See other Religion Articles
Title: Can Christ Followers Save The World From Christians
Source:
We Hold These Truths
URL Source: http://www.whtt.org/index.php?news=2&id=709
Published: Feb 6, 2006
Author: Charles E. Carlson
Post Date: 2006-02-15 00:09:52 by Red Jones
Keywords: Christians, Followers, Christ
Views: 5284
Comments: 491
Can Christ Followers save the world from Christians Charles E. Carlson Feb 06, 2006 Why all the bad news? The news stories in the world press, from South Africa to Norway, are incredibly negative about the USA. It was not always that way. Once, not long ago, most press was good to the USA. Our generations of military and tourists have been treated like liberators in Germany and Japan, countries we helped to destroy and then rebuilt. But no more, “America” is mud. This letter is not for everyone. Some already recognize the answer, but many still deny that the USA has become both the awful predator, and the world’s engine of monetary dilution. Less anyone thinks this writer is causing America’s image problem we add these words from a pretty good President, Theodore Roosevelt, who was also a decorated military officer: "Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President or any other public official, save to the extent in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country.” "In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth - whether about the president or anyone else - save in the rare case where this would make known to the enemy information of military value which would otherwise be unknown to him." -Theodore Roosevelt Jesus gave us parables to help us understand his lessons. We follow his example with a parable about a man and the pet he loves and think he controls, which we liken to our government. This man discovers, to his horror and dismay, that his family dog has become a nighttime marauder, a predator, slipping out of the yard and pillaging the community, killing other pets and threatening pedestrians, and then jumping back into the backyard to sleep it off. What should the man do: 1) Feed the dog more and hope he will stay home? 2) Build a higher fence, cement-in the yard and put double locks on every access? (3) Ignore the problem? (4) Put the dog to sleep before someone is hurt? The pet owner could try the second choice (2), if he has the patience and money, but chances are he will not sleep well at night. It is his responsibility to stop the crimes, even if it means he has to destroy his own dog. It is not up to the police to solve the crime, nor is it up to the neighbors to correct it. In truth, he should do it himself because he is responsible, not the taxpayers who pay for the animal shelter. Similarly, it is up to the most responsible Americans to correct criminal acts against its world neighbors, and if we do not then the blood of the USA’s every crime is on our hands. It is not good enough to say, "Oh, this is a great place to live...our standard of living is the envy of the world...even if we do make some mistakes." It is not our place to recite all the wrongs of our government, we would never finish, nor do we defend any other government for it murderous faults. All are corrupt to some degree. We do defend the right to life of our neighbors, as described in our own Declaration of Independence. Life itself is a gift from God...this is not (for followers of Christ) a subjective, take it or leave it observation, it is an absolute. A friend and supporter recently called to ask me if I might tone down what he considered my obvious favoritism toward the Palestinian people, whom we have come to call the Philistines. He told me I sound so biased that someone who did not know me might think "they are paying me." In fact, it is people like my caller who is supporting We Hold These Truths, so we listen. My reply was: Thanks, but I cannot help what I say or the passion that shows through. I have been to the land of the Philistines and seen. Now I am their champion as long as they are suppressed by our own government. Our government is the marauding dog. I told my friend I would try to do a better job of explaining my bias, but I must not stop defending the innocent blood that is being shed. This is not to say the Philistines, or their current leaders, Hamas, are perfect, nor to deny they have their criminal element, which they do have. I told a beleaguered Univerisity class the same thing when I stood among them in Gaza City, but it is our government. not theirs, that is the problem. I have but one point to make. God does not “Will” that this great land become the predator of the world. He expects us to be the good stewards of what we are given. We can stop the marauding animal in our back yards if we will allow God to help us. And, if God does not help us, we need not worry about it, for it should now be obvious to most that we cannot overcome the mass of evil power loosed on the world by our own strength alone. Our “predator” inside our gates has become a "King Kong behemoth. We can succeed only if we do it God’s way, else we will fail. Abraham Lincoln may have later broken his own rules, but he was dead right when he stated in 1848: “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and form a new one that suits them better.” It seem logical thta God's way is to correct His followers As we have said over and over again and say now, the self-styled Christian Zionist churches, with some 70 million under their influence, are the logical answer. We call them Scofieldized churches, others call them Dispensational, or lately Christian Zionists, whatever name