pertinent Christian claims, that he's omnipresent, and that he can't
exist in the presence of evil, define him out of possibility.)
I need some evidence for these claims.
Christianity is all the evidence you need. It's the Christian claim
that the Christian god can't be in the presence of evil and that he's
omnipresent.
Cite where this is claimed in the Bible.
Try actually sticking to Christianity if you want to argue the
Christian side.
You asked me a question. I don't claim to know whatever you are defining
as 'Christian'.
Then why are you engaged in a discussion about Christian claims?
Because you asked a question and I gave my opinion. Now you are claiming
to know about all these "Christian claims" yet you don't have any cites
to back up your version of the religion.
Some day someone will invent a religion that has arguments that
actually hold together. No one has done it yet, and some religions
fall apart more readily than others. Some come fallen apart - like
the revealed religions of the desert.
You just don't have enough faith.
In religion? I have no religious faith at all. Why should I? I've
never seen any evidence of any god and, in the case of Christianity,
I've seen evidence that it's all *****. Why would I have faith
that ***** is truth?
You asked.
The paragraph you responded to had no question in it.
Try actually reading the posts you respond to, and your own responses.
Even if you don't want the intellectual exercise, do it as a courtesy
to those who actually read your posts before responding to them.
I did read my posts as I was making them. And you haven't backed up your
claims.
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
23 Jan 2005 12:53:37 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:00:14 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:23:41 -0800, Bill Bonde <stderr@mail.com> said
in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:11:55 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
What is free will?
Uh, no, you already know the rules about redefining things.
Asking a question isn't redefining things.
Free will is already defined in Christianity. Either use that
definition or admit that you don't know enough about Christianity to
participate in this discussion.
I've provided the dictionary definition of free will.
Reading comprehension problem? We're talking about the Christian
definition here, since this discussion is about the Christian claims
about free will.
Regardless of how large heaven is, the Christian god is omnipresent,
so "Maybe heaven is a big place" has nothing to do with the Christian
god not being able to be in heaven if people can sin there.
Don't you even read the arguments you post?
If this god is omnipresent, he's everywhere in the universe right now
too and there is sin in the universe by definition, therefore your claim
doesn't hold up.
My claim that he can't be where there's sin? Or my claim that he's
omnipresent?
(They're both claims of Christianity. It's not my fault if
Christianity is internally contradictory. In fact, that's one of its
hallmarks)
pertinent Christian claims, that he's omnipresent, and that he can't
exist in the presence of evil, define him out of possibility.)
I need some evidence for these claims.
Christianity is all the evidence you need. It's the Christian claim
that the Christian god can't be in the presence of evil and that he's
omnipresent.
Cite where this is claimed in the Bible.
Christianity is pretty much extra-biblical. If it were strictly
biblical there's be only 1 Church. Yet there isn't even only 1 bible.
--
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your
Christ."
- Mohandas Gandhi
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shoutingloud " |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
23 Jan 2005 04:23:32 AM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:00:14 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:23:41 -0800, Bill Bonde <stderr@mail.com> said
in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:11:55 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
What is free will?
Uh, no, you already know the rules about redefining things.
Asking a question isn't redefining things.
Free will is already defined in Christianity. Either use that
definition or admit that you don't know enough about Christianity to
participate in this discussion.
I've provided the dictionary definition of free will.
Reading comprehension problem? We're talking about the Christian
definition here, since this discussion is about the Christian claims
about free will.
Provide me with some sort of cite that backs up what you claim is the
Christian definition of free will that makes it different from the
dictionary definition.
Regardless of how large heaven is, the Christian god is omnipresent,
so "Maybe heaven is a big place" has nothing to do with the Christian
god not being able to be in heaven if people can sin there.
Don't you even read the arguments you post?
If this god is omnipresent, he's everywhere in the universe right now
too and there is sin in the universe by definition, therefore your claim
doesn't hold up.
My claim that he can't be where there's sin? Or my claim that he's
omnipresent?
(They're both claims of Christianity. It's not my fault if
Christianity is internally contradictory. In fact, that's one of its
hallmarks)
Where are these claims in the Bible?
pertinent Christian claims, that he's omnipresent, and that he can't
exist in the presence of evil, define him out of possibility.)
