| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Fredric L. Rice" |
| Date: |
26 Oct 2003 07:25:44 PM |
| Object: |
Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
-=-
From The Washington Post, 10/25/03:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14193-2003Oct24.html
By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 25, 2003; Page A01
Republican lawmakers and conservative activists are making plans to
turn gay marriage into a major issue in next year's elections, with
some Christian groups saying that banning same-sex unions is a higher
immediate priority for them than restricting abortion.
Party strategists said the issue could be a bonanza for mobilizing
conservatives to fund campaigns and turn out to vote, particularly in
the South.
Conservative groups said they plan to challenge candidates to sign a
pledge in support of a constitutional amendment precluding gay
marriage, then use the results -- along with votes Republicans hope to
force in the House and Senate -- as a wedge against Democrats.
Watching the Episcopal Church roiled over whether openly gay bishops
should be confirmed, politicians in both parties are beginning to see
gay marriage as a potentially key issue for candidates in a 50-50
nation.
"It's becoming a bigger issue by the day," said Tony Perkins,
president of the Family Research Council, a conservative group with
many friends in the White House.
"It's going to have a big impact on this election cycle. And we're
going to help it become a front-burner issue at the state and national
level, if it doesn't become one on its own."
---
"I spewed bodily fluids." - Shydavid http://www.skeptictank.org/
http://www.RonTheNut.ORG/ PGP: http://www.skeptictank.org/frice.pgp
-- You love drugs! You love drugs, don't you?! You better
not say anything about my mother! Don't you DARE say anything
about my mother! -- Scientology's International President (Audio
files of this nutter at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice
.
|
|
| User: "Fester" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
27 Oct 2003 06:43:26 AM |
|
|
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
27 Oct 2003 02:30:05 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<Op8nb.19626$IA2.813531@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
Not all, no. Maybe not even most, but certainly the only ones we hear
from regurally. If that bothers you then you should speak out against
them. Instead of trying to convince us to lay off them.
jwk
BAAWA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
02 Nov 2003 02:50:41 PM |
|
|
(jwk) wrote in message news:<c6f5ba32.0310271230.5ecea92d@posting.google.com>...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<Op8nb.19626$IA2.813531@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
Not all, no. Maybe not even most, but certainly the only ones we hear
from regurally.
I agree with 2/3rds of what you say here. But I do think that
it is overstatement to say that we only regularly hear from
the "bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressor" faction of Christianity.
Realize, too that the people who you are addressing aren't,
for the most part, going to know what you are talking about
because they are seeing this in alt.religion.christianity (where
Fred Rice crossposted this) NOT alt.atheism. (Note that
crossposting inflamatory messages to groups with opposing views
is universally considered troll behavior)
If that bothers you then you should speak out against
them.
Then shouldn't we be speaking out against crossposting bigot
trolls like Fred Rice? That's what I'm doing.
Instead of trying to convince us to lay off them.
If the past is prelude, you will see some here in a.a. trying
to "convince" me to lay off Fred, including Fred himself who
(again, if past is prelude) will brand me a "Christian" for
the effrontery of daring to criticize him.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
03 Nov 2003 08:03:42 AM |
|
|
(Del) wrote in message news:<1902ce50.0311021250.709ca517@posting.google.com>...
jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com (jwk) wrote in message news:<c6f5ba32.0310271230.5ecea92d@posting.google.com>...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<Op8nb.19626$IA2.813531@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
Not all, no. Maybe not even most, but certainly the only ones we hear
from regurally.
I agree with 2/3rds of what you say here. But I do think that
it is overstatement to say that we only regularly hear from
the "bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressor" faction of Christianity.
Realize, too that the people who you are addressing aren't,
for the most part, going to know what you are talking about
because they are seeing this in alt.religion.christianity (where
Fred Rice crossposted this) NOT alt.atheism.
I said "hear from". I wasn't referring only to these newsgroups. Go
read the paper. I'll bet for every nice xian message of tolerance you
have ten of intolerance. And the nasty ones are front-page.
I don't know that Fester is from alt.religion.christianity, but I
didn't trim the headers just in case. arc knows the score on x-posts.
They aren't innocent babes-in-the-woods. Nice try.
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
03 Nov 2003 05:58:08 PM |
|
|
(jwk) wrote in message news:<c6f5ba32.0311030603.1dc32052@posting.google.com>...
jfacts@earthlink.net (Del) wrote in message news:<1902ce50.0311021250.709ca517@posting.google.com>...
(jwk) wrote in message news:<c6f5ba32.0310271230.5ecea92d@posting.google.com>...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote in message news:<Op8nb.19626$IA2.813531@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
Not all, no. Maybe not even most, but certainly the only ones we hear
from regurally.
I agree with 2/3rds of what you say here. But I do think that
it is overstatement to say that we only regularly hear from
the "bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressor" faction of Christianity.
Realize, too that the people who you are addressing aren't,
for the most part, going to know what you are talking about
because they are seeing this in alt.religion.christianity (where
Fred Rice crossposted this) NOT alt.atheism.
I said "hear from". I wasn't referring only to these newsgroups.
Well, in my experience the ones "we" hear from regularly are the
ones who invade alt.atheism with their ***** attacks.
Go read the paper.
Huh?
I'll bet for every nice xian message of tolerance you
have ten of intolerance. And the nasty ones are front-page.
I don't know what your point is.
I don't know that Fester is from alt.religion.christianity, but I
didn't trim the headers just in case. arc knows the score on x-posts.
They aren't innocent babes-in-the-woods. Nice try.
Who is "arc?" Who are "they?" What do you imagine I'm
trying?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
27 Oct 2003 08:26:31 PM |
|
|
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
The Constitution dictates that all States must recognize the marriages of
all other states -- that's a given not subject to debate. I also never
said that _all_ Christians were like this but I _will_ point out that the
vast majority are. Any time a believer in any god, goddess, pixie,
vampire, or werewolf presumes to drag their intellectual superiors into
their -- the believer's -- delusions, historically the blood flows freely.
---
Yes, George W. Bush is an unelected baby killing fascist dictator.
Also: Scientology's International President (Audio files of this
nutter available at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice )
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
02 Nov 2003 03:41:18 PM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vprktceqosbtf8@corp.supernews.com>...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" < > wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
The Constitution dictates that all States must recognize the marriages of
all other states -- that's a given not subject to debate. I also never
said that _all_ Christians were like this but I _will_ point out that the
vast majority are. Any time a believer in any god, goddess, pixie,
vampire, or werewolf presumes to drag their intellectual superiors into
their -- the believer's -- delusions, historically the blood flows freely.
Speaking of delusions, how about providing some evidence that
the vast majority of Christians would be burning gays and
stringing them up from street lamp posts if they had their way?
And no, merely saying that "history shows" this to be true
does not qualify as showing this to be true. It qualifies
as yet another unsupported claim.
Yes, George W. Bush is an unelected baby killing fascist dictator.
Wow. Well at least give him credit for being the only
unelected baby killing fascist dictator in history who
would allow someone in his domain to call him this. Doesn't
seem to make sense, does it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
02 Nov 2003 07:32:54 PM |
|
|
(Del) wrote:
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vprktceqosbtf8@corp.supernews.com>...
"Fester" <not@home.com> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
The Constitution dictates that all States must recognize the marriages of
all other states -- that's a given not subject to debate. I also never
said that _all_ Christians were like this but I _will_ point out that the
vast majority are. Any time a believer in any god, goddess, pixie,
vampire, or werewolf presumes to drag their intellectual superiors into
their -- the believer's -- delusions, historically the blood flows freely.
Speaking of delusions, how about providing some evidence that
the vast majority of Christians would be burning gays and
stringing them up from street lamp posts if they had their way?
First the clown rhetorically asks for evidence.
And no, merely saying that "history shows" this to be true
does not qualify as showing this to be true. It qualifies
as yet another unsupported claim.
Then the clown poisons the well by proactively dismissing the history of
the death cult which proves undeniably that given the chance Christianity
would love to continue where the U. S. Constitution cropped it off.
Wonderful.
---
Yes, George W. Bush is an unelected baby killing fascist dictator.
Also: Scientology's International President (Audio files of this
nutter available at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice )
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
03 Nov 2003 09:25:47 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqbc2n4r10415a@corp.supernews.com>...
jfacts@earthlink.net (Del) wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vprktceqosbtf8@corp.supernews.com>...
"Fredric L. Rice" < > wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
Here are the key points of Fred's claims:
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
[...]
I also never
said that _all_ Christians were like this but I _will_ point out that the
vast majority are.
[...]
Speaking of delusions, how about providing some evidence that
the vast majority of Christians would be burning gays and
stringing them up from street lamp posts if they had their way?
First the clown rhetorically asks for evidence.
And no, merely saying that "history shows" this to be true
does not qualify as showing this to be true. It qualifies
as yet another unsupported claim.
Then the clown poisons the well by proactively dismissing the history of
the death cult
"Proactively"? LOL. I think you were trying to say
"preemptively," but of course that's false too.
Since Fred is irrational I won't bother with him. But as
any rational reader can see I didn't dismiss history, I
dismissed Fred trying to pawn off *the statement* "history
shows" _AS_ evidence. I did this because I knew Fred had
no evidence of his claim that: the vast majority of
Christians would be burning gays and stringing them up
from street lamp posts if they had their way.
As you will see, Fred will continue to stonewall his
lack of evidence by trying to change the subject to me instead.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
03 Nov 2003 09:45:21 PM |
|
|
(Del) wrote:
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqbc2n4r10415a@corp.supernews.com>...
Speaking of delusions, how about providing some evidence that
the vast majority of Christians would be burning gays and
stringing them up from street lamp posts if they had their way?
First the clown rhetorically asks for evidence.
And no, merely saying that "history shows" this to be true
does not qualify as showing this to be true. It qualifies
as yet another unsupported claim.
Then the clown poisons the well by proactively dismissing the history of
the death cult
"Proactively"? LOL. I think you were trying to say
"preemptively," but of course that's false too.
Proactively: Acting in advance to deal with an expected difficulty;
anticipatory: proactive steps to prevent terrorism.
Typical fucking brain damaged Christian.
Since Fred is irrational I won't bother with him.
There you have it: Christianity's history is glibly dismissed with but
a wave of the hand. The inhuman atrocities committed by Christianity
is religated to the non-existant by nothing more than a complaint that
those who would rub their fucking noses in their own history are
"irreational."
That's why you baby killing fuckers keep killing innocent people in
the first place. You don't take responsibility for your own murderous
death cult and that's why people like you invade innocent countries and
start murdering their children -- like your ideologies bussies are doing
in Iraq right now... just another religious crusade in the never-ending
war between the Christian buttfucks and the Islamic buttfucks.
---
Yes, George W. Bush is an unelected baby killing fascist dictator.
Also: Scientology's International President (Audio files of this
nutter available at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice )
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
05 Nov 2003 03:48:00 PM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqe88n9sqfc795@corp.supernews.com>...
Look, it's very simple. You made a claim: that if (the
vast majority of) Christians across the country had
their way, they would be burning gays and stringing
them up from street lamp posts.