you call them, they are the enablers of the monster on the loose in the world. It is Scofieldized churches that feed it; it is they who left the gate ajar at night, and they taught the marauder to vault the highest fence. They hatched a logic and theology that enables ethnic cleansing in the Mideast. Only the Scofieldized church, among all the major religions in the world, believes the acts of the nighttime marauder are Godly, and therefore, encourages it. In America the members of the Scofieldized churchs are the salt of the earth, the good neighbors we all want, the famliy poeple who care, but they are horrible and criminaly misled and they must be salvaged from God professors to Jesus Christ's followers. Scofildized Christian Zionists simply refuse to see the blood and torn bodies of victims. One of the Ten Commandments that God is said to have given to Moses is: "You shall not [no, never] take the name of the Lord your God in vain." This is exactly what the Scofieldized churches do today by supporting in God’s name that which God abhors, the spilling of innocent blood. Each one allows the abuses that Jesus denied and decried. He said to the Pharisees, "you will not enter into heaven, and you block the way of anyone who would enter." Jesus could have been speaking to the pastors today. What is needed is men who will use any tactic that is legal, moral and Godly to reach into the evangelical church and paint the blood of the victims on its doorways where they cannot overlook it. This is the mission of Pharisee Watch and Project Strait Gate. And how do we achieve such a feat? God’s churches, if they are of God, should be the salt of the earth, but these millions have lost their savor, and therefore, are: "fit only to be trodden under the feet of men." But they can change…most of We Hold These Truth's advisors did. Each Christian Zionist at some point lost his senses in the shouting crowd; they will regain their senses slowly, one by one, church by church…with our/your help. This is our agenda. Start by watching our one hour presentation, with your friends, right on your computer, or you may buy it for your TV: Our best tool to help you teach, view it free: Why Christian-Zionist cannot work for peace, Interactive fully guided free audio/video.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-451) not displayed.
.
.
.
#452. To: Feynman Lives! (#446)
We can see that these two numbers are "Basically the same" but not "THE SAME" Does that help? Okey. That problem with words again.
Diana, Our entire existence is contained inside of words, it is how we communicate. There is a huge and insigificant difference between something being BASICALLY the same and THE SAME. If you got married, and your husband was replaced one day with a guy who looked and acted BASICALLY the same as your husband, you would notice and it would more than likely be an issue of great concern to you. The your husband and his impostor are BASICALLY THE SAME, but not THE SAME, and that is an issue of major importance to you. If you order coffee and they don't have cream, but they do have skim milk, then it probably would NOT be a big deal that cream and skim milk are BASICALLY the same. They are BASICALLY THE SAME, but not THE SAME, yet you are not concerned. Does THAT help?
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman That is an assumption on your part that I don't understand the differece between the definitions and their usage. I was letting you know of some more definitions that were in my dictionary under "universal", that's all. My brain is too tired to think at this point, I need to go to bed. Scooter thankyou for that text, I read it but I think it will be better to read it again tomorrow. FL you have A LOT of energy.
Are you a defense lawyer?
He's a troll, Diana. Best to ignore him. Everyone should Bozo Filter him; sooner or later he will give up and leave, when no one is responding to his posts.
"I am to misbehave" -- Mal Reynolds, Firefly
I've never used the bozo filter, but I think this is a time for it.
Most, but not all. Most does not make it UNIVERSAL. So tell me what cultures allow killing your father, screwing your mother and eating your kids?
HEY ..what's the problem?? Maybe he's a member of the Church of Satan?? :P
Probably.. he's
defending the indefensible LOL
True, or he could be an Illuminati, in which case he gets a promotion with each of those.
Mehitable, It is not about CULTURES. Universal Morality fails if ONE person feels contrary to you about any given action. This is the inherent problem with universal qualifiers.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman Zip, What am I defending that is indefensible?
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman It is not about CULTURES. Universal Morality fails if ONE person feels contrary to you about any given action. This is the inherent problem with universal qualifiers. So why does it matter if one crazy person thinks it's okay to kill your father, screw your mother and eat your children? WHat is the possible significance of that to the larger society? Or do you think that the opinion of one person that it is okay to kill your father, screw your mother and eat your children morally equates to the opinion of all the rest of the people who don't agree with that?
You are obviously supportive of and promoting moral relativism, which is precisely as you have outlined - that if ONE person disagrees with the moral principles of an entire society and rejects them and breaks them, that position is morally equivalent to the position of the greater society.