I need some evidence for these claims.
Christianity is all the evidence you need. It's the Christian claim
that the Christian god can't be in the presence of evil and that he's
omnipresent.
Cite where this is claimed in the Bible.
Christianity is pretty much extra-biblical. If it were strictly
biblical there's be only 1 Church. Yet there isn't even only 1 bible.
So what version of Christianity are you referring to?
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
23 Jan 2005 06:35:06 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 20:23:32 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Provide me with some sort of cite that backs up what you claim is the
Christian definition of free will that makes it different from the
dictionary definition.
The Christian claim that we need to be able to choose to sin in order
to have free will. That defines free will.
Regardless of how large heaven is, the Christian god is omnipresent,
so "Maybe heaven is a big place" has nothing to do with the Christian
god not being able to be in heaven if people can sin there.
Don't you even read the arguments you post?
If this god is omnipresent, he's everywhere in the universe right now
too and there is sin in the universe by definition, therefore your claim
doesn't hold up.
My claim that he can't be where there's sin? Or my claim that he's
omnipresent?
(They're both claims of Christianity. It's not my fault if
Christianity is internally contradictory. In fact, that's one of its
hallmarks)
Where are these claims in the Bible?
Not all of Christianity's claims come from the bible.
pertinent Christian claims, that he's omnipresent, and that he can't
exist in the presence of evil, define him out of possibility.)
I need some evidence for these claims.
Christianity is all the evidence you need. It's the Christian claim
that the Christian god can't be in the presence of evil and that he's
omnipresent.
Cite where this is claimed in the Bible.
Christianity is pretty much extra-biblical. If it were strictly
biblical there's be only 1 Church. Yet there isn't even only 1 bible.
So what version of Christianity are you referring to?
The ones practiced in Christian Churches.
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
23 Jan 2005 01:05:44 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 06:56:06 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:11:55 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:50:10 -0800, "Bill Bonde ( ''The chamber was in
confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
So you're saying that people CAN choose to sin in heaven.
How would I know? I gave you two possibilities and you want to make
something more out of them than was intended.
The two 'possibilities':
1) People can't sin in heaven. This means that there's no free will
in heaven. If there's no free will in heaven, why does there have to
be free will on Earth?
What is free will?
Uh, no, you already know the rules about redefining things.
1a) Free will is possible in heaven even if people don't have the free
will to choose to sin. If so in heaven, why not on Earth?
Again, what is free will?
Again, no.
Now address the actual issue.
2) People CAN sin in heaven. Since the Christian god can't be in the
presence of sin, the Christian god can't be in heaven, destroying most
of Christianity in one sentence.
What? Maybe heaven is a big place.
That's counter to Christian claims, so it won't wash. (Actually the
pertinent Christian claims, that he's omnipresent, and that he can't
exist in the presence of evil, define him out of possibility.)
Try actually sticking to Christianity if you want to argue the
Christian side. You can't claim the Christian god, then change his
properties to fit your argument.
Some day someone will invent a religion that has arguments that
actually hold together. No one has done it yet, and some religions
fall apart more readily than others. Some come fallen apart - like
the revealed religions of the desert.
You just don't have enough faith.
In religion? I have no religious faith at all. Why should I? I've
never seen any evidence of any god and, in the case of Christianity,
I've seen evidence that it's all *****. Why would I have faith
that ***** is truth?
Yeah, but its 'TRUE(tm)' *****.
--
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: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT (For ARTD-L) Sticker shock... |
23 Jan 2005 04:06:31 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:05:44 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> said in
alt.atheism:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 06:56:06 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
In religion? I have no religious faith at all. Why should I? I've
never seen any evidence of any god and, in the case of Christianity,
I've seen evidence that it's all *****. Why would I have faith
that ***** is truth?
Yeah, but its 'TRUE(tm)' *****.
Would you prefer FALSE(tm) *****? :~)
--
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but
not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."
-A. Einstein (1929 -- Einstein Archive 33-272)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