Can you substantiate that the "vast majority" of
Christians would do this or not? This has nothing to do
with me no matter how hard you try to deflect the issue.
You certainly demand evidence of others often enough:
"Why not defend your arguments like a man and back them
up with evidence?"
"You make the claim, you get to provide the evidence."
"Why can't these nuts ever post their evidence?"
Etc.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Erica" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
05 Nov 2003 10:05:29 PM |
|
|
(Del) wrote in message news:<1902ce50.0311051348.4dcdef@posting.google.com>...
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqe88n9sqfc795@corp.supernews.com>...
Look, it's very simple. You made a claim: that if (the
vast majority of) Christians across the country had
their way, they would be burning gays and stringing
them up from street lamp posts.
Can you substantiate that the "vast majority" of
Christians would do this or not? This has nothing to do
with me no matter how hard you try to deflect the issue.
You certainly demand evidence of others often enough:
"Why not defend your arguments like a man and back them
up with evidence?"
"You make the claim, you get to provide the evidence."
"Why can't these nuts ever post their evidence?"
Etc.
If he narrowed that to a vast majority of Christians *on Usenet* he
MIGHT have a case. At least he'd have a place to start looking,
anyway.
And then, after he's done with gathering that data, he can try and
substantiate his claim that you are a "typical fucking brain damaged
Christian." Now THAT'S going to be a toughie.
Erica
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Atheism Doesn't Need Sophistry Was: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
06 Nov 2003 02:45:35 PM |
|
|
Hi Erica
I hope you don't mind if I use your post to introduce
Fred Rice to an audience that knows relatively little
about him.
scribe53151@yahoo.com (Erica) wrote in message
news:<6dfe32b8.0311052005.4c0901f4@posting.google.com>...
jfacts@earthlink.net (Del) wrote in message
news:<1902ce50.0311051348.4dcdef@posting.google.com>...
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message
news:<vqe88n9sqfc795@corp.supernews.com>...
Look, it's very simple. You made a claim: that if (the
vast majority of) Christians across the country had
their way, they would be burning gays and stringing
them up from street lamp posts.
[...]
If he narrowed that to a vast majority of Christians *on Usenet* he
MIGHT have a case.
I doubt it.
At least he'd have a place to start looking,
anyway.
At least if he cared about evidence.
And then, after he's done with gathering that data, he can try and
substantiate his claim that you are a "typical fucking brain damaged
Christian." Now THAT'S going to be a toughie.
Thanks. Considering that I'm an atheist it might be.
However Fred has never been one to let facts inhibit
him. Especially when he is on the ropes like he is now.
Unfortunately his sophistic tactics are not so well
known on alt.atheism. But here is what I've seen:
Fred's #1 tactic is, of course, ad hominem. Example:
he tries to avoid the issue of his lack of evidence by
talking about me. But what do I have to do with this
lack of evidence of his?
Which brings us to his #2 tactic: misrepresentation--of
various kinds, including outright lying. Example: In
his desperation to deflect the issue to me he
misrepresents what I said. He claims:
"And you stated from the onset that you would refuse to admit or even
look at the history of the Christanic death cult which proves the fact
undeniably."
He is willing to look pathetic here (poor Fred is
helpless in the face of my alleged intransigence!) and
to lie rather than admit he was wrong.
As you know, Erica, (and he knows) I simply told him,
up front, that merely declaring that "history shows" is
not, in itself, evidence:
"And no, merely saying that 'history shows' this to be true
does not qualify as showing this to be true. It qualifies
as yet another unsupported claim."
More about this in a moment.
To try to deflect the issue Fred also misrepresents me
as being a Christian (where have we seen that before?).
Then he can use ad hominem to talk about me instead of
his lack of evidence (Assuming that only a Christian
would call him on his dishonesty is an insult to
atheists and I take it as such). Check out this humorous
rant where he combines the ad hominem, false analogy
and straw man fallacies:
Don't like it? Leave the fucking cult. When you join the KKK, don't
go whine about how you're not a racist and don't go demanding you can
ignore the mountain of evidence that shows what the KKK stands for.
Notice Fred's specious attempt here to compare the
"mountain of evidence that shows what the KKK stands
for" and the evidence for his claim? I guess if it
wasn't for me denying him permission, he would produce
some of this evidence, the poor baby.
His misrepresentation also includes creative editing of
posts. Notice his habit of deleting whatever he lacks
the courage to answer. Often, he will attempt to put
words in your mouth that are contradicted by the words
he deleted. Here is an example of that: when I said...
"Since Fred is irrational I won't bother with him. But as
any rational reader can see I didn't dismiss history, I
dismissed Fred trying to pawn off *the statement* "history
shows" _AS_ evidence. I did this because I knew Fred had
no evidence of his claim that: the vast majority of
Christians would be burning gays and stringing them up
from street lamp posts if they had their way."
----
.... Fred deleted all but the first line so he could
say:
"There you have it: Christianity's history is glibly dismissed with but
a wave of the hand. The inhuman atrocities committed by Christianity
is religated to the non-existant by nothing more than a complaint that
those who would rub their fucking noses in their own history are
'irreational' [sic]."
-----
He even builds on this fabrication in his next post,
adding new dimensions to it:
"And you stated from the onset that you would refuse to admit or even
look at the history of the Christanic death cult which proves the fact
undeniably."
-----
And finally, notice that he does, in the above, just
exactly what I predicted--he pretends that his claim
that "history shows" ("...the history of the Christanic
death cult which proves the fact undeniably") is
itself evidence.
This is not the end of his sophistry. But I want Fred
to get in a little deeper before I drop that bomb on
him.
Ciao.
PS: I trimmed alt.religion.christianity from the header
and as soon as he noticed it, guess who put it back in?
Certified troll behavior.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
05 Nov 2003 07:23:34 PM |
|
|
(Del) wrote:
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqe88n9sqfc795@corp.supernews.com>...
Look, it's very simple. You made a claim: that if (the
vast majority of) Christians across the country had
their way, they would be burning gays and stringing
them up from street lamp posts.
And you stated from the onset that you would refuse to admit or even
look at the history of the Christanic death cult which proves the fact
undeniably. And by history, that falls into the persecution of gays,
women, and Arabs that's sweeping the United States these days, all of
which are solely because the people who join authoritarian death cults
are the type of barbarians that atrocities appeal to.
Don't like it? Leave the fucking cult. When you join the KKK, don't
go whine about how you're not a racist and don't go demanding you can
ignore the mountain of evidence that shows what the KKK stands for.
---
Yes, George W. Bush is an unelected baby killing fascist dictator.
Also: Scientology's International President (Audio files of this
nutter available at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice )
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
06 Nov 2003 09:52:16 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqj8mvsnv7j9b@corp.supernews.com>...
jfacts@earthlink.net (Del) wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqe88n9sqfc795@corp.supernews.com>...
Look, it's very simple. You made a claim: that if (the
vast majority of) Christians across the country had
their way, they would be burning gays and stringing
them up from street lamp posts.
Can you substantiate that the "vast majority" of
Christians would do this or not? This has nothing to do
with me no matter how hard you try to deflect the issue.
You certainly demand evidence of others often enough:
"Why not defend your arguments like a man and back them
up with evidence?"
"You make the claim, you get to provide the evidence."
"Why can't these nuts ever post their evidence?"
Etc.
And you stated from the onset that you would refuse to admit or even
look at the history of the Christanic death cult which proves the fact
undeniably.
As you know I said nothing of the kind. Go ahead, quote me.
I dare you. It's got nothing to do with me in any event.
I don't decide what evidence is convincing to readers or
not. Why don't you just admit that you can't provide any
evidence for your claim that "the vast majority" of
Christians "would be burning gays and stringing them up
from street lamp posts" "if they had their way"?
People who can't admit they are wrong look ridiculous.
If you have evidence, post it. If you don't then continue
to stonewall if your ego is so fragile you can't admit it.
I've got nothing to do with it no matter how hard you try
to change the subject.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hector Plasmic" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
06 Nov 2003 02:19:07 PM |
|
|
(Del) wrote in message news:<1902ce50.0311060752.25fc62d2@posting.google.com>...
Why don't you just admit that you can't provide any
evidence for your claim that "the vast majority" of
Christians "would be burning gays and stringing them
up from street lamp posts" "if they had their way"?
Yep, it's a pretty ridiculous stance. Social ostracism, police
harrassment, even an occassional killing (SSDD), sure.
Fanatics always try to make the other side sound like it's composed
mainly of fanatics, it seems to me.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
06 Nov 2003 09:51:16 PM |
|
|
(Del) wrote:
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqj8mvsnv7j9b@corp.supernews.com>...
(Del) wrote:
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqe88n9sqfc795@corp.supernews.com>...
Look, it's very simple. You made a claim: that if (the
vast majority of) Christians across the country had
their way, they would be burning gays and stringing
them up from street lamp posts.
Can you substantiate that the "vast majority" of
Christians would do this or not? This has nothing to do
with me no matter how hard you try to deflect the issue.
You certainly demand evidence of others often enough:
"Why not defend your arguments like a man and back them
up with evidence?"
"You make the claim, you get to provide the evidence."
"Why can't these nuts ever post their evidence?"
Etc.
And you stated from the onset that you would refuse to admit or even
look at the history of the Christanic death cult which proves the fact
undeniably.
As you know I said nothing of the kind. Go ahead, quote me.
I dare you. It's got nothing to do with me in any event.
If it wasn't you, it was one of your ideological colleagues that tried
to poison the well. As it stands, the mountain of evidence that history
has to show stands regardless of whether you or some other fundie wants
to admit it exists or not. And I see later from your comments that you,
too, want to deny your own death cult's history.
I don't decide what evidence is convincing to readers or
not. Why don't you just admit that you can't provide any
evidence for your claim that "the vast majority" of
Christians "would be burning gays and stringing them up
from street lamp posts" "if they had their way"?
And yet here you are denying the history of your own death cult. And at
the same time you're ignoring the inhuman atrocities your kind are
committing against gays, women, blacks, and Islamics in this country
even now. The only reason Christianity isn't engaging in wholesale
slaughter in the United States right now is because -- as it has been
shown down through history -- all you're waiting for is the hat to drop.
When you join Christianity, you can't thereafter claim you don't agree
or abide by what it has historically stood for. You don't join the KKK
and then demand you're not a racist.
People who can't admit they are wrong look ridiculous.
People who ignore their own cult's history are dangerous to their
neighbors.
If you have evidence, post it. If you don't then continue
to stonewall if your ego is so fragile you can't admit it.
I've got nothing to do with it no matter how hard you try
to change the subject.
You're either a troll or you don't know what the history of your own
death cult is. You're either an insane buttfuck else you don't care
what your own cult's ideology of genocide is.
---
Yes, George W. Bush is an unelected baby killing fascist dictator.
Also: Scientology's International President (Audio files of this
nutter available at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice )
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
10 Nov 2003 07:27:09 AM |
|
|
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vqm5n3go88lr61@corp.supernews.com...
jfacts@earthlink.net (Del) wrote:
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message
news:<vqj8mvsnv7j9b@corp.supernews.com>...
jfacts@earthlink.net (Del) wrote:
frice@skeptictank.org (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message
news:<vqe88n9sqfc795@corp.supernews.com>...
Look, it's very simple. You made a claim: that if (the
vast majority of) Christians across the country had
their way, they would be burning gays and stringing
them up from street lamp posts.
Can you substantiate that the "vast majority" of
Christians would do this or not? This has nothing to do
with me no matter how hard you try to deflect the issue.
You certainly demand evidence of others often enough:
"Why not defend your arguments like a man and back them
up with evidence?"
"You make the claim, you get to provide the evidence."
"Why can't these nuts ever post their evidence?"
Etc.
And you stated from the onset that you would refuse to admit or even
look at the history of the Christanic death cult which proves the fact
undeniably.
As you know I said nothing of the kind. Go ahead, quote me.
I dare you. It's got nothing to do with me in any event.
If it wasn't you, it was one of your ideological colleagues that tried
to poison the well. As it stands, the mountain of evidence that history
has to show stands regardless of whether you or some other fundie wants
to admit it exists or not. And I see later from your comments that you,
too, want to deny your own death cult's history.
I don't decide what evidence is convincing to readers or
not. Why don't you just admit that you can't provide any
evidence for your claim that "the vast majority" of
Christians "would be burning gays and stringing them up
from street lamp posts" "if they had their way"?
And yet here you are denying the history of your own death cult. And at
the same time you're ignoring the inhuman atrocities your kind are
committing against gays, women, blacks, and Islamics in this country
even now. The only reason Christianity isn't engaging in wholesale
slaughter in the United States right now is because -- as it has been
shown down through history -- all you're waiting for is the hat to drop.
When you join Christianity, you can't thereafter claim you don't agree
or abide by what it has historically stood for. You don't join the KKK
and then demand you're not a racist.
People who can't admit they are wrong look ridiculous.
People who ignore their own cult's history are dangerous to their
neighbors.
If you have evidence, post it. If you don't then continue
to stonewall if your ego is so fragile you can't admit it.
I've got nothing to do with it no matter how hard you try
to change the subject.
You're either a troll or you don't know what the history of your own
death cult is. You're either an insane buttfuck else you don't care
what your own cult's ideology of genocide is.
You are right. Del is an insane buttfuck. She/he appears to be an agnostic
but calls herself an atheist. She pretends to be an impartial observer
pointing out logical fallacies and errors of facts. Her tag line reflects
her sky high opinion of herself: "Viscount of alt.atheism Debate Standards
and Practices". In reality she is a compulsive liar. She has set the
record for most lies to me in one post (22). She defends Christians quite
often even when they are clearly lying. For example, one Christian
misquoted me five times, and every time I told him that he misquoted me and
that he was a liar. Del defended the Christian and even went so far as to
apologize to the Christian because I called him a liar.
(P.S. This little factoid should not be interpreted as an endorsement of
your opinions.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
12 Nov 2003 05:50:19 AM |
|
|
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message news:<boo3nn$dma$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
[...]
You are right. Del is an insane buttfuck.
Now come on. You're just upset because I demonstrated that
your claim--that your goal in spamming 5+ Christian groups
was to "educate" Christians--was BS.
Crossposting flame bait messages between philosophically
opposed groups is certified troll behavior and you do it
_every day_.
I even told you how you could avoid the flame wars that
you start by your crossposting while still posting your
diatribes, but you ignored it. I can only conclude from
that, that your intent is to start those flame wars and
that you revel in the attention.
She/he appears to be an agnostic
but calls herself an atheist. She pretends to be an impartial observer
Funny, I never said this, or anything remotely like it. By
your (lack of) standards this qualifies as a lie. For examples
of your (lack of) standards for what constitutes a lie (for
other people, never yourself) just keep reading.
Her tag line reflects
her sky high opinion of herself: "Viscount of alt.atheism Debate Standards
and Practices".
LOL! I can see how a humorless dweeb might take a tag line
seriously, especially one who is so self important as to
bestow upon himself the title of "Editor" when he is no
such thing. But I think most people can figure it out that
I am probably not an actual "Viscount." Gee, I bet you can
see your reflection in the bottom of that barrel!
In reality she is a compulsive liar. She has set the
record for most lies to me in one post (22).
Here is an example of what constitutes a "lie" according to you:
Chris Baba:
This was not written by me. I will not be responding to it.
Del:
Correct. My mistake. But you do concur with it and ask
questions based on it. But are you now saying that you
repudiate it? What, exactly in it do you disagree with?
Chris Baba:
I'll mark this down as another lie. I said "I will not be responding
to
it." I didn't say anything about disagreeing with it.
---------
As any reasonably sane person can see, I was asking two
questions, the second one a follow up of the first.
Obviously if you had answered the first one in the negative
the second question would have been moot. But since you
preferred here to be evasive, and since you seem desperate
here to find something to accuse me of, you ignored the
first question and say I am lying by asking you the second
(asking a question is a lie now!) Note that I even said that you
concurred with the statement (see the statement below) and
asked questions based on it. Calling this a lie is itself a
lie and an example of your desperation-time tactics.
Another example of what you call "lies:"
Chris Baba:
By the way this is the second time you erroneously inserted the spelling
incorrect "[sic]" after a word which was spelled correctly.
Del:
"Sic" does not mean "spelling incorrect," It is short
for "so it stands," and means the text was quoted
exactly as found and the error was not made in
transcribing it. It is telling that you don't see the
error in claiming "god" committed genocide.
Baba:
Wow! You are actually right about something and I was wrong.
However, your usage doesn't seem to conform to common usage.
Del:
However, I
actually did mistakenly correct the original mispelling
in my quoting of it, which could be one source of your
confusion. For this I appologize. You have enough
confusion to deal with already without my adding to it.
Baba:
You didn't correct any misspelling of mine. I looked at the
originals. No
misspelling that you corrected. I'll mark that down as another lie.
---------
Where did I say I was correcting any mispellings of
yours, dufus? By your own (lack of ) standards that is
itself a lie.
Furthermore I was right about what I said. Here is
the original quote:
Mylon:
The fact that ol' Yahweh doesn't mind telling people to commit
genoside (but
spare the virgins!) says a lot for the morals of this supposed
Yahweh. And
it only takes one bad deed to forever tarnish your reputation. Look
at
Peewee Herman. People will forever remember him for masturbating in
public,
no matter what he does now, yet you expect us to forgive God for
multiple
genocides?
-------
See the first "genoside"?
I commented:
Del:
How does a non-existent God commit multiple genocides [sic]?
---
As you can see, I inadvertently corrected the misspelling
in my re-statement of the word.
All this shows the level of dishonesty you are willing to
perpetrate against not just me but virtually anyone who
explicitly disagrees with you. You are a disgrace and I
resent you representing yourself as an atheist when in
fact you are an anti-Christian cross-posting troll.
She defends Christians quite
often even when they are clearly lying.
Another blatant flat out lie by Chris Baba. Note also the
immaturity in constantly referring to me as "she" and "her."
If I applied Baba's (lack of) standards as to what constitutes
a lie, this would also qualify.
For example, one Christian
misquoted me five times, and every time I told him that he misquoted me and
that he was a liar. Del defended the Christian and even went so far as to
apologize to the Christian because I called him a liar.
Another flat out lie that is easily proved to be. Here is
my answer to your post whining about my apology and where
I informed you of my reasons for it. As you and everyone
else can see, your above accusation is an undeniable lie,
one that is typical of your behavior in general. Naturally
I dont expect you to be mature enough to admit it despite
the smoking gun nature of the proof:
-= Begin Quote =-
From: (Del)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christianity
Subject: Re: Apology. Was: Re: Yarrido the Liar - Legal Action Next
Date: 23 Sep 2003 14:24:34 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <1902ce50.0309231324.46cfbcac@posting.google.com>
References: <1902ce50.0309170858.5a03e2c9@posting.google.com>
<bkola9$1gh$1@bob.news.rcn.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.252.216.132
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1064352276 3017 127.0.0.1 (23 Sep 2003
21:24:36 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Sep 2003 21:24:36 GMT
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message news:<bkola9$1gh$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
"Del" < > wrote in message
news:1902ce50.0309170858.5a03e2c9@posting.google.com...
As an atheist, I would like to publicly apologize for the
words and behavior of the poster "Editor of EvilBible.com"
in your newsgroup. I want you to know that he does not reflect
the attitudes of atheists in general. I have just now found
this thread, which explains why I am posting this a month and
a half after the fact. I would only request that you not
judge all atheists based on the behavior of this moron.
Once again my apologies.
What are you apologizing about?
For your words and behavior here, in this newsgroup, as
a self proclaimed atheist. Try working on your reading
comprehension.
I have done nothing wrong.
You've done plenty wrong, from your crude, boorish behavior,
to your crude, boorish language. Your hate-filled anti-christian
posts just ooze contempt and spite, while you hide behind your
rationalization that you are "educating" Christians. You fit
every negative stereotype that atheists have been wrongly
identified with and then some.
You, Del, on
the other hand lie almost constantly and berate others who you don't agree
with.
Wait a minute! You say this as if you believed your opinion
was relevant! You have no credibility and it is laughably
easy to demonstrate why. The most charitable conclusion one
can arrive at about you is that you have a reckless disregard
for the truth. Want me to prove it? Ok, I don't agree with
Christians and yet here I am, taking their side. And you said
that I berate others who I don't agree with. Clearly a lie by
your own standards.
If past be prelude, you will now go into dammage control mode
and modify your false accusation to try to make it fit,
while pretending it is what you've been saying all along.
If you want to make atheists look good
Twist and spin--what does the truth matter when your ego is
on the line, huh? "want(ing) to make atheists look good"
is somethng you simply made up, feigned certainty in, and
stated. You knew it had no correspondence with the truth.
But you have higher priorities than "mere" truth.
I would recommend that you insist
that Yarrido apologize for his slander that I try to do violence to God's
people and not defend him.
My goodness. What would you do, what would you be left with,
if you were disallowed your primary unethical tactic of
pretending your accusations were just oh so certain that you
don't need to support them? Your statement claiming that I
defend Yarrido is a lie. He doesn't need my help. In fact
he shot down your accusation of slander and you never bothered
to respond. But here you are, repeating your false charge
again. Reckless disregard for the truth is _too_ charitable
a description of your behavior.
-= End Quote =-
As the above demonstrates, your contempt for the truth is
manifest, Baba. You are utterly without any detectable
scruples.
Let your stonewalling begin...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
12 Nov 2003 10:56:15 PM |
|
|
"Del" <jfacts@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1902ce50.0311120350.4aa81f2f@posting.google.com...
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:<boo3nn$dma$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
[...]
You are right. Del is an insane buttfuck.
Now come on.... <Snipped *****. Nothing left.>
Del, you are an insane buttfuck. You need to see a shrink. Or better yet,
you need to get your head shrink wrapped.
I tried my hardest to have a reasonable conversation with you but it didn't
work because you are truly an insane buttfuck. All that is left is name
calling and I don't like to do that too often.
And get some help for your compulsive lying.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
13 Nov 2003 08:27:52 PM |
|
|
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote:
"Del" <jfacts@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1902ce50.0311120350.4aa81f2f@posting.google.com...
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:<boo3nn$dma$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
[...]
You are right. Del is an insane buttfuck.
Now come on.... <Snipped *****. Nothing left.>
Del, you are an insane buttfuck.
Hey! Calling people a "buttfuck" is an exclusive right that only I
may exercise. I use it almost as frequently as "unsalted nut." }:-}
---
Yes, George W. Bush is an unelected baby killing fascist dictator.
Also: Scientology's International President (Audio files of this
nutter available at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice )
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
12 Nov 2003 10:19:52 PM |
|
|
(Del) wrote:
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message news:<boo3nn$dma$1@bob.news.rcn.net>...
Crossposting flame bait messages between philosophically
opposed groups is certified troll behavior and you do it
_every day_.
Something you're doing right now, *****.
No offense.
---
Yes, George W. Bush is an unelected baby killing fascist dictator.
Also: Scientology's International President (Audio files of this
nutter available at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice )
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
10 Nov 2003 01:21:47 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message
news:<vqm5n3go88lr61@corp.supernews.com>...
As it stands, the mountain of evidence that history
has to show stands regardless of whether you or some other fundie wants
to admit it exists or not.
Help me out here Fried. If a fundy was claiming that
the vast majority of atheists would be burning
Christians if they had their way, and he claimed to
have a "mountain of evidence" for this claim--but
instead of producing it he kept stonewalling (like
you have been doing) for over a week--what would
_you_ do?
You see, Fried, when someone alleges to have evidence
for a claim like this one:
"the vast majority" of Christians "would be burning gays
and stringing them up from street lamp posts" "if they had
their way" -- FRED RICE
....they should expect that someday they might be called
upon to produce that evidence. Well, Fried, that
"someday" is here and NOW. Overdue in fact.
So let's see this evidence of yours that you've been
bragging about for the last week now, kapech?
Chop, chop.
Viscount of alt.atheism Debate Standards and Practices
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
10 Nov 2003 12:28:49 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message
news:<vqm5n3go88lr61@corp.supernews.com>...
jfacts@earthlink.net (Del) wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message
news:<vqj8mvsnv7j9b@corp.supernews.com>...
And you stated from the onset that you would refuse to admit or even
look at the history of the Christanic death cult which proves the fact
undeniably.
As you know I said nothing of the kind. Go ahead, quote me.
I dare you. It's got nothing to do with me in any event.
If it wasn't you, it was one of your ideological colleagues that tried
to poison the well.
Why are you afraid to provide the quote then? I'm not
afraid to quote you:
Why not defend your arguments like a man and back them
up with evidence?
Good question, Fried. Why HAVEN'T you defended your
arguments like a man and backed them up with evidence?
Also, where is the evidence you swore up and down you
had for _this_ claim:
"the vast majority" of Christians "would be burning gays
and stringing them up from street lamp posts" "if they had
their way" -- FRED RICE
You weren't LYING when you said you could prove this,
were you, Fried?
I have a feeling that your assertion won't be going
away any time soon.
Viscount of alt.atheism Debate Standards and Practices
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
10 Nov 2003 12:30:17 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in message news:<vqm5n3go88lr61@corp.supernews.com>...
You're either a troll or you don't know what the history of your own
death cult is. You're either an insane buttfuck else you don't care
what your own cult's ideology of genocide is.
And this means you don't have to back up your claims?
How do you figure that? If you are capable, explain this
in logical terms. Explain why you think that saying the above
exempts you from having to support this assertion of yours:
"the vast majority" of Christians "would be burning gays
and stringing them up from street lamp posts" "if they had
their way" -- FRED RICE
We're waiting...
Viscount of alt.atheism Debate Standards and Practices
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "patrick_darcy" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
27 Oct 2003 06:23:23 PM |
|
|
Fester wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
your statement is true. some are not, but then
many are. that i believe is what is causing so
many people , one of the reasons at least to hate
christians and christianity. many christians
do indeed act bloodthristy and are very intolerent.
im glad to hear that u are not.
it only takes one prominent christian to make
a vast number of christians appear to be intolerant.
and it only takes a few christians to just sit
there and keep their mouths shut when they should
be engaging other people to make it appear that
most christians are completely stupid.
when a prominent christian leader stands up and
says something very very mean and cruel and the
other christians seem to not have mouths to use,
yes, this does make christianity look rather
ridiculous.
--
of all the songs sung from the dawn of creation, some were meant to persist.
of all the bells rung from a thousand steeples, none ring truer than this,
its all God's children singing glory glory, hallelujah He
Reigns...............................................................NeWsBoYs
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
02 Nov 2003 03:07:10 PM |
|
|
patrick_darcy <patrickd@grandecom.net> wrote in message news:<vprdnggq5rstc5@corp.supernews.com>...
Fester wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
your statement is true. some are not, but then
many are. that i believe is what is causing so
many people , one of the reasons at least to hate
christians and christianity. many christians
do indeed act bloodthristy and are very intolerent.
im glad to hear that u are not.
it only takes one prominent christian to make
a vast number of christians appear to be intolerant.
and it only takes a few christians to just sit
there and keep their mouths shut when they should
be engaging other people to make it appear that
most christians are completely stupid.
when a prominent christian leader stands up and
says something very very mean and cruel and the
other christians seem to not have mouths to use,
yes, this does make christianity look rather
ridiculous.
Your point is well taken. But for people like you and I
to have the moral authority AND the credibility to be
taken seriously when we say such things then don't we have
to practice what we preach? Shouldn't we be calling Fred
Rice on his claim that "the vast majority" of Christians
would murder gays if they had their way?
Not only is that statement a manifestation of bigotry, it
also serves to subvert the very issue that he raises by making
"look who's talking" a seemingly relevant observation.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dewey Henize" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
29 Oct 2003 03:44:10 AM |
|
|
In article <Op8nb.19626$IA2.813531@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
not@home.com says...
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
In the US, you can get away with nearly anything if you claim you're
doing it because you are Xian. Commit the most evil act you can think of
and the majority of "good, honest" Xians will shake their heads, say
"tut, tut, naughty" and let you go till next time.
The great Xian majority are totally unable to understand that monsters
claiming to act as Xians reflect on them. Even as they lump all
atheists, blacks, aliens, etc. into homogeneous groups.
NEVER underestimate the danger presented by Xians to identifiable
minorities. It doesn't matter if 99% won't do a thing to said minority,
what matters is the 1% will and the 99% will make excuses for them
instead of stopping or preventing them.
Dew de la BAAWA
.
|
|
|
| User: "stillsunny" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
29 Oct 2003 09:05:30 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:44:10 GMT, Dewey Henize <dhenize@earthlink.net>
wrote:
In article <Op8nb.19626$IA2.813531@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
not@home.com says...
"Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org> wrote in message
news:vposr5s3vb2ef9@corp.supernews.com...
If Christians across the country had their way, they would be burning
gays and stringing them up from street lamp posts.
If you want to argue whether states should be required to recognize gay
marriages, so be it. But what is the BS about lynchings? Believe it or
not, all Christians are not bloddthirsty, intolerant oppressors out to get
you.
In the US, you can get away with nearly anything if you claim you're
doing it because you are Xian. Commit the most evil act you can think of
and the majority of "good, honest" Xians will shake their heads, say
"tut, tut, naughty" and let you go till next time.
The great Xian majority are totally unable to understand that monsters
claiming to act as Xians reflect on them. Even as they lump all
atheists, blacks, aliens, etc. into homogeneous groups.
NEVER underestimate the danger presented by Xians to identifiable
minorities. It doesn't matter if 99% won't do a thing to said minority,
what matters is the 1% will and the 99% will make excuses for them
instead of stopping or preventing them.
Dew de la BAAWA
DEWEY!
*grin*
How the heck are you?
Sunny
Oh, yeah. This is supposed to be an argument, huh? I'll fight with
you later -- right now, I'm just glad to see your name
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dewey Henize" |
|
| Title: Re: Washington Post on Christian hatred and bigotry |
02 Nov 2003 07:40:13 AM |
|
|
[Groups trimmed]
n article <1rv0qvg34i7ocas7g6obtk97fet4tsb367@4ax.com>,
stillsunny1@yahoo.com says...
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:44:10 GMT, Dewey Henize <dhenize@earthlink.net>
wrote:
[Snip]
In the US, you can get away with nearly anything if you claim you're
doing it because you are Xian. Commit the most evil act you can think of
and the majority of "good, honest" Xians will shake their heads, say
"tut, tut, naughty" and let you go till next time.
The great Xian majority are totally unable to understand that monsters
claiming to act as Xians reflect on them. Even as they lump all
atheists, blacks, aliens, etc. into homogeneous groups.
NEVER underestimate the danger presented by Xians to identifiable
minorities. It doesn't matter if 99% won't do a thing to said minority,
what matters is the 1% will and the 99% will make excuses for them
instead of stopping or preventing them.
Dew de la BAAWA
DEWEY!
*grin*
How the heck are you?
Sunny
Oh, yeah. This is supposed to be an argument, huh? I'll fight with
you later -- right now, I'm just glad to see your name
Good to see you too. You're still one of the best people (and thereby
lousiest Xians) I know :-)
I wish I didn't believe the above post re: Xians, but it keeps coming
through. Over and over we see attrocities committed by a few folks
and the majority are ready to draw and quarter them, right up to the
second they're shown to be churchgoing - then it's all right.
I'm particularly thinking right now of the couple caught busily
starving the four male kids they were "raising". 85 lbs and 17 yrs old?
Interesting how the media, try though they might, couldn't find anyone
to talk for them - except the leader of their church. Where, of course,
they'd been tithing regularly. NO ONE in the church had ever made
an effort, even though those monsters dragged the poor kids in every
week, so it wasn't like they weren't seen.
Anyhow, I don't post much anymore because there's too many threads that
don't seem to be going anywhere. Many of my friends here seem to be
too easily goaded into responding to the severely brain damaged, AKA
fundimentalist Xian trolls, that polute most of the threads. Seems like
nearly every thread either goes that way or turns into a government
bashing party. Since that gets boring after the first 10K posts of "me
too I hate Bush/Ashcroft/Fred/Barney", I've been quiet. [I'm disgusted
with the first two myself. Not worth a dozen followup posts, though.]
My friends know who they are (even you, Steve), and I will continue to
be the ghost in the closet for now.
Best to all.
Dew de la BAAWA
read, and I like knowing the good folks are still there as well.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