Mehitable, Why it matters is that it disproves the theory of Universal Morality. You can EASILY make a case for a SOCIAL Morality, that is based upon the OPINIONS of any given society, but you can't make a case for a UNIVERSAL morality, in which EVERYONE agrees that "X is Y in all situations." Morality is established a posteriori, not a priori. A new born baby does not care one way or the other whether or not you kill your father, screw your mother or eat your children. It does not understand the concepts and has not formed AN OPINION on the matter. The opinion of one person that it is okay to kill your father, screw your mother and eat your children ABSOLUTELY morally equates to the opinion of all the rest of the people who don't agree with that. Because they are JUST OPINIONS, not facts. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. This is another reason why Universal Morality fails, because Morality is BASED upon opinion, not fact. YOU calling someone who disagrees with you "Crazy" is just your OPINION of that person's state of mind, it is not a factual statement. There are many examples in society where people called those who disagreed with society "CRAZY" in order to discount what they had to say. Many of them were scientists who were "CRAZY" enough to think things like "The earth is NOT the center of the universe," or "The sun does NOT revolve around the earth." There is no such thing as a Universal Morality, sorry.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman Mehitable, Once again you are incorrect. I am not supportive of, nor am I promoting moral relativism, I simply understand that the position is tennable. What I am stating is plain - that a UNIVERSAL morality does not exist. By contrast, I am a large supporter of SOCIETAL morality, even though I understand that the underlying principle is fluid.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman We know that what you are saying is untrue just by canvassing various societies throughout history - none have supported the behaviour I referred to. The only individuals who would engage in such behavior have been denounced and treated as criminals in every single society on earth - and you cannot find an exception. If you are (and you ARE) equating the moral positions of criminals with those of the vast majority of society, you are a moral relativist, whether you admit or acknowledge that or not. Stop lying by cutting hairs. You're gonna end up bald.
Stop lying by cutting hairs. You're gonna end up bald. ROFL... Mehitable, you just ignored my entire post, and then you PROVED it correct. Wow. Most impressive. You keep proving it... you fall back to the morality of the "VAST MAJORITY OF SOCIETY," which, as we all know is NOT Universal. Like I said, I agree with and believe in SOCIETAL MORALITY, because it exists. You just proved AGAIN that there is no UNIVERSAL MORALITY. I am not a moral relativist at all, Mehitable, I am just smart enough to see that Universal Morality is a myth. I am not lying at all, I am showing you The Truth.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman Realistically there are things, such as injunctions against killing your father, screwing your mother and eating your children, that are universally true or moral among all sane people and the only people who violate those things are people who are INSANE or CRIMINALS. So ultimately what you are doing is saying that the moral positions taken by insane people or criminals are equal to the moral positionsof the rest of society. Just to say that there are people whose moral positions differ from the rest of society is...MEANINGLESS...as you are referring to criminals. So what is your point in debating these things? What are you trying to prove? You seem to argue for the sake of arguing - I don't see any ultimate point in what you have been saying. What is the point of your stating that there is no Universal Morality?
Mehitable, For the record, many cultures, for example, the Aztecs allowed killing your father - incest is COMMONPLACE in many cultures, for example, one of the socioligists who worked on the Kinsey report showed in his extensive study that the childhood in much of India begins with the young child being regularly masturbated by the mother, and it virtually all non-Western cultures, the child sleeps in the family bed for several years and regularly observes sexual intercourse between the parents. Boys as well as girls are reported as being masturbated and raped by the men in the family, including fathers, older brothers, uncles and cousins. He found that by the time children are four or five, they are usually taken to bed at night by others in the extended household - and MANY cultures have been shown to condone cannabilism. So... even though we are talking about UNIVERSAL morality, I thought I would share that with you.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman This is an unsubstantiated judgement. Define "All Sane People." As I said, society has a habit of calling those who disagree "criminals." Gallileo would have been considered one of these "CRIMINALS" in your view. And there are people who take moral positions that differ from the rest of society, Mehitable. Most of the people on this board take moral positions that differ from the rest of society. You have people here who think hemp should be legalized, that the current government are crooks and should be overthrown, that all guns should be legal, etc. Does that mean that they are ALL CRIMINALS and therefore MEANINGLESS? You might want to be careful... YOU are one of those Meaningless Criminals... Sorry, but there simply is no Universal Morality. Societal Morality, sure, but not Universal.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman Mehitable, I am simply being the advocate of truth in this matter. You state, incorrectly, that there IS such a thing as a Universal Morality. I, as the advocate of truth, am here to show you the error of your ways. It is as simple as that.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman Why do I get the impression that you would love to introduce some of those practices in our culture? While I would have to do some investigation into your allegations about the Aztecs as I have never heard or read that they allowed killing your father, your other assertions are not what I said at all. Masturbating children does not equate to screwing your mother. As your own sexual practices are probably...deviant...you may not understand the difference, but the rest of us do. Moreover, I don't know of any cannibal society in which eating your own children was encouraged, but perhaps you can find some obscure psychotic stone age tribe in Borneo that does. You are a moral relativist. I wish you would just be honest about your own positions. You lie by splitting hairs and trying to cover up what you actually believe about various issues. You are a deceiver, and I think you're probably a pretty evil person, now that I've been observing you and your thinking. You come across all chuckles and feyness, but so did some of the jolliest Nazis. I do hope you are not in any aspect of education. You are not someone I would trust with the minds of the young as I sense you are deeply perverted in your thinking. I don't mean just sexually - I mean intellectually/psychologically. Frankly I'm getting sick of you so I'm going to stop answering your posts. There appears to be no point to your arguments other than the sake of arguing itself. I can do that for a while, but like your posts, it becomes...meaningless.
