Re: Fundie-ism: ideology for dinosaurs



 Religions > Atheism > Re: Fundie-ism: ideology for dinosaurs

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Pastor Frank"
Date: 06 Aug 2004 03:18:23 AM
Object: Re: Fundie-ism: ideology for dinosaurs
"Gwar" <xeno@xor.qua> wrote in message
news:20040805214519.X5128@synergy.transbay.net...

On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Pastor Frank wrote:

Considering we turn up the media to drown our the screams of the
tortured, ignore the permanently imprisoned, disowned, exiled and live
on
top of the mass-graves of the original inhabitants, tell us why you
think
humanity doesn't need "controlling"?


Tell us why we need to be under the control of your superstitions? That's
what you're really arguing for.

Because "controlling" is the rationality behind torture, permanent
imprisonment, mass-graves, holy wars, genocide, etc..


I see. You are saying that a society "out of control", i.e. an anarchic
one, would not practice man's inhumanity against their fellow man. Any
evidence for that? Examples? I bet this is something you just dreamed up

all

by yourself. Right?


We have more choices than either anarchy & your preferred brand of
nonsense. & answer this question Frank:
How do you know your interpretation of what you deem is an inerant
reference is congruent with that alleged inerrancy?

If there were any "choices" you would have mentioned them. But you
merely want to trash and flame in our Christian NGs. I will post you over to
some flame groups.
.

User: "Pastor Frank"

Title: Re: Fundie-ism: ideology for dinosaurs 07 Aug 2004 07:45:25 AM
"Gwar" <xeno@xor.qua> wrote in message
news:20040807001943.M71187@synergy.transbay.net...

On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Pastor Frank wrote:

We have more choices than either anarchy & your preferred brand of
nonsense. & answer this question Frank:
How do you know your interpretation of what you deem is an inerant
reference is congruent with that alleged inerrancy?


If there were any "choices" you would have mentioned them.


That isn't self-evident. As usual you throw up trifling objections as if
it proves a point you haven't sucessfully argued for. How do you know your
interpretation of what you deem is an inerant reference is congruent with
that alleged inerrancy? Or are you going to flounder in your tar pit
arguing against those who CHOOSE not to join you?

Insulting Subject line. I will post you over to some flame groups.
.


  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
Atheism in 1793 and a Messianic Shi'ism
jesu'it'ism
Ft Wayne, IN Pastor Arrested... For Violating Probation (TheoCon-ism- the Religion of Pedophiles)
Re: Does theistic evolution[ism] have a specific definition
Atheism in 1793 and a Messianic Shi'ism
Re: Atheism is twerp-ism running amok in Christian NGs
Re: Does theistic evolution[ism] have a specific definition
Re: Atheism is twerp-ism running amok in Christian NGs
Re: Does theistic evolution[ism] have a specific definition
U.S. Economy: ISM Manufacturing Index Rises in July( Good News for Bush)! Liberals Hate America!
Re: Did Darwinism Smooth the Way for Nazi Ideology?
The violence that lies in every ideology
OT: Bleak forecast for dangerous ideology of meteorology {Emma Tom}
Kerry attacks Bush's 'extreme right-wing ideology' in banning stem cell research
Re: Did Darwinism Smooth the Way for Nazi Ideology?
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER