| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Neil Kelsey" |
| Date: |
05 Feb 2007 11:47:23 AM |
| Object: |
Theists on alt.atheism |
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
While I'm at it, is there any theist anywhere that presents a good
case? I'd like to read from the best they have to offer, because
frankly, on alt.atheism they seem either mentally ill, mentally
deficient, or mentally evasive.
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
05 Feb 2007 12:20:26 PM |
|
|
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
While I'm at it, is there any theist anywhere that presents a good
case? I'd like to read from the best they have to offer, because
frankly, on alt.atheism they seem either mentally ill, mentally
deficient, or mentally evasive.
They have nothing to argue with, software or hardware. The stronger they
come on, the more viscious they get. And when they are defeated they
either melt down, spraying cyber-spittle in a barrage of all-caps, or run
away with their tails between their legs.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Convicted by Earthquack
Plonked by Fester
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hatter" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
05 Feb 2007 12:28:35 PM |
|
|
On Feb 5, 1:20 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote innews:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
While I'm at it, is there any theist anywhere that presents a good
case? I'd like to read from the best they have to offer, because
frankly, on alt.atheism they seem either mentally ill, mentally
deficient, or mentally evasive.
They have nothing to argue with, software or hardware. The stronger they
come on, the more viscious they get. And when they are defeated they
either melt down, spraying cyber-spittle in a barrage of all-caps, or run
away with their tails between their legs.
--
Well you've forgotten:
1) Accusing us of intolerence/hatred/calling them a liar
2) Condecending Piety
Hatter
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
05 Feb 2007 07:54:51 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
Truthfully, I see no point in arguing very much. I will change my mind
only if I have proof that I am wrong; you all will change your minds
only if you can have something to measure, smell, taste, pinch, and/or
weigh. I omitted see as the eye can be fooled much too easily to be
accepted; I can, however, imagine several instances where visual proof
might be accepted, but only if every single atheist personally was able
to see whatever it was.
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span. Despite much research,
nothing has explained any one of those physical occurrences - let alone
all three. If I ever have an explanation of all three, I will become
an atheist.
While I'm at it, is there any theist anywhere that presents a good
case? I'd like to read from the best they have to offer, because
frankly, on alt.atheism they seem either mentally ill, mentally
deficient, or mentally evasive.
They have nothing to argue with, software or hardware. The stronger they
come on, the more viscious they get. And when they are defeated they
either melt down, spraying cyber-spittle in a barrage of all-caps, or run
away with their tails between their legs.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greywolf" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 07:08:43 AM |
|
|
"Pangur Ban" <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:mn.2c6e7d72b404c766.64065@worldnet.att.net...
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
Truthfully, I see no point in arguing very much. I will change my mind
only if I have proof that I am wrong; you all will change your minds only
if you can have something to measure, smell, taste, pinch, and/or weigh.
I omitted see as the eye can be fooled much too easily to be accepted; I
can, however, imagine several instances where visual proof might be
accepted, but only if every single atheist personally was able to see
whatever it was.
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will add
one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span. Despite much research,
nothing has explained any one of those physical occurrences - let alone
all three. If I ever have an explanation of all three, I will become an
atheist.
Hmmm. After reading your posts over time, I wonder if you becoming an
atheist would be all *that* great a thing. The degree of polarization
between theists and we atheists is alarming. We *need* people to occupy the
'middle' ground and help stabilize things a bit. You do that *very* well.
It's a position the famed and respected 'Scientific American' columnist,
Martin Gardner, took and regally held. (No 'slouch' there, *that's* for
sure.) So take your time turning into an atheist. And do that for the
*right* reasons; and not just to 'please'. We need all the true 'moderates'
we can get.
Greywolf
<politely snipped>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 08:31:21 AM |
|
|
After serious thinking Greywolf wrote :
"Pangur Ban" <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:mn.2c6e7d72b404c766.64065@worldnet.att.net...
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
Truthfully, I see no point in arguing very much. I will change my mind
only if I have proof that I am wrong; you all will change your minds only
if you can have something to measure, smell, taste, pinch, and/or weigh. I
omitted see as the eye can be fooled much too easily to be accepted; I
can, however, imagine several instances where visual proof might be
accepted, but only if every single atheist personally was able to see
whatever it was.
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will add
one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span. Despite much research,
nothing has explained any one of those physical occurrences - let alone all
three. If I ever have an explanation of all three, I will become an
atheist.
Hmmm. After reading your posts over time, I wonder if you becoming an atheist
would be all *that* great a thing. The degree of polarization between theists
and we atheists is alarming. We *need* people to occupy the 'middle' ground
and help stabilize things a bit. You do that *very* well. It's a position the
famed and respected 'Scientific American' columnist, Martin Gardner, took and
regally held. (No 'slouch' there, *that's* for sure.) So take your time
turning into an atheist. And do that for the *right* reasons; and not just to
'please'. We need all the true 'moderates' we can get.
Greywolf
<politely snipped>
Walksalone has told me much the same.....two wise folk. :-)
I am in no hurry to turn to atheism because at present I am still very
convinced of my theist beliefs. Frankly, nothing any atheist (and I
mean no offense to anyone) has posted anything to change my mind. Some
arguments have been very logical and very well constructed. Some
comments directed specifically at me have occasioned much thought and
introspection, which I see as a "good thing".
I don't mind being in the "middle ground" - though one does tend to
draw fire from both sides sometimes. LOL
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 03:28:01 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:54:51 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
- Refer: <mn.2c6e7d72b404c766.64065@worldnet.att.net>
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
Truthfully, I see no point in arguing very much. I will change my mind
only if I have proof that I am wrong; you all will change your minds
only if you can have something to measure, smell, taste, pinch, and/or
weigh. I omitted see as the eye can be fooled much too easily to be
accepted; I can, however, imagine several instances where visual proof
might be accepted, but only if every single atheist personally was able
to see whatever it was.
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span. Despite much research,
nothing has explained any one of those physical occurrences - let alone
all three. If I ever have an explanation of all three, I will become
an atheist.
You can't say fairer than that!
The Dalai Lama agrees with you, for what that's worth...
While I'm at it, is there any theist anywhere that presents a good
case? I'd like to read from the best they have to offer, because
frankly, on alt.atheism they seem either mentally ill, mentally
deficient, or mentally evasive.
They have nothing to argue with, software or hardware. The stronger they
come on, the more viscious they get. And when they are defeated they
either melt down, spraying cyber-spittle in a barrage of all-caps, or run
away with their tails between their legs.
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 07:16:20 AM |
|
|
Michael Gray submitted this idea :
On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:54:51 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
- Refer: <mn.2c6e7d72b404c766.64065@worldnet.att.net>
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
Truthfully, I see no point in arguing very much. I will change my mind
only if I have proof that I am wrong; you all will change your minds
only if you can have something to measure, smell, taste, pinch, and/or
weigh. I omitted see as the eye can be fooled much too easily to be
accepted; I can, however, imagine several instances where visual proof
might be accepted, but only if every single atheist personally was able
to see whatever it was.
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span. Despite much research,
nothing has explained any one of those physical occurrences - let alone
all three. If I ever have an explanation of all three, I will become
an atheist.
You can't say fairer than that!
The Dalai Lama agrees with you, for what that's worth...
*grin* Much better company than the fundies!!
For anything and everything non-religious, I'd rather be with this
group than anywhere else!!
While I'm at it, is there any theist anywhere that presents a good
case? I'd like to read from the best they have to offer, because
frankly, on alt.atheism they seem either mentally ill, mentally
deficient, or mentally evasive.
They have nothing to argue with, software or hardware. The stronger they
come on, the more viscious they get. And when they are defeated they
either melt down, spraying cyber-spittle in a barrage of all-caps, or run
away with their tails between their legs.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 02:14:02 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:58:01 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:54:51 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
- Refer: <mn.2c6e7d72b404c766.64065@worldnet.att.net>
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
Truthfully, I see no point in arguing very much. I will change my mind
only if I have proof that I am wrong; you all will change your minds
only if you can have something to measure, smell, taste, pinch, and/or
weigh. I omitted see as the eye can be fooled much too easily to be
accepted; I can, however, imagine several instances where visual proof
might be accepted, but only if every single atheist personally was able
to see whatever it was.
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span. Despite much research,
nothing has explained any one of those physical occurrences - let alone
all three. If I ever have an explanation of all three, I will become
an atheist.
You can't say fairer than that!
The Dalai Lama agrees with you, for what that's worth...
If even 10% of theists were like the Dalai Lama, the world would be a
much better place for it!
--
"O Sybilli, si ergo
Fortibus es in ero
O Nobili! Themis trux
Sivat sinem? Causen Dux"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Free Lunch" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 02:30:57 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:14:02 -0500, in alt.atheism
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
<0bohs21t80tbai2iiljid0n692adn0683v@4ax.com>:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:58:01 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:54:51 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
- Refer: <mn.2c6e7d72b404c766.64065@worldnet.att.net>
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1170697642.897070.211460@a34g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Poll: what theist presents the best/most challenging arguments for
theism on this newsgroup?
None. They are nothing but punching bags. Pangur and Thuriez (sp?) are
non-christian and tend to argue with us, which works fine since most of
the invading riff-raff is christian.
Truthfully, I see no point in arguing very much. I will change my mind
only if I have proof that I am wrong; you all will change your minds
only if you can have something to measure, smell, taste, pinch, and/or
weigh. I omitted see as the eye can be fooled much too easily to be
accepted; I can, however, imagine several instances where visual proof
might be accepted, but only if every single atheist personally was able
to see whatever it was.
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span. Despite much research,
nothing has explained any one of those physical occurrences - let alone
all three. If I ever have an explanation of all three, I will become
an atheist.
You can't say fairer than that!
The Dalai Lama agrees with you, for what that's worth...
If even 10% of theists were like the Dalai Lama, the world would be a
much better place for it!
Imagine what the world would be like if even 1% were like that fine
German musician (and doctor) Albert Schweitzer.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 02:28:42 PM |
|
|
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
news:0bohs21t80tbai2iiljid0n692adn0683v@4ax.com:
If even 10% of theists were like the Dalai Lama, the world would be a
much better place for it!
I always thought that was just Dolly Parton's Llama.
<braces for rubber chicken attack>
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Convicted by Earthquack
Plonked by Fester
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
16 Feb 2007 05:59:16 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:28:42 -0600, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
news:0bohs21t80tbai2iiljid0n692adn0683v@4ax.com:
If even 10% of theists were like the Dalai Lama, the world would be a
much better place for it!
I always thought that was just Dolly Parton's Llama.
<braces for rubber chicken attack>
/me sics Wiley E. Coyote on him.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 02:46:25 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:28:42 -0600, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote:
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
news:0bohs21t80tbai2iiljid0n692adn0683v@4ax.com:
If even 10% of theists were like the Dalai Lama, the world would be a
much better place for it!
I always thought that was just Dolly Parton's Llama.
Or David Vorous' Llama ranch in the Sierras.
<braces for rubber chicken attack>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 04:02:20 PM |
|
|
Christopher A.Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote in
news:c5qhs21u9ua6b6q5a8o9h3q3fgbrbav2kp@4ax.com:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:28:42 -0600, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote:
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
news:0bohs21t80tbai2iiljid0n692adn0683v@4ax.com:
If even 10% of theists were like the Dalai Lama, the world would be a
much better place for it!
I always thought that was just Dolly Parton's Llama.
Or David Vorous' Llama ranch in the Sierras.
He used to post here, didn't he?
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Convicted by Earthquack
Plonked by Fester
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 04:42:27 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:02:20 -0600, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote:
Christopher A.Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote in
news:c5qhs21u9ua6b6q5a8o9h3q3fgbrbav2kp@4ax.com:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:28:42 -0600, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote:
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
news:0bohs21t80tbai2iiljid0n692adn0683v@4ax.com:
If even 10% of theists were like the Dalai Lama, the world would be a
much better place for it!
I always thought that was just Dolly Parton's Llama.
Or David Vorous' Llama ranch in the Sierras.
He used to post here, didn't he?
He still does occasionally.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
05 Feb 2007 10:36:31 PM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack. Plonked by Fester.
Member Duke Spanking Club.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
06 Feb 2007 07:12:41 AM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
07 Feb 2007 01:36:24 AM |
|
|
In article <mn.31747d72e234a1ed.64065@worldnet.att.net>,
Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
That sums up my whole attitude towards believers. Believe whatever you
want to believe, just don't tell me what I have to believe.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
Hopefully (fingers and toes crossed), things will change with a new
administration in 2009.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
16 Feb 2007 05:58:13 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom. As Shrub 1 stated paraphrased; "We've got to compete
with China and our educational system must reflect that."
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
19 Feb 2007 02:01:33 AM |
|
|
On Feb 16, 6:58 pm, stoney <sto...@the.net> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom.
So, you think that it's currently the worst it's ever
been? In any of the categories the two of you
reference above?
I'm just trying to determine if the two of you
are enjoying a flight of hyperbole here.
--
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
19 Feb 2007 04:10:16 AM |
|
|
After serious thinking wrote :
On Feb 16, 6:58 pm, stoney <sto...@the.net> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their
proof isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander
those who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in
this country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom.
So, you think that it's currently the worst it's ever
been? In any of the categories the two of you
reference above?
I'm just trying to determine if the two of you
are enjoying a flight of hyperbole here.
Check out my threads on the Thief, the job, the future and the one on
An Email. The Constitution is irrelevant; crime and corruption is
tolerated at best or aided and abetted at worst.
Whistleblowers have not as yet received ONE SINGLE RESPONSE.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
19 Feb 2007 08:35:53 AM |
|
|
On Feb 19, 5:10 am, Pangur Ban <PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
After serious thinking wrote :
On Feb 16, 6:58 pm, stoney <sto...@the.net> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their
proof isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander
those who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in
this country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom.
So, you think that it's currently the worst it's ever
been? In any of the categories the two of you
reference above?
I'm just trying to determine if the two of you
are enjoying a flight of hyperbole here.
Check out my threads on the Thief, the job, the future and the one on
An Email. The Constitution is irrelevant; crime and corruption is
tolerated at best or aided and abetted at worst.
Whistleblowers have not as yet received ONE SINGLE RESPONSE.
Pangur, that's sad - because believing that current
conditions regarding civil rights, liberty, corruption
and religious interference with government are worse
than they've ever been shows, at best, an MTV sense
of history. I'd hoped that you and stoney were hyping
up the situation so you'd feel more heroic in your
great struggle - but you really believe that you're
facing a new and unique apocalypse.
Damn, it's almost like you've got religion and
found a doomsday prophet.
--
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
19 Feb 2007 12:09:35 PM |
|
|
After serious thinking wrote :
On Feb 19, 5:10 am, Pangur Ban <PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
After serious thinking wrote :
On Feb 16, 6:58 pm, stoney <sto...@the.net> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net> bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their
proof isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically
slander those who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the
majority in this country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst
them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom.
So, you think that it's currently the worst it's ever
been? In any of the categories the two of you
reference above?
I'm just trying to determine if the two of you
are enjoying a flight of hyperbole here.
Check out my threads on the Thief, the job, the future and the one on
An Email. The Constitution is irrelevant; crime and corruption is
tolerated at best or aided and abetted at worst.
Whistleblowers have not as yet received ONE SINGLE RESPONSE.
Pangur, that's sad - because believing that current
conditions regarding civil rights, liberty, corruption
and religious interference with government are worse
than they've ever been shows, at best, an MTV sense
of history.
I think what you are reading is my sense of frustration more than
anything. Goodness, I know that each generation throughout history has
felt that things were going to hell in a hand-basket - and longed for
the good-old-times. Having been through the civil rights era, I know
things are better for many; I do think our civil rights are in more
danger than they have been in the past 200 years - despite the McCarthy
era. I feel indifference to corruption is too low - but I don't
despair; I know most people are decent once they KNOW - the problem is
getting the information out. I have seen religion trying to interfere
with government - as in the Kennedy candidacy... and I am aware
attempts are still being made in other areas; I see them no different
than the Great Experiment.... except that they are capable of doing
great harm.
Uh, what is an MTV sense of history? Obviously it has something to do
with television.... of which I watch very little.
I'd hoped that you and stoney were hyping
up the situation so you'd feel more heroic in your
great struggle - but you really believe that you're
facing a new and unique apocalypse.
For me, it is new. I know it is not unique. It is new for me as for
the majority of my life I have never known nor never worked with such
despicable people. Most of the criminals I have known were in fiction
- books and movies. Pfffttt ... these folks are real and I have to
deal with them daily.
Heroic?? No .... I think of myself as a scared but moral and ethical
person who is trying to stop heartless and immoral people... just three
of them. Heroes change the world - I just want to change the small
community where I live.
Damn, it's almost like you've got religion and
found a doomsday prophet.
Uh, I already have a religion. However, this is NOT a religious issue.
The majority of atheists on this group and I share the same morals and
ethics. I think - and hope - that any of them would do the same as I
and the other whistleblowers are trying to do.
I appreciate your comments. Any response from anyone is carefully read
and considered by me. It helps me try to keep a sense of perspective.
I need that when every day one of the other whistleblowers calls me
having remembered yet another abuse of a client or a theft.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
22 Feb 2007 08:05:30 PM |
|
|
On 19 Feb 2007 00:01:33 -0800, wrote in
alt.atheism
On Feb 16, 6:58 pm, stoney <sto...@the.net> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanThe...@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom.
So, you think that it's currently the worst it's ever
been? In any of the categories the two of you
reference above?
Currently the worst it's ever been? Not at all, but imo the decrease in
education's heading that way.
I'm just trying to determine if the two of you
are enjoying a flight of hyperbole here.
No hyperbole on my part, and I never ever expected to come to that
conclusion.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
16 Feb 2007 08:26:26 PM |
|
|
stoney explained on 2/16/2007 :
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom. As Shrub 1 stated paraphrased; "We've got to compete
with China and our educational system must reflect that."
Have you read The Handmaid's Tale?
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
05 Mar 2007 08:06:51 PM |
|
|
Have you read The Handmaid's Tale?
I read it a long time ago. I did not see the movie. My memory may be
faulty. It seems it was yet another dystopia based on a completely
unrealistic paranoid view of America. It was as if Jerry Falwell and
Pat Robertson took over the country and started slaughtering people
and turned Christianity into a version of Islam.
Americans wouldn't put up with it for a second. Remember the
resounding success of Pat Robertson's presidential run? And that was
before he said some of his stupidest things, such as blaming 9/11 on
pagans and gays, calling the wrath of God down on Dover, Pennsylvania,
and more stupid stuff I'm sure most of you are familiar with.
Christians are not the monsters some here believe they are. Obsessive
paranoia about Christians is indefensible. Look at the real world
around you. Four out of five identify themselves as Christians, but
only a tiny minority is interested in the Dictatorship of Christ.
Pete
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
05 Mar 2007 09:47:28 PM |
|
|
After serious thinking wrote :
Have you read The Handmaid's Tale?
I read it a long time ago. I did not see the movie. My memory may be
faulty. It seems it was yet another dystopia based on a completely
unrealistic paranoid view of America. It was as if Jerry Falwell and
Pat Robertson took over the country and started slaughtering people
Not slaughtering.... controlling. The book made clear that many people
had fled to Mexico and Canada.
and turned Christianity into a version of Islam.
Not quite. The book covered the evils of ANY sort of religious
fanaticism having power. As I read the book, I thought of Nazi
Germany, and Salem, and other societies where fundamentalism had power.
Americans wouldn't put up with it for a second.
Remember prohibition? Never underestimate the idiocy of the American
people.
Remember the
resounding success of Pat Robertson's presidential run? And that was
before he said some of his stupidest things, such as blaming 9/11 on
pagans and gays, calling the wrath of God down on Dover, Pennsylvania,
and more stupid stuff I'm sure most of you are familiar with.
Oh, yes. America was fortunate - this time. Let the right conditions
and the right person coincide - and the Handmaid's tale is not
impossible... not exactly as written, but the basic premise.
Christians are not the monsters some here believe they are.
Of course they are not.
Obsessive
paranoia about Christians is indefensible. Look at the real world
around you. Four out of five identify themselves as Christians, but
only a tiny minority is interested in the Dictatorship of Christ.
Total agreement - but those same folks don't have an interest in voting
either. Look at what small turn-outs elections have compared to
eligible population.
I think in a way that was the point of the story - a small determined
group can take over and mold a society into its own horrid beliefs..
whether Nazis, Puritans, or fundamentalist islamics, or christians, or
jews, or whatever group of nutters.
Pete
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
--
Pangur Ban - funter
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
19 Feb 2007 01:39:09 AM |
|
|
In article <mn.84857d72e382d699.64065@worldnet.att.net>,
Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
stoney explained on 2/16/2007 :
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their
proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom. As Shrub 1 stated paraphrased; "We've got to compete
with China and our educational system must reflect that."
Have you read The Handmaid's Tale?
I haven't read the book, but I saw the movie. Scary.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
19 Feb 2007 04:01:07 AM |
|
|
johac submitted this idea :
In article <mn.84857d72e382d699.64065@worldnet.att.net>,
Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
stoney explained on 2/16/2007 :
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned: what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their
proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom. As Shrub 1 stated paraphrased; "We've got to compete
with China and our educational system must reflect that."
Have you read The Handmaid's Tale?
I haven't read the book, but I saw the movie. Scary.
I agree about the educational system.... it started going downhill in
the 60's - and I am not referring to the kids. It began with the
"warm, fuzzy" directives we began to get from the administration.
Don't discipline the students; don't expect too much from them; be a
friend to them. Caught a football playing cheating big-time on an
exam; if I failed him, he would be ineligible to play for a while. A
Vice-principal tried to get me to pass him. Pffftttt.
Constitution? An old piece of paper ......
I quit listening to rustling of the bushes long ago.....
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
19 Feb 2007 02:11:20 PM |
|
|
In article <mn.98b57d72f8821bcb.64065@worldnet.att.net>,
Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
johac submitted this idea :
In article <mn.84857d72e382d699.64065@worldnet.att.net>,
Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
stoney explained on 2/16/2007 :
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned:
what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their
proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander
those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in
this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom. As Shrub 1 stated paraphrased; "We've got to compete
with China and our educational system must reflect that."
Have you read The Handmaid's Tale?
I haven't read the book, but I saw the movie. Scary.
I agree about the educational system.... it started going downhill in
the 60's - and I am not referring to the kids. It began with the
"warm, fuzzy" directives we began to get from the administration.
Don't discipline the students; don't expect too much from them; be a
friend to them. Caught a football playing cheating big-time on an
exam; if I failed him, he would be ineligible to play for a while. A
Vice-principal tried to get me to pass him. Pffftttt.
As you know I am quite critical or religion. I endured twelve years of
Catholic schooling. I resent now the time that I wasted in religion
class, and how they tried to warp history and the science. But for a few
things I will give them credit. First there was discipline in the
classroom. In elementary school a lot of it was enforced by physical
punishment which I think was wrong. In high school it was enforced by
threat of detention or in worse cases expulsion. Some may call this
draconian, but there was order in the classroom and kids were there to
learn and not interfere with other kids learning.
Second. While I felt that education in science (I never had a biology
course until I got to college) was lacking, they were very good on the
basics. By the time I graduated from elementary school, every kid in my
class could read, write and do simple math. If kids failed, they were
left back.
I'm not saying that we should run our schools as prison camps, but we
need to restore discipline and concentrate on the basics. In addition to
the topics I mentioned above kids today need a good grounding in
science. As far as sports and the other things, it should be understood
that kids are there to learn and that has priority over everything.
Constitution? An old piece of paper ......
Sadly true.
I quit listening to rustling of the bushes long ago.....
There's no way that the current one should have been selected.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Theists on alt.atheism |
19 Feb 2007 03:09:03 PM |
|
|
After serious thinking johac wrote :
In article <mn.98b57d72f8821bcb.64065@worldnet.att.net>,
Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
johac submitted this idea :
In article <mn.84857d72e382d699.64065@worldnet.att.net>,
Pangur Ban <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
stoney explained on 2/16/2007 :
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:12:41 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote after much deliberation:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net>
bloodied us up with this:
Most know that I feel I have proof - for myself - of a deity. I will
add one more bit of information of my proof I've never mentioned:
what
convinced me consisted in part of three distinct, separate, physical
occurrences.... within a very short time-span.
I have no problem with that at all. Even when Christians make the same
claim. The problem with them is that they can't understand why their
proof
isn't proof for anyone else. Then they go on to publically slander
those
who don't and can't agree with them. Since they are the majority in
this
country, it can be downright scary to walk amongst them.
I would never, ever, demand or even politely ask that anyone believe as
I do.
I too find the religious climate in this country scary ... and I fear
for the future.
What 'future?' The public educational system was dismantled years ago.
The US Constitution's been toilet paper for years. What's ahead is, at
best, serfdom. As Shrub 1 stated paraphrased; "We've got to compete
with China and our educational system must reflect that."
Have you read The Handmaid's Tale?
I haven't read the book, but I saw the movie. Scary.
I agree about the educational system.... it started going downhill in
the 60's - and I am not referring to the kids. It began with the
"warm, fuzzy" directives we began to get from the administration.
Don't discipline the students; don't expect too much from them; be a
friend to them. Caught a football playing cheating big-time on an
exam; if I failed him, he would be ineligible to play for a while. A
Vice-principal tried to get me to pass him. Pffftttt.
As you know I am quite critical or religion.
*giggle* Nooooooo! I hadn't noticed! lol
I endured twelve years of
Catholic schooling. I resent now the time that I wasted in religion
class, and how they tried to warp history and the science. But for a few
things I will give them credit. First there was discipline in the
classroom.
And there still is from what I have learned by exchanging chit-chat
with the catholic school teachers here. As the parents PAY directly
for the schooling, the kids HAVE to toe whatever line the teachers set.
I envy this.
In elementary school a lot of it was enforced by physical
punishment which I think was wrong.
Agreed - and those methods are falling to the wayside as teachers learn
more effective discipline methods. Wish public school teachers could
do the same, but they can't. When I teach my parenting classes, that
is one issue which arises again and again disciplining of the kids at
school. Parents have a hard time seeing that what they can expect of
their kids at home is very very different from what a teacher must
expect. At home a parent has one to maybe six kids - a teacher has 25!
BIG DIFFERENCE.
In high school it was enforced by
threat of detention or in worse cases expulsion.
When I quit teaching, expulsion and/or detention were hoped for by the
kids. Support from the parents was non-existent as they had no control
over their kids either.
Some may call this
draconian, but there was order in the classroom and kids were there to
learn and not interfere with other kids learning.
Hear! Hear! When things changed to the opposite is when I quit.
Second. While I felt that education in science (I never had a biology
course until I got to college) was lacking, they were very good on the
basics. By the time I graduated from elementary school, every kid in my
class could read, write and do simple math. If kids failed, they were
left back.
Oh, but now we have social promotion. Can't have the little kiddos
feelings hurt ..... move them on with their classmates even if they
can't read, write, or spell.
I'm not saying that we should run our schools as prison camps,
Hrmmmm.... let me think about that. :')
but we
need to restore discipline and concentrate on the basics. In addition to
the topics I mentioned above kids today need a good grounding in
science. As far as sports and the other things, it should be understood
that kids are there to learn and that has priority over everything.
Learning the basics is hard work ... memorization and drill. Don't
tell me you are advocating those? (TIC)
Constitution? An old piece of paper ......
Sadly true.
I quit listening to rustling of the bushes long ago.....
There's no way that the current one should have been selected.
I didn't vote for either of them!!!!!
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