It's nonsense.. and circular reasoning..There is no winning or convincing .. it's not about honest discussion obviously.
1>WOW... that is skating on a VERY thin thread... condoned incest is condoned incest. If you want to shut your eyes to it that is fine, I wont press the point further if you are so adamant on denying it. You have been shown. 2> It is clear that there are volumes of things that "you don't know" but your ignorance of the world is no defense against the truth. You never said that eating children had to be "encouraged," just accepted. 3>I am not a moral relativist by any means. I believe in the morality of the society. You are free to stop answering my posts, as you have clearly been shown that your position is untennable and your points have been refuted. Have a good day.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman Zip, What is circular about the reasoning? Do tell...
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman The moral of this story is: "Don't feed the trolls". And now I will go update my Bozo list.
I think you are a very evil person who knows far too much about masturbating children. And yes, this is the end of our communication. I think I've revealed you for what you are.
Yes, I know. SOme of what I was doing was playing with the fool, but I also wanted to get to point where he would make statements that clearly reveal his mindset and beliefs, which I think he has. I think people like FL are important to be aware of and understand as I think they are a significant source of the moral evil that has been poisoning our society for a generation at least. Now that I feel I've "outed" him, I'm done with him. Throw him on the wagon.
What Richard "shared" with us in #471 is his attempt to compare the primitive ways of third world tree monkeys, with those our society Yep, you outet this Deep Ellum friend of Abe Foxman.
You have "outed" me? How so? I proved your point to be flat out wrong. You have a very limited understanding of my mindset and my beliefs, Mehitable. But you are free to flee on your wagon if you choose. It is typical for those who have been roundly bested, as you have been, to then say while they retreat into the darkness that they are NOT actually retreating, but that they are excecuting a strategic withdrawl... LOL Whatever you need to believe, sweetie...
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman WOW, You are just a full-blown racist, Jethro. I really should not be surprised, but I didn't see that one coming... What amazes me further is that no one will chastise you here for your disgusting belief that your skin color makes you pure. I guess I hit the nail right on the head when I compared you to a Klansman, did you get your new robes yet?
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman Mehitable, Unlike you, I am one who takes the time to LEARN about the real world instead of just sitting there and making it up to suit my purposes. I know that although you say that this is the end of our communication, it will not be. You have only revealed that your collasal ignorance of the world around you goes far deeper than you first thought it did.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman Attach this comment to your Klan association and that's the second time today you've made this inference about me. The wheels are coming off, Abe :)
I think it's time to....starve the troll. BWAAAHAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
The reason I make that inference is because, based upon your OVERTLY racist, homophobic and anti-jew statements, I feel that it is more than likely true. Also, you have yet to deny that you are a racist, homophobic, xenophobic bigot. My wheels are firmly in place, but your Emperor's New Clothes are looking a little ragged.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman That's one tactic, and I can't blame anyone for doing that. I like to identify their belief system and then watch them melt. Dick will be a puddle in a day or two.
You are still going to lose, but you may learn something from playing the game. Tell me what you mean by "conceptual" and "logical". Thanks.
You will have to ask WRENCH, as he was the one framing that debate.
"There are 10 the 11th power stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers." ----Richard Feynman 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 + 2 = 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000000,000,000,000,002
#453. To: Diana (#452)
That problem with words again.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#454. To: Feynman Lives!, Scooter (#450)
Yes, those are all different definitions for the word. However, you need to look at the term in the situation in which it is being employed to know which definition to use.
#455. To: Feynman Lives! (#453)
#456. To: Diana (#455)
Are you a defense lawyer?
#457. To: YertleTurtle, Diana (#456)
Everyone should Bozo Filter him
#458. To: Feynman Lives! (#408)
Killing your father, screwing your mother and eating your kids. Most folks would agree about that
#459. To: mehitable (#458)
So tell me what cultures allow killing your father, screwing your mother and eating your kids?
#460. To: Diana (#455)
Are you a defense lawyer?
#461. To: Zipporah (#459)
#462. To: mehitable (#458)
So tell me what cultures allow killing your father, screwing your mother and eating your kids?
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#463. To: Zipporah (#460)
Probably.. he's defending the indefensible LOL
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#464. To: Feynman Lives! (#462)
Mehitable,
#465. To: Feynman Lives! (#463)
#466. To: mehitable (#464)
So why does it matter if one crazy person thinks it's okay to kill your father, screw your mother and eat your children? WHat is the possible significance of that to the larger society? Or do you think that the opinion of one person that it is okay to kill your father, screw your mother and eat your children morally equates to the opinion of all the rest of the people who don't agree with that?
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#467. To: mehitable (#465)
You are obviously supportive of and promoting moral relativism, which is precisely as you have outlined - that if ONE person disagrees with the moral principles of an entire society and rejects them and breaks them, that position is morally equivalent to the position of the greater society.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#468. To: Feynman Lives!, all (#467)
What I am stating is plain - that a UNIVERSAL morality does not exist. By contrast, I am a large supporter of SOCIETAL morality, even though I understand that the underlying principle is fluid.
#469. To: mehitable (#468)
The only individuals who would engage in such behavior have been denounced and treated as criminals in every single society on earth - and you cannot find an exception. If you are (and you ARE) equating the moral positions of criminals with those of the vast majority of society, you are a moral relativist, whether you admit or acknowledge that or not.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#470. To: Feynman Lives!, (#469)
I am not a moral relativist at all, Mehitable, I am just smart enough to see that Universal Morality is a myth.
#471. To: mehitable (#458)
So tell me what cultures allow killing your father, screwing your mother and eating your kids?
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#472. To: mehitable (#470)
universally true or moral among all sane people and the only people who violate those things are people who are INSANE or CRIMINALS.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#473. To: mehitable (#470)
So what is your point in debating these things? What are you trying to prove? You seem to argue for the sake of arguing - I don't see any ultimate point in what you have been saying. What is the point of your stating that there is no Universal Morality?
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#474. To: Feynman Lives!, Zipporah, all (#471)
#475. To: mehitable (#474)
#476. To: mehitable (#474)
1>Masturbating children does not equate to screwing your mother 2>I don't know of any cannibal society in which eating your own children was encouraged, 3>You are a moral relativist.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#477. To: Zipporah (#475)
It's nonsense.. and circular reasoning..
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#478. To: Zipporah (#475)
#479. To: Feynman Lives!, Zipporah, all (#476)
#480. To: Zipporah (#475)
#481. To: mehitable (#480)
#482. To: mehitable (#480)
Now that I feel I've "outed" him, I'm done with him. Throw him on the wagon.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#483. To: Jethro Tull (#481)
is his attempt to compare the primitive ways of third world tree monkeys,
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#484. To: mehitable (#479)
I think you are a very evil person who knows far too much about masturbating children. And yes, this is the end of our communication. I think I've revealed you for what you are.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#485. To: Feynman Lives! (#483)
You are just a full-blown racist, Jethro.
#486. To: Jethro Tull (#481)
#487. To: Jethro Tull (#485)
Attach this comment to your Klan association and that's the second time today you've made this inference about me.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
#488. To: mehitable (#486)
#489. To: Feynman Lives! (#487)
The reason I make that inference is because, based upon your OVERTLY racist, homophobic and anti-jew statements, I feel that it is more than likely true.
#490. To: Feynman Lives! (#441)
GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF A CONCEPTUAL LOGICAL ABSOLUTE.
#491. To: scooter (#490)
Tell me what you mean by "conceptual" and "logical". Thanks.
"THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION." ----1796 Treaty of Tripoli — initiated by George Washington and signed into law by John Adams
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest