From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Sat Oct 1 00:46:34 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Fri Sep 30 23:50:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In article , "Bcs1" wrote: > they are the basis of our laws No, they are not and never have been. Here's the text of the commandments from Exodus 20 (KJV), with my comments interspersed: > 2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, > out of the house of bondage. > 3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. It's not illegal to worship a god or gods other than the Judeo-Christian god, and with a few exceptions from colonial days it never has been. > 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any > thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is > in the water under the earth: > 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD > thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the > children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; Nor is it illegal to bow down before a graven image. > 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my > commandments. > 7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD > will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. It's not illegal in most places to blaspheme, and in those jurisdictions where such laws are still on the books they're either ignored or rarely enforced. > 8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. > 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: > 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt > not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor > thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: > 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in > them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath > day, and hallowed it. Yes, not keeping the sabbath day holy was illegal at one time in most places. But it's not the case any longer in most places, and again where such laws are still on the books they are ignored or seldom enforced. > 12 ¶ Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the > land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. A fine sentiment, but it's never been a legal requirement. > 13 Thou shalt not kill. An interesting choice of word there. It's _always_ been legal to kill in certain circumstances: self-defense, in wartime, to enforce the law, as punishment for a crime. Even the bible repeatedly endorses killing. > 14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. Again, once illegal, but no longer. > 15 Thou shalt not steal. This is the only commandment that is enshrined in civil law. > 16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. There's no law against lying generally. Lying under oath is illegal, and lying with intent to defraud is as well, but the vast majority of lies in society are not criminal. > 17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour¹s house, thou shalt not covet thy > neighbour¹s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor > his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour¹s. As the Mills Brothers sang, "Brother, you can't go to jail for what you're thinking." (Yet, anyway.) -- D.F. Manno | dfm2a3l0t2@spymac.com The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression.--H.L. Mencken, "Minority Report" (1956) From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Sat Oct 1 09:07:03 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Sat Oct 1 03:10:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in > >>But how about this one, gorillas using tools: >>http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2005-09-29-gorilla-too >>ls_x.htm "For the first time, biologists have documented gorillas in >>the wild using simple tools, such as poking a stick in a swampy pool >>of water to check its depth." > > Well that's not exactly anything to do with humping a leg... but > interesting nonetheless! Chimps have been observed using tools for a long > time. Heck, even some birds do it (to smash snails etc) It wasn't really meant to relate to humping a leg, it was going more back to the original intent of the thread, animal thought processes and all that. But I guess it is the first time that gorillas have been observed using tools in the wild. And it is a pretty neat bit of reasoned intelligence. It isn't just smashing at something with something else to get food out of it but a bit more indirect in using something to measure how wet you might get. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 1 10:18:44 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Sat Oct 1 04:20:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "D.F. Manno" wrote in message news:dfm2a3l0t2-5AF319.23463430092005@news.cesmail.net... > In article , "Bcs1" > wrote: > > > There's no law against lying generally. Lying under oath is illegal, and > lying > with intent to defraud is as well, but the vast majority of lies in > society are > not criminal. > >> 17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour¹s house, thou shalt not covet thy >> neighbour¹s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, >> nor >> his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour¹s. > Ermmm...... When did the 10 commandments become the 17 commandments?? I think you've been quoting the wrong extracts............. :-|> From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 1 15:48:27 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Sat Oct 1 09:50:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-DEC615.09005001102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> Ermmm...... When did the 10 commandments become the 17 commandments?? I >> think you've been quoting the wrong extracts............. > > Those are the verse numbers, not the commandment numbers. I think you > might not know your bible... ;) > Well, it gets a bit confusing when you're "talking" about 10 commandments and then list 17 verses. It would have been *much* clearer if you had just listed the 10 commandments straight off. And, no, I don't have a bible. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 1 17:21:16 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Sat Oct 1 11:25:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-B0855B.10183101102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> And, no, I don't have a bible. > > It might actually do you some good to read one. Why? Has it changed since the last time I read it? > (and no I'm not > proselytizing) Some people might be surprised at how devout I used to > be. Reading and understanding the Bible helps you understand a lot of > literary and cultural allusions. Hmmm..... Does it? I tend to prefer to spend what spare time I have to devote to these things studying the nature of things/stuff/life/...... > It also helps when arguing against much > of the foolish misinterpretation that the fundamentalists support. I can see how it might lend amunition to theological arguments - but little else......... > Very much like having a good understanding of the Constitution helps you > pick > apart many political arguments. I'll pass on that one, as the constitution of the US doesn't affect me. (Not directly, anyway). From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sat Oct 1 11:46:38 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sat Oct 1 11:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message news:433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net... > I prefer to teach how to fish. And I prefer to be tought by fishing > alongside the teacher. > > > and as always it's just MHO > > "Ditto". The point being that although couched in 'religious' terms, the concepts behind the commandments are not any different than other schemes for good living. Taken as one expression of good living, in the context of cultural history, there is nothing in them to warrant removal. In today's context of atheist vs Christian, there is every reason to not post them. However, the context of divisiveness was created by the atheists, not the Christians, who, for the most part, were willing to include other expressions of faith and to allow those without faith to 'affirm' rather than swear on the bible (and I know there are faiths who will not swear either). And, in a way, 'learning alongside the teacher' is part of the gut reaction of those who are upset at the removal - part of faith is, for some people, acknowledging their teachers as in "under God" as well as action. There are people, like St. Francis, who said to teach the Gospel, and if necessary use words. I happened to see a piece on TV about a trip that Karen Hughes made to the Middle East. I forget the man's name, but he said that what she did reinforced bin Laden's rhetoric about the US - about forcing our faith and lifestyle on the Muslim people. That's what people should be up in arms about - and there might be a lot more support for a protest of that sort since I believe that most US citizens are willing to be tolerant of other cultures (aside from the merchants who want to export stuff - another issue). Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sat Oct 1 12:09:59 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sat Oct 1 12:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-8E108E.12125430092005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Miss Betsy" wrote: > > > And that's easy also. Do you ask living people to pray for you? > > If you believe in heaven, then there is no reason why you can't ask > > dead people to pray for you. The statues are visual reminders of > > the oral stories for those who are illiterate (and some people > > still like something solid to help them 'connect'). > > Your explanation makes a lot of sense as to why they do it, but it > doesn't really explain why it isn't a violation of the "no graven > images" rule. (which seems overly broad in modern times when we can make > an image so easily) > Again, it is whether one takes it by letter or by spirit. The idea is that one doesn't put a material thing first. Although statues can foster superstition (like the one of burying St. Joseph's statue in order to sell your house), the primary purpose in the beginning was to tell a story since there were no books. And as I said, it is still true that certain people (or at certain times) need something material in order to 'connect' to the spiritual. It is no different from those who 'connect' by walking in the woods or along the seashore. I am not a biblical scholar, but it makes sense to me that even when that was written, it did not mean to cease creating images of all kinds. It was only directed at 'worshipping' a person or thing - particularly creating an image to worship. It is a little like the admonition in the New Testament about calling no man, father. The concept is that even though in the physical world, one is created by a man and woman, the true force behind that creation is God. It is not, as Bill Cosby says to his kids, "I brought you into this world and I can take you out!" One has to have a name for one's genetic parent. And the term is often used as a sign of respect for others, more so in ancient times, but still sometimes used today. Though, in the US South today it is more likely to be Mr. and Miss (like Miss Betsy). Some strict religions do not use titles at all to avoid any semblance of giving respect to mortals. I once watched a series on comparative religions. The man explaining the Hindu religion said everything was a pointer to God - the thousands of gods and goddesses, the rituals. And all these things we are arguing about are 'pointers' - for some they work; for others, they don't. Miss Betsy From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 1 18:02:40 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Sat Oct 1 12:05:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" wrote in message news:dhmaim$jgk$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > The point being that although couched in 'religious' terms, the > concepts behind the commandments are not any different than other > schemes for good living. The concept behind them is not what's in dispute. What's in dispute is them being couched in 'religious' terms. > Taken as one expression of good living, > in the context of cultural history, there is nothing in them to > warrant removal. In today's context of atheist vs Christian, there > is every reason to not post them. Ummm.... Excuse me!?! Where did "atheism vs. christian" come from? It's not a case of being atheist. It's the christians vs. everyone who isn't christian (atheists being such a small percentage of that to hardly count) that's the major gripe - and their insistance upon preaching to everyone. > However, the context of > divisiveness was created by the atheists, not the Christians, who, > for the most part, were willing to include other expressions of > faith and to allow those without faith to 'affirm' rather than > swear on the bible (and I know there are faiths who will not swear > either). BS. The christian churches have been amongst the most oppressive/devisive/repressive in history > > And, in a way, 'learning alongside the teacher' is part of the gut > reaction of those who are upset at the removal - part of faith is, > for some people, acknowledging their teachers as in "under God" as > well as action. There are people, like St. Francis, who said to > teach the Gospel, and if necessary use words. > > I happened to see a piece on TV about a trip that Karen Hughes made > to the Middle East. I forget the man's name, but he said that what > she did reinforced bin Laden's rhetoric about the US - about > forcing our faith and lifestyle on the Muslim people. Not only the Muslims. But it *is* largely to do with the atrocities carried out in the name of "God", via the christians, which has created a lot of todays problems... It's pay-back time..... From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sat Oct 1 12:16:50 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sat Oct 1 12:10:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-240738.12160930092005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Miss Betsy" wrote: > > > It is not something to be ashamed of that our ancestors based our > > law (including the Constitution) on the 10 commandments. > > How is US law based on the ten commandments? Where does the ten > commandments even approach the Constitution. (I agree that it isn't > something to be /ashamed/ of for any other country, but it is forbidden > by our Constitution.) Laws are based on the cultural background in which they are made. The big difference about Judaism is that their law was based on something other than a man's judgment. Other 'commandments' were proposed and enforced by particular kings, but that was that king's law. In Judea, it was God's law and when they finally had kings, those kings were bound by the same laws as his subjects. The Judeo-Christian values shaped our laws - including the Constitution. It was not influenced by Islam or by Tao or by Buddhism or by the Native American religions in its conception. Miss Betsy From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Sat Oct 1 14:36:15 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Sat Oct 1 13:40:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In article , "Porpoise" wrote: > "David Dean" wrote in message > > > "Porpoise" wrote: > > > >> Ermmm...... When did the 10 commandments become the 17 commandments?? I > >> think you've been quoting the wrong extracts............. > > > > Those are the verse numbers, not the commandment numbers. I think you > > might not know your bible... ;) > > Well, it gets a bit confusing when you're "talking" about 10 commandments > and then list 17 verses. It would have been *much* clearer if you had just > listed the 10 commandments straight off. And, no, I don't have a bible. Well, the Catholics have a different way of numbering the commandments than the Protestants do, so instead of picking one version or the other I just scooped up the text from the bible. -- D.F. Manno | dfm2a3l0t2@spymac.com The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression.--H.L. Mencken, "Minority Report" (1956) From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Sat Oct 1 20:11:47 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Sat Oct 1 14:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: David Dean wrote: > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >>Ummm.... Excuse me!?! Where did "atheism vs. christian" come from? It's not >>a case of being atheist. It's the christians vs. everyone who isn't >>christian (atheists being such a small percentage of that to hardly count) >>that's the major gripe - and their insistance upon preaching to everyone. > > In fact, a number of the Supreme Court cases were Christian vs. > Christian. I would agree that atheists are somewhat on the fringe in all of this. I see it more as a number of rather extreme Christians (i.e. the people telling FP's grandchildren to put more clothes on) who want to make everybody live under their rules and version of morality. It seems to me that probably the majority of people call themselves Christians but don't really support the more fringe views. It seems like the extreme positions have a voice much out of proportion with the actual percentage of the people who hold those views because they are much more determined and involved in pushing their agendas whereas everybody is more concerned with more basic parts of life and only really start to take notice when, what do you mean you are going to start censoring Desperate Housewives? I think though that there isn't a theocracy in place now mostly because, as FP has pointed out, most of them can't agree on the exact dogma they support. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Sat Oct 1 15:26:23 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Sat Oct 1 14:45:34 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <433ED4CF.4871893@spamcop.net> "D.F. Manno" wrote: [...] > > 13 Thou shalt not kill. > > An interesting choice of word there. It's _always_ been legal to kill > in certain circumstances: self-defense, in wartime, to enforce the law, > as punishment for a crime. Even the bible repeatedly endorses killing. [...] My understanding is that the original Hebrew uses the word "murder", not "kill". -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Sat Oct 1 15:32:26 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Sat Oct 1 14:45:42 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <433ED63A.6D4A5EC7@spamcop.net> David Dean wrote: > > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > > > And, no, I don't have a bible. > > It might actually do you some good to read one. (and no I'm not > proselytizing) Some people might be surprised at how devout I used to > be. Reading and understanding the Bible helps you understand a lot of > literary and cultural allusions. It also helps when arguing against much > of the foolish misinterpretation that the fundamentalists support. Very > much like having a good understanding of the Constitution helps you pick > apart many political arguments. One place is Bartleby.com, which has the entire King James version at For example, the passages quoted by D.F. Manno can be found at: I find it quite useful when engaging in online discussions about it. (ie: "Yes, Leviticus does call homosexuality an 'abomination', but in the verse right next to that one, it also says...") It's fully searchable by book/chapter/verse or keyword. They have many other books there as well. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From lib_bob at spamcop.net Sat Oct 1 19:56:54 2005 From: lib_bob at spamcop.net (lib_bob) Date: Sat Oct 1 19:00:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1agrj1h2eg141vcdvrnbh7hv22oho6b5fg@4ax.com> Message-ID: <3u4uj1pvugieucvkd5mkrlh8sqo61r1b3q@4ax.com> On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:35:52 +0000 (UTC), Charles <8hmte5s02@sneakemail.com> wrote: >Dumb question here, but, uh, did you know you were replying to a troll? I guess I really haven't kept up; I haven't really been an active reader here for a long while so I must have missed that. Thank you for the information. j From borgholio at storymind.com Sat Oct 1 17:11:59 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Sat Oct 1 19:15:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > Got some pretty good pics. I'll put them up shortly. :) Fire pics. They're a mix of optical zoom / digital zoom / normal exposure / high exposure. Some are pretty impressive. This is the largest fire in our area...the actual fire line extends several miles to either side. http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire1.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire2.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire3.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire4.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire5.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire6.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire7.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire8.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire9.jpg From devnull at spamcop.net Sat Oct 1 23:26:06 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sat Oct 1 22:35:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] A Picture is worth 1000 words ... Message-ID: http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031785345290&path=%21editorials%21cartoons&s =1045855934997 From bcs1 at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 01:55:13 2005 From: bcs1 at spamcop.net (Bcs1) Date: Sun Oct 2 00:50:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "Bcs1" wrote in message news:dhifel$7oq$1@news.spamcop.net... yup replying to me again LOL ok having not followed this too much until it was brought up in here, I've heard that this prosecutor dude has taken 5 or 6 sets of charges to the grand jury in order to try to get Delay indicted, and after all those failures he finally got one to indict on conspiracy... now I'm no legal scholar, but isn't that charge just a "we can't find anything else that might stick" charge? I dunno though just a thought Bill From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Sun Oct 2 05:50:32 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Sun Oct 2 00:55:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "Bcs1" wrote in news:dhnoqv$clo$1@news.spamcop.net: > now I'm no legal scholar, but isn't that charge just a "we can't find > anything else that might stick" charge? But, isn't that the way it's done in texas?? From jzeitlin at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 07:44:39 2005 From: jzeitlin at spamcop.net (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?E=F6nw=EB?=) Date: Sun Oct 2 06:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433ED4CF.4871893@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:26:23 -0400, Kenneth Brody wrote: >"D.F. Manno" wrote: >[...] >> > 13 Thou shalt not kill. >> An interesting choice of word there. It's _always_ been legal to kill >> in certain circumstances: self-defense, in wartime, to enforce the law, >> as punishment for a crime. Even the bible repeatedly endorses killing. >[...] >My understanding is that the original Hebrew uses the word "murder", >not "kill". More accurately: The original Hebrew is more accurately translated as 'murder' than merely 'kill'. 'Murder' is an English word; it is quite unlikely that it would have been used in a document written in ancient Hebrew. :) Also, the word translated as 'steal' is better translated as 'kidnap', and I have no idea why they translated the Hebrew word for 'steal' as 'covet'. -- E?nw? (SpamCop subscriber, not staff/admin) From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 08:36:06 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Oct 2 08:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:dhmbvi$kce$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > news:dhmaim$jgk$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > The point being that although couched in 'religious' terms, the > > concepts behind the commandments are not any different than other > > schemes for good living. > > The concept behind them is not what's in dispute. What's in dispute is them > being couched in 'religious' terms. > > > Taken as one expression of good living, > > in the context of cultural history, there is nothing in them to > > warrant removal. In today's context of atheist vs Christian, there > > is every reason to not post them. > > Ummm.... Excuse me!?! Where did "atheism vs. christian" come from? It's not > a case of being atheist. It's the christians vs. everyone who isn't > christian (atheists being such a small percentage of that to hardly count) > that's the major gripe - and their insistance upon preaching to everyone. It is not the Jews nor the Muslims nor the Mormons who are bringing the lawsuits, but the atheists. It began with O'Hare and prayer in the schools - which is still an issue today. It caused people to feel 'unfaired' against because efforts were made to include other religions in the prayers, but because there were people who did not pray (a minority), no prayers could be said. > > However, the context of > > divisiveness was created by the atheists, not the Christians, who, > > for the most part, were willing to include other expressions of > > faith and to allow those without faith to 'affirm' rather than > > swear on the bible (and I know there are faiths who will not swear > > either). > > BS. The christian churches have been amongst the most > oppressive/devisive/repressive in history Perhaps in other centuries and other cultures. Until atheists brought up the subject by suing to remove prayer from the schools, ecumenism was gaining ground in the US. Now, people are getting entrenched and the climate is ripe for the kind of attitudes that FP talks about. > > Not only the Muslims. But it *is* largely to do with the atrocities carried > out in the name of "God", via the christians, which has created a lot of > todays problems... It's pay-back time..... Those who live in the past are especially doomed to repeat the past. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 08:42:59 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Oct 2 08:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhmjh3$nvo$1@news.spamcop.net... > I would agree that atheists are somewhat on the fringe in all of this. > I see it more as a number of rather extreme Christians (i.e. the people > telling FP's grandchildren to put more clothes on) who want to make > everybody live under their rules and version of morality. It seems to > me that probably the majority of people call themselves Christians but > don't really support the more fringe views. > > It seems like the extreme positions have a voice much out of proportion > with the actual percentage of the people who hold those views because > they are much more determined and involved in pushing their agendas > whereas everybody is more concerned with more basic parts of life and > only really start to take notice when, what do you mean you are going to > start censoring Desperate Housewives? I think though that there isn't a > theocracy in place now mostly because, as FP has pointed out, most of > them can't agree on the exact dogma they support. Actually, most atheists are not offended by those who are believers and vice versa. It is the 'fringe' who are causing the trouble demanding their 'rights' - at both ends - preventing moderate, tolerant people from looking at the practicality of how to live the spirit of the Constitution in an age where there are significant minorities who are not Christian instead of protecting different expressions of Christianity as it was in the beginning. Miss Betsy From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 2 14:42:39 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Sun Oct 2 08:45:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" wrote in message news:dhojpb$pjp$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Porpoise" wrote in message > news:dhmbvi$kce$1@news.spamcop.net... >> >> Ummm.... Excuse me!?! Where did "atheism vs. christian" come > from? It's not >> a case of being atheist. It's the christians vs. everyone who > isn't >> christian (atheists being such a small percentage of that to > hardly count) >> that's the major gripe - and their insistance upon preaching to > everyone. > > It is not the Jews nor the Muslims nor the Mormons who are bringing > the lawsuits, but the atheists. I see, they stood up and said "I am an atheist" did they? How do you know they were atheists, and not just people who are fed up of being preached at? > > It began with O'Hare and prayer in the schools - which is still an > issue today. It caused people to feel 'unfaired' against because > efforts were made to include other religions in the prayers, but > because there were people who did not pray (a minority), no prayers > could be said. How do you know they do not pray? There are a large proportion of people who prefer to do their praying/meditation in private - which is how it should be. > >> > However, the context of >> > divisiveness was created by the atheists, not the Christians, > who, >> > for the most part, were willing to include other expressions of >> > faith and to allow those without faith to 'affirm' rather than >> > swear on the bible (and I know there are faiths who will not > swear >> > either). >> >> BS. The christian churches have been amongst the most >> oppressive/devisive/repressive in history > > Perhaps in other centuries and other cultures. Until atheists > brought up the subject by suing to remove prayer from the schools, > ecumenism was gaining ground in the US. Now, people are getting > entrenched and the climate is ripe for the kind of attitudes that > FP talks about. It still is. And you still haven't producced evidence of it being only atheists who prefer not to have other peoples religious beliefs shoved down their throats. >> >> Not only the Muslims. But it *is* largely to do with the > atrocities carried >> out in the name of "God", via the christians, which has created a > lot of >> todays problems... It's pay-back time..... > > Those who live in the past are especially doomed to repeat the > past. What goes round, comes round.......... The time is now. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 10:34:42 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Heidi) Date: Sun Oct 2 09:35:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "Bcs1" wrote in message news:dhnoqv$clo$1@news.spamcop.net... > > ok having not followed this too much until it was brought up in here, I've > heard that this prosecutor dude has taken 5 or 6 sets of charges to the > grand jury in order to try to get Delay indicted, and after all those > failures he finally got one to indict on conspiracy... > now I'm no legal scholar, but isn't that charge just a "we can't find > anything else that might stick" charge? > I dunno though just a thought http://www.news8austin.com/content/your_news/default.asp?ArID=146685 The 12-member grand jury that indicted U.S. Rep. Tom Delay, R-Sugar Land, faces scrutiny from critics who say they are lackeys for Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle Gibson isn't really afraid of that. He did his duty and that bound him to look at Tom Delay as just another Texan accused of criminal conspiracy, he said. "I like his aggressiveness and everything, and I had nothing against the House majority man, but I felt that we had enough evidence, not only me, but the other grand jury members," Gibson said. The grand jury foreman also takes great exception to accusations that he and 11 other grand jury members followed the lead of Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle instead of following the evidence. "It was not a rubber stamp deal. It was not an overnight deal. If we needed extra information, it was provided to us," Gibson said. Gibson thinks there is enough evidence to convict Delay. "We would not have handed down an indictment. We would have no-billed the man, if we didn't feel there was sufficient evidence," said Gibson. The evidence is there to prove Delay was involved in wrongdoing and also prove that he and his fellow grand jurors acted independent of political influence, Gibson said. "It wasn't Mr. Earle that indicted the man. It was the 12 members of the grand jury," Gibson said. From devnull at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 11:49:23 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Oct 2 10:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" | > Ummm.... Excuse me!?! Where did "atheism vs. Christian" come | from? It's not a case of being atheist. It's the Christians vs. everyone who | isn't Christian (atheists being such a small percentage of that to | hardly count) that's the major gripe - and their insistence upon preaching to | everyone. | | It is not the Jews nor the Muslims nor the Mormons who are bringing | the lawsuits, but the atheists. Muslims are trying to keep their heads (down) and for good reason. As are the others you mention but lesser so. I find it curious that the Christian want to ascribe all those things they find bothersome to some boogey man that all can be encouraged to hate with impunity and thereby avoid addressing the real issues. If it's prayer in school or the pledge then it's the atheists. But then there are the street signs 'Flush the Koran". Jews are another issue, if it's Israel against those Muslims Arabs hara for the Jews, if it's Jews speaking out about evangelist in their neighborhood/home their hammered for not hearing the Word of God (aka the teachings of Jesus) they are the lost and not allowed to associated with decent folk. Homosexuals are dirt under their feet UNLESS they are an immediate member of the family but only tolerated if they are a family member of one of the powerful. However if it's the son/daughter of one of the church faithful they are vilified and often they and the church member driven off in the process as 'associated with the unclean sinners' I've been on the edges of those battles and have been known to hand out small tobacco pounces containing stones engraved John 8:7 many times to cold stares and hot words. I truly believe the only reason those stones are not used on me and mine is that we have been active in help those same folk when they were truly in need. (hospice et all) | It began with O'Hare and prayer in the schools - which is still an | issue today. It caused people to feel 'unfaired' against because | efforts were made to include other religions in the prayers, but | because there were people who did not pray (a minority), no prayers | could be said. | | > > However, the context of divisiveness was created by the atheists, not the Christians, | who, for the most part, were willing to include other expressions of | > > faith and to allow those without faith to 'affirm' rather than | > > swear on the bible (and I know there are faiths who will not | swear either). | > | > BS. The Christian churches have been amongst the most | > oppressive/divisive/repressive in history | | Perhaps in other centuries and other cultures. Until atheists | brought up the subject by suing to remove prayer from the schools, | ecumenism was gaining ground in the US. Now, people are getting | entrenched and the climate is ripe for the kind of attitudes that | FP talks about. | | | > | > Not only the Muslims. But it *is* largely to do with the | atrocities carried out in the name of "God", via the Christians, which has created a | lot of today's problems... It's pay-back time..... | | Those who live in the past are especially doomed to repeat the | past. Then why are those in the Christian right so hell bent (I use the word advisedly) on repeating the errors of the past? Think inquisition, think the letters to/from Jefferson and the Baptist of that time. (who were at that time, coincidently on the receiving end of what they are now doing to others today). I have never, ever, seen a case were force/coercion effected a person's conversion to any faith. Given a big enough stick and at best you will obtain lip service to the process and the rules but nothing more. Those that would convert others best do it by proper example of the application of beliefs and faith not by compulsion. From bcs1 at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 12:04:41 2005 From: bcs1 at spamcop.net (Bcs1) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "JohnL" wrote in message news:Xns96E2E85E2FE90innewsgrouponly@216.154.195.61... > "Bcs1" wrote in news:dhnoqv$clo$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> now I'm no legal scholar, but isn't that charge just a "we can't find >> anything else that might stick" charge? > > But, isn't that the way it's done in > texas?? LOL our local "govnmnt basher" host was talking about all the screw-ups in the government, and one of his callers brought that up talking about how he was glad to see delay indicted ect, ect and the host dude came back with that.... and a few choice comments about Texas Justice LMAO. From devnull at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 11:51:22 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:15:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Porpoise" | > | > Those who live in the past are especially doomed to repeat the | > past. | | What goes round, comes round.......... The time is now. Not quite yet grasshopper but soon all too soon and we will all be the worse off for the result. From devnull at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 11:55:56 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:15:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" | Actually, most atheists are not offended by those who are believers | and vice versa. It is the 'fringe' who are causing the trouble | demanding their 'rights' - at both ends - preventing moderate, | tolerant people from looking at the practicality of how to live the | spirit of the Constitution in an age where there are significant | minorities who are not Christian instead of protecting different | expressions of Christianity as it was in the beginning. Not offended by believers is true as far as it goes. There is, however, a growing number of people of all flavors who are offended by the actions of the few. Especially those in political office or public prominence that are working to advance their religious beliefs in the community as a mandate. From devnull at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 12:10:54 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:15:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "Bcs1" | yup replying to me again LOL | | ok having not followed this too much until it was brought up in here, I've | heard that this prosecutor dude has taken 5 or 6 sets of charges to the | grand jury in order to try to get Delay indicted, and after all those | failures he finally got one to indict on conspiracy... | now I'm no legal scholar, but isn't that charge just a "we can't find | anything else that might stick" charge? | I dunno though just a thought Despite the general understanding once impaneled GJ are independent but still affected by political pressure and mind set. It is quite likely that any given GJ has members that are of the mind set 'my party, right or wrong'. In some states (Louisiana comes to mind) once impaneled a GJ can go most anywhere and investigate anything they might see as needful of investigation and the DA be damned. As to shopping GJ correct me if I'm wrong but aren't all cases presented to a GJ before going to trail? I seem to recall any number of cases that had to be presented to a GJ in various reiterations before there was a finding of probable cause. This is in part what a GJ is required to do i.e. act as a test to prevent abuse of the power of the government to use legal action as a hammer. I would give some credence to the assertion that this has partisan motivation except that Earl has a reputation (well earned) for going after Democrats with the same zeal. From devnull at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 12:11:31 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:15:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "JohnL" wrote in message news:Xns96E2E85E2FE90innewsgrouponly@216.154.195.61... | "Bcs1" wrote in news:dhnoqv$clo$1@news.spamcop.net: | | > now I'm no legal scholar, but isn't that charge just a "we can't find | > anything else that might stick" charge? | | But, isn't that the way it's done in | texas?? And most other states and the federal court system From bcs1 at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 12:31:38 2005 From: bcs1 at spamcop.net (Bcs1) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:25:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: waht on ertah deos tihs maen? References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E14CC1EB95Aspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > Can you raed tihs? > > cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. > The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch sutdy > at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers > in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat > ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you > can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid > deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. > Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! > > (oh and if yuvo'e got any sramtsas cemomnts auobt it not bneig a rael > sutdy > at Cmagribde I'm not itnestered... tihs is a bit of asunmemet bieng psased > anorud oaky?) > > actually it is real, in fact most people don't read EACH letter, they only need the first and the last letter to be correct in order to know what the word is and it was an English research study that found this out...I've used the text from that study in several of my room topics for years From bcs1 at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 12:36:02 2005 From: bcs1 at spamcop.net (Bcs1) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:31:26 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: waht on ertah deos tihs maen? References: <2l0rj1l8dshidruavok759j93017cetl6b@4ax.com> Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhk6oa$b8r$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Mr K. Mean wrote: > your mind can unscramble >> and repair a certain amount of static and noise that might otherwise >> make this unreadable. > > You mean like about 80% of Charles' stream-of-consciousness posts? > (doesn't > work for me ;-) > > ROFLMAO From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Sun Oct 2 16:33:26 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:35:53 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: waht on ertah deos tihs maen? References: Message-ID: "Bcs1" wrote in news:dhou48$uf7$1@news.spamcop.net: > actually it is real, in fact most people don't read EACH letter, they > only > need the first and the last letter to be correct in order to know what > the word is Thks for that info Bab. From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Sun Oct 2 16:37:40 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Sun Oct 2 11:40:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: waht on ertah deos tihs maen? References: Message-ID: JohnL wrote in news:Xns96E3613A8F4D9innewsgrouponly@216.154.195.61: > Thks for that info Bab ---and of course I meant... Thks for that info, Ball From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Sun Oct 2 15:09:28 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Sun Oct 2 14:10:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In article , "Porpoise" wrote: > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > > > It began with O'Hare and prayer in the schools - which is still an > > issue today. It caused people to feel 'unfaired' against because > > efforts were made to include other religions in the prayers, but > > because there were people who did not pray (a minority), no prayers > > could be said. > > How do you know they do not pray? There are a large proportion of people who > prefer to do their praying/meditation in private - which is how it should > be. "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." (Matthew 6:5-6) -- D.F. Manno | dfm2a3l0t2@spymac.com The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression.--H.L. Mencken, "Minority Report" (1956) From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Sun Oct 2 15:16:24 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Sun Oct 2 14:20:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: In article , "Frog Prince" wrote: > As to shopping GJ correct me if I'm > wrong but aren't all cases presented to a GJ before going to trail? I seem > to recall any number of cases that had to be presented to a GJ in various > reiterations before there was a finding of probable cause. Not any more. Most states have done away with the indicting grand jury. -- D.F. Manno | dfm2a3l0t2@spymac.com The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression.--H.L. Mencken, "Minority Report" (1956) From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Sun Oct 2 23:05:50 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Sun Oct 2 17:10:19 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: <433ED63A.6D4A5EC7@spamcop.net> References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433ED63A.6D4A5EC7@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > David Dean wrote: >> It might actually do you some good to read one. (and no I'm not >>proselytizing) Some people might be surprised at how devout I used to >>be. Reading and understanding the Bible helps you understand a lot of >>literary and cultural allusions. It also helps when arguing against much >>of the foolish misinterpretation that the fundamentalists support. Very >>much like having a good understanding of the Constitution helps you pick >>apart many political arguments. > > I find it quite useful when engaging in online discussions about it. > (ie: "Yes, Leviticus does call homosexuality an 'abomination', but in > the verse right next to that one, it also says...") > > It's fully searchable by book/chapter/verse or keyword. They have many > other books there as well. For myself, I don't see the point in reading the Bible for the purpose of better arguments. Yes, it is an important historical and literary document that will make many cultural and literary references make more sense, but for myself, I won't be reading it for the purpose of pointing out misinterpretations. If you accept that it is a document of a faith, then you should see the problem right there. Having faith requires you to accept certain things that can't really be proven one way or another. Does it really matter at all if there is a section in there or not that calls homosexuality an abomination? Yes, the verses around that same section make lots of other nutty statements that are conveniently overlooked by most people and you can always point out the internal contradictions in accepting one of the verses but not the others, but overall I don't see any purpose in using a religious document to debate about matters that in the end have to be a personal acceptance of what somebody does or doesn't believe. Calling homosexuality an abomination is a matter of faith and not of law. I don't accept the point that it is the same as understanding the Constitution either. Unless of course you want to say the Bible is subject to the same sorts of things, that 3/4 of the voters can decide to drop sections, or modify them, or add new ones. But you are supposed to accept that the Bible was written at least indirectly by god and that it has been properly translated and that all of the sections that are there were meant to be there and that there are not any sections that got edited out (by people) because they didn't fit somehow. The Constitution is a work in progress, an ever changing document, but the Bible is supposed to be perfect in itself and never changing. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 19:25:40 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Oct 2 19:20:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhotd5$u5c$2@news.spamcop.net... > > "Miss Betsy" > > | Actually, most atheists are not offended by those who are believers > | and vice versa. It is the 'fringe' who are causing the trouble > | demanding their 'rights' - at both ends - preventing moderate, > | tolerant people from looking at the practicality of how to live the > | spirit of the Constitution in an age where there are significant > | minorities who are not Christian instead of protecting different > | expressions of Christianity as it was in the beginning. > > Not offended by believers is true as far as it goes. There is, however, a > growing number of people of all flavors who are offended by the actions of > the few. Especially those in political office or public prominence that are > working to advance their religious beliefs in the community as a mandate. > And that's what I keep saying: it is getting harder for the people of 'all flavors' who want tolerance to be able to have a voice because of the minority who want it 'their way or no way' Just like abortion. People have to be pro-abortion or anti-abortion; there is no middle ground where moderates can enact laws against abortion for choosing the sex or for abortion in the case of rape - thus establishing that there are some things the 'majority' agree on while leaving the more difficult cases up to the individuals involved. Slyvestethecat wondered if I were in favor of allowing government to allow revenge killing. Like abortion and many other laws that reflect moral values, it really is very difficult to allow those whose values include retribution because those on whom retribution is being practiced may not be believers in those values. However, any government who says that I may not kill in retribution can also make it mandatory that I retaliate without government protection from attack. The ideal is a government that has no laws based on moral vaues, but simply 'regulations' like traffic laws that make it easier for many people to interact. However, at this time in history, we do make laws based on moral values and since we do, then people who want more restrictive laws (for instance, the old blue laws for no business on Sunday or abortion or divorce only for adultery) have a perfect right to lobby for those laws - including teaching Creationism, if they can get a majority. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 19:31:57 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Oct 2 19:25:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:dhokkq$q26$1@news.spamcop.net... > > How do you know they do not pray? There are a large proportion of people who > prefer to do their praying/meditation in private - which is how it should > be. You are going to make me conform to your standard of how it should be? > >> Not only the Muslims. But it *is* largely to do with the > > atrocities carried > >> out in the name of "God", via the christians, which has created a > > lot of > >> todays problems... It's pay-back time..... > > > > Those who live in the past are especially doomed to repeat the > > past. > > What goes round, comes round.......... The time is now. That's a secular view of the world. In the spiritual view, the past is past and what matters is now. Your words indicate that you believe in the biggest stick, not tolerance. Your attitude will come back to you. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 19:41:54 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Oct 2 19:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhos35$tdm$1@news.spamcop.net... > I have never, ever, seen a case were force/coercion effected a person's > conversion to any faith. Given a big enough stick and at best you will > obtain lip service to the process and the rules but nothing more. Those > that would convert others best do it by proper example of the application of > beliefs and faith not by compulsion. And that is the whole point: Prevent me from praying publically and you reinforce the idea that the biggest stick is what is needed. Does it really hurt anyone to utter the words, 'Under God'? No. Is it making those who do not believe in God paraihs? Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. It is a bogeyman while the people you are talking about and others get away with their intolerant attitudes. It is because most people don't live Gospel values or Jewish values or Muslim values or Mormon values or Navajo values or whatever values you want to list. Miss Betsy From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 3 02:06:45 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Sun Oct 2 20:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" wrote in message news:dhpq72$c81$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Porpoise" wrote in message > news:dhokkq$q26$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> >> How do you know they do not pray? There are a large proportion of > people who >> prefer to do their praying/meditation in private - which is how > it should >> be. > > You are going to make me conform to your standard of how it should > be? No, what I'm saying is whether or not I pray is my own private affair and I don't think people should be trying to shove religion down my throat by trying to force me to pray in public. > > >> >> Not only the Muslims. But it *is* largely to do with the >> > atrocities carried >> >> out in the name of "God", via the christians, which has > created a >> > lot of >> >> todays problems... It's pay-back time..... >> > >> > Those who live in the past are especially doomed to repeat the >> > past. >> >> What goes round, comes round.......... The time is now. > > That's a secular view of the world. In the spiritual view, the > past is past and what matters is now. Your words indicate that you > believe in the biggest stick, not tolerance. Your attitude will > come back to you. Quite the opposite - what I'm saying is that the things the christians did in the past are now coming back to haunt them. It's the christians that have insisted on trying to force their beliefs on everyone else. *That* is what everyone else is beefing about. Those that are tolerant are the ones that just quietly get on with with their own lives/beliefs without trying to force everyone else to conform to them. Unfortunately, christians don't seem to be able to that, for some reason. They persist in trying to force their views/beliefs onto everyone else, and "convert" them. From devnull at spamcop.net Sun Oct 2 21:09:05 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Oct 2 20:15:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" | | > I have never, ever, seen a case were force/coercion effected a | person's conversion to any faith. Given a big enough stick and at best you | will obtain lip service to the process and the rules but nothing more. | Those that would convert others best do it by proper example of the | application of beliefs and faith not by compulsion. | | And that is the whole point: Prevent me from praying public | and you reinforce the idea that the biggest stick is what is | needed. Does it really hurt anyone to utter the words, 'Under | God'? No. Is it making those who do not believe in God pariahs? | Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. | | It is a bogeyman while the people you are talking about and others | get away with their intolerant attitudes. It is because most | people don't live Gospel values or Jewish values or Muslim values | or Mormon values or Navajo values or whatever values you want to | list. You're mixing apples and oranges. The point is the inclusion of religious doctrine in tax supported public venues not in where you chose to pray. As with most any public activity there are limits where you can engage in that practice especially when it interferes with the conduct of other lawful activities. For example one can pray on the street corner but not in the middle of the street where it disrupts others lawful actions. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 3 02:17:43 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Sun Oct 2 20:20:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" wrote in message news:dhpqpn$ci1$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Frog Prince" wrote in message > news:dhos35$tdm$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> I have never, ever, seen a case were force/coercion effected a > person's >> conversion to any faith. Given a big enough stick and at best you > will >> obtain lip service to the process and the rules but nothing more. > Those >> that would convert others best do it by proper example of the > application of >> beliefs and faith not by compulsion. > > And that is the whole point: Prevent me from praying publically > and you reinforce the idea that the biggest stick is what is > needed. I don't recall the argument being about preventing you from praying in public (although why people feel the need to do it in public raises other questions) the argument was about stopping you from requiring everyone else to also pray in public. > Does it really hurt anyone to utter the words, 'Under > God'? No. Is it making those who do not believe in God paraihs? > Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. Does it really hurt anyone to *not* require other people to utter the words 'Under God'? No! > > It is a bogeyman while the people you are talking about and others > get away with their intolerant attitudes. In what way is it intolerant to not want other people to force their beliefs on you and require you to follow *their* beliefs. If you follow a belief that you have to flog yourself twice a day, that is up to you - I have no interest in knowing that you do that - and I don't want you bothering me with your attempts at trying to get me to do it too. How does that make me intolerant? The intolerance is in your not allowing me the freedom to avoid the invasion of privacy. THAT is what the argument is! From post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com Sun Oct 2 21:42:00 2005 From: post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com (DougW) Date: Sun Oct 2 21:45:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] O-tay. Message-ID: >From the "I had no idea they made that" file. http://www.kemcooil.com/products.php?cId=5 Now your car can smell like a two bit ho when your getting screwed at the pump. Bloody amazing. -- DougW From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Mon Oct 3 09:38:18 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Oct 3 03:40:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > >>Does it really hurt anyone to utter the words, 'Under >>God'? No. Is it making those who do not believe in God paraihs? >>Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. > > Does it really hurt anyone to *not* require other people to utter the words > 'Under God'? No! So, you know, how about you change them to "under Satan" instead. After all, they are only words, no harm in making people say that every day, would there? Sure, not everybody will be happy with that, but oh well. From bait-423c86b2-42ff9001 at good.julianhaight.com Mon Oct 3 04:04:31 2005 From: bait-423c86b2-42ff9001 at good.julianhaight.com (Chris F. Willoughby) Date: Mon Oct 3 06:05:19 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:dhgncg$4l7$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "Frog Prince" wrote in message > news:dhfm3s$b42$4@news.spamcop.net... >> >> By them my great grand kids will be speaking what language? > > > CHINESE!!! > I was thinking Spanish myself. ;-) Chris From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 3 12:28:02 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Mon Oct 3 06:30:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Chris F. Willoughby" wrote in message news:dhqvn9$u23$1@news.spamcop.net... "Porpoise" wrote in message news:dhgncg$4l7$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "Frog Prince" wrote in message > news:dhfm3s$b42$4@news.spamcop.net... >> >> By them my great grand kids will be speaking what language? > > > CHINESE!!! > I was thinking Spanish myself. ;-) ??????? Why would it be Spanish? China is going to be the major economic force in the next 10 years. And given that more people already speak Chinese than any other language.......... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0226_040226_language.html From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 07:46:23 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Oct 3 07:40:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:dhpsnp$dhr$1@news.spamcop.net... > Quite the opposite - what I'm saying is that the things the christians did > in the past are now coming back to haunt them. It's the christians that have > insisted on trying to force their beliefs on everyone else. *That* is what > everyone else is beefing about. Those that are tolerant are the ones that > just quietly get on with with their own lives/beliefs without trying to > force everyone else to conform to them. Unfortunately, christians don't seem > to be able to that, for some reason. They persist in trying to force their > views/beliefs onto everyone else, and "convert" them. We are talking specifically about the US, not the centuries before. The whole premise of the Constitution is that no particular 'religion' - which at the time the Constitution was written encompassed only Christian religions and Judaism for practical purposes - would neither be promoted by the government nor suppressed by the government. In this century, the kinds of religions that a significant number of citizens may practice include non-Judeo-Christian religions. It presents a problem to including prayer, phrases, and other symbols of religious values in governmental buildings or functions (such as schools). In the lawsuits to set precedence for this new situation, the attitude of the majority was to include as best one could different forms of religion. It was not until 'all' religion was banned that the issue started becoming divisive - not because it was impractical to come up with something that the majority of religious people could live with, but because an atheist objected to 'all' prayer on the grounds they were being forced to pray. The majority of people who are believers of some sort were obedient to the law, though, just like the privacy laws now in effect it did not really affect them directly, just made life a little more difficult. It was another instance of how the Federal Government was reaching into their customs and dictating to them. A minority of Christians reacted in kind and thus began the attitudes that FP warns about. Now, we have come to the phrase 'under God' - the majority are not going to get into the extremist arguments, but they resent the change in custom, think it is another example of how a minority viewpoint dictates Federal policy (which, in their viewpoint, is totally unnecessary where they live - however necessary other places), and are not about to support a change. OTOH, they wouldn't support a change to make the US a 'Christian' nation either. As I am typing this, it shows the advantages of majority rule - change may come slowly, but it does keep the extremes from 'forcing' a particular viewpoint - adherents do have to use persuasion or dramatic example rather than government decree. And, for the record, it is not only Christian nations who have made their religious values part of the governmental law. That is one of the problems in the Middle East - according to Western ideas (not conservative Christian ideas), women have equality. Making that a law is 'forcing' a nation to change their values. In the Karen Hughes news piece, that was one of the issues debated. As I said before, IMHO, government should not be in the business of making moral laws - even if that means that certain people conduct human sacrifice or have multiple wives or live by the values of revenge. The only problem is that it is difficult to maintain individual rights if an individual does not hold the same values as hir minority group and to prevent a minority group from exercising their values on non-believers. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 08:07:10 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Oct 3 08:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhpstc$djf$1@news.spamcop.net... > You're mixing apples and oranges. The point is the inclusion of religious > doctrine in tax supported public venues not in where you chose to pray. > > As with most any public activity there are limits where you can engage in > that practice especially when it interferes with the conduct of other lawful > activities. For example one can pray on the street corner but not in the > middle of the street where it disrupts others lawful actions. The limits are based on practicality. If most of the governmental body wants to say a prayer, it is more practical to do so within the government building than to convene somewhere else and then enter the building. It also makes the ones who do not attend more conspicuous, than if they simply do not join in. However, most people accepted the arguments about prayer in the schools. It is just that most people are not going to get in the secular/religious fight. " 'Under God' was ok with my grandfather and you aren't going to make me change just because you don't believe in God. " "and don't give me stuff about separation of Church and State - those who don't believe in God are trying to force their unbelief on me." OTOH, as you point out, they won't stand for any different beliefs being taught or forced on them. I think, perhaps, we are not talking logic here. I don't disagree with your observations nor with your stance on the separation of Church and State on a thinking level. Politics is the art of the possible because the majority do not 'think' but vote on a 'gut' level. My argument here is not that 'under God' should be included, but that it is the wrong time to press for its removal - and particularly on the grounds that some people do not believe. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 08:13:05 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Oct 3 08:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:dhptcb$ds1$1@news.spamcop.net... > > It is a bogeyman while the people you are talking about and others > > get away with their intolerant attitudes. > > In what way is it intolerant to not want other people to force their beliefs > on you and require you to follow *their* beliefs. If you follow a belief > that you have to flog yourself twice a day, that is up to you - I have no > interest in knowing that you do that - and I don't want you bothering me > with your attempts at trying to get me to do it too. How does that make me > intolerant? The intolerance is in your not allowing me the freedom to avoid > the invasion of privacy. > > THAT is what the argument is! Aha, it is 'invasion of privacy' that is the right you are invoking - not separation of Church and State. My point, however, is that there are concrete actions being taken by our government that are intolerant that people are ignoring while being caught up in an argument that has little or no consequence to the majority of people. It is bad tactics. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 08:22:16 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Oct 3 08:15:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhqn5b$q13$1@news.spamcop.net... > Porpoise wrote: > > > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > > > >>Does it really hurt anyone to utter the words, 'Under > >>God'? No. Is it making those who do not believe in God paraihs? > >>Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. > > > > Does it really hurt anyone to *not* require other people to utter the words > > 'Under God'? No! > > So, you know, how about you change them to "under Satan" instead. After > all, they are only words, no harm in making people say that every day, > would there? Sure, not everybody will be happy with that, but oh well. The point actually is that no one is requiring anyone to 'say' them - only to listen to them while others are saying them. And that there are some real problems of inequality and injustice and intolerance that need to be addressed that are being ignored. I felt so bad for the man who was upset with Karen Hughes. He pointed out that the US citizen response to the tsunami contradicted bin Laden's arguments, that Karen Hughes did not represent the US in her comments. But anyone who might have supported him is too worried about the possibility that they will have to hear someone else express hir faith and thus be violated to give support to what is ecumenical and inclusive and object when government officials give voice to opposite sentiments. Miss Betsy From devnull at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 09:19:47 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Mon Oct 3 08:25:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" | | > You're mixing apples and oranges. The point is the inclusion of | religious doctrine in tax supported public venues not in where you chose to pray. | > | > As with most any public activity there are limits where you can | engage in that practice especially when it interferes with the conduct of | other lawful activities. For example one can pray on the street corner but not in the middle of the street where it disrupts others lawful actions. | | The limits are based on practicality. If most of the governmental | body wants to say a prayer, it is more practical to do so within | the government building than to convene somewhere else and then | enter the building. It also makes the ones who do not attend more | conspicuous, than if they simply do not join in. | | However, most people accepted the arguments about prayer in the | schools. It is just that most people are not going to get in the | secular/religious fight. " 'Under God' was ok with my grandfather | and you aren't going to make me change just because you don't | believe in God. " "and don't give me stuff about separation of | Church and State - those who don't believe in God are trying to | force their unbelief on me." OTOH, as you point out, they won't | stand for any different beliefs being taught or forced on them. And you propose I conceded to the inclusion (which was politically motivated during the McCarthy era might do some research into the abuse of that period) because you do believe in God? | My argument here is not that 'under God' should be | included, but that it is the wrong time to press for its removal - | and particularly on the grounds that some people do not believe. That last sentence is the crux of the matter and what makes the separation of church and state critical. And it's not so much that few or many do or don't believe it a matter of being true to the constitution. And much more critical is that there is a McCarty type movement within the Christian community to have selected Christian doctrine the law of the land. We are not that far from having Religious Police in the same manner as they have in many Islamic countries. As example I point to John Ashcroft's spending over $5000.00 dollars to drape a nude statue. On a smaller scale we have a religious group that felt empowered to chastise me about the clothing that my 5 and 11 y.o. grand daughters were wearing to play in my back yard. To their mind set those kids were being lewd and lavacious in their dress and provocative in their action. (Their words not mine). BTW they would have you walk two steps to the left and one step behind your husband or your sons. And by the way once your son reached the age of 11 you he would have say over your actions. From devnull at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 09:53:01 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Mon Oct 3 08:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" < | > > | > >>Does it really hurt anyone to utter the words, 'Under | > >>God'? No. Is it making those who do not believe in God | paraihs? | > >>Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. | > > | > > Does it really hurt anyone to *not* require other people to | utter the words 'Under God'? No! | > | > So, you know, how about you change them to "under Satan" instead. | After all, they are only words, no harm in making people say that every | day, would there? Sure, not everybody will be happy with that, but oh | well. | | The point actually is that no one is requiring anyone to 'say' | them - only to listen to them while others are saying them. Back to my sex act analogy no one is required to participate only watch while other engage. Both can be/are offensive. | | And that there are some real problems of inequality and injustice | and intolerance that need to be addressed that are being ignored. | I felt so bad for the man who was upset with Karen Hughes. He | pointed out that the US citizen response to the tsunami | contradicted bin Laden's arguments, that Karen Hughes did not | represent the US in her comments. But anyone who might have | supported him is too worried about the possibility that they will | have to hear someone else express her faith and thus be violated to | give support to what is ecumenical and inclusive and object when | government officials give voice to opposite sentiments. Words have powerful implications. Recall that in response to 911 GWB verbalized that our response would be a crusade. Even though the vast majority of the Islamic world had a great empathy for the US that phase sparked serious negative reaction throughout the world in both the Islamic cultures and other religions. I myself cringed. The reason being was the mind set of the medieval Christians. I don't recall Huges exact statement but given the pronouncements of this administration and other Christians in their camp I would expect that her pronouncements were viewed, and rightly so, as the official policy of this administration. Recall that Huges has spoken for the President in the past and with his full support. Going back to my problem with the church group behind my house. I received an offical applogoy but I know what their mind set is and the formal expression of that feeling, appology not withstanding, is a clear indication to me that I need to be exceedingly careful with my grand kids's safty in my own back yard. Now just how safe should I feel if these folk controled serious weapons and had the proven ability to employ them at their whim. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 10:03:36 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Mon Oct 3 09:05:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Kerry will love this Message-ID: I was listening to the news about the nomination of Miers as the new SC judge, and the reporter said "The President calls her a pitbull in size 6 shoes, she's never married, has no children, leads a very vigorous and active life. She's close to the President, has even been down on his ranch clearing brush....." WTF IS IT with "clearing brush" on that goddamn ranch?? Is that the only task he can be trusted to do without supervision? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 10:35:37 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Mon Oct 3 09:40:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Willie Nelson Biodiesel Message-ID: I just saw Willie on Real Time, talking about his biodiesel company-anyone seen these tanks around yet in CA, TX or SC? http://www.wnbiodiesel.com/products.html From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 10:46:47 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Oct 3 09:50:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433D8F56.3DD9AEC6@spamcop.net> <433DBCA8.20D50DA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > indigo wrote: > > > > Kenneth Brody wrote: > > In fact, the so-called "blue > > > laws" ("thou shalt not open your stores on Sunday") have been > > > declared unconstitutional, AFAIK. > > > > AFAIKYAIS > > "As far as I know, you are incredibly smart"? :-) As far as I know, you are incorrect, sir ;-) From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 12:32:18 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <43414F02.D1D09FC1@spamcop.net> Miss Betsy wrote: > > "Porpoise" wrote in message > news:dhmbvi$kce$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > > news:dhmaim$jgk$1@news.spamcop.net... [...] > > > Taken as one expression of good living, > > > in the context of cultural history, there is nothing in them to > > > warrant removal. In today's context of atheist vs Christian, > > > there is every reason to not post them. > > > > Ummm.... Excuse me!?! Where did "atheism vs. christian" come > > from? It's not a case of being atheist. It's the christians vs. > > everyone who isn't christian (atheists being such a small > > percentage of that to hardly count) that's the major gripe - and > > their insistance upon preaching to everyone. > > It is not the Jews nor the Muslims nor the Mormons who are bringing > the lawsuits, but the atheists. And yet (according to your quoted text, above), the athists are only going against the Christians. How is that possible? > It began with O'Hare and prayer in the schools - which is still an > issue today. I get it... Since the prayers were Christian in nature, when an atheist complained, it must be because it's "athiest vs. Christian". > It caused people to feel 'unfaired' against because > efforts were made to include other religions in the prayers, but > because there were people who did not pray (a minority), no prayers > could be said. It's not possible to have an "all inclusive" prayer. Therefore, any government-sponsored prayer must, by definition, be supportive of some religions at the expense of others. [...] > > BS. The christian churches have been amongst the most > > oppressive/devisive/repressive in history > > Perhaps in other centuries and other cultures. Until atheists > brought up the subject by suing to remove prayer from the schools, > ecumenism was gaining ground in the US. Now, people are getting > entrenched and the climate is ripe for the kind of attitudes that > FP talks about. And, until abolitionists started publicly denouncing slavery, it was "okay". Until Rosa Parks said "I'm not moving", it was "okay" to force blacks to give up their seats to whites. Until Olver Brown said "I want my daughter to go to a good school", segregation was "okay". It's those darn troublemakers again, isn't it? [...] > > Not only the Muslims. But it *is* largely to do with the > > atrocities carried out in the name of "God", via the christians, > > which has created a lot of todays problems... It's pay-back > > time..... > > Those who live in the past are especially doomed to repeat the > past. But not until after those who wish to pretend that it never happened. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 12:34:45 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:31 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <43414F95.B3891064@spamcop.net> Porpoise wrote: > > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message [...] > >> BS. The christian churches have been amongst the most > >> oppressive/devisive/repressive in history > > > > Perhaps in other centuries and other cultures. Until atheists > > brought up the subject by suing to remove prayer from the schools, > > ecumenism was gaining ground in the US. Now, people are getting > > entrenched and the climate is ripe for the kind of attitudes that > > FP talks about. > > It still is. And you still haven't producced evidence of it being only > atheists who prefer not to have other peoples religious beliefs shoved down > their throats. [...] I can produce evidence to the contrary. I am not an atheist, and I prefer not to have other people's religious beliefs shoved down my throat. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 12:36:47 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:33 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Miss Betsy wrote: > > "Porpoise" wrote in message > news:dhokkq$q26$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > How do you know they do not pray? There are a large proportion of > > people who prefer to do their praying/meditation in private - which > > is how it should be. > > You are going to make me conform to your standard of how it should > be? Well, you're trying to make him conform to yours, so it only seems fair. :-) [...] -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 12:41:11 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:34 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <43415117.F2AC9B4B@spamcop.net> Porpoise wrote: > > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message [...] > > That's a secular view of the world. In the spiritual view, the > > past is past and what matters is now. Your words indicate that you > > believe in the biggest stick, not tolerance. Your attitude will > > come back to you. > > Quite the opposite - what I'm saying is that the things the christians did > in the past are now coming back to haunt them. It's the christians that have > insisted on trying to force their beliefs on everyone else. *That* is what > everyone else is beefing about. Those that are tolerant are the ones that > just quietly get on with with their own lives/beliefs without trying to > force everyone else to conform to them. Unfortunately, christians don't seem > to be able to that, for some reason. They persist in trying to force their > views/beliefs onto everyone else, and "convert" them. Well, to be fair, most Christians are tolerant of others, just as most others are tolerant of Christians. It's the holier-than-thou minority that is trying to force their version of Christianity on the world. (You know, by saying things along the lines of "if you don't want to pray in school, you must be a godless atheist" and the like.) -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 12:51:42 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:36 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <4341538E.767AC0F9@spamcop.net> Miss Betsy wrote: > > "Frog Prince" wrote in message > news:dhos35$tdm$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > I have never, ever, seen a case were force/coercion effected a > > person's conversion to any faith. Given a big enough stick and > > at best you will obtain lip service to the process and the rules > > but nothing more. Those that would convert others best do it by > > proper example of the application of beliefs and faith not by > compulsion. > > And that is the whole point: Prevent me from praying publically > and you reinforce the idea that the biggest stick is what is > needed. But nobody is preventing you from publically praying. What is being prevented is the government stepping up and saying "we are now going to recite this Christian prayer, which you don't have to say if you're a godless athiest". > Does it really hurt anyone to utter the words, 'Under God'? No. Yes, it does hurt people to be coerced in reciting a pledge which contains those words. Does it hurt _you_? No. Are there others who are hurt by it? Yes! Does it hurt people to say the pledge without "Under G-d"? > Is it making those who do not believe in God paraihs? I think we've already heard from others on this list with first-hand experience who can answer "definitely yes" to that question. > Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. Since when does being a minority mean you are deprived of your rights? > It is a bogeyman while the people you are talking about and others > get away with their intolerant attitudes. It is because most > people don't live Gospel values or Jewish values or Muslim values > or Mormon values or Navajo values or whatever values you want to > list. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 12:56:05 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:38 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pickone) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <43415495.5B93CED6@spamcop.net> "Mr K. Mean" wrote: > > Porpoise wrote: > > > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > > > >>Does it really hurt anyone to utter the words, 'Under > >>God'? No. Is it making those who do not believe in God paraihs? > >>Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. > > > > Does it really hurt anyone to *not* require other people to utter the words > > 'Under God'? No! > > So, you know, how about you change them to "under Satan" instead. After > all, they are only words, no harm in making people say that every day, > would there? Sure, not everybody will be happy with that, but oh well. Perhaps "under Allah" instead. After all, Miss Betsy said that Muslims shouldn't be offended by using the Judeo-Christian name of their god, so Christians shouldn't be offended by using the Muslim name instead. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 12:59:16 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:40 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <43415554.CB8786A1@spamcop.net> Miss Betsy wrote: [...] > > The point actually is that no one is requiring anyone to 'say' > them - only to listen to them while others are saying them. ... and thereby being told "you are not part of this country or its government". [...] -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 13:08:15 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:42 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pickone) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433ED63A.6D4A5EC7@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <4341576F.5CADFB5@spamcop.net> "Mr K. Mean" wrote: [...] > > I find it quite useful when engaging in online discussions about it. > > (ie: "Yes, Leviticus does call homosexuality an 'abomination', but in > > the verse right next to that one, it also says...") > > > > It's fully searchable by book/chapter/verse or keyword. They have many > > other books there as well. > > For myself, I don't see the point in reading the Bible for the purpose > of better arguments. Yes, it is an important historical and literary > document that will make many cultural and literary references make more > sense, but for myself, I won't be reading it for the purpose of pointing > out misinterpretations. It also makes for more intelligent discussions. For example, when FP said he hands out stones with "John 8:7" carved them, it only took a few seconds to look up: So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And now I understood the reason for (and the humor behind) the reference. [...] > Yes, the verses around that same section make lots of other nutty > statements that are conveniently overlooked by most people and you can > always point out the internal contradictions in accepting one of the > verses but not the others, but overall I don't see any purpose in using > a religious document to debate about matters that in the end have to be > a personal acceptance of what somebody does or doesn't believe. Calling > homosexuality an abomination is a matter of faith and not of law. Except that some people are trying to make it law based on their faith. And that's where the problems start. [...] -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 13:14:57 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 12:25:44 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433ED4CF.4871893@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <43415901.2C12E910@spamcop.net> E?nw? wrote: > > On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:26:23 -0400, Kenneth Brody > wrote: > > >"D.F. Manno" wrote: > >[...] > >> > 13 Thou shalt not kill. > > >> An interesting choice of word there. It's _always_ been legal to kill > >> in certain circumstances: self-defense, in wartime, to enforce the law, > >> as punishment for a crime. Even the bible repeatedly endorses killing. > >[...] > > >My understanding is that the original Hebrew uses the word "murder", > >not "kill". > > More accurately: The original Hebrew is more accurately translated as > 'murder' than merely 'kill'. 'Murder' is an English word; it is quite > unlikely that it would have been used in a document written in ancient > Hebrew. :) > > Also, the word translated as 'steal' is better translated as 'kidnap', > and I have no idea why they translated the Hebrew word for 'steal' as > 'covet'. Another reason I don't understand those who say that the Bible is the word of G-d and must be taken exactly as written. Assuming that G-d physically wrote the first copy, or at least proofread the transcription, how can you claim that after thousands of years of copying, rewriting, and translating by fallible humans, that the Bible in your hand is still 100% accurate to the original? (A quick look at Michelangelo's statue of Moses can confirm that there have been errors in translation.) -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Oct 3 11:46:30 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Oct 3 13:50:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in news:dhl7en$tie$1 > @news.spamcop.net: > > >>Got some pretty good pics. I'll put them up shortly. :) >> > > > Has the smoke been bad? I sure am glad I'm not in Glendale any more! Not too bad now...the whole city smelled like BBQ for the first few days. From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Oct 3 11:48:33 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Oct 3 13:50:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: More fun with Nigerian scams In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Some new sucker on a hook. He switches email accounts on a regular basis, probably due to the fact I keep manually larting each new one I encounter. Here's his latest "excuse": DEAR PARTNER, THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ALERT, I SENT YOU AN E-MAIL EARLIER ON TODAY DEMANDING FOR A NEW NUMBER VIA: info1000@luxmail.com PLEASE, YOU ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO SEND ANY MAIL TO info1000@luxmail.com again as INTERNET POLICE JUST ALERTED ME ON THE SCAM FRAUDULENT INTERCEPTION BY INTERNET HACKERS OF THE PASSWORD TO THE luxmail.com mailBOX HAS BEEN TRAPPED BY INTERNET HACKERS/PROGRAMMERS WHICH ARE RAMPANT HERE IN SPAIN, IT IS IMPORTANT YOU ADHERE TO THIS ADVICE, JUST SEND YOUR RESPONSE MAIL TO THIS MAIL BOX: glenowens01@yahoo.com ONLY., this is the only true box, any mail you receive from info1000@luxmail.com from any impostor/impersonator claiming to be me: PROFESSOR GLEN OWENS , please disregard it and forward the mail to only this mailbiox : glenowens01@yahoo.com for now as there is fire on the mountain, this is what i have been advising you about the sop called criminals in ANGOLA because of the reliable info i got, this afternoon my country spanish timing, the password to: info1000@luxmail.com has been trapped. BE WARNED. send all further information to this yahoomailbox ONLY. (glenowens01@yahoo.com) I await your immediate response through this box ONLY, God Bless! G.OWENS --------------------------------- Yahoo! for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Mon Oct 3 19:54:34 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Oct 3 13:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > I was listening to the news about the nomination of Miers as the new SC judge, and > the reporter said "The President calls her a pitbull in size 6 shoes, she's never > married, has no children, leads a very vigorous and active life. She's close to the > President, has even been down on his ranch clearing brush....." > > WTF IS IT with "clearing brush" on that goddamn ranch?? Is that the only task he can > be trusted to do without supervision? Miers sounds a whole lot like Rice. But you know, when you have that one hopeless kid but they can sort of do one thing, maybe not all that well but you feel like you should be supportive so that they might possibly make something of their life and won't be a burden on society forever? You go, you clear that brush, give it all you've got, you can do it. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Mon Oct 3 19:54:45 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Oct 3 13:55:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message > >>So, you know, how about you change them to "under Satan" instead. > After >>all, they are only words, no harm in making people say that every > day, >>would there? Sure, not everybody will be happy with that, but oh > well. > > The point actually is that no one is requiring anyone to 'say' > them - only to listen to them while others are saying them. > > And that there are some real problems of inequality and injustice > and intolerance that need to be addressed that are being ignored. > I felt so bad for the man who was upset with Karen Hughes. He > pointed out that the US citizen response to the tsunami > contradicted bin Laden's arguments, that Karen Hughes did not > represent the US in her comments. So, are you saying then that you would have no problem with changing it to "under Satan" then, especially since nobody is actually required to say it but just listen to it? But I disagree that nobody is required to say it, on a practical level, is there any difference between being pressured to do something and being required to do something? And I must confess that I have absolutely no idea the point you are making with Karen Hughes. I know she went home to Texas for a while and then was appointed to be the ambassador of good cheer spreading the good news about America or something recently but I have no idea what she has done or said since then. So, I don't know the story behind somebody being upset with her. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Mon Oct 3 19:54:53 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Oct 3 13:55:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "Chris F. Willoughby" > >>>By them my great grand kids will be speaking what language? >> >>CHINESE!!! > > I was thinking Spanish myself. ;-) > > ??????? Why would it be Spanish? China is going to be the major economic > force in the next 10 years. And given that more people already speak Chinese > than any other language.......... > > http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0226_040226_language.html In some parts of the US, Spanish is likely to surpass English as the language of the majority in the next few years, such as Southern California. Spanish language radio is already starting to top the rating charts in those regions. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 15:45:53 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Oct 3 14:50:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in > news:dhlciv$aj$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > And it is a pretty neat bit of reasoned intelligence. It isn't just > > smashing at something with something else to get food out of it but > > a bit more indirect in using something to measure how wet you might > > get. > > Or more to the point... whether swimming is required. I wonder if > gorillas can even swim. Their anatomy may prevent it. Huh? Is there any animal on earth that _can't_ swim? I mean ones with limbs, of course, worms don't count. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Mon Oct 3 20:47:00 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Oct 3 14:50:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "Miss Betsy" wrote in news:dhr6f2$1aq$1 > >>The limits are based on practicality. If most of the governmental >>body wants to say a prayer, it is more practical to do so within >>the government building than to convene somewhere else and then >>enter the building. It also makes the ones who do not attend more >>conspicuous, than if they simply do not join in. > > Firstly, why do they feel the need to say prayers in such a context? It's > not a religious place, religion has no business in a government meeting and > secondly, nobody should be made to feel either conspicuous by their absence > or forced to 'join in'. To me, it seems like the most destructive part of some religions is the need/command to spread the religion to the unconverted. That's one thing you have to say about Buddhists, for example, you don't see them sending packs of missionaries to spread the word. If somebody is interested and asks, they will tell them about it but otherwise they mind their own business. From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Oct 3 13:02:02 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Oct 3 15:05:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: More fun with Nigerian scams In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in > news:dhrqs4$bkc$2@news.spamcop.net: > > >>Some new sucker on a hook. He switches email accounts on a regular >>basis, probably due to the fact I keep manually larting each new one I >>encounter. Here's his latest "excuse": > > > > >>BE WARNED. send all further >>information to this yahoomailbox ONLY. (glenowens01@yahoo.com) >> >>I await your immediate response through this box ONLY, God Bless! >>G.OWENS > > > LOL... so have you informed yahoo that that address needs to be nuked? I > wonder how he's going to explain THAT to you, when the yahoo addy goes tits > up LOL > > is he really in spain? Dunno where he really is from, but since he sent this email from a yahoo email address, I think it'll be nuked soon after I report that it's part of a 419 scam. :) From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Oct 3 13:03:06 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Oct 3 15:05:26 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in news:dhrqo8$bkc$1 > @news.spamcop.net: > > >>>Has the smoke been bad? I sure am glad I'm not in Glendale any more! >> >>Not too bad now...the whole city smelled like BBQ for the first few days. >> > > > so where's the aforementioned pics? > > we were getting the smoke from the west valley fires last week but the wind > shifted and it's been ok since Posted earlier. :) Here they are again: Fire pics. They're a mix of optical zoom / digital zoom / normal exposure / high exposure. Some are pretty impressive. This is the largest fire in our area...the actual fire line extends several miles to either side. http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire1.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire2.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire3.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire4.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire5.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire6.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire7.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire8.jpg http://storymindmedia.com/borgholio/images/fire9.jpg From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 16:09:54 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Neil) Date: Mon Oct 3 15:10:19 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: A Picture is worth 1000 words ... References: Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhngqa$95o$1@news.spamcop.net... > http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031785345290&path=%21editorials%21cartoons&s > =1045855934997 > > Not strictly just a picture, but "A picture and 20 words is worth a 1000 words" doesn't quite have the same ring does it? From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Oct 3 13:28:11 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Oct 3 15:30:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > > Heh, number 3 is a good one. I'm going to have to come over that way and > see what part of the hill has been burned. I used to go walking up there, > you know where the golf course is and you can carry on up the hill to some > sort of nature information center and park there. From there you can/could > walk up to the crest and look out over burbank and see for miles on a clear > day. Yeah, Wildwood Canyon. I love that place. From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Oct 3 13:50:25 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Oct 3 15:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in > news:dhs0mu$ec5$3@news.spamcop.net: > > > >>Yeah, Wildwood Canyon. I love that place. >> > > > Is that what got burnt? :o( Yep, the hills above the park itself. I dunno if the park green got burned...I hope not. I used to hike in the hills, and having picnic lunches in the green was nice. Wildwood is a very quiet, secluded place to relax. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 17:07:59 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 16:20:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <43418F9F.590B322C@spamcop.net> Sylvesterthekat wrote: > > "D.F. Manno" wrote in > news:dfm2a3l0t2-2CBAFB.14092802102005@news.cesmail.net: > > > > "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for > > they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the > > streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They > > have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, > > and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in > > secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee > > openly." (Matthew 6:5-6) > > I assume that this advice is contradicted elsewhere... otherwise how do > they dare to congregate in churches? unless of course they count 'closet' > to mean church! (but synagogue being a jewish church somehow is a cause for > hypocrisy) Just remember... Jesus was Jewish. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 17:12:33 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Oct 3 16:20:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Sylvesterthekat wrote: > > "Porpoise" wrote in > news:dhm9hu$j52$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Why? Has it changed since the last time I read it? > > Have you actually read the whole thing? Were you raised in a religious > environment? I can't think of too many other reasons for reading it all the > way thru. I tried, once, but didn't even get past Genesis. > > >> Very much like having a good understanding of the Constitution helps > >> you pick > >> apart many political arguments. > > > > I'll pass on that one, as the constitution of the US doesn't affect > > me. (Not directly, anyway). > > There's the British Constitution. I watched Panorama last night online and > found it interesting that Charles's marriage to Camilla may go against what > the Brit Constitution says (ie it's illegal because a member of the royal > family in line for the throne may only be legally married in a church and > you cannot marry in church if you are divorced). Are you sure about that last part? Wasn't the whole Church of England set up as a split from Roman Catholicism because the king wanted to get a divorce? (Not all forms of Christianity listen to the Pope.) -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From devnull at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 18:20:03 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Mon Oct 3 17:35:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pickone) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433ED63A.6D4A5EC7@spamcop.net> <4341576F.5CADFB5@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" | > > I find it quite useful when engaging in online discussions about it. | > > (ie: "Yes, Leviticus does call homosexuality an 'abomination', but in | > > the verse right next to that one, it also says...") | > > | > > It's fully searchable by book/chapter/verse or keyword. They have many | > > other books there as well. | > | > For myself, I don't see the point in reading the Bible for the purpose | > of better arguments. Yes, it is an important historical and literary | > document that will make many cultural and literary references make more | > sense, but for myself, I won't be reading it for the purpose of pointing | > out misinterpretations. | | It also makes for more intelligent discussions. For example, when FP | said he hands out stones with "John 8:7" carved them, it only took a | few seconds to look up: | | So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said | unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a | stone at her. | | And now I understood the reason for (and the humor behind) the reference. | | [...] | > Yes, the verses around that same section make lots of other nutty | > statements that are conveniently overlooked by most people and you can | > always point out the internal contradictions in accepting one of the | > verses but not the others, but overall I don't see any purpose in using | > a religious document to debate about matters that in the end have to be | > a personal acceptance of what somebody does or doesn't believe. Calling | > homosexuality an abomination is a matter of faith and not of law. | | Except that some people are trying to make it law based on their | faith. And that's where the problems start. | It is far more productive to read ahead and behind the quoted reference if you are to understand the reference in full context. It is also helpful if you can bring in other references such as different translations. Aside from a moral/spiritual lesson there is ignorant information for the understanding of man himself. As to the specific reference to John 8:7 the people who I've had occasion to use that reference should know better as they typically know the passage by heart. Handing them a tobacco pouch with the reference is especially telling and the only way out is for them to figuratively act as dumb as a rock. I've had some who defended their action with a comment to the effect that 'I don't do THAT sin'. Ok the which sin are you guilty of? If none, then start pitching but be careful of the blow back. It's a justification game of he's a bigger sinner than I and I must correct his failure which often leads to other traps in quoting scripture. I recall a 6 y.o. that asked in all innocence: Where in the Bible does Jesus teach us to hate? Anyone want to take a crack at that one? Hint: there is an answer but it's one of inference. From devnull at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 18:27:43 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Mon Oct 3 17:35:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <43414F95.B3891064@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" | > > Perhaps in other centuries and other cultures. Until atheists | > > brought up the subject by suing to remove prayer from the schools, | > > ecumenism was gaining ground in the US. Now, people are getting | > > entrenched and the climate is ripe for the kind of attitudes that | > > FP talks about. | > | > It still is. And you still haven't produced evidence of it being only | > atheists who prefer not to have other peoples religious beliefs shoved down | > their throats. | [...] | | I can produce evidence to the contrary. I am not an atheist, and I | prefer not to have other people's religious beliefs shoved down my | throat. BINGO I've been tooting that horn for years. BTW It's not always atheists as exampled in the east end of NC were (very) conservative Christians filed complaints about the chants being taught in a stress reduction class. BTW the complaints were not based on anything said or taught in the class but the person teaching was of some esoteric religion that was known to use chants in their services. I assume that the kids did not have to participate in the chant (they could remain silent) was not sufficient for the complainers faith. Does any one see a lick of irony in this case? From devnull at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 18:32:03 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Mon Oct 3 17:35:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433ED4CF.4871893@spamcop.net> <43415901.2C12E910@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" | > | > >> An interesting choice of word there. It's _always_ been legal to kill | > >> in certain circumstances: self-defense, in wartime, to enforce the law, | > >> as punishment for a crime. Even the bible repeatedly endorses killing. | > >[...] | > | > >My understanding is that the original Hebrew uses the word "murder", | > >not "kill". | > | > More accurately: The original Hebrew is more accurately translated as | > 'murder' than merely 'kill'. 'Murder' is an English word; it is quite | > unlikely that it would have been used in a document written in ancient | > Hebrew. :) | > | > Also, the word translated as 'steal' is better translated as 'kidnap', | > and I have no idea why they translated the Hebrew word for 'steal' as | > 'covet'. | | Another reason I don't understand those who say that the Bible is the | word of G-d and must be taken exactly as written. Assuming that G-d | physically wrote the first copy, or at least proofread the transcription, | how can you claim that after thousands of years of copying, rewriting, | and translating by fallible humans, that the Bible in your hand is still | 100% accurate to the original? (A quick look at Michelangelo's statue | of Moses can confirm that there have been errors in translation.) There is a long history of theologians meeting to determine which (of many) text are to be included. In the process, over the years, many valuable (in a historical sense) text have been burned as heresy. From devnull at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 18:34:05 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Mon Oct 3 18:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <43418F9F.590B322C@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" | > | > | > > "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for | > > they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the | > > streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They | > > have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, | > > and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in | > > secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee | > > openly." (Matthew 6:5-6) | > | > I assume that this advice is contradicted elsewhere... otherwise how do | > they dare to congregate in churches? unless of course they count 'closet' | > to mean church! (but synagogue being a jewish church somehow is a cause for | > hypocrisy) | | Just remember... Jesus was Jewish. | And He died for that sin? (D&R) From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Oct 3 17:13:07 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Oct 3 19:15:21 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in > news:dhs20j$ec5$4@news.spamcop.net: > > >>Yep, the hills above the park itself. I dunno if the park green got >>burned...I hope not. I used to hike in the hills, and having picnic >>lunches in the green was nice. Wildwood is a very quiet, secluded >>place to relax. >> > > > > Damn, that'd be a real shame. The hills themselves probably needed a good > burn back but there's some really nice trees in that park, I hope they > escaped. I'll probably take a drive up there and see later this week. From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Oct 3 19:20:44 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Oct 3 21:25:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in > news:dhsdu3$ec5$5@news.spamcop.net: > > >>I'll probably take a drive up there and see later this week. > > > If you get to the golf course and can't proceed, I guess it'll be bad news! > > Have you ever been to that restaurant up there, The Castaway? > I've been up to it, but I don't recall every dining there. It's pretty expensive. :) From skiwi at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 21:06:44 2005 From: skiwi at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Mon Oct 3 23:10:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: A Picture is worth 1000 words ... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Frog Prince wrote: > http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031785345290&path=%21editorials%21cartoons&s > =1045855934997 heh! - and #2 today! even the "Will & Grace" TV shopw were making fun of him... (live show) aside - www.tinyurl.com gives http://tinyurl.com/co8cm !! :-) although, interestingly, leave off the wrapped "http://tinyurl.com/co8cm" still takes you there... From skiwi at spamcop.net Mon Oct 3 21:08:05 2005 From: skiwi at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Mon Oct 3 23:10:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: A Picture is worth 1000 words ... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Frog Prince wrote: > http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031785345290&path=%21editorials%21cartoons&s > =1045855934997 heh! - and #2 today! even the "Will & Grace" TV shopw were making fun of him... (live show) (as S.Kat noted - interestingly, leave off the wrapped "http://tinyurl.com/co8cm" still takes you there still) From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 09:48:06 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 03:50:19 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E46DCBDEE51spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Porpoise" wrote in > news:dhm9hu$j52$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> Why? Has it changed since the last time I read it? > > Have you actually read the whole thing? Were you raised in a religious > environment? I can't think of too many other reasons for reading it all > the > way thru. I tried, once, but didn't even get past Genesis. Ermm... when kid...... Sunday school......... > >>> Very much like having a good understanding of the Constitution helps >>> you pick >>> apart many political arguments. >> >> I'll pass on that one, as the constitution of the US doesn't affect >> me. (Not directly, anyway). > > There's the British Constitution. I watched Panorama last night online and > found it interesting that Charles's marriage to Camilla may go against > what > the Brit Constitution says (ie it's illegal because a member of the royal > family in line for the throne may only be legally married in a church and > you cannot marry in church if you are divorced). Ermm.... Britain doesn't have a Constitution per se. There are certain things embedded in law regarding the Institution that is the Royal Family etc., but no actual Constitution. The nearest thing to a constitution would be the Magna Carta. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/british_constitution1.htm From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 10:29:02 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 04:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E47AE6B8A6spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > > Quite so, I couldn't agree more. I think a good part of the reason behind > their wanting to pray before meetings or whatever is this underlying urge > to indoctrinate others. Putting it on the most basic of terms, they seem > to > behave like randy young men - wanting to spread their seed far and wide. > > I have never been visited on my doorstep by any religious group other than > those based in Christianity, or preached at completely out of the blue and > in an out of context location (like work). > Indeed! Now, isn't that a thing????................ From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 11:40:37 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 05:45:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-6DA12D.13234003102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> ??????? Why would it be Spanish? China is going to be the major economic >> force in the next 10 years. And given that more people already speak >> Chinese >> than any other language.......... > > IIRC, in the US, the number of Spanish speaking families is growing > faster than the number of Chinese speaking families. > Ah... Of course.... I was forgetting..... The US doesn't count the rest of the world.... ;-) From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 11:43:52 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 05:45:19 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhrr9d$c69$3@news.spamcop.net... > > In some parts of the US, Spanish is likely to surpass English as the > language of the majority in the next few years, such as Southern > California. Spanish language radio is already starting to top the > rating charts in those regions. > Ah... Yes.... Sorry, us in the rest of the world keep forgetting that everything revolves around the US (as far as the US is concerned). The rest of us tend to talk about the world as a whole rather than being US-centric............ From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 11:44:53 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 05:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E4748935CEspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Porpoise" wrote in > news:dhr14s$ukb$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> I was thinking Spanish myself. ;-) >> >> >> ??????? Why would it be Spanish? > > because he lives in the US and the biggest immigrant group, especially in > the southern states bordering Mexico, is hispanic. their population is > also > growing at a more rapid rate since they're mostly catholic and mostly > lower > income and less well educated Aahh..... US-centricity again!!.......... From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 07:31:29 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Oct 4 07:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message news:4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net... > Miss Betsy wrote: > > > > "Porpoise" wrote in message > > news:dhokkq$q26$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > > > How do you know they do not pray? There are a large proportion of > > > people who prefer to do their praying/meditation in private - which > > > is how it should be. > > > > You are going to make me conform to your standard of how it should > > be? > > Well, you're trying to make him conform to yours, so it only seems > fair. :-) It is a difficult situation, isn't it? You can't have it both ways. However, those who like to pray in private, don't have to pray in public; they only have to listen to others pray. However, if no one can pray in public, then some people are being denied their rights, ISTM. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 07:45:30 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Oct 4 07:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <43415554.CB8786A1@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message news:43415554.CB8786A1@spamcop.net... > Miss Betsy wrote: > [...] > > > > The point actually is that no one is requiring anyone to 'say' > > them - only to listen to them while others are saying them. > > ... and thereby being told "you are not part of this country or > its government". I don't see that at all. Some people in this country believe that God is watching over this country whether or not they are allowed to say it or not. If the interpretation you are making is correct, then not allowing them to say it publically as part of the pledge is telling them that they are not part of this country or its government - which is what is creating the problem. As I have said before, the problems of inclusiveness are much more difficult than they were when the Constitution was written so that the arguments for not mentioning any religious viewpoint are pretty solid to preserve the spirit of the Constitution and to prevent certain elements from creating a State religion. However, arguments such as saying that by retaining 'under God' excludes non-believers from being a part of the country just fuel the feeling that deleting it excludes believers and makes it seem as though the State is against religion and that is not constitutional. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 08:00:32 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Oct 4 07:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-AE6B6E.12475603102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Miss Betsy" wrote: > > > The point actually is that no one is requiring anyone to 'say' > > them - only to listen to them while others are saying them. > > I was forced out of the room entirely, even when the pledge wasn't > being said. Well, if your objection was to hearing the words, then obviously the only way to honor your objection would be to ask you to leave. I forget what happened - you objected as a student and were expelled? There are other issues there - much as teenagers like to think they are grown up, they still have to obey the rules. Your parents apparently supported you, though I don't remember whether they refused to say the pledge also. OTOH, those who object to the way public schools handle all kinds of moral issues have also been 'forced' out and have created their own schools. My mother thought that public education was what created the strength of the US; that, in public schools, the 'melting pot' was successful by creating tolerance for various cultures, but having a common standard. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 08:13:06 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Oct 4 08:10:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhrr96$c69$2@news.spamcop.net... > So, are you saying then that you would have no problem with changing it > to "under Satan" then, especially since nobody is actually required to > say it but just listen to it? But I disagree that nobody is required to > say it, on a practical level, is there any difference between being > pressured to do something and being required to do something? And that is part of the argument for not including the phrase. If 'under God' could be included, then so could 'under Satan' if the majority were satanists. Though actually, the phrase is vague enough that those who believe Satan is god wouldn't have to refrain from saying it if they wanted to interpret it that way. And I think there is a difference. One school I went to had a sizable minority of Catholics. They stopped saying the Lord's Prayer when it came to the glory part while the rest of the class finished it up the Protestant way. Everyone knew they were Catholic any way so I don't know that it made any difference. To be the only one in the class to finish the prayer the Protestant way might have been hard for a child to do, but to be silent while the rest of the class kept on wouldn't have been as hard. > > And I must confess that I have absolutely no idea the point you are > making with Karen Hughes. I know she went home to Texas for a while and > then was appointed to be the ambassador of good cheer spreading the good > news about America or something recently but I have no idea what she has > done or said since then. So, I don't know the story behind somebody > being upset with her. Exactly. Those who are concerned about keeping Church and State separate would be (if this news bite I saw was true) much better employed checking out what she is doing than fussing about the pledge. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 08:20:31 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Oct 4 08:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E47390F7F57spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Miss Betsy" wrote in news:dhpqpn$ci1$1 > @news.spamcop.net: > > >Is it making those who do not believe in God paraihs? > > Only because they are raising the issue of minority rights. > > > !!!!!!!!! > > "only"?! > > so it's ok to be made a pariah if you're standing up for minority rights? > hoo boy! > > may good sense protect all of us from views such as that becoming > acceptable! To argue that 'under God' should be deleted because inclusiveness is too difficult (other names for god; more than one god; no god; the implication that it is a Christian god, not any other god; that Allah and other names should be included, etc.) is a good argument and one that most people would accept. To say "I don't feel a part of this country because I have to say those words" means that the collolary is that if those words aren't said, the ones who do believe will feel like not part of this country. It becomes a question of whose rights are going to be honored. Miss Betsy From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 08:38:05 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Oct 4 08:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <43414F02.D1D09FC1@spamcop.net> Message-ID: > > "Porpoise" wrote in message > > news:dhmbvi$kce$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > > > news:dhmaim$jgk$1@news.spamcop.net... > [...] > > > > Taken as one expression of good living, > > > > in the context of cultural history, there is nothing in them to > > > > warrant removal. In today's context of atheist vs Christian, > > > > there is every reason to not post them. > > > > > > Ummm.... Excuse me!?! Where did "atheism vs. christian" come > > > from? It's not a case of being atheist. It's the christians vs. > > > everyone who isn't christian (atheists being such a small > > > percentage of that to hardly count) that's the major gripe - and > > > their insistance upon preaching to everyone. > > > > It is not the Jews nor the Muslims nor the Mormons who are bringing > > the lawsuits, but the atheists. > > And yet (according to your quoted text, above), the athists are > only going against the Christians. How is that possible? Because for the most part, those lawsuits from other major religions brought expressions of faith that the Jews, Mormons, Muslims, and most sects of Christianity could accept. And, like it or not, the majority of the US has been Christian so that an attack on religion is primarily an attack on Christianity because it is the most visible. The atheists are against all religions, but it is the conservative Christian minority who are responding. It is not atheist vs everybody, but atheist vs conservative Christian. Other minorities don't want to get involved with what is so obviously a bigotted argument between the fringes. > > > It began with O'Hare and prayer in the schools - which is still an > > issue today. > > I get it... Since the prayers were Christian in nature, when an > atheist complained, it must be because it's "athiest vs. Christian". Actually, by that time, the prayers were inclusive of various Christian sects and Jewish tradition. > > > It caused people to feel 'unfaired' against because > > efforts were made to include other religions in the prayers, but > > because there were people who did not pray (a minority), no prayers > > could be said. > > It's not possible to have an "all inclusive" prayer. Therefore, any > government-sponsored prayer must, by definition, be supportive of > some religions at the expense of others. And that's what we are discovering. > > [...] > > > BS. The christian churches have been amongst the most > > > oppressive/devisive/repressive in history > > > > Perhaps in other centuries and other cultures. Until atheists > > brought up the subject by suing to remove prayer from the schools, > > ecumenism was gaining ground in the US. Now, people are getting > > entrenched and the climate is ripe for the kind of attitudes that > > FP talks about. > > And, until abolitionists started publicly denouncing slavery, it > was "okay". Until Rosa Parks said "I'm not moving", it was "okay" > to force blacks to give up their seats to whites. Until Olver > Brown said "I want my daughter to go to a good school", segregation > was "okay". I am not so sure that it is the same thing. The government should neither promote nor suppress religion. And the government still makes lots of laws based on current morality. Religion is not wrong, the way slavery is wrong. > > Those who live in the past are especially doomed to repeat the > > past. > > But not until after those who wish to pretend that it never happened. When one repeats aphorisms, there is always an opposite! One needs to learn from the lessons of history (such as the danger of a State Religion); OTOH, making decisions today because of what happened in the past only perpetuates division (many of the conflicts in today's world are based on centuries old divisions). Miss Betsy From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 09:38:53 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 08:40:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > I called the mammal curator of the Rio Grande Zoo in Albuquerque, New > Mexico, Tom Silva (you remember him from my "Can elephants jump" > column). According to Tom, most large primates such as gorillas and > orangutans cannot swim, partly because their centers of gravity are > in their necks and sternums. "They sink like stones," says Tom. He > says he has seen chimpanzees swim, though. > > http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcamelswim.html You failed to include the author's view of that curator's opinion, dearie: I'm skeptical about the center of gravity thing--humans and gorillas aren't built that much differently, and we manage to swim OK. But I do know that some humans, those having low body fat for example, have a tough time staying afloat. Maybe gorillas are (or perhaps I should say, need to be) in the same boat. I agree with him, there isn't any physiological reason why a gorilla shouldn't be able to swim, I always failed the "float without moving" test in swimming class when I was a kid because I sunk like a rock too (and still do). But I can swim just fine..... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 09:44:57 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 08:45:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > > Heh, number 3 is a good one. I'm going to have to come over that way > and see what part of the hill has been burned. Damn, that server is slow.....I've been waiting over a minute now and #3 photo still isn't loaded yet... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 09:47:11 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 08:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > > If the programme I watched is to be believed, yes. The Church of > England did not give permission for him to marry in a church, the > Queen, as head of that church, refused to attend the civil ceremony > on principle. Remember, Edward VIII had to abdicate in order to marry > Mrs Simpson. It seems that the Lord Chancellor in this instance > declared the marriage legal but on somewhat disputed legal grounds. > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/4294546.stm# Seems like Prince Chaz is in a bit of hot water over the same issue.....he didn't marry Camille in a church, and that violates the rules for a successor to the throne. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 08:55:40 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Oct 4 08:50:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhr7og$21f$2@news.spamcop.net... > | My argument here is not that 'under God' should be > | included, but that it is the wrong time to press for its removal - > | and particularly on the grounds that some people do not believe. > > That last sentence is the crux of the matter and what makes the separation > of church and state critical. And it's not so much that few or many do or > don't believe it a matter of being true to the constitution. > > And much more critical is that there is a McCarty type movement within the > Christian community to have selected Christian doctrine the law of the land. > > We are not that far from having Religious Police in the same manner as they > have in many Islamic countries. As example I point to John Ashcroft's > spending over $5000.00 dollars to drape a nude statue. I totally agree with you. Look at my posts about Karen Hughes. My argument is that those who object on the basis of 'my rights' are undermining the whole constitutional concept of Church and State and paving the way for allowing Karen Hughes to make her statements and John Ashcroft to drape statues without protest and to make the saying of the pledge a McCarthyite problem because most people feel their rights are being denied if they can't say 'under God' while they wouldn't condone any of the agenda of the conservative Christian. The argument about the 'under god' phrase is a smokescreen that is working against effectively combatting completely unconstitutional actions by our present government. (though your neighbor has a perfect right to make his objections known to you while you have a perfect right to ignore them - it is only when it becomes legal or illegal that there is a problem. People can't walk naked on their properties where others can see them, I believe. Another practical clash that is almost impossible to solve without someone losing one's rights) Miss Betsy From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 09:56:42 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 09:00:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] This seems so appropriate.... Message-ID: got this in my inbox, can't say the 's' word here, but, where the hell do they come up with these things? ..... "Religion is pickled God. The absence of flaw in beauty is itself a flaw." From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 10:31:22 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Eponym) Date: Tue Oct 4 09:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Public Prayer (was Defenders of "under god") Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" wrote in message news:dhtoo4$dn5$1@news.spamcop.net... > > It is a difficult situation, isn't it? You can't have it both > ways. However, those who like to pray in private, don't have to > pray in public; they only have to listen to others pray. However, > if no one can pray in public, then some people are being denied > their rights, ISTM. > IMO, a "right" to public prayer is equivalent to a "right" to fart, belch, spit, pick your nose, etc.. Sure you can do those things and you might even have difficulty controlling when they're done...but normal people avoid performing those acts in public. It is just plain bad manners....some things should just not be done in polite society. People advocating public prayer have no shame, and even less modesty. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 10:32:20 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 09:35:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhtt4t$g0q$1@news.spamcop.net... > > You failed to include the author's view of that curator's opinion, dearie: > I'm skeptical about the center of gravity thing--humans and gorillas aren't > built that much differently, and we manage to swim OK. But I do know that > some humans, those having low body fat for example, have a tough time > staying afloat. Maybe gorillas are (or perhaps I should say, need to be) in > the same boat. I'll go with Jeff Corwin.... "Western and eastern lowland subspecies of gorillas cannot swim and are thus physically and reproductively isolated by the Zaire River. Both eastern subspecies, G. g. Graueri and G. g. Beringei, do not interact because they occupy different habitats. " http://animal.discovery.com/fansites/jeffcorwin/carnival/primate/gorilla.html or: http://www.riverbanks.org/s02zoo/factsheet/wlgorilla.shtml "Gorillas cannot swim and have been known to drown in relatively shallow water." It makes perfect sense to me that they would not be able to swim - they're very top-heavy, head and shoulders are far more muscular than the bottom half, and their center of gravity would be different, because their lower half is so much shorter and smaller than the upper half. Look at the picture: http://www.ohiostatepress.org/index.htm?/books/book%20pages/lyttle%20gorillas.htm From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 10:44:41 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 09:50:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhrr8r$c69$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Miers sounds a whole lot like Rice. Unfortunately, I think you're right. What kind of ass kisser goes to her boss's house to clear his damn brush? Don't you love that Cheney had to call into Rush Limbaugh's radio show after he started whining about how Miers isn't right wing enough? Cheney assured him that she "has a conservative judicial philosophy that you [Limbaugh] would be comfortable with." Must stroke the base....must stroke the base....especially if they start whinging in public. > But you know, when you have that one hopeless kid but they can sort of > do one thing, maybe not all that well but you feel like you should be > supportive so that they might possibly make something of their life and > won't be a burden on society forever? You go, you clear that brush, > give it all you've got, you can do it. Perhaps he's trying to take a page out of Reagan's book trying to look like Rugged Everyman, however I swear if he takes his shirt off I'll need brain bleach. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 10:55:52 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 10:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > It makes perfect sense to me that they would not be able to swim - > they're very top-heavy, head and shoulders are far more muscular than > the bottom half, and their center of gravity would be different, > because their lower half is so much shorter and smaller than the > upper half. Ok, ok.....so they're built the opposite of me (long muscular legs). So I sink feet first and they sink chest first ;-) From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 10:57:33 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 10:00:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhu1la$iov$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Ok, ok.....so they're built the opposite of me (long muscular legs). So I > sink feet first and they sink chest first ;-) Or rather, head first, which would make breathing rather difficult....... From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 10:50:00 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 10:20:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: | | Aahh..... US-centricity again!!.......... | how much per cilowatt hour? From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 11:41:50 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 10:45:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dhu1la$iov$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > Ok, ok.....so they're built the opposite of me (long muscular > > legs). So I sink feet first and they sink chest first ;-) > > Or rather, head first, which would make breathing rather > difficult....... Someone needs to teach them the survivor float position....now that one I was good at....the one where you kinda curl into a fetal position, head down. Although if their lungs can't hold enough air to overcome their weight I guess they'd still sink. From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Tue Oct 4 15:49:14 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Tue Oct 4 10:50:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in news:dhu4be$k4u$1@news.spamcop.net: > Although if their lungs can't hold enough air to overcome their weight > I guess they'd still sink. I remember when I was young, I could let out the air in my lungs and sit on the bottom of the pool. Was able to do that until mid twenties, then I started developing a little more "float" material (but still _very_ thin until my 30's) From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 16:53:34 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 10:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" wrote in message news:dhtoo4$dn5$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message > news:4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net... >> >> Well, you're trying to make him conform to yours, so it only > seems >> fair. :-) > > It is a difficult situation, isn't it? You can't have it both > ways. However, those who like to pray in private, don't have to > pray in public; they only have to listen to others pray. That's the point you seem to be missing - WHY should they have to listen to others pray????? WHY do they need to pray out loud anyway - apparently god can hear your silent prayers just as well........... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 11:55:45 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 11:00:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: JohnL wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhu4be$k4u$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Although if their lungs can't hold enough air to overcome their > > weight I guess they'd still sink. > > I remember when I was young, I could let out the air in my lungs and > sit on the bottom of the pool. > Was able to do that until mid twenties, then I started developing a > little more "float" material (but still _very_ thin until my 30's) Oh, I can still do that! (don't even need to fully empty my lungs ;-) Laying flat on the bottom of a warm quiet pool is a cool sensation, almost like an isolation chamber. And I am by no means thin (now). I must have heavy bones or sumpthin....... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 17:10:58 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 11:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-ADDA17.09252004102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> Aahh..... US-centricity again!!.......... > > Well, you did ask about why *his* kids would be speaking Spanish. I'd > say that you got what you asked for. Where did I ask why *his* kids would be speaking Spanish? He originally asked what his GREAT GRAND CHILDREN would be speaking, to which I replied CHINESE ..... etc. The way things are going, Chinese is most likely to be the most needed to know language for conducting business on the world stage - not Spanish. Even the Spanish will need to learn Chinese if they want to get anywhere in world business..... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 17:14:02 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 11:20:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhu2r8$jds$1@news.spamcop.net... > > | > | Aahh..... US-centricity again!!.......... > | > > how much per cilowatt hour? Do you know? I first read that as silly twat hour for some reason......... ;-) From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 17:35:20 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 11:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhu4be$k4u$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Someone needs to teach them the survivor float position....now that one I > was good at....the one where you kinda curl into a fetal position, head > down. Although if their lungs can't hold enough air to overcome their > weight > I guess they'd still sink. > Well, unless their bones are a whole lot denser, they will be made up of mostly water, same as we are, so would therefore be slightly negatively bouyant in fresh water and more-or-less neutrally bouyant in salt water, same as we are. However, people drown primarily because they panic through lack of swimming skill - ergo, perhaps it's just because they've never learnt to swim.............. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 17:39:46 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 11:45:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:dhu53c$km7$2@news.spamcop.net... > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > news:dhtoo4$dn5$1@news.spamcop.net... >> "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message >> news:4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net... > >>> >>> Well, you're trying to make him conform to yours, so it only >> seems >>> fair. :-) >> >> It is a difficult situation, isn't it? You can't have it both >> ways. However, those who like to pray in private, don't have to >> pray in public; they only have to listen to others pray. > > That's the point you seem to be missing - WHY should they have to listen > to > others pray????? WHY do they need to pray out loud anyway - apparently god > can hear your silent prayers just as well........... > I meant to add (but hit the send button too quick ;-]) By having a moments silent contemplation instead, they could cater to all camps, those that wish to pray to *their* god could do so [silently], whilst those who merely wish to meditate/clear their thoughts could also do so [silently], and no-one would be any the wiser as to who follows which beliefs............ Therefore it wouldn't be so divisive...... From kenbrody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 11:56:42 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Tue Oct 4 11:45:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <4342982A.ED3571D4@spamcop.net> Miss Betsy wrote: > > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message > news:dhrr96$c69$2@news.spamcop.net... > > > So, are you saying then that you would have no problem with > > changing it to "under Satan" then, especially since nobody > > is actually required to say it but just listen to it? But > > I disagree that nobody is required to say it, on a practical > > level, is there any difference between being pressured to do > > something and being required to do something? > > And that is part of the argument for not including the phrase. If > 'under God' could be included, then so could 'under Satan' if the > majority were satanists. So, the government can only sponsor the religion of the majority? Now _there's_ a frightening thought! > Though actually, the phrase is vague enough that those who believe > Satan is god wouldn't have to refrain from saying it if they wanted > to interpret it that way. Well, I'm not a satanist, but isn't Satan, to them, the equivalent of G-d to you? If so, than "Satan" is simply another name for "G-d", and you should have no objections to saying it. After all, you have already said that Muslims shouldn't object to having to say "G-d" rather than "Allah", as it's just "a different name". > And I think there is a difference. One school I went to had a > sizable minority of Catholics. They stopped saying the Lord's > Prayer when it came to the glory part while the rest of the class > finished it up the Protestant way. Everyone knew they were > Catholic any way so I don't know that it made any difference. To > be the only one in the class to finish the prayer the Protestant > way might have been hard for a child to do, but to be silent while > the rest of the class kept on wouldn't have been as hard. I think David Dean has already proved that that is not the case. [...] -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 12:10:53 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Tue Oct 4 11:45:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <43414F02.D1D09FC1@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <43429B7D.330F954E@spamcop.net> Miss Betsy wrote: [...] > The atheists are against all religions, Umm, the fist thing that comes to my mind over that is "WTF?" Athiests aren't against _any_ religion. They simply don't believe in a god. To say Athiests are "against all religions" is the same as saying "Christians are against all non-Christian religions". What the _are_ against is having others' religions forced down their throats. [...] > > > It began with O'Hare and prayer in the schools - which is still > > > an issue today. > > > > I get it... Since the prayers were Christian in nature, when an > > atheist complained, it must be because it's "athiest vs. > Christian". > > Actually, by that time, the prayers were inclusive of various > Christian sects and Jewish tradition. Even if that was true, it still excluded all non-Judeo-Christians. [...] > > It's not possible to have an "all inclusive" prayer. Therefore, > > any government-sponsored prayer must, by definition, be supportive > > of some religions at the expense of others. > > And that's what we are discovering. That was "discovered" centuries ago, which is why the writers of our Constitution prohibited the government's involvement in religious matters. [...] > > > Perhaps in other centuries and other cultures. Until atheists > > > brought up the subject by suing to remove prayer from the > > > schools, ecumenism was gaining ground in the US. Now, people > > > are getting entrenched and the climate is ripe for the kind of > > > attitudes that FP talks about. > > > > And, until abolitionists started publicly denouncing slavery, it > > was "okay". Until Rosa Parks said "I'm not moving", it was "okay" > > to force blacks to give up their seats to whites. Until Olver > > Brown said "I want my daughter to go to a good school", > > segregation was "okay". > > I am not so sure that it is the same thing. The government should > neither promote nor suppress religion. Yet forcing "Under G-d" into the pledge, which was put there explicitly for religious purposes, you don't see as "promoting" religion? > And the government still makes lots of laws based on current morality. "Morality", while often based on religious beliefs, is not the same thing as religion itself. I doubt that there is some passed in any religious text along the lines of "thou shalt not drive in excess of 55 MPH". > Religion is not wrong, the way slavery is wrong. "Religion" is not wrong per se, but "promoting some religions at the expense of others" is. Since it happens to be your religions that is being promoted, you can't see the difference. > > > > Those who live in the past are especially doomed to > > > repeat the past. > > > > But not until after those who wish to pretend that it never > > happened. > > When one repeats aphorisms, there is always an opposite! One needs > to learn from the lessons of history (such as the danger of a State > Religion); OTOH, making decisions today because of what happened in > the past only perpetuates division (many of the conflicts in > today's world are based on centuries old divisions). Can you honestly say that you make decisions with total disregard for everything that has previously happened in your life? Are you saying that there is nothing you do today that is different from what you used to do because the old way didn't work? Or that you keep doing something a specific way because you know it did work in the past? -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 12:36:44 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Tue Oct 4 11:45:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433ED4CF.4871893@spamcop.net> <43415901.2C12E910@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <4342A18C.59D5A7D@spamcop.net> Frog Prince wrote: > > "Kenneth Brody" [...] > | Another reason I don't understand those who say that the Bible is the > | word of G-d and must be taken exactly as written. Assuming that G-d > | physically wrote the first copy, or at least proofread the transcription, > | how can you claim that after thousands of years of copying, rewriting, > | and translating by fallible humans, that the Bible in your hand is still > | 100% accurate to the original? (A quick look at Michelangelo's statue > | of Moses can confirm that there have been errors in translation.) > > There is a long history of theologians meeting to determine which (of many) > text are to be included. In the process, over the years, many valuable (in > a historical sense) text have been burned as heresy. There was an interesting show on PBS that I caught a while ago about this. It was called something like "The Lost Books of the Bible". -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From six.million at dollar.man Tue Oct 4 13:03:16 2005 From: six.million at dollar.man (dwåcôn) Date: Tue Oct 4 12:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Hotel Bill Message-ID: A husband and wife are traveling by car from Key West to Boston. After almost twenty-four hours on the road, they're too tired to continue and decide to stop for a rest. They pull into a nice hotel and take a room, but they plan to sleep for only four hours and then get back on the road. When they check out four hours later, the desk clerk hands them a bill for $350. The man explodes and demands to know why the charge is so high. He tells the clerk that, although it's a nice hotel, the rooms are certainly not worth $350. When the clerk tells him $350 is the standard rate, the man insists on speaking to the Manager. The Manager appears, listens to the man and explains that the hotel has an Olympic-sized pool and a huge conference center that were available for the husband and wife to use. "But we didn't use them," the man complains. "Well, they are here and you could have," explains the Manager He goes on to explain they could have taken in one of the shows for which the hotel is famous. "The best entertainers from New York, Hollywood and Las Vegas perform here," the Manager says. "But we didn't go to any of those shows," complains the man again. "Well, we have them and you could have," the Manager replies. No matter what facility the Manager mentions, the man replies "But we didn't use it!" The Manager is unmoved and eventually the man gives up and agrees to pay. He writes a check and gives it to the Manager. The Manager is surprised when he looks at the check. "But sir," he says, "this check is made out only for $50." "That's correct," says the man. "I charged you $300 for sleeping with my wife." "But I didn't!" exclaims the Manager. "Well, too bad," the man replies. "She was here and you could have." -- Save 15% on Bare Essentials www.cafepress.com/dwacon From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 12:57:27 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 12:10:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <43414F02.D1D09FC1@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" | The atheists are against all religions, but it is the conservative | Christian minority who are responding. It is not atheist vs. | everybody, but atheist vs. conservative Christian. Other | minorities don't want to get involved with what is so obviously a | bigoted argument between the fringes. Bad assumption. Atheists are non religious and the vast majority don't care what the religious folk do so long as it does not include them and theirs. Especially when the inclusion is mandatory and carries reprisals. (I'm far from being an atheists but ascribe to the desire to be left alone in my business/personal life). Many Christians adopt the them vs. us mentality and miss use words and concepts to paint anyone who is not 'with them' as being 'against them'. (Do you see any parallels in what the current administration does in this regard?) The thing that allows the conservative Christian program (aka abuse) to work is that many groups, for very good reasons, keep their heads down in the hope that they are not targeted. There too I am also guilty as I do not want the fall out of my objections to land on my kids and grand kids so I don't take as active a participation in righting the wrongs as I might. Still I do manage to sew seeds with quite pointed comments and actions were I see it might do some good. From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 13:07:00 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 12:10:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" | I totally agree with you. Look at my posts about Karen Hughes. My | argument is that those who object on the basis of 'my rights' are | undermining the whole constitutional concept of Church and State | and paving the way for allowing Karen Hughes to make her statements | and John Ashcroft to drape statues without protest and to make the | saying of the pledge a McCarthyism problem because most people feel | their rights are being denied if they can't say 'under God' while | they wouldn't condone any of the agenda of the conservative | Christian. The argument about the 'under god' phrase is a | smokescreen that is working against effectively combating | completely unconstitutional actions by our present government. | (though your neighbor has a perfect right to make his objections | known to you while you have a perfect right to ignore them - it is | only when it becomes legal or illegal that there is a problem. The neighbor is out of line regardless epically so when such actions carry the implied treat of reprisals. As to John Ashcroft and Karen Hughes they can do what they want within the limits of their private lives. When they accept the privileges and responsibility of high level office they effective speak for government and in turn for the WeThePeople and no longer have the latitude to do what they might as private citizens. | People can't walk naked on their properties where others can see | them, I believe. Another practical clash that is almost impossible | to solve without someone losing one's rights) So I'm safe assume that butt f*cking live stock on the town square is not permitted? And allowing a half hour to draw a crowd is also not a good idea? From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 13:10:02 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 12:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dhu4be$k4u$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > > Someone needs to teach them the survivor float position....now that > > one I was good at....the one where you kinda curl into a fetal > > position, head down. Although if their lungs can't hold enough air > > to overcome their weight > > I guess they'd still sink. > > > > Well, unless their bones are a whole lot denser, they will be made up > of mostly water, same as we are, so would therefore be slightly > negatively bouyant in fresh water and more-or-less neutrally bouyant > in salt water, same as we are. But gorillas have immense muscles, muscle mass is very heavy.... From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:30:58 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message > >>In some parts of the US, Spanish is likely to surpass English as the >>language of the majority in the next few years, such as Southern >>California. Spanish language radio is already starting to top the >>rating charts in those regions. > > Ah... Yes.... Sorry, us in the rest of the world keep forgetting that > everything revolves around the US (as far as the US is concerned). The rest > of us tend to talk about the world as a whole rather than being > US-centric............ Gee, calm down there. I was just saying why he probably said it would be Spanish. As for the rest of the world outside the US, well, we expect they will all speak 'merican before long. If not, well, we got an army for you to speak to, oh crap, hurricane expenses, double crap, recruiting is way down this year, well, if not, we still have that old Yankee know-how, aack, test scores. Hmm. But yes, I expect the next step is India is going to start losing the outsourcing to even cheaper places like China soon enough. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:31:09 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:20 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "David Dean" wrote in message > >>"Porpoise" wrote: >> >>>??????? Why would it be Spanish? China is going to be the major economic >>>force in the next 10 years. And given that more people already speak >>>Chinese >>>than any other language.......... >> >> IIRC, in the US, the number of Spanish speaking families is growing >>faster than the number of Chinese speaking families. > > Ah... Of course.... I was forgetting..... The US doesn't count the rest of > the world.... ;-) But you know, as isolated as Americans are in the US, this whole shift I think is something that has been sort of hidden from view and WASP (white Anglo Saxon protestant) America is going to wake up soon and find themselves a minority and it is going to be a bit of a shock. The US has resisted becoming multicultural for quite some time (immigration quotas from anywhere else but Western Europe) but reality will set in eventually. It seems like the UK has already gone through much of this shift but still it is having problems really accepting it (i.e. the Queen's Xmas message this last year). From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:31:21 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:23 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > It is a difficult situation, isn't it? You can't have it both > ways. However, those who like to pray in private, don't have to > pray in public; they only have to listen to others pray. However, > if no one can pray in public, then some people are being denied > their rights, ISTM. It probably depends on your definition of praying in public. If you want to stand in the middle of a public park and pray, then yeah go to it. If you want to sit at your desk in the State Department and say a prayer, ok. If you want to organize a prayer meeting for all your subordinates in the State Department using the conference room, I would hope that somebody would step in and say that was inappropriate. Certain rights are limited depending on the circumstances and where they happen. If you want to hit on women in bars, up to a reasonable point nobody is going to tell you to stop. If you are the boss in a company and you are hitting on the female workers under you, you are likely to be charged with sexual harassment. Is that guy's right to free expression being denied in certain cases, yeah probably. But what is this burning need to pray in public anyways? Nobody is telling anybody they can't go down to their church and pray there or they can't say a prayer before dinner in their dining room at home. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:31:31 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:26 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message > >>And I must confess that I have absolutely no idea the point you > are >>making with Karen Hughes. I know she went home to Texas for a > while and >>then was appointed to be the ambassador of good cheer spreading > the good >>news about America or something recently but I have no idea what > she has >>done or said since then. So, I don't know the story behind > somebody >>being upset with her. > > Exactly. Those who are concerned about keeping Church and State > separate would be (if this news bite I saw was true) much better > employed checking out what she is doing than fussing about the > pledge. Why does fussing about the pledge preclude also doing anything about what Karen Hughes is doing. I assume what she did wasn't a great thing. I never liked what she would do back when I was paying attention, I can't imagine that she has suddenly turned into somebody who I could respect or approve of what she is doing. But why can't I fight being forced to chat a pledge that I don't believe in at the same time I complain about officials who are making a mess of the world and misrepresenting me? It might be a small issue (and even a silly one) but I can see how its importance outweighs its perceived size. Why have so many been so obsessed with the flag burning issue? I also think that is a stupid and silly issue but it carries great symbolic weight and is a step in an agenda. Do we really need to waste a lot of time trying to add that to the Constitution? Some people seem to think so. You know, doesn't allowing girls to wear makeup lead to condoning school dances which leads to heroin which is just a short step away from a life of crime and armed robbery. Ok, that was a joke but doesn't a fight have to start somewhere? If you want to start a theocracy, where do you start, you start with indoctrinating kids. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:31:39 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:30 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <43414F02.D1D09FC1@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > Because for the most part, those lawsuits from other major > religions brought expressions of faith that the Jews, Mormons, > Muslims, and most sects of Christianity could accept. And, like it > or not, the majority of the US has been Christian so that an attack > on religion is primarily an attack on Christianity because it is > the most visible. > > The atheists are against all religions, but it is the conservative > Christian minority who are responding. It is not atheist vs > everybody, but atheist vs conservative Christian. Other > minorities don't want to get involved with what is so obviously a > bigotted argument between the fringes. Attack? What are you talking about? Are you saying that because atheists don't believe in god that they are attacking all religions and want to see them destroyed? How is filing a lawsuit to stop the government from imposing/promoting a particular religion(s) an attack? From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:31:48 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:33 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Sylvesterthekat wrote: > >>If the programme I watched is to be believed, yes. The Church of >>England did not give permission for him to marry in a church, the >>Queen, as head of that church, refused to attend the civil ceremony >>on principle. Remember, Edward VIII had to abdicate in order to marry >>Mrs Simpson. It seems that the Lord Chancellor in this instance >>declared the marriage legal but on somewhat disputed legal grounds. >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/4294546.stm# > > Seems like Prince Chaz is in a bit of hot water over the same issue.....he > didn't marry Camille in a church, and that violates the rules for a > successor to the throne. But since Parliament is the law of the land, the succession, if it does become an issue, could be fixed by an Act of Parliament. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:31:56 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:37 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message > >>Miers sounds a whole lot like Rice. > > Unfortunately, I think you're right. What kind of ass kisser goes to her boss's > house to clear his damn brush? Don't you love that Cheney had to call into Rush > Limbaugh's radio show after he started whining about how Miers isn't right wing > enough? Cheney assured him that she "has a conservative judicial philosophy that > you [Limbaugh] would be comfortable with." Must stroke the base....must stroke the > base....especially if they start whinging in public. How much is stealth though? Since she has never been a judge, there is no public record on any of the issues that people care about, so the confirmation won't have any of those problems. But in private, how many of these issues were discussed and some sort of an understanding reached? Considering the past record of screw you, in your face appointments, I can't believe that she is a moderate. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:32:05 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:39 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: David Dean wrote: > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >>That's the point you seem to be missing - WHY should they have to listen to >>others pray????? WHY do they need to pray out loud anyway - apparently god >>can hear your silent prayers just as well........... > > I don't like the moment of silence either. I think it fails the lemon > test for not having a non-religious purpose. So, do you feel silly too, looking around to see if anybody else is looking around? From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:32:13 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:35:41 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: David Dean wrote: > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >>He originally asked what his GREAT GRAND CHILDREN would be speaking, to >>which I replied CHINESE ..... etc. > > You will probably consider this US-centrism as well, but yes *his* > great grandchildren are still more likely to learn to speak spanish than > Chinese. I say this because it will be more important to them locally. > Now if one of them does become a high level manager, they might need to > learn chinese as well, but the local level is almost always more of an > influence than the global one. I suppose it depends on where the power base lies in the future. The presumption currently is that the Chinese will learn and speak English to do business with us. Whether that remains the case in the future, I don't know. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 19:35:58 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in > >>I've been up to it, but I don't recall every dining there. It's >>pretty expensive. :) > > Ah, I was wondering what it's like. We almost went there for my birthday > last year but in the end went to an Italian place instead. Sweet! The Olive Garden? Don't deny it, we know better. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 14:38:04 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Eponym) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:40:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:dhu53c$km7$2@news.spamcop.net... > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > news:dhtoo4$dn5$1@news.spamcop.net... >> "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message >> news:4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net... > >>> >>> Well, you're trying to make him conform to yours, so it only >> seems >>> fair. :-) >> >> It is a difficult situation, isn't it? You can't have it both >> ways. However, those who like to pray in private, don't have to >> pray in public; they only have to listen to others pray. > > That's the point you seem to be missing - WHY should they have to listen > to > others pray????? WHY do they need to pray out loud anyway - apparently god > can hear your silent prayers just as well........... > My solution...whenever somebody asks to pray in public, stand up and ask "Ugh!!! Who farted!?!". Maybe someday the people that are asking will catch on that they're showing bad manners. IMO, farting and praying in public are equivalent. :o) From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 14:52:09 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 13:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > As for the rest of the world outside the US, well, we expect they will > all speak 'merican before long. If not, well, we got an army for you > to speak to, oh crap, hurricane expenses, double crap, recruiting is > way down this year, well, if not, we still have that old Yankee > know-how, aack, test scores. Hmm. Anyone see John Stewart's wonderful depiction of this administration's doublespeak on the war in Iraq on last night's show? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 14:55:49 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhueac$qn1$7@news.spamcop.net... > How much is stealth though? Since she has never been a judge, there is > no public record on any of the issues that people care about, so the > confirmation won't have any of those problems. But in private, how many > of these issues were discussed and some sort of an understanding > reached? Considering the past record of screw you, in your face > appointments, I can't believe that she is a moderate. I don't believe it either, I think someone dredged up somewhere where she voted against a woman's right to choose, but I think she was groomed and placed there because she's expected to toe the line. Everyone's saying that the confirmation committee having let Roberts slide by is loaded for bear now, and the hearings are expected to be quite vigorous. She's been nothing but his patsy so far, and because he's so stupid he can't look beyond the end of his own nose to find qualified people, he thinks she's the perfect choice. I'd be more impressed if she cleared brush on her own ranch...... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 14:56:35 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:00:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > > How much is stealth though? Since she has never been a judge, there > is no public record on any of the issues that people care about, so > the confirmation won't have any of those problems. But in private, > how many of these issues were discussed and some sort of an > understanding reached? Considering the past record of screw you, in > your face appointments, I can't believe that she is a moderate. How do the neocons view gambling? After all, she does have that impressive head of the Texas Lottery Commission job on her resume..... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 14:58:05 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:00:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: Eponym wrote: > My solution...whenever somebody asks to pray in public, stand up and > ask "Ugh!!! Who farted!?!". Maybe someday the people that are asking > will catch on that they're showing bad manners. IMO, farting and > praying in public are equivalent. :o) What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before eating while in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 14:58:17 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:00:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhueac$qn1$7@news.spamcop.net... Considering the past record of screw you, in your face > appointments, I can't believe that she is a moderate. LOL.... thanks for confirming what we all knew, Orrin..... http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1182875 "A lot of my fellow conservatives are concerned, but they don't know her as I do," said Hatch, a former Judiciary Committee chairman. **** "She's going to basically do what the president thinks she should****, and that is be a strict constructionist." From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 14:59:25 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:00:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: Most animals do it instinctively > using the same locomotion that they usually use when walking or moving > around. Gorillas could hardly rely on their usual motion to help them > swim. See, that's where in my head I go "hey, they walk just like a doggie paddle!" From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:00:51 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:05:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhttkf$ge6$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Seems like Prince Chaz is in a bit of hot water over the same > > issue.....he didn't marry Camille in a church, and that violates the > > rules for a successor to the throne. > > > > > Except that the Lord Chancellor gave them his blessing (ie ruled that > it was legal). So unless someone challenges that ruling, they'll be > ok. I can't see who would challenge it. Male to male marriage is condoned in England?! (G, D &R ;-) From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:01:12 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:05:21 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhttga$g80$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Damn, that server is slow.....I've been waiting over a minute now > > and #3 photo still isn't loaded yet... > > > > It loaded quickly for me. Cuz you're right next door to Borg mebbe? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:01:23 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:05:24 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Spamvireslayer" wrote in message news:dhufoh$rqu$1@news.spamcop.net... > > I don't believe it either, I think someone dredged up somewhere where she voted > against a woman's right to choose Correcting myself - she contributed to an anti-abortion group. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/04/earlyshow/main907134.shtml (CBS) At 60 years old, President Bush's fellow Texan has never been called a slouch. After all, Harriet Miers was often the only woman clearing brush with the president on his ranch. She has contributed to GOP campaigns, but also gave $1,000 to Al Gore's 1988 presidential bid. She also donated $150 to an anti-abortion group From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:01:56 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:05:27 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhufok$rr1$1@news.spamcop.net... > > How do the neocons view gambling? After all, she does have that impressive > head of the Texas Lottery Commission job on her resume..... I'm sure they're all for it as long as they get their cut.... From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Tue Oct 4 19:04:20 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:05:29 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in news:dhug19$s0l$1@news.spamcop.net: > Cuz you're right next door to Borg mebbe? Loaded quick for me also, and I'm far, far away. ;-) From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:03:58 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:05:32 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E56F8B1F88Fspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > Well that's interesting! Until that was said, nobody knew WHAT her opinions > on things might be considering she's never even BEEN a judge! All that says to me is that having no history of her own, Cheny and Bush have given her her marching orders, you know what a fucking pit bull he is, I'm sure his "views" were very convincing. > > Perhaps he's trying to take a page out of Reagan's book trying to look > > like Rugged Everyman, however I swear if he takes his shirt off I'll > > need brain bleach. > > to put in your eyes? To wash away the bad images of a flabby chested man who clears brush as a second job.... From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:13:29 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Eponym) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:15:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhufre$rrf$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Eponym wrote: >> My solution...whenever somebody asks to pray in public, stand up and >> ask "Ugh!!! Who farted!?!". Maybe someday the people that are asking >> will catch on that they're showing bad manners. IMO, farting and >> praying in public are equivalent. :o) > > What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before eating while > in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? > If they're doing it loud enough for everyone to hear, yes!! What someone does in their own home or within a group of like minded people (i.e., church) is one thing...praying in mixed company is something else. And the funny thing is...there are admonitions in the Bible about public prayer!! From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:16:25 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Eponym) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:20:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhufre$rrf$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Eponym wrote: >> My solution...whenever somebody asks to pray in public, stand up and >> ask "Ugh!!! Who farted!?!". Maybe someday the people that are asking >> will catch on that they're showing bad manners. IMO, farting and >> praying in public are equivalent. :o) > > What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before eating while > in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? > In case you're wondering... Matthew 6:5-6 From kenbrody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:15:40 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <433ED4CF.4871893@spamcop.net> <43415901.2C12E910@spamcop.net> <4342A18C.59D5A7D@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <4342C6CC.784F91F8@spamcop.net> Kenneth Loafman wrote: > > On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:36:44 -0400, Kenneth Brody > wrote: > > >Frog Prince wrote: [...] > >> There is a long history of theologians meeting to determine which (of many) > >> text are to be included. In the process, over the years, many valuable (in > >> a historical sense) text have been burned as heresy. > > > >There was an interesting show on PBS that I caught a while ago about this. > >It was called something like "The Lost Books of the Bible". > > There would be an even more interesting show, > "The lost, disappeared, and modified books of the Bible.", > which would include all of the Bible plus some interesting reading. Well, the show I saw did include things along that line. For example, the story of Mary Magdalene, as I recall, was basically along the lines that (according to ancient texts) she was apparently a very prominent person in Jesus' life, and held quite a bit of power, and this didn't sit well with the men deciding which books and stories would be in the "official Bible", so they turned things around and made her into a prostitute. > Christians have a very selective religion. Strange that anyone would > stand up and say it was the "word of god" with a straight face. Every > single word in the Bible was written/selected by humans. I've heard it first hand. He never did give a response to my question about "even if the original copy were written by the hand of G-d himself, what about the thousands of years of copying, transcribing, and translating by us fallible humans?" -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:21:00 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:25:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "undergod" are .) References: Message-ID: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> indigo wrote: > > Eponym wrote: > > My solution...whenever somebody asks to pray in public, stand up and > > ask "Ugh!!! Who farted!?!". Maybe someday the people that are asking > > will catch on that they're showing bad manners. IMO, farting and > > praying in public are equivalent. :o) > > What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before eating while > in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? It wouldn't offend me unless they insisted others join them, or insisted that everyone else be quiet. I'm also not offended when I am at someone else's house and they stop to say grace before eating. (I can sit quietly or a moment while they pray.) On the other hand, I've also never had someone over to my house for dinner who insisted that we say grace in my house. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Tue Oct 4 19:35:21 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:40:33 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote in news:Xns96E4BA8336452spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61: > Have you ever been to that restaurant up there, The Castaway? Is that from the same chain "The Castaways" ? There used to be one in San Bernardino, I ate there a few times in the late 70's/ early 80's. Good food and yes a little expensive, but not that bad. Really nice, on top of a hill with views in all directions. Only bad thing was a VERY steep and winding road that was barely wide enough for two cars and a steep drop off on one side. Not a road to drive fast, specially if you've had a few of the drinks at the top. ;-) From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Oct 4 12:37:31 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:40:49 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Sylvesterthekat wrote: > >>Heh, number 3 is a good one. I'm going to have to come over that way >>and see what part of the hill has been burned. > > > Damn, that server is slow.....I've been waiting over a minute now and #3 > photo still isn't loaded yet... > > Fast for me... From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Oct 4 12:38:42 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:40:52 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in > news:dhsldb$riu$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > >>I've been up to it, but I don't recall every dining there. It's >>pretty expensive. :) >> > > > Ah, I was wondering what it's like. We almost went there for my birthday > last year but in the end went to an Italian place instead. > I'll have to go there myself, sometime. I've been hooked on a Brazilian Grill lately... From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:38:45 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Eponym) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:40:55 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message news:4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net... > > It wouldn't offend me unless they insisted others join them, or insisted > that everyone else be quiet. I'm also not offended when I am at someone > else's house and they stop to say grace before eating. (I can sit quietly > or a moment while they pray.) On the other hand, I've also never had > someone over to my house for dinner who insisted that we say grace in my > house. > I think one can still be offended by it in nearly any case...just a matter of whether they want to make an issue of it. If you're in someone else's home, obviously it would be impolite. If someone came in my home and insisted, then they're being impolite. IMO, what's even worse is when you're invited to dinner at someone else's home and asked to lead a prayer. UGH! After 2000 years, you'd think the polite thing to do would be obvious, but I guess not. From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Oct 4 12:39:54 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:40:57 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: JohnL wrote: > Sylvesterthekat wrote in > news:Xns96E4BA8336452spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61: > > >>Have you ever been to that restaurant up there, The Castaway? > > > Is that from the same chain "The Castaways" ? > > There used to be one in San Bernardino, I ate there a few times in the late > 70's/ early 80's. > Good food and yes a little expensive, but not that bad. > Really nice, on top of a hill with views in all directions. > Only bad thing was a VERY steep and winding road that was barely wide > enough for two cars and a steep drop off on one side. Not a road to drive > fast, specially if you've had a few of the drinks at the top. ;-) Actually that sounds like OUR Castaway...top of the hill, excellent view, steep winding road... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:24:41 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhufga$ri1$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Anyone see John Stewart's wonderful depiction of this administration's > doublespeak on the war in Iraq on last night's show? > Was that the one where McCain's eyes turned red? I just watched in online, as well as "the Scent of a Woman"....hilarious..... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:47:00 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:50:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > > > > eh? who mentioned male to male marriage? > > in fact i think some law is being introduced that allows gay marriage > (maybe Meanie will know), but i don't know what that has to do with > charles Erm....take a look at the person he married. Lose your funny bone somewhere today? From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:47:41 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:50:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires References: Message-ID: JohnL wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhug19$s0l$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Cuz you're right next door to Borg mebbe? > > Loaded quick for me also, and I'm far, far away. ;-) Bet you're closer to him than me! Maybe his server just doesn't like my IP address.... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:47:05 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:50:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E57398D611Espamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > Of course she's not a moderate. Bush would never nominate someone who'd be > likely to do something that went against his 'values'. Either she's totally > manipulable or she's of the same mindset. > > Then again, she could be the sacrificial lamb that he's putting up, knowing > that the Dems will shoot down her nomination. That way he'll be able to say > "I nominated a woman and you vetoed her" before he puts in another of the > old boys' club instead. Unbelievable, that's exactly what one of my co-workers just said. I said "Bush is not that intelligent", 'Well, HE's not, but Rove certainly is'..... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:49:25 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:50:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: So that's why we > went to the Italian for my birthday, it was within walking distance > so I could have a few margaritas! You had margaritas in an Italian ristorante? What in god's name is wrong with you, woman?! From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:53:47 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message > news:Xns96E56F8B1F88Fspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > > Well that's interesting! Until that was said, nobody knew WHAT her > > opinions on things might be considering she's never even BEEN a > > judge! > > All that says to me is that having no history of her own, Cheny and > Bush have given her her marching orders, you know what a fucking pit > bull he is, I'm sure his "views" were very convincing. Speaking of Cheney, he and Rummy have recently purchase estates down on the Bay waterfront in one of my favorite little towns, St. Michaels. They apparently are quite fond of visiting the nice restaurants and antique shoppes on the weekends, many sightings have been made by the locals. Guess I better stay out of that town, if I saw Dick on the street I'd yell "Eff you Mr. Cheney, Eff you!" just like that woman from NOLA. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 20:54:43 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 14:55:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: JohnL wrote: > "indigo" wrote in news:dhug19$s0l$1@news.spamcop.net: > >>Cuz you're right next door to Borg mebbe? > > Loaded quick for me also, and I'm far, far away. ;-) Worked fairly quick for me yesterday too and I daresay I'm a bit further even. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:56:39 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:00:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E56C642DF41spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > why do the proponents of 'under god' (or some of them anyway) feel the need > to make anyone feel like a pariah at all? if they'd respect each > individual's choice then i'm sure there would be far less of an issue about > it because every person who had been persecuted for their objection to it, > especially as a child, would not be calling out now for the phrase to be > removed It's the arrogance of Christianity - everyone else must do as they do or they're "wrong", all the other religions in the world are "wrong" so we will inflict ours upon you whether you like it or not, there is absolutely no respect for anyone's viewpoint but theirs, because theirs is the ONLY religion. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:57:29 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:00:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhug0k$rvj$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Male to male marriage is condoned in England?! (G, D &R ;-) ITYM 'male to mare' From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 15:58:43 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:00:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message > > knowing that the Dems will shoot down her nomination. That way > > he'll be able to say "I nominated a woman and you vetoed her" > > before he puts in another of the old boys' club instead. > > Unbelievable, that's exactly what one of my co-workers just said. I > said "Bush is not that intelligent", 'Well, HE's not, but Rove > certainly is'..... My money is on his wife being the instigator. And I bet 50 quatloos she gets approved too -- the neocons are up in arms about the nomination. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:01:11 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:05:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > > well you did compare yourself to a gorilla earlier, so no surprise > then! Well, the sides of my head *are* starting to resemble a silverback....... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:01:40 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:05:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhu9gr$nis$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > >> Well, unless their bones are a whole lot denser, they will be made > >> up of mostly water, same as we are, so would therefore be slightly > >> negatively bouyant in fresh water and more-or-less neutrally > >> bouyant in salt water, same as we are. > > > > But gorillas have immense muscles, muscle mass is very heavy.... > > > > LOL, so I take it that you're now convinced I was right? ;o) NO! If they'd just doggie paddle they'd live! From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:02:24 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:05:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhuftv$rrv$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > See, that's where in my head I go "hey, they walk just like a doggie > > paddle!" > > > but they don't Wonder if swimming is learned behavior..... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:03:23 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:05:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: Eponym wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > > What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before > > eating while in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? > > > > If they're doing it loud enough for everyone to hear, yes!! Everyone in the place or just the adjacent tables? Big diff. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:07:10 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Eponym wrote: > > I think one can still be offended by it in nearly any case...just a > matter of whether they want to make an issue of it. If you're in > someone else's home, obviously it would be impolite. If someone came > in my home and insisted, then they're being impolite. IMO, what's > even worse is when you're invited to dinner at someone else's home > and asked to lead a prayer. UGH! > > After 2000 years, you'd think the polite thing to do would be > obvious, but I guess not. When in Rome.... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:06:59 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:10:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E575E5F9A07spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > > He's probably already got his hand rammed up her ass. And now he's got both hands busy.... http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/12811711.htm "Could it be that Bush doesn't care about Miers' positions on social issues like reproductive and gay rights, but instead is focused on maintaining executive power to pursue whatever war policies he chooses? On that score, Miers is a sure vote. Could it be that Miers' is a potential sacrificial lamb who, if rejected, would make it easier for Bush to name a hard-right candidate? It all comes down to who's getting rolled. For sure, someone is." > Ah well, just over 3 years it'll be his only job. And then with any luck > he'll be doing it inside prison somewhere. Hopefully he can join DeLay there - indicted yet again yesterday on two more counts..... From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 21:10:05 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:15:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message news:dhufga$ri1$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Anyone see John Stewart's wonderful depiction of this administration's >>doublespeak on the war in Iraq on last night's show? > > Was that the one where McCain's eyes turned red? I just watched in online, as well > as "the Scent of a Woman"....hilarious..... Hurray, coming next week, a new E4 channel which is going to start showing the Daily Show. I guess I need to drop some of the other shows I watch to make time. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:10:05 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:15:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dhufga$ri1$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > Anyone see John Stewart's wonderful depiction of this > > administration's doublespeak on the war in Iraq on last night's > > show? > > > Was that the one where McCain's eyes turned red? I just watched in > online, as well as "the Scent of a Woman"....hilarious..... Yeah. "Oh no you didn't!" I love the way J.S. says that ;-) (for those not in the know, one of the generals kind of dissed veterans from the Vietnam war in front of McCain's panel). From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:10:12 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:15:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhujho$um4$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Well, the sides of my head *are* starting to resemble a silverback....... Not to mention that big pointy dome on top.... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:11:55 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:15:21 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: has anyone tried sparkling red wine? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Apparently it's a big thing in Australia. I had some called Wally > Grout a week or so ago and it was wonderful. Now I'm having trouble > finding any in shops. Just wondering if anyone else has any > experience. And this is red wine by the way, not rose, so it's very > smooth like red wine is but with this sparkly tingle. Is it made by Bartles and Jaymes? ;-) From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:13:10 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Eponym) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:15:24 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhujlv$unq$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Eponym wrote: >> "indigo" wrote in message > >> > What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before >> > eating while in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? >> > >> >> If they're doing it loud enough for everyone to hear, yes!! > > Everyone in the place or just the adjacent tables? Big diff. > I don't make it a habit to eavesdrop. So, if their prayer is no louder than normal conversation, I probably wouldn't notice. If I did, I might still be offended...and say nothing...or give them a raised eyebrow or evil eye. Public praying really is like public farting....one can draw many parallels to either behavior. The silent but deadly types always get ya though. :o) From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:13:08 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:15:27 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhuk2e$v3c$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Yeah. "Oh no you didn't!" I love the way J.S. says that ;-) (for those not > in the know, one of the generals kind of dissed veterans from the Vietnam > war in front of McCain's panel). "Oh no you dih-int!" LOL...... That was just beyond insulting, I'm glad he didn't let that slide. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 21:13:48 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:15:30 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "Spamvireslayer" wrote in > >>LOL.... thanks for confirming what we all knew, Orrin..... >> >>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1182875 >>"A lot of my fellow conservatives are concerned, but they don't know >>her as I do," said Hatch, a former Judiciary Committee chairman. >>**** "She's going to basically do what the president thinks she >>should****, and that is be a strict constructionist." > > HA! just what I said... she's going to do as HE WANTS. Except once they are confirmed, they are pretty much untouchable and don't always perform as expected. After all O'Connor was a Reagan appointee. Not that I expect it in this case though. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:16:45 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:20:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: David Dean wrote: > In article , > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote: > > > If you want to organize a prayer meeting for all your > > subordinates in the State Department using the conference room, I > > would hope that somebody would step in and say that was > > inappropriate. > > IMO that would be inappropriate at a private firm. Something similar happened in a research lab I used to work in. Most of the technicians had small radios at their workstations, one of them listened to this fire and brimstone all religion all the time AM station, loudly, and on occasion proselytized about what he was listening to. We complained about it. He complained about our sacriligeous music. End result, all radios were banned from the lab. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:17:57 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:20:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dhug0k$rvj$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > Male to male marriage is condoned in England?! (G, D &R ;-) > > ITYM 'male to mare' Better said. Thank you. Now maybe S-kat will get it? ;-) From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 21:19:33 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:20:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > >>Speaking of Cheney, he and Rummy have recently purchase estates down >>on the Bay waterfront in one of my favorite little towns, St. >>Michaels. They apparently are quite fond of visiting the nice >>restaurants and antique shoppes on the weekends, many sightings have >>been made by the locals. Guess I better stay out of that town, if I >>saw Dick on the street I'd yell "Eff you Mr. Cheney, Eff you!" just >>like that woman from NOLA. > > Would you? I wouldn't be so polite! I'd say "Fuck you Mr Cheney" and have > done with it ;o) Besides, it was a man (Dr something or other) in Mississippi. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:21:40 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > Hopefully he can join DeLay there - indicted yet again yesterday on > two more counts..... And the best part is the one new one -- money laundering. Class 1 felony. Plus conspiracy to money launder. Of course the indictment is "an abomination of justice", you know.... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:25:06 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhuj3s$ua3$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > > Speaking of Cheney, he and Rummy have recently purchase estates down > > on the Bay waterfront in one of my favorite little towns, St. > > Michaels. They apparently are quite fond of visiting the nice > > restaurants and antique shoppes on the weekends, many sightings have > > been made by the locals. Guess I better stay out of that town, if I > > saw Dick on the street I'd yell "Eff you Mr. Cheney, Eff you!" just > > like that woman from NOLA. > > Would you? I wouldn't be so polite! I'd say "Fuck you Mr Cheney" and > have done with it ;o) Heh. One of the women quoted in the article said she rolled down her car window to put her hand out and give him a "big thumbs up" (obviously one of the stupid townsfolk who don't follow politics). Afterwards, she said "Now I wonder if that was a smart thing to do, sticking my hand out the window at Cheney, what with that big black Escalade trailing behind him and his wife".... From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Oct 4 13:26:25 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:30:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > JohnL wrote: > >>"indigo" wrote in >>news:dhug19$s0l$1@news.spamcop.net: >> >> >>>Cuz you're right next door to Borg mebbe? >> >>Loaded quick for me also, and I'm far, far away. ;-) > > > Bet you're closer to him than me! Maybe his server just doesn't like my IP > address.... > > Well...nobody does. :-P From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:26:53 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:30:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhujk1$unj$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > > Wonder if swimming is learned behavior..... > > > > It is in humans because we can't use our usual locomotion to swim. > Neither can gorillas, so they'd have to learn (even assuming that > they could overcome the difficulties of the distribution of their > body mass). So do chimps learn to swim or do it naturally? What about orangutans? And other various primates? From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Oct 4 13:27:06 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:30:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in > news:dhui7a$oo7$2@news.spamcop.net: > > > >>I'll have to go there myself, sometime. I've been hooked on a >>Brazilian Grill lately... >> > > > Oh, the one just up what is it, Orange? I forget which street it's on now. > I meant to go there but never got around to it. It's on Palm, I believe. Just off of Third Street, across from the Police Station. Best meat I've ever had... From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Oct 4 13:27:18 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:30:21 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in > news:dhui9i$oo7$3@news.spamcop.net: > > > >>Actually that sounds like OUR Castaway...top of the hill, excellent >>view, steep winding road... >> > > > Naw, the road isn't remotely scary the way John described. It is if you're drunk. :) From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:27:53 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:30:24 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dhujho$um4$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > Well, the sides of my head *are* starting to resemble a > > silverback....... > > Not to mention that big pointy dome on top.... Just in the morning, before I take my shower...... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:29:59 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:30:28 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > > LOL... oh how I wish I still had that photo of you in Hawaii, I'd set > to work with PhotoShop hee hee "still had"? What you downloaded it from Yahoo? That page is long gone anyways (and I'm 15 lbs lighter!). From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:30:06 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:35:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E57BE8EEB9Bspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhuin4$u46$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > > Erm....take a look at the person he married. Lose your funny bone > > somewhere today? > > > > oh come on! she's not Diana but she's not THAT ugly. Now if you'd said > 'male to horse' I might have found it more appropriate! LOL...I find that insulting to every horse I've ever known.... they can shit and walk at the same time and even they have more class..... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:31:09 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:35:22 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dhuk2e$v3c$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > Yeah. "Oh no you didn't!" I love the way J.S. says that ;-) (for > > those not in the know, one of the generals kind of dissed veterans > > from the Vietnam war in front of McCain's panel). > > "Oh no you dih-int!" LOL...... Dammit, I knew there was a phonetic way to spell it but I couldn't figger it out. You nailed it. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:32:51 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:35:25 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: Eponym wrote: > I don't make it a habit to eavesdrop. So, if their prayer is no > louder than normal conversation, I probably wouldn't notice. If I > did, I might still be offended...and say nothing...or give them a > raised eyebrow or evil eye. > I think mebbe you need to lower your "I'm offended by your behavior" meter a tad....... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:34:51 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:35:29 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhukev$vge$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > End result, all radios were banned from the lab. > > I'd call that merciful. There is NO WAY I'd sit and listen to some > religious radio programming all day. I'd leave the job first. Still pissed us off -- it had taken several months of negotiations for the rest of us to decide on a common music channel! From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:35:34 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:40:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhuj3s$ua3$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Speaking of Cheney, he and Rummy have recently purchase estates down on the > Bay waterfront in one of my favorite little towns, St. Michaels. They > apparently are quite fond of visiting the nice restaurants and antique > shoppes on the weekends, holding hands and cuddling all the while? many sightings have been made by the locals. Guess > I better stay out of that town, if I saw Dick on the street I'd yell "Eff > you Mr. Cheney, Eff you!" just like that woman from NOLA. Go ahead, we want to see what really happens after they "escort" you someplace else. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:43:35 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dhuj3s$ua3$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > Speaking of Cheney, he and Rummy have recently purchase estates > > down on the Bay waterfront in one of my favorite little towns, St. > > Michaels. They apparently are quite fond of visiting the nice > > restaurants and antique shoppes on the weekends, > > holding hands and cuddling all the while? Dunno. But they said he does like taking long walks around his neighborhood. Where's Hovenboof and his .50 cal sniper rifle when you need him? From Paul.Sawyer.does.not.want.spam at unh.BAD.EXAMPLE.edu Tue Oct 4 20:43:42 2005 From: Paul.Sawyer.does.not.want.spam at unh.BAD.EXAMPLE.edu (Paul) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:45:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Eponym" wrote in news:dhui7n$tlv$1@news.spamcop.net: > "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message > news:4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net... >> >> It wouldn't offend me unless they insisted others join them, or >> insisted that everyone else be quiet. I'm also not offended when I >> am at someone else's house and they stop to say grace before eating. >> (I can sit quietly or a moment while they pray.) On the other hand, >> I've also never had someone over to my house for dinner who insisted >> that we say grace in my house. >> > > I think one can still be offended by it in nearly any case...just a > matter of whether they want to make an issue of it. If you're in > someone else's home, obviously it would be impolite. If someone came > in my home and insisted, then they're being impolite. IMO, what's > even worse is when you're invited to dinner at someone else's home and > asked to lead a prayer. UGH! "Good bread, good meat; good God, let's eat! Halleleuja!" They won't ask you again! > After 2000 years, you'd think the polite thing to do would be obvious, > but I guess not. After all, common sense isn't.... -- From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:45:16 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Eponym) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:50:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhuld4$fr$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Eponym wrote: >> I don't make it a habit to eavesdrop. So, if their prayer is no >> louder than normal conversation, I probably wouldn't notice. If I >> did, I might still be offended...and say nothing...or give them a >> raised eyebrow or evil eye. >> > > I think mebbe you need to lower your "I'm offended by your behavior" meter > a > tad....... > I disagree. If one "must" pray in public, they should do so very quietly and not draw attention to themselves. Its the same type of behavior observed in some people using cell phones at restaurants. One should recognize the environment they are and show some respect to others. With some people, the intent is to be intrusive, arrogant, or pretentious...and that is just plain obnoxious and rude. And it won't stop until they're called out for it. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:45:09 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:50:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhuko5$vl9$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> And the best part is the one new one -- money laundering. Class 1 felony. > Plus conspiracy to money launder. Of course the indictment is "an > abomination of justice", you know.... They better stop with the indictments, De Lay is running out of silly adjectives to describe them..... ;D From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:29:28 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:50:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" | | > The company I work for is "Christian" and prays at every gathering. | > If you want to keep your job, you keep your mouth shut. I would love | > to tell them off, but a week later, or less, I'd be out of a job. | > Just not worth it to be "right", but totally broke. | | That's awful! I'd be constantly looking for another job. And I'd ask them | first if they have prayers at work. Asking that question could get un 'unhired' quick as there are concerns on both sides of that issue. From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:35:34 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:50:19 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "indigo" | > > If you want to organize a prayer meeting for all your | > > subordinates in the State Department using the conference room, I | > > would hope that somebody would step in and say that was | > > inappropriate. | > | > IMO that would be inappropriate at a private firm. | | Something similar happened in a research lab I used to work in. Most of the | technicians had small radios at their workstations, one of them listened to | this fire and brimstone all religion all the time AM station, loudly, and on | occasion proselytized about what he was listening to. We complained about | it. He complained about our sacrilegious music. End result, all radios were | banned from the lab. We had several folk that played aggravating music at loud levels. Since this was an RF R&D engineering group and the ones most aggravated were the engineers it was amazing how many very localized, frequency specific noise generators materialized. "Must be the result of some test in the lab...." From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:39:15 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:50:23 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "indigo" | > My solution...whenever somebody asks to pray in public, stand up and | > ask "Ugh!!! Who farted!?!". Maybe someday the people that are asking | > will catch on that they're showing bad manners. IMO, farting and | > praying in public are equivalent. :o) | | What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before eating while | in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? No but having someone stand up and either call for a prayer from all present or pray so loudly that the rest of the restaurant is disturbed does. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:49:42 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:55:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhuko5$vl9$1@news.spamcop.net... > > And the best part is the one new one -- money laundering. Class 1 felony. > Plus conspiracy to money launder. Of course the indictment is "an > abomination of justice", you know.... Bwahahah...this is funny http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-britain-delay-thatcher,0,7012805.story?coll=sns-ap-world-headlines LONDON -- Prosecutors investigating Rep. Tom DeLay have asked former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher for details of a meeting between the two politicians, her spokesman confirmed Tuesday. The newspaper quoted the Home Office document as saying the investigation centered on the activities of Jack Abramoff, a lobbyist with close ties to DeLay. "U.S. officials are investigating whether Abramoff was involved in obtaining legislative assistance from public officials in exchange for arranging and underwriting trips to the U.K.," the document said. "It is alleged that Abramoff arranged for his clients to pay for the trips to the U.K. on the basis that Congressman DeLay would support favorable legislation if they paid for the trip," it added, according to the Mirror. The document reportedly noted that there would be "considerable interest in this case if it were to become public knowledge" and said police had been asked to keep the request for information about Thatcher's meeting confidential. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:52:22 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:55:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhul9t$f5$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > "Oh no you dih-int!" LOL...... > > Dammit, I knew there was a phonetic way to spell it but I couldn't figger it > out. You nailed it. I just about splorfed my drink when he said that...LOL From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:53:42 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 15:55:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhuk9d$v51$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Except once they are confirmed, they are pretty much untouchable and > don't always perform as expected. After all O'Connor was a Reagan > appointee. Not that I expect it in this case though. It's not like she was career driven and had ambitions to be a SCJ, she was placed there, so I doubt very much she'll have a mind of her own. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:01:29 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:05:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Frog Prince wrote: > We had several folk that played aggravating music at loud levels. > Since this was an RF R&D engineering group and the ones most > aggravated were the engineers it was amazing how many very localized, > frequency specific noise generators materialized. > Heh. We had this huge 25,000 watt RF generator in the lab that we used with water cooled coils to sinter powdered metal. When that baby got fired up every computer screen in the building (plus radios) went berserk. Ended up having to make the lab area into a faraday cage with copper mesh screen in the walls and ceiling. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:03:47 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:05:27 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: Eponym wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dhuld4$fr$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > Eponym wrote: > >> I don't make it a habit to eavesdrop. So, if their prayer is no > >> louder than normal conversation, I probably wouldn't notice. If I > >> did, I might still be offended...and say nothing...or give them a > >> raised eyebrow or evil eye. > >> > > > > I think mebbe you need to lower your "I'm offended by your > > behavior" meter a > > tad....... > > > > I disagree. If one "must" pray in public, they should do so very > quietly and not draw attention to themselves. I said 'quietly prayed at an adjacent table'. You said if you overheard it, even by accident, you'd be offended. I think that's taking things too far in the opposite direction. From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 16:59:12 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:05:31 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" < | | I don't see that at all. Some people in this country believe that | God is watching over this country whether or not they are allowed | to say it or not. If the interpretation you are making is correct, | then not allowing them to say it public as part of the pledge | is telling them that they are not part of this country or its | government - which is what is creating the problem. | | As I have said before, the problems of inclusiveness are much more | difficult than they were when the Constitution was written so that | the arguments for not mentioning any religious viewpoint are pretty | solid to preserve the spirit of the Constitution and to prevent | certain elements from creating a State religion. However, | arguments such as saying that by retaining 'under God' excludes | non-believers from being a part of the country just fuel the | feeling that deleting it excludes believers and makes it seem as | though the State is against religion and that is not | constitutional. Interesting point. Consider that at one time you or I could stand on the street corner when any politician came by and call them names, even slander them and giving them vivid instructions to engage in auto-intercourse without fear of reprisal. Yet under this administration such protesters are not only bared but anyone engaging in those rights are physically accosted, hand cuffed and detained. I seriously wonder how much longer it might be before these same tactics will be employed against those that do not Paul parrot the Pledge or join in public prayer? From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 22:09:12 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Sylvesterthekat wrote: > >>"indigo" wrote in >>news:dhukev$vge$1@news.spamcop.net: >> >>>End result, all radios were banned from the lab. >> >>I'd call that merciful. There is NO WAY I'd sit and listen to some >>religious radio programming all day. I'd leave the job first. > > Still pissed us off -- it had taken several months of negotiations for the > rest of us to decide on a common music channel! Ahh, that reminds me of the big Quake battle we had at one place I worked. And by that, I mean we all played it at lunch time and one woman hated it and spent months waging war with all of us about it. She was a total loon though. Eventually she completely flipped out and started screaming "f*ck Quake" like 10 times in a staff meeting. I was a bit sad that I was off at training the week they packed her stuff in a box and showed her the door (except from what I heard, everybody ran and hid when they heard it was going down). Oh, did I mention she was completely incompetent too? But we also had wagering on when she would get fired on a white board. But I think we called it "what day will Windows 98 actually be released." From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:09:53 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:15:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhum18$vt$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Dunno. But they said he does like taking long walks around his neighborhood. > Where's Hovenboof and his .50 cal sniper rifle when you need him? Ol' Cloven Hoof got fed up with the troll and buggered off - someone should give him the 'all clear', LOL From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:12:52 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:15:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Paul" wrote in message news:Xns96E59FFF4D9F1Senex@216.154.195.61... > > "Good bread, good meat; good God, let's eat! Halleleuja!" They won't ask > you again! > > > After 2000 years, you'd think the polite thing to do would be obvious, > > but I guess not. > > After all, common sense isn't.... So how's the weather up there in NH? ;) From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:14:23 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:20:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Kenneth Loafman" wrote in message news:gsn5k1tne05710o0i3dtnp33i74hu3olck@4ax.com... > Ahhh, made in the Shrub's own image. She'd be controlled by the same > group that controls Bush. A puppet for the right wing. A puppet who clears brush - how useful is that?? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:15:16 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:20:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E57DCA18682spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > LOL yeah, money laundering.. and he thinks it's an abuse of the legal > system! ROFL, I just bet he does, especially if he's convicted! What a sleazebag. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:15:49 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:20:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: has anyone tried sparkling red wine? References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E576F83F49Espamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > Apparently it's a big thing in Australia. I had some called Wally Grout a > week or so ago and it was wonderful. Now I'm having trouble finding any in > shops. Just wondering if anyone else has any experience. And this is red > wine by the way, not rose, so it's very smooth like red wine is but with > this sparkly tingle. Didn't you pick it up yet? I'm interested to know who makes it. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:19:09 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:20:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > Ahh, that reminds me of the big Quake battle we had at one place I > worked. And by that, I mean we all played it at lunch time We had a similar lunchtime deal, except our gig was multiple pinochle games. It was kind of a musical chairs thing every day to get to the lunch room and seated in foursomes before this terribly nerdy and annoying engineer player showed up ;-) and one > woman hated it and spent months waging war with all of us about it. > She was a total loon though. Eventually she completely flipped out > and started screaming "f*ck Quake" like 10 times in a staff meeting. > If you were playing on computers WTF did she care? Or did you guys just monopolize the conversation about it everyday? From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 22:18:10 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:20:22 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhu9gr$nis$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Porpoise wrote: >> >> Well, unless their bones are a whole lot denser, they will be made up >> of mostly water, same as we are, so would therefore be slightly >> negatively bouyant in fresh water and more-or-less neutrally bouyant >> in salt water, same as we are. > > But gorillas have immense muscles, muscle mass is very heavy.... > > I've not come across any info to show that it's any denser than human muscle...... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:21:12 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > > > > But gorillas have immense muscles, muscle mass is very heavy.... > > > > > > I've not come across any info to show that it's any denser than human > muscle...... I didn't say it was, it's just that they have about 400lbs more of it than we do.....and if lung size is remotely similar that's the answer why they can't float. From Paul.Sawyer.does.not.want.spam at unh.BAD.EXAMPLE.edu Tue Oct 4 21:23:31 2005 From: Paul.Sawyer.does.not.want.spam at unh.BAD.EXAMPLE.edu (Paul) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:25:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Spamvireslayer" wrote in news:dhunpb$2b3$1@news.spamcop.net: > So how's the weather up there in NH? ;) Just fine at the moment, subject to change, as always.... And the Red Sox still have a chance.... -- From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 22:26:59 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E56A87CD4DDspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Porpoise" wrote in > news:dhtc5e$7l5$2@news.spamcop.net: > > >> Ermm... when kid...... Sunday school......... > > > And you remember it?! > SPLORF! Yeah, word for word............. Of course I don't remember it word for word. Having decided to follow a different route to enlightenment, why would I want to waste energy trying to remember all that. But my decision was based on having read it. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 22:30:16 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:35:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-4DEC0F.12102904102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> That's the point you seem to be missing - WHY should they have to listen >> to >> others pray????? WHY do they need to pray out loud anyway - apparently >> god >> can hear your silent prayers just as well........... > > I don't like the moment of silence either. I think it fails the lemon > test for not having a non-religious purpose. > Meditation has nothing to with religion............... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 22:31:48 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:35:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhufre$rrf$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Eponym wrote: >> My solution...whenever somebody asks to pray in public, stand up and >> ask "Ugh!!! Who farted!?!". Maybe someday the people that are asking >> will catch on that they're showing bad manners. IMO, farting and >> praying in public are equivalent. :o) > > What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before eating while > in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? Not if I don't have to hear it. From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:32:44 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:40:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "indigo" | > eh? who mentioned male to male marriage? | > | > in fact i think some law is being introduced that allows gay marriage | > (maybe Meanie will know), but i don't know what that has to do with | > charles | | Erm....take a look at the person he married. Lose your funny bone somewhere | today? | More like a saddle and bridal than a bridal vale. From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Tue Oct 4 21:35:20 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:40:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Burbank Fires References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote in news:dhul2e$vuc$3 @news.spamcop.net: > Sylvesterthekat wrote: >> Borgholio wrote in >> news:dhui9i$oo7$3@news.spamcop.net: >> >> >> >>>Actually that sounds like OUR Castaway...top of the hill, excellent >>>view, steep winding road... >>> >> >> >> Naw, the road isn't remotely scary the way John described. > > > It is if you're drunk. :) > I'll drink to that! ;-) Actually the road in SanBerdoo is exactly the way I described. It's a tense drive even sober. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 22:36:02 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:40:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E56AE1297C0spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Porpoise" wrote in > news:dhtiof$ars$2@news.spamcop.net: > > >> Ah... Of course.... I was forgetting..... The US doesn't count the >> rest of the world.... ;-) >> >> >> > > The question posed was... 'what language do you think your grand children > will be speaking'... so naturally his answer would be 'spanish'. The rest > of the world is not relevant to his children in that context. Well I suppose that depends on how far into the future his grand children will be.......... and whether they're even born yet........... ;-) From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:43:43 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:45:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" | > > So, are you saying then that you would have no problem with | > > changing it to "under Satan" then, especially since nobody | > > is actually required to say it but just listen to it? But | > > I disagree that nobody is required to say it, on a practical | > > level, is there any difference between being pressured to do | > > something and being required to do something? | > | > And that is part of the argument for not including the phrase. If | > 'under God' could be included, then so could 'under Satan' if the | > majority were satanists. | | So, the government can only sponsor the religion of the majority? | Now _there's_ a frightening thought! What is more frightening is that the government is sponsoring hte religion of the POWERFUL From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:45:40 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:50:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Paul" wrote in message news:Xns96E5A6BF08798Senex@216.154.195.61... > "Spamvireslayer" wrote in > news:dhunpb$2b3$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > So how's the weather up there in NH? ;) > > Just fine at the moment, subject to change, as always.... Odd...it's the same here....... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 22:46:18 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:50:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhueat$qn1$9@news.spamcop.net... > > I suppose it depends on where the power base lies in the future. The > presumption currently is that the Chinese will learn and speak English > to do business with us. Whether that remains the case in the future, I > don't know. > I think it's unlikely - it tends to be the one with the greater need that learns the means to communicate with the party that has whatever it is that is needed. As it happens, the west wants china to produce it's goods at much lower prices than they could produce them themselves, and so has the greater "need" to communicate. Especially as the Chinese themselves gradually become more affluent. They do have 4.5 times the population of the US......... From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Oct 4 14:50:57 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Gonna kill my dad... Message-ID: He just got a 42" Plasma TV. Lousy stinking sonofa.... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 22:52:52 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 16:55:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E56B667FE67spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Porpoise" wrote in > news:dhtiuj$b14$2@news.spamcop.net: > > >> Ah... Yes.... Sorry, us in the rest of the world keep forgetting that >> everything revolves around the US (as far as the US is concerned). The >> rest of us tend to talk about the world as a whole rather than being >> US-centric............ > > Jeeze get over it already! It's far more likely that Spanish will be the > majority language in THIS country (America) than Chinese. Why do you think the Spanish speakers wouldn't find the need to speak Chinese too, if they wish to get on in the new world order? Is it because you consider the Spanish speakers to be the "thickoes" of the Americas? Or do you think that the Americas will somehow be immune to whatever is happening in the rest of the world? > Why shouldn't he > answer as appertains to his own experience? Does it not count? It doesn't > mean that if the question was phrased differently (ie what language do you > think will be spoken by the majority of people in the world as a whole) > that he'd have said Spanish. It probably already IS some form of Chinese > that is dominant in raw numbers but that hardly answers the question as > originally posed. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 22:55:53 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Mr K. Mean wrote: > >>Ahh, that reminds me of the big Quake battle we had at one place I >>worked. And by that, I mean we all played it at lunch time > > We had a similar lunchtime deal, except our gig was multiple pinochle games. > It was kind of a musical chairs thing every day to get to the lunch room and > seated in foursomes before this terribly nerdy and annoying engineer player > showed up ;-) > >>woman hated it and spent months waging war with all of us about it. >>She was a total loon though. Eventually she completely flipped out >>and started screaming "f*ck Quake" like 10 times in a staff meeting. > > If you were playing on computers WTF did she care? Or did you guys just > monopolize the conversation about it everyday? Well, it was a company filled full of computer geeks, so it didn't really fill up much more than any other topic. We never did figure out her particular psychosis though (manic, paranoia, who knows). I can't say that it was a male/female thing since there were other women who played too and who didn't feel the need to curse about it. And she was more than welcome to play, the more the better. It was amazing how the whole feel of the place changed after she was gone. For the next few weeks, you would look up and say, what is that, oh, it is the sound of not being surrounded by anger and bitterness. And even thought it took weeks to clean up all the things she had screwed up, and all the things that she didn't actually finish and had covered up, it was still such a much nicer place after that. It is amazing how just one person can really drive a whole group to the edge like that. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 4 22:55:37 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:00:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E56BA54719spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > David Dean wrote in news:ozchzhq02- > ADDA17.09252004102005@frylock.local: > >> In article , >> "Porpoise" wrote: >> >>> Aahh..... US-centricity again!!.......... >> >> Well, you did ask about why *his* kids would be speaking Spanish. I'd >> say that you got what you asked for. >> > > Precisely. His anti-US sentiments just can't be suppressed apparently. Well...... it gets harder and harder............. in the light of actions conducted and policies formed....... Gosh, I wonder why the US seems to have made so many enemies round the place........... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:57:00 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:00:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Gonna kill my dad... References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > He just got a 42" Plasma TV. Lousy stinking sonofa.... I thought DPL was the new future of TV tech? Oh, and didn't you just break the 7th or 8th commandment? ;-) From nospam at nospam.org Tue Oct 4 21:59:34 2005 From: nospam at nospam.org (Bubba Yarfkowitz) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:00:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Gonna kill my dad... References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in news:dhuqat$41j$1@news.spamcop.net: > > I thought DPL was the new future of TV tech? Oh, and didn't you just > break the 7th or 8th commandment? ;-) > "DLP" and I, for one, certainly think it's a better technology than plasma... http://www.dlp.com From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 18:02:16 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:05:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > It was amazing how the whole feel of the place changed after she was > gone. For the next few weeks, you would look up and say, what is > that, oh, it is the sound of not being surrounded by anger and > bitterness. Been there, done that, and it was also a woman causing the problem. After one very long and tense hardware test (we set the record for longest test ever, a dubious one to own) everyone, and I mean everyone (about 30 people), was ready to literally stab her in the eye with a fork. And now the program is being revived and guess who is currently in charge? Hopefully her psychosis has disappeared, but I won't know until the pressure gets notched up a couple of levels to see how she reacts...... From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Oct 4 15:14:47 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Gonna kill my dad... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bubba Yarfkowitz wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhuqat$41j$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >>I thought DPL was the new future of TV tech? Oh, and didn't you just >>break the 7th or 8th commandment? ;-) >> > > > "DLP" and I, for one, certainly think it's a better technology than > plasma... > > http://www.dlp.com Oh I agree with both of you, but a 42" Plasma is still better than my 15" curved-tube set. From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:48:34 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:15:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Eponym" wrote in message news:dhui7n$tlv$1@news.spamcop.net... | "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message | news:4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net... | > | > It wouldn't offend me unless they insisted others join them, or insisted | > that everyone else be quiet. I'm also not offended when I am at someone | > else's house and they stop to say grace before eating. (I can sit quietly | > or a moment while they pray.) On the other hand, I've also never had | > someone over to my house for dinner who insisted that we say grace in my | > house. | > | | I think one can still be offended by it in nearly any case...just a matter | of whether they want to make an issue of it. If you're in someone else's | home, obviously it would be impolite. If someone came in my home and | insisted, then they're being impolite. IMO, what's even worse is when | you're invited to dinner at someone else's home and asked to lead a prayer. | UGH! The most effective way to save your self from that dilemma next time is a) mumble one/two words followed by a loud AMEN or mumble a long list of words and eventually a loud AMEN From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 17:55:30 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:15:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "Eponym" | > | >> > What about a family quietly reciting the dinner prayer before | >> > eating while in a restaurant? Does that offend you too? | >> > | >> | >> If they're doing it loud enough for everyone to hear, yes!! | > | > Everyone in the place or just the adjacent tables? Big diff. | > | | I don't make it a habit to eavesdrop. So, if their prayer is no louder than | normal conversation, I probably wouldn't notice. If I did, I might still be | offended...and say nothing...or give them a raised eyebrow or evil eye. Be selective in what you take offense too as there is then less need to forgive. Can we spell stress relief? From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 18:08:51 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:15:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Kerry will love this References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhuj3s$ua3$1@news.spamcop.net... | | | Spamvireslayer wrote: | > "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message | > news:Xns96E56F8B1F88Fspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... | > > Well that's interesting! Until that was said, nobody knew WHAT her | > > opinions on things might be considering she's never even BEEN a | > > judge! | > | > All that says to me is that having no history of her own, Cheny and | > Bush have given her her marching orders, you know what a fucking pit | > bull he is, I'm sure his "views" were very convincing. | | Speaking of Cheney, he and Rummy have recently purchase estates down on the | Bay waterfront in one of my favorite little towns, St. Michaels. They | apparently are quite fond of visiting the nice restaurants and antique | shoppes on the weekends, many sightings have been made by the locals. Guess | I better stay out of that town, if I saw Dick on the street I'd yell "Eff | you Mr. Cheney, Eff you!" just like that woman from NOLA. It was male doctor and on the Mississippi Gulf Coast .. Biloxi I think. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 4 23:15:50 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Tue Oct 4 17:20:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Outsourced In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message > news:dhueat$qn1$9@news.spamcop.net... > >>I suppose it depends on where the power base lies in the future. The >>presumption currently is that the Chinese will learn and speak English >>to do business with us. Whether that remains the case in the future, I >>don't know. > > I think it's unlikely - it tends to be the one with the greater need that > learns the means to communicate with the party that has whatever it is that > is needed. > > As it happens, the west wants china to produce it's goods at much lower > prices than they could produce them themselves, and so has the greater > "need" to communicate. Especially as the Chinese themselves gradually become > more affluent. They do have 4.5 times the population of the US......... I'm not sure that the power currently lies with the Chinese people, there are probably still lots of other places that could be used instead. Walmart still has the ability to dictate much of the wage and working conditions in China and can still drive those downward. However, the Chinese government is becoming increasingly powerful due to their propping up the growing US debt and continuing to buy US Treasury notes. American have always been pretty reluctant to learn any other languages and mostly count on others learning English which has worked mostly since it is still kind of the universal language. It is funny, you look at computer code written in just about any language (language meaning the target spoken language) and it is all still in English keywords with embedded localized strings of Chinese or Japanese or French or whatever. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 19:34:55 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Tue Oct 4 18:50:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <4343038F.AD9A952D@spamcop.net> Frog Prince wrote: > > "indigo" [...] > | Something similar happened in a research lab I used to work in. Most of > | the technicians had small radios at their workstations, one of them > | listened to this fire and brimstone all religion all the time AM > | station, loudly, and on occasion proselytized about what he was > | listening to. We complained about it. He complained about our > | sacrilegious music. End result, all radios were banned from the lab. > > We had several folk that played aggravating music at loud levels. Since > this was an RF R&D engineering group and the ones most aggravated were the > engineers it was amazing how many very localized, frequency specific noise > generators materialized. > > "Must be the result of some test in the lab...." http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/electronic/79be/ The Mind Molester is an instrument of creative electronic harassment. It is an electronic device that can drive your victims a little crazy trying to figure out what it is and where it's located. Your friends/ enemies will become obsessed, awaiting the next chirp trying to determine its location, completely disrupting their normal activities. Just connect this device to a 9-volt battery and plant it in an appropriate location. It produces a one-second electronic chirp about once every 3 minutes. Due to the chirp's duration, frequency, and sound characteristics, it's a very difficult, time-consuming, frustrating and maddening task to locate the unit. And even if they find it, they'll have no idea what it is. The number of effective locations to plant the Mind Molester is limited only by your imagination. Of course, this device is for use on deserving subjects only. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 4 19:30:18 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Oct 4 19:25:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:dhuq8p$40v$1@news.spamcop.net... ]> > It was amazing how the whole feel of the place changed after she was > gone. For the next few weeks, you would look up and say, what is that, > oh, it is the sound of not being surrounded by anger and bitterness. > And even thought it took weeks to clean up all the things she had > screwed up, and all the things that she didn't actually finish and had > covered up, it was still such a much nicer place after that. It is > amazing how just one person can really drive a whole group to the edge > like that. It would be amazing too, the sound of not being surrounded by anger and bitterness if we could just shut up the people who are demanding their 'rights' by either not saying 'under God' or saying 'under God'! Most people, even judging by the posts in this thread, don't object to people 'doing their thing' whether it is to join in the group and to sit out. Miss Betsy From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 03:50:42 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 21:55:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhujk1$unj$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Sylvesterthekat wrote: >> "indigo" wrote in >> news:dhuftv$rrv$1@news.spamcop.net: >> >> > See, that's where in my head I go "hey, they walk just like a doggie >> > paddle!" >> >> >> but they don't > > Wonder if swimming is learned behavior..... No. Various particular strokes might be, but when you put a baby into the water, s/he knows instinctively what to do just fine. (As long as you get them in before their parents' fear starts to rub off on them). From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 03:54:57 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 22:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dhuo7p$2nq$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Porpoise wrote: >> "indigo" wrote in message >> > >> > But gorillas have immense muscles, muscle mass is very heavy.... >> > >> > >> >> I've not come across any info to show that it's any denser than human >> muscle...... > > I didn't say it was, it's just that they have about 400lbs more of it than > we do.....and if lung size is remotely similar that's the answer why they > can't float. Being able to float isn't the same as being able to swim. A lot of animals can swim that can't float/bob/tread. Horses, cattle, wildebeast, etc. I'm not sure if cats and dogs can actually float without kicking either....... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 04:26:35 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 22:30:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-FC527B.18435204102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> Meditation has nothing to with religion............... > > They didn't pass the law in order to let people meditate. I didn't say they had. I was merely making the suggestion that, if they instead allowed a moment's reflection for people to do whatever was their preference (in silence) then people could either pray, reflect, meditate or just plain scratch their arse without anyone offending anyone. On the other hand, if they just "obeyed the teachings of their god" and skipped all this praying in public thing, there wouldn't be an issue either....... 5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. seen Matt 6:1, Matt 6:16, Matt 23:5 6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. reward Jer 17:10, Matt 6:4, Matt 6:18 From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 04:29:40 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Tue Oct 4 22:35:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhurc1$4os$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > The most effective way to save your self from that dilemma next time is a) > mumble one/two words followed by a loud AMEN or mumble a long list of > words > and eventually a loud AMEN Or just say to them "Sorry, I only pray in private like it says in 'The Good Lord's Book'". From noone at hansen.com Wed Oct 5 13:53:54 2005 From: noone at hansen.com (Michael Cole) Date: Tue Oct 4 22:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1127157731.370374.307340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > The Judeo-Christian values shaped our laws - including the > Constitution. It was not influenced by Islam or by Tao or by > Buddhism or by the Native American religions in its conception. No, they were in fact directly derived from the Pagan religions of Denmark, Mercia and Wessex. -- Regards, Michael Cole From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 00:19:20 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 23:20:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Another Outbreak References: Message-ID: The Center for Disease Control has issued a warning about a new virulent strain of Sexually Transmitted Disease. This disease is contracted through dangerous and high risk behavior. The disease is called Gonorrhea Lectim (pronounced "gonna reelect him"). Many victims have contracted it after having been screwed for the past 4 years, in spite of having taken measures to protect themselves from this especially troublesome disease. Cognitive sequelae of individuals infected with Gonorrhea Lectim include, but are not limited to, antisocial personality disorder traits; inability to tell the truth, delusions of grandeur with a distinct messianic flavor; chronic mangling of the English language; extreme cognitive dissonance; inability to incorporate new information; pronounced xenophobia; inability to accept responsibility for actions; exceptional cowardice masked by acts of misplaced bravado; uncontrolled facial smirking; ignorance of geography and history; tendencies toward creating evangelical theocracies; and a strong propensity for categorical, all-or-nothing behavior. The disease is sweeping Washington, trailer parks, and the red states. Naturalists and epidemiologists are amazed and baffled that this malignant disease originated only a few years ago from a Texas Bush. From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 00:40:04 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Oct 4 23:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Another Funny Man Checks Out References: <1128439684.809840.18470@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Nipsey Russell dead at 80. http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/10/04/obit.russell.ap/index.html From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:23:30 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Patto) Date: Wed Oct 5 00:25:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: has anyone tried sparkling red wine? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Apparently it's a big thing in Australia. I had some called Wally Grout a > week or so ago and it was wonderful. Now I'm having trouble finding any in > shops. Just wondering if anyone else has any experience. And this is red > wine by the way, not rose, so it's very smooth like red wine is but with > this sparkly tingle. I tried it first time in a strange restaurant called Lawry's. Unfortunately their website (http://www.wondertable.com/app/tenpo/tenpo?code=Lawrys) does not contain a wine list. But I've also bought it in my local wine shop; they have three or four different brands (from France, Australia, United States). All are dry, and very beautifully ruby red. I can check the vineyards' names tonight. From bcs1 at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 01:49:35 2005 From: bcs1 at spamcop.net (Bcs1) Date: Wed Oct 5 00:45:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Ping John/David Message-ID: John, Scamz is back up };O)~ David, do you still need a temp shell? Took a trip to Chicago today, when I got there I was about ready to go thru the freaking roof...... The datacenter had informed me that the server arrived with the box damaged, and the rackmount ears bent, then they went to rack the unit, and told me it would not post/boot, so after a small amount of troubleshooting the "tech" at the DC informed me that the server was dead. I stayed up almost all night last night setting the other one up to run Plesk and all, then headed out today.... got to the DC and saw the server and I was livid LOL, the "ears" were bent bad too, and they are 3 layers of metal, and the CPU had been jarred loose from the socket, even though the heatsink was still on top of it..... Anyway to make a long story short, the "tech" at the DC told me how he'd spent like an hour and couldn't get it to come up, 20 mins after I got started, the system was up.............. So we're back in business again };O)~ From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Wed Oct 5 05:46:27 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Wed Oct 5 00:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Ping John/David References: Message-ID: "Bcs1" wrote in news:dhvlke$i76$1@news.spamcop.net: > Anyway to make a long story short, the "tech" at the DC told me how > he'd > spent like an hour and couldn't get it to come up, 20 mins after I got > started, the system was up.............. So rather than kick the box, did you kick the tech? ;-) From edb2000 at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 00:26:45 2005 From: edb2000 at spamcop.net (Don Wannit) Date: Wed Oct 5 02:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: has anyone tried sparkling red wine? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Apparently it's a big thing in Australia. I had some called Wally Grout a > week or so ago and it was wonderful. Now I'm having trouble finding any in > shops. Just wondering if anyone else has any experience. And this is red > wine by the way, not rose, so it's very smooth like red wine is but with > this sparkly tingle. Are they still making Ripple? Found a big market down under, eh? -- Don Wannit Life's too short to drink bad wine. From edb2000 at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 00:46:31 2005 From: edb2000 at spamcop.net (Don Wannit) Date: Wed Oct 5 02:50:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) In-Reply-To: References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Eponym wrote: > > >>I think one can still be offended by it in nearly any case...just a >>matter of whether they want to make an issue of it. If you're in >>someone else's home, obviously it would be impolite. If someone came >>in my home and insisted, then they're being impolite. IMO, what's >>even worse is when you're invited to dinner at someone else's home >>and asked to lead a prayer. UGH! >> >>After 2000 years, you'd think the polite thing to do would be >>obvious, but I guess not. > > > When in Rome.... > > ... eat and then barf? -- Don Wannit How much up would an upchuck chuck if an upchuck did upchuck? From edb2000 at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 00:48:32 2005 From: edb2000 at spamcop.net (Don Wannit) Date: Wed Oct 5 02:50:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Eponym wrote: > >>I don't make it a habit to eavesdrop. So, if their prayer is no >>louder than normal conversation, I probably wouldn't notice. If I >>did, I might still be offended...and say nothing...or give them a >>raised eyebrow or evil eye. >> > > > I think mebbe you need to lower your "I'm offended by your behavior" meter a > tad....... Yes, I agree. The setpoint threshhold is far too high. Any talking louder than normal conversation is offensive in a restaurant, whether it's someone praying or telling a raunchy joke. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 5 09:22:12 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Wed Oct 5 03:25:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: References: <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > > It would be amazing too, the sound of not being surrounded by anger > and bitterness if we could just shut up the people who are > demanding their 'rights' by either not saying 'under God' or saying > 'under God'! > > Most people, even judging by the posts in this thread, don't object > to people 'doing their thing' whether it is to join in the group > and to sit out. Ok, yeah, I'm all done with the religious aspects of this thread. Moving on... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 10:49:30 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 04:56:01 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Another Funny Man Checks Out References: <1128439684.809840.18470@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhvihl$gkr$1@news.spamcop.net... > Nipsey Russell dead at 80. > > http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/10/04/obit.russell.ap/index.html > > Never mind that - Ronnie Barker http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4310772.stm http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/profiles/ronnie_barker.shtml R.I.P. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 10:55:56 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 05:00:50 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] About Ronnie Message-ID: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/4310442.stm From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 09:37:35 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 08:40:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> <4343038F.AD9A952D@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/electronic/79be/ > > The Mind Molester is an instrument of creative electronic > harassment. It is an electronic device that can drive your > victims a little crazy trying to figure out what it is and where > it's located. Your friends/ enemies will become obsessed, > awaiting the next chirp trying to determine its location, > completely disrupting their normal activities. > > Just connect this device to a 9-volt battery and plant it in an > appropriate location. It produces a one-second electronic chirp > about once every 3 minutes. Due to the chirp's duration, > frequency, and sound characteristics, it's a very difficult, > time-consuming, frustrating and maddening task to locate the > unit. And even if they find it, they'll have no idea what it is. > The number of effective locations to plant the Mind Molester is > limited only by your imagination. Of course, this device is for > use on deserving subjects only. I already have, oh, mebbe 6 of those things in my house. They're called hardwired smoke detectors with battery backups ;-) From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 09:38:56 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 08:40:28 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > > > > I didn't say it was, it's just that they have about 400lbs more of > > it than we do.....and if lung size is remotely similar that's the > > answer why they can't float. > > Being able to float isn't the same as being able to swim. Kinda hard to drown if you float. From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 15:55:22 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 10:00:22 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> <4343038F.AD9A952D@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di0hef$2c3$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > I already have, oh, mebbe 6 of those things in my house. They're called > hardwired smoke detectors with battery backups ;-) I call them bacon detectors.......... they *ALWAYS* go off when I'm grilling bacon (I like it crispy/well done).. {8>()X From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 15:56:47 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 10:00:36 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di0hh0$2ch$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Porpoise wrote: > >> > >> > I didn't say it was, it's just that they have about 400lbs more of >> > it than we do.....and if lung size is remotely similar that's the >> > answer why they can't float. >> >> Being able to float isn't the same as being able to swim. > > Kinda hard to drown if you float. > Quite so, but what I meant was, just because someone can't float, doesn't mean they can't swim...... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 15:58:52 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 10:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-C02909.08571305102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> I didn't say they had. I was merely making the suggestion that, if they >> instead allowed a moment's reflection for people to do whatever was their >> preference (in silence) then people could either pray, reflect, meditate >> or >> just plain scratch their arse without anyone offending anyone. > > I was talking about the lemon test: The government's action must have > a legitimate secular purpose. And I'm certain the law wasn't passed so > that people could scratch their ass. I didn't mention a four-legged animal............... ;-) and...and... *how* certain are you? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 11:29:14 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 10:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Bacon Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:di0m2r$4rq$1@news.spamcop.net... > > I call them bacon detectors.......... they *ALWAYS* go off when I'm grilling > bacon (I like it crispy/well done).. Do it in the microwave - much better that way, lots less grease and smoke From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 11:34:04 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 10:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] 'Rude' author ejected from school Message-ID: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/4311826.stm Teachers told GP Taylor, who wrote best seller Shadowmancer, to stop his talk at Penair School after using words such as "bum" and "ass" to 12-year-olds. But headteacher Barbara Vann said Mr Taylor's language was "inappropriate." She said: "We know children will use inappropriate language but we don't have staff using that language. "It would seem as if we are condoning inappropriate language and we don't." She said words used by Mr Taylor included "fart" and "pee". Mr Taylor, from Scarborough, said: "If you stand in any playground you will hear language that is far in excess of that. "English has changed and inappropriate language is now part of everyday language of teenagers. "The word ass is not used as a swear word and it is used to describe part of the anatomy - bum." From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 17:08:44 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 11:15:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-0B728C.10552305102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> I didn't mention a four-legged animal............... ;-) and...and... >> *how* certain are you? > > Well, it was published at the time of making the law that it's intent > was to give time for prayer. In fact, The moment of silence bill starts: > "In order that the right of every pupil to the free exercise of religion > be guaranteed within the schools and that the freedom of each individual > pupil be subject to the least possible pressure from the Commonwealth > either to engage in, or to refrain from, religious observation on school > grounds, the school board of each school division shall establish the > daily observance of one minute of silence in each classroom of the > division." > How can that be viewed as anything other than a religious purpose? Well, it does say ".....either to engage in, or to refrain from....." From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 17:12:50 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 11:15:22 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "Spamvireslayer" wrote in message news:di0o18$5ph$2@news.spamcop.net... > > "Porpoise" wrote in message > news:di0m2r$4rq$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> >> I call them bacon detectors.......... they *ALWAYS* go off when I'm >> grilling >> bacon (I like it crispy/well done).. > > Do it in the microwave - much better that way, lots less grease and smoke Doesn't it make it a bit rubbery? (Like it does with other stuff). From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 12:24:40 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 11:30:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:di0qk5$72k$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Doesn't it make it a bit rubbery? (Like it does with other stuff). No, it gets nice and dark and, and since you're doing it on a special pan where the fat drains away, it comes out dry and crisp and not dripping with fat, the longer you cook it the darker and drier it gets - it's my favorite way to cook bacon now. From edb2000 at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 10:11:36 2005 From: edb2000 at spamcop.net (Don Wannit) Date: Wed Oct 5 12:15:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Porpoise wrote: > > >>>I didn't say it was, it's just that they have about 400lbs more of >>>it than we do.....and if lung size is remotely similar that's the >>>answer why they can't float. >> >>Being able to float isn't the same as being able to swim. > > > Kinda hard to drown if you float. > > Not at all, if you float face-down... Or nostril-down, anyway. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 13:23:13 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 12:25:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Porpoise" wrote in message > news:di0m2r$4rq$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > I call them bacon detectors.......... they *ALWAYS* go off when I'm > > grilling bacon (I like it crispy/well done).. > > Do it in the microwave - much better that way, lots less grease and > smoke Nah, doesn't get as nice and crispy that way. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 13:25:07 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 12:30:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Porpoise" wrote in message > news:di0qk5$72k$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > Doesn't it make it a bit rubbery? (Like it does with other stuff). > > No, it gets nice and dark and, and since you're doing it on a special > pan where the fat drains away, it comes out dry and crisp and not > dripping with fat, the longer you cook it the darker and drier it > gets - it's my favorite way to cook bacon now. No need for that special bacon microwave pan, just do what I do (whenever I cook bacon at home, which is extremely rare). Put the bacon on a paper towel after taking it off the skillet and pat it down with another paper towel to remove the grease. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 13:26:59 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 12:30:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:di0hh0$2ch$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > Porpoise wrote: > > > >> > > >> > I didn't say it was, it's just that they have about 400lbs more > >> > of it than we do.....and if lung size is remotely similar that's > >> > the answer why they can't float. > >> > >> Being able to float isn't the same as being able to swim. > > > > Kinda hard to drown if you float. > > > > Quite so, but what I meant was, just because someone can't float, > doesn't mean they can't swim...... Leading of course, to the question "what do you call a man with no arms and no legs floating in the surf?" ;-) From johnl at in.newsgroup.only Wed Oct 5 17:29:15 2005 From: johnl at in.newsgroup.only (JohnL) Date: Wed Oct 5 12:30:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in news:di0usk$9jk$1@news.spamcop.net: > Leading of course, to the question "what do you call a man with no > arms and no legs floating in the surf?" ;-) "Bob" From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 19:29:09 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 13:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: "David Dean" wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-70440F.11462305102005@frylock.local... > In article , > "Porpoise" wrote: > >> Well, it does say ".....either to engage in, or to refrain from....." > > You don't need a moment of silence for that. Agreed. I *am* on your side, I'm just trying to find the "middle-ground" to try to keep everyone happy...... :-) From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 19:33:59 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 13:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "Spamvireslayer" wrote in message news:di0r95$7eh$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "Porpoise" wrote in message > news:di0qk5$72k$1@news.spamcop.net... >> >> Doesn't it make it a bit rubbery? (Like it does with other stuff). > > No, it gets nice and dark and, and since you're doing it on a special pan > where the > fat drains away, it comes out dry and crisp and not dripping with fat, the > longer you > cook it the darker and drier it gets - it's my favorite way to cook bacon > now. Well, it comes out dry and crisp and not dripping with fat from the grill too (and from the George thingy). From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 5 19:35:17 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Wed Oct 5 13:40:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di0usk$9jk$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > Leading of course, to the question "what do you call a man with no arms > and > no legs floating in the surf?" ;-) F*****D! From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Oct 5 11:44:19 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Oct 5 13:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Porpoise wrote: > "Spamvireslayer" wrote in message > news:di0r95$7eh$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>"Porpoise" wrote in message >>news:di0qk5$72k$1@news.spamcop.net... >> >>>Doesn't it make it a bit rubbery? (Like it does with other stuff). >> >>No, it gets nice and dark and, and since you're doing it on a special pan >>where the >>fat drains away, it comes out dry and crisp and not dripping with fat, the >>longer you >>cook it the darker and drier it gets - it's my favorite way to cook bacon >>now. > > > Well, it comes out dry and crisp and not dripping with fat from the grill > too (and from the George thingy). > > I cook it campfire style. Just dump a pound or two into a pot and let 'er rip. It's strained afterwards so it's really not all that greasy. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:45:34 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 13:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di0ulh$9ds$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Nah, doesn't get as nice and crispy that way. Yes it does.... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:47:01 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 13:50:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:di12sq$bt9$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Well, it comes out dry and crisp and not dripping with fat from the grill > too (and from the George thingy). I have a George thingy stuffed in the back of my closet, I never thought to try bacon on that but I bet it would be great because everything runs off - doesn't it overflow the drip tray though? It's kind of small.... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:50:45 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 13:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Cold weather, time for soup! Message-ID: Anyone like to make soup? I tried this one from the Food Network last weekend, it kicks ass! And the chipotle corn muffins to go with are delish too, I put the leftover chipotles in turkey meatloaf last night and it was excellent. Try Dave's black bean soup..... http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/recipes/recipe/0,,FOOD_9936_31040,00.html From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:55:17 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 14:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > Anyone like to make soup? I tried this one from the Food Network last > weekend, it kicks ass! And the chipotle corn muffins to go with are > delish too, I put the leftover chipotles in turkey meatloaf last > night and it was excellent. Try Dave's black bean soup..... I know it might sound gross, but me and this gal I used to date *loved* TGIF's black bean soup. We made a batch once at her house, don't know what recipe she found, but it was damn good! (we made it a bit spicier than called for). From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:56:41 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 14:00:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:di0ulh$9ds$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > Nah, doesn't get as nice and crispy that way. > > Yes it does.... Doesn't taste the same. I've done it both ways, BTW. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:59:20 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 14:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di1426$cis$1@news.spamcop.net... > > I know it might sound gross, but me and this gal I used to date *loved* > TGIF's black bean soup. We made a batch once at her house, don't know what > recipe she found, but it was damn good! (we made it a bit spicier than > called for). This is great with the bacon, just spicy enough with the 1T of chili powder but you could add more. I am not a big cilantro fan, tastes like soap to me but I put it in anyway, it's delicious, and I doubled the amount of lime juice, I used a whole one. His recipe says to cook the bacon 'till it gives up its fat', but you have to cook it to crisp or it doesn't cook when you add all the other stuff. Yum...I'm eating it again today for lunch. From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:30:17 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Wed Oct 5 14:05:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "Don Wannit" | >>>I didn't say it was, it's just that they have about 400lbs more of | >>>it than we do.....and if lung size is remotely similar that's the | >>>answer why they can't float. | >> | >>Being able to float isn't the same as being able to swim. | > | > | > Kinda hard to drown if you float. | > | > | | Not at all, if you float face-down... Or nostril-down, anyway. There are some (mostly politicians) that can breathe that way. From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 14:31:28 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Wed Oct 5 14:05:19 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "indigo" | > Quite so, but what I meant was, just because someone can't float, | > doesn't mean they can't swim...... | | Leading of course, to the question "what do you call a man with no arms and | no legs floating in the surf?" ;-) | Corky? and alternatively F*cked! From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 15:04:19 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 14:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di144q$cnu$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Doesn't taste the same. I've done it both ways, BTW. Tastes fine to me, nice and crisp - if I cooked to the doneness I like on the stovetop my house would be filled with smoke! From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 15:59:53 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Neil) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:00:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: About Ronnie References: Message-ID: "Porpoise" wrote in message news:di04h4$qsi$1@news.spamcop.net... > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/4310442.stm > Any "Goodnight from him" headlines in the press? The Two Ronnies, Open All Hours, and Porridge. Some of my favourite programmes from my childhood. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 15:00:09 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) In-Reply-To: <4342982A.ED3571D4@spamcop.net> References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4342982A.ED3571D4@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > Well, I'm not a satanist, but isn't Satan, to them, the equivalent > of G-d to you? If so, than "Satan" is simply another name for "G-d", > and you should have no objections to saying it. After all, you have > already said that Muslims shouldn't object to having to say "G-d" > rather than "Allah", as it's just "a different name". What's with all this censoring of the word "God" especially when you didn't censor "Allah" or "Satan"? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 16:02:29 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:05:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: About Ronnie References: Message-ID: "Neil" wrote in message news:di17rb$euk$1@news.spamcop.net... > > The Two Ronnies, Open All Hours, and Porridge. Some of my favourite > programmes from my childhood. For some reason that's not made it over here, maybe it will replace Benny Hill eventually.... Speaking of shows, have you watched the F*cking Fulfords? From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 16:10:03 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: About Ronnie References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Neil" wrote in message > news:di17rb$euk$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > The Two Ronnies, Open All Hours, and Porridge. Some of my favourite > > programmes from my childhood. > > For some reason that's not made it over here, maybe it will replace > Benny Hill eventually.... They predated Benny, didn't they? In any case, they were a hell of lot more clever (I know, not hard to do). From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 16:12:29 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:15:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:di144q$cnu$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > Doesn't taste the same. I've done it both ways, BTW. > > Tastes fine to me, nice and crisp - if I cooked to the doneness I > like on the stovetop my house would be filled with smoke! I like it almost black. You're cooking it at too high heat if you're filling your house with smoke. Patience, my dear, is the key to life's joys ;-) From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 16:13:19 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:15:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Frog Prince wrote: > "Don Wannit" > > | > | Not at all, if you float face-down... Or nostril-down, anyway. > > There are some (mostly politicians) that can breathe that way. But their nostrils are generally pointed up, into someone's ass...... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 16:23:05 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:25:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di18iu$ffl$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > I like it almost black. You're cooking it at too high heat if you're filling > your house with smoke. Patience, my dear, is the key to life's joys ;-) Nuh uh, it's just that when cook it longer and longer, things start to get browner and browner....cooking on high heat would just burn it. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 5 21:35:41 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:40:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Frog Prince wrote: > >>"Don Wannit" > >>| Not at all, if you float face-down... Or nostril-down, anyway. >> >>There are some (mostly politicians) that can breathe that way. > > But their nostrils are generally pointed up, into someone's ass...... So, you are saying that generally they are able to breathe in areas where there isn't a lot of air? From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 5 21:37:38 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:40:28 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > Anyone like to make soup? I tried this one from the Food Network last weekend, it > kicks ass! And the chipotle corn muffins to go with are delish too, I put the > leftover chipotles in turkey meatloaf last night and it was excellent. Try Dave's > black bean soup..... > > http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/recipes/recipe/0,,FOOD_9936_31040,00.html What's with all this good food? Where are the crap recipes? From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 16:54:55 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 15:55:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:di18iu$ffl$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > > > I like it almost black. You're cooking it at too high heat if > > > you're filling > > your house with smoke. Patience, my dear, is the key to life's joys > > ;-) > > Nuh uh, it's just that when cook it longer and longer, things start > to get browner and browner....cooking on high heat would just burn it. "it's just that when cook it longer and longer"? Spracken zie English? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 16:57:00 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di1b2g$h7c$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "it's just that when cook it longer and longer"? Spracken zie English? Nein... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:05:52 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:di1a22$g7a$2@news.spamcop.net... > Spamvireslayer wrote: > > > Anyone like to make soup? I tried this one from the Food Network last weekend, it > > kicks ass! And the chipotle corn muffins to go with are delish too, I put the > > leftover chipotles in turkey meatloaf last night and it was excellent. Try Dave's > > black bean soup..... > > > > http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/recipes/recipe/0,,FOOD_9936_31040,00.html > > What's with all this good food? Where are the crap recipes? Just for you, from the Semi-Ho..... http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/cda/recipe_print/0,1946,FOOD_9936_31311_PRINT-RECIPE-FULL-PAGE,00.html By the way, you may get your chance with Ms. "My Nipples are Tucked into my Belt", rumor has it that she and "Wallet" are headed for divorce court. http://www.denverpost.com/entertainment/ci_3084779 Guess her shine as a trophy wife was tarnished with all that crap she created in public..... Wallet's company (he owns it) gave him a $100 million bonus last year, shades of Enron, perhaps? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:16:36 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:20:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:di19ue$g7a$1@news.spamcop.net... > So, you are saying that generally they are able to breathe in areas > where there isn't a lot of air? Kinda like amphibians......... From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:25:40 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:30:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > Guess her shine as a trophy wife was tarnished with all that crap she > created in public..... Wallet's company (he owns it) gave him a $100 > million bonus last year, shades of Enron, perhaps? Speaking of Wallets.....guess what movie is finally being released!? http://www.wandg.com/ From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:28:49 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:30:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:di1b2g$h7c$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > "it's just that when cook it longer and longer"? Spracken zie > > English? > > Nein... hübsches offensichtliches From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:29:11 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:30:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di1cs4$idd$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Speaking of Wallets.....guess what movie is finally being released!? > http://www.wandg.com/ Bwahaha....Anti Pesto Swat team... I have to see this movie! From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:31:23 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di1d22$iip$1@news.spamcop.net... > > hübsches offensichtliches > mindestens ich habe nicht einen pointy Kopf From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 5 22:32:34 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:35:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > Just for you, from the Semi-Ho..... > http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/cda/recipe_print/0,1946,FOOD_9936_31311_PRINT-RECIPE-FULL-PAGE,00.html > > By the way, you may get your chance with Ms. "My Nipples are Tucked into my Belt", > rumor has it that she and "Wallet" are headed for divorce court. > http://www.denverpost.com/entertainment/ci_3084779 > > Guess her shine as a trophy wife was tarnished with all that crap she created in > public..... Wallet's company (he owns it) gave him a $100 million bonus last year, > shades of Enron, perhaps? Aack, damn you, making me click on a banana recipe. Banana pudding bites? Strangely enough, that doesn't seem like such a wacky recipe though. But ohh, I have a chance with the dreamy Sandra Lee then. (Except, I'm probably more of a Sandra Dee kind of guy, well, back in those days of summer lovin' but before she skanked herself out and you better watch out.) But oh yeah, I should be there to pick up the pieces then. Maybe he complained about her cooking or something, the heartless bastard. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:36:27 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:di1d92$imd$1@news.spamcop.net... > But ohh, I have a chance with the dreamy Sandra Lee then. (Except, I'm > probably more of a Sandra Dee kind of guy, well, back in those days of > summer lovin' but before she skanked herself out and you better watch > out.) But oh yeah, I should be there to pick up the pieces then. Maybe > he complained about her cooking or something, the heartless bastard. I think she made promises with a corn dog that she just could not live up to...... From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 5 22:38:51 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:40:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message news:di1cs4$idd$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Speaking of Wallets.....guess what movie is finally being released!? >>http://www.wandg.com/ > > Bwahaha....Anti Pesto Swat team... I have to see this movie! And let the run on Stinking Bishop begin. Although they are probably no more prepared than Wensleydale were. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:29:43 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pickone) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4342982A.ED3571D4@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <434437B7.89467DC2@spamcop.net> Cat wrote: > > Kenneth Brody wrote: > > > > Well, I'm not a satanist, but isn't Satan, to them, the equivalent > > of G-d to you? If so, than "Satan" is simply another name for "G-d", > > and you should have no objections to saying it. After all, you have > > already said that Muslims shouldn't object to having to say "G-d" > > rather than "Allah", as it's just "a different name". > > > > What's with all this censoring of the word "God" especially when you > didn't censor "Allah" or "Satan"? It's not "censoring", at least not in the sense I think you mean. I do it because that's the way I was tought to do it. For more details, see Deuteronomy 12:3-4 and . -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:47:30 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:50:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:di1d22$iip$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > hübsches offensichtliches > > > mindestens ich habe nicht einen pointy Kopf Fart I in Ihrer allgemeinen Richtung From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 17:49:39 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Oct 5 16:50:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > > Aack, damn you, making me click on a banana recipe. Hehehehe..... From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Wed Oct 5 18:08:03 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Wed Oct 5 17:10:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: Message-ID: In article , "Porpoise" wrote: > Agreed. I *am* on your side, I'm just trying to find the "middle-ground" to > try to keep everyone happy...... :-) There is no middle ground. There can't be when the issue is constitutional rights. The Constitution clearly prohibits government endorsement of religion, for very good reasons. Either the country follows the Constitution or it welcomes chaos and oppression. The other side doesn't want to obey the law and can't change it, so they try end runs around it, or use societal or other pressure to make others toe their line, or simply ignore the law. None of that is acceptable behavior. -- D.F. Manno | dfm2a3l0t2@spymac.com The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression.--H.L. Mencken, "Minority Report" (1956) From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 18:07:14 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Wed Oct 5 17:25:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Post turtle References: <17865-4343407C-1502@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75-year old West Texas rancher, who caught his hand in the gate while driving the cattle through, the doctor struck up a conversation with the grizzled old guy. He asked what the rancher thought about another West Texan, George W. Bush, being in the White House. "Well, you know," the old boy said, "George is what we call a 'post turtle'." The doctor, being unfamiliar with the term, asked for clarification. "When you're driving down a country road," the rancher said, "and you come across a bobwire fence post with a turtle sitting on top of it, that's a 'post turtle'." Seeing utter incomprehension in the doctor's eyes, the old man continued. "You know he didn't get there by himself. He don't belong there. He don't know what to do while he's up there. And the best thing to do is just to help the dumb bastard get down." From bcs1 at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 19:06:42 2005 From: bcs1 at spamcop.net (Bcs1) Date: Wed Oct 5 18:00:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: waht on ertah deos tihs maen? References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E471EEA2E20spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Bcs1" wrote in news:dhou48$uf7$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> actually it is real, in fact most people don't read EACH letter, they >> only >> need the first and the last letter to be correct in order to know what >> the word is >> and it was an English research study that found this out...I've used >> the >> text from that study in several of my room topics for years > > wehhter it's rael or not, i've gowrn wraey llatey of eyvrehtnig bneig > pckied arapt! > > the pehonemonn is porblaby waht mekas it so dfficlut to poorf raed a > dcumonet arucctaley LOL i aerge blil From bcs1 at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 19:09:35 2005 From: bcs1 at spamcop.net (Bcs1) Date: Wed Oct 5 18:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "Frog Prince" wrote in message news:dhotd5$u5c$3@news.spamcop.net... > > I would give some credence to the assertion that this has partisan > motivation except that Earl has a reputation (well earned) for going after > Democrats with the same zeal. > > oh yeah I don't doubt that a bit to be honest, and that host was talking about that too, seems he's done this to some dems too ( the GJ shopping).... anyway I dunno, just thought I'd share that with ya'll Bill From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 19:09:41 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Wed Oct 5 18:10:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Priceless!!! References: Message-ID: http://www.wimp.com/blowjob/ From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 19:19:45 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Wed Oct 5 18:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: GWB without Delay References: <1127926278.936042.190930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: "Bcs1" | > | > I would give some credence to the assertion that this has partisan | > motivation except that Earl has a reputation (well earned) for going after | > Democrats with the same zeal. | > | > | oh yeah I don't doubt that a bit to be honest, and that host was talking | about that too, seems he's done this to some dems too ( the GJ shopping).... | | anyway I dunno, just thought I'd share that with ya'll I was talking to a lawyer friend who practices criminal law in Austin. She said that the reindictment was to address some technicality in the process. Her assessment is this is a strong case and Delay and friends are in for a hard ride. Also there was an interview with someone who was on the GJ and the consensus was that Earle did his job and they did theirs. From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Oct 5 17:44:58 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Oct 5 19:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Real Estate...need a bit of advice. Message-ID: My search area for finding a home has increased severalfold. I just discovered that the west side of the Sierras is exactly what I'm looking for. Trouble is, there are countless communities in that area. Right now I'm calling every single agent I can find and asking what they have available. There has to be a better way. I've been told that I can "hire" a real estate agent to do all the searching for me. How would I go about doing this? Or else, how would I go about finding a home without calling every single real estate agent between Burbank and Sacramento? From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 21:25:24 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Heidi) Date: Wed Oct 5 20:30:21 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Real Estate...need a bit of advice. References: Message-ID: "Borgholio" wrote in message news:di1oh6$mv4$1@news.spamcop.net... > My search area for finding a home has increased severalfold. I just > discovered that the west side of the Sierras is exactly what I'm looking > for. Trouble is, there are countless communities in that area. Right now > I'm calling every single agent I can find and asking what they have > available. There has to be a better way. I've been told that I can "hire" > a real estate agent to do all the searching for me. How would I go about > doing this? Or else, how would I go about finding a home without calling > every single real estate agent between Burbank and Sacramento? Look for a multiple listing service that can search by state or town: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=california+mls From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Oct 5 18:29:16 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Oct 5 20:30:34 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Real Estate...need a bit of advice. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Heidi wrote: > "Borgholio" wrote in message > news:di1oh6$mv4$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>My search area for finding a home has increased severalfold. I just >>discovered that the west side of the Sierras is exactly what I'm looking >>for. Trouble is, there are countless communities in that area. Right now >>I'm calling every single agent I can find and asking what they have >>available. There has to be a better way. I've been told that I can > > "hire" > >>a real estate agent to do all the searching for me. How would I go about >>doing this? Or else, how would I go about finding a home without calling >>every single real estate agent between Burbank and Sacramento? > > > Look for a multiple listing service that can search by state or town: > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=california+mls > > Yeah I use Realtor.com's MLS, but I know that many homes aren't listed with the MLS, and it's finding those that I'm having trouble with. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 21:30:06 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Heidi) Date: Wed Oct 5 20:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:di1d92$imd$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Aack, damn you, making me click on a banana recipe. Banana pudding > bites? Strangely enough, that doesn't seem like such a wacky recipe though. It was a fortuitous find....... :) From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 21:34:08 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Wed Oct 5 20:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Real Estate...need a bit of advice. References: Message-ID: "Borgholio" wrote in message news:di1oh6$mv4$1@news.spamcop.net... | My search area for finding a home has increased several. I just | discovered that the west side of the Sierras is exactly what I'm looking | for. Trouble is, there are countless communities in that area. Right now | I'm calling every single agent I can find and asking what they have | available. There has to be a better way. I've been told that I can "hire" | a real estate agent to do all the searching for me. How would I go about | doing this? Or else, how would I go about finding a home without calling | every single real estate agent between Burbank and Sacramento? It's called a buyer's agent and that's a wise move. The cost is usually paid by the seller through the sellers agent. I've seen cases were a buyer's agent was able to turn a deal that was not on the market and had no plans to sell. Look into a book called Places Rated Almanac. I think it's now on line. Also contact the Chamber of commerce in each city/town you're considering have then send you local data. Sub to the local papers. If you have time go to some of the local events. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 21:48:29 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Heidi) Date: Wed Oct 5 20:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:di1e53$j72$1@news.spamcop.net... > Fart I in Ihrer allgemeinen Richtung schließen Sie Ihr Gesicht, Sie snotty gerochener Haufen von Papageiendroppings! From bait-423c86b2-42ff9001 at good.julianhaight.com Wed Oct 5 18:55:02 2005 From: bait-423c86b2-42ff9001 at good.julianhaight.com (Chris F. Willoughby) Date: Wed Oct 5 20:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Real Estate...need a bit of advice. References: Message-ID: MLS is your friend ;-) Chris "Borgholio" wrote in message news:di1oh6$mv4$1@news.spamcop.net... > My search area for finding a home has increased severalfold. I just > discovered that the west side of the Sierras is exactly what I'm looking > for. Trouble is, there are countless communities in that area. Right now > I'm calling every single agent I can find and asking what they have > available. There has to be a better way. I've been told that I can "hire" > a real estate agent to do all the searching for me. How would I go about > doing this? Or else, how would I go about finding a home without calling > every single real estate agent between Burbank and Sacramento? From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Oct 5 21:56:51 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Heidi) Date: Wed Oct 5 21:00:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] from Moveon.org-Miers info Message-ID: http://www.moveon.org/r?r=952&id=6085-6266401-rp.qN5cwWK9CRaS8y0pljA&t=2 Immediately after Miers' nomination, MoveOn members stepped up to try to fill the information void. In the last 48- hours we've collected nearly 5,000 facts about Harriet Miers' record- and we're working to get this information into the hands of the media and our partner organizations. But it's remarkable how, even after collecting nearly everything that's publicly available, Miers' position on major constitutional questions and her qualifications to be a judge are still almost completely unknown. What is clear is the deep personal and professional connection shared by Harriet Miers and George W. Bush. Here's what some members have uncovered about their long relationship: >From David, of Howell, MI: When Miers was Bush's appointee to head the Texas State Lottery Commission, the lottery was accused by a former director of awarding multi-million dollar no-bid contracts to a technology firm represented by former Lieutenant Governor Ben Barnes. Barnes has since said he helped Bush escape active duty in Vietnam, and the lottery director alleged that Barnes demanded, (and under Miers received) the lucrative public contracts to keep quiet about Bush's military service.6 >From Paula, of San Mateo, CA As Governor, Bush signed a law blocking Texas consumers from collecting a $6 billion dollar judgment against car dealers for predatory lending and keeping secret kickbacks. The law firm Miers headed represented the auto dealers.7 >From Nancy of Austin, TX Miers was hired as legal counsel on both Bush's gubanatorial campaigns. Among other things, her research was used to persuade a local judge to excuse then Governor Bush from jury duty, a civic task that would have forced him to disclose his 1976 arrest for drunken driving in Maine. He was then able to keep his arrest secret until late in the 2000 presidential campaign.8 >From Stephen of Birmingham, AL: Miers's personal friendship and allegiance to Bush has been cited for years in connection with her promotions, including to her highest post of White House Counsel.9 From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Oct 5 19:00:34 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Oct 5 21:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Real Estate...need a bit of advice. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Chris F. Willoughby MLS is your friend ;-) > > Chris > > "Borgholio" wrote in message news:di1oh6$mv4$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>My search area for finding a home has increased severalfold. I just >>discovered that the west side of the Sierras is exactly what I'm looking >>for. Trouble is, there are countless communities in that area. Right now >>I'm calling every single agent I can find and asking what they have >>available. There has to be a better way. I've been told that I can "hire" >>a real estate agent to do all the searching for me. How would I go about >>doing this? Or else, how would I go about finding a home without calling >>every single real estate agent between Burbank and Sacramento? Yeah but MLS doesn't cover the stuff "sold by owner" that may be more affordable. :) From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Thu Oct 6 09:32:15 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Thu Oct 6 03:35:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] I guess they won't always have Paris Message-ID: Can you believe it? I'm agog, the engagement of Paris and man Paris has broken up. Now I've slowly accepted the breakup of Drew Barrymore and Tom Green, but this one has really shaken my faith in love and marriage. From skiwi at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 08:33:57 2005 From: skiwi at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Thu Oct 6 10:35:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: I guess they won't always have Paris In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > Can you believe it? I'm agog, the engagement of Paris and man Paris has > broken up. Now I've slowly accepted the breakup of Drew Barrymore and > Tom Green, but this one has really shaken my faith in love and marriage. I feel your pain... Don't forget Renne Z. & Kenny (G?), and Jessica & Nick, and... But Paris H. has found another Greek tycoon's son, so there is SOME good news... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 11:51:07 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 10:55:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: I guess they won't always have Paris References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:di2ju0$7dr$1@news.spamcop.net... > Can you believe it? I'm agog, the engagement of Paris and man Paris has > broken up. Now I've slowly accepted the breakup of Drew Barrymore and > Tom Green, but this one has really shaken my faith in love and marriage. But then you know, there's Demi and Ashton, 14 years in age makes no difference, and you know if she's not already pregnant she will be by the end of the year, they want to "grow" their family...... From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 6 17:38:09 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Thu Oct 6 11:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E755FF015B3spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhulgs$l0$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> Still pissed us off -- it had taken several months of negotiations for >> the rest of us to decide on a common music channel! >> > > LOL. That's what headphones are for. WOT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU, I'VE GOT MY HEADPHONES ON! ;-) From porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 6 17:50:23 2005 From: porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk (Porpoise) Date: Thu Oct 6 11:55:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E7591A615spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Porpoise" wrote in news:dhuo41$2ko$1 > @news.spamcop.net: > > >> I've not come across any info to show that it's any denser than human >> muscle...... >> > > their muscle to bodyfat ratio means they're much less buouyant than we are That kinda makes sense, but can Arnie not swim? ;-) From devnull at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 13:01:37 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Thu Oct 6 12:05:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" | | > Asking that question could get un 'unhired' quick as there are | > concerns on both sides of that issue. | > | | You could be right. BUT, most likely only at a place that DID do the prayer | thing so it'd be ok! Not necessarily. Simply stating the question would raise flags. Some businesses might be concerned that they would be hiring a bible thumper who would through evangelizing disrupt the day to day business. I once interview for a job dealing with Saudi Aramco. Each interviewee as quietly taken aside and casually asked about a) their religious faith and if no Islamic cautioned not to bring any other faith up at any point in the interview and if hired do NOT have a bible or text of any other faith in your position when on company property. It was clear that the concern was not with individual faith (they could care less) but for the possibility that the company would lose their contracts with Aramco. The entire process was surreal in that most companies would simple have a no religious text/context rule but they could not have a rule against Muslim text and stay on the right side of the Saudi's. From devnull at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 13:04:24 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Thu Oct 6 12:05:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" | | > If your termination letter said you were being fired for being an | > atheist or agnostic, yes, a suit would go, but employers are more | > often that not just letting folks go with "Your services are no longer | > needed". That could be anything from an economic downturn to dislike | > of your tie. | | | Why was 'at will' thought up and who thought it would be a good idea? | Didn't anyone get to vote on it? Why would the public support such a thing? | It treats people like machine parts instead of human beings with lives and | families. Most places it was sold as a 'right to work' issue meaning that people could not be compelled to join a union when in fact the laws were drafted to limit workers rights and recourse. From borgholio at storymind.com Thu Oct 6 10:31:59 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Thu Oct 6 12:35:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Gonna kill my dad... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Borgholio wrote in news:dhupv8$vuc$5 > @news.spamcop.net: > > >>He just got a 42" Plasma TV. Lousy stinking sonofa.... >> > > > What make? Some chinese brand. Great reviews, though. From devnull at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 14:03:51 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Thu Oct 6 13:10:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Priceless!!! References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" < | | > http://www.wimp.com/blowjob/ | | I'm surprised they haven't been sued by MasterCard! On what grounds? Parody is clearly protected under fair use. OTOH if I were MasterCard I'd do all I could to quietly encourage them. From devnull at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 14:04:27 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Thu Oct 6 13:10:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Post turtle References: <17865-4343407C-1502@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" | | > Seeing utter incomprehension in the doctor's eyes, the old man | > continued. "You know he didn't get there by himself. He don't belong | > there. He don't know what to do while he's up there. And the best | > thing to do is just to help the dumb bastard get down." | > | | LOL, I like it! It's old but still funny From devnull at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 14:08:24 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Thu Oct 6 13:15:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: has anyone tried sparkling red wine? References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" | > Are they still making Ripple? Found a big market down under, eh? | > | | What's Ripple? Last I heard about $2 / gallon From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 14:52:56 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 13:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: To pray or not to pray......... (was Re: Defenders of "under god" are .) References: <4342C80C.15EEFF25@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E75987C4244spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > "Spamvireslayer" wrote in > news:dhupmr$3n8$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > >> > So how's the weather up there in NH? ;) > >> > >> Just fine at the moment, subject to change, as always.... > > > > Odd...it's the same here....... > > > > have you lost your marbles? LOL...no, I was just having a little joke....UNH is not too far away... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 15:12:17 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 14:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] How long is he going to beat this dead horse? Message-ID: http://tinyurl.com/9j53a President George W. Bush on Thursday rejected critics of the Iraq war who demand a U.S. pullout and cast the conflict as necessary to prevent Islamic militants from gaining a foothold for a sweeping empire. "We will never back down, never give in and never accept anything less than complete victory," Bush said in a speech on Washington's war on terrorism. Bush used new and more specific language in characterizing the opponents as part of an Islamic radical movement "with a clear and coherent ideology" and territorial ambitions, rather than dismissing them as the terrorist "evildoers" of his early speeches on the issue. Democrats did not hear what they wanted from Bush. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said Bush failed to outline a strategy for achieving military, political and economic success in Iraq. "Instead, the president continued to falsely assert there is a link between the war in Iraq and the tragedy of September 11th, a link that did not and does not exist," he said. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 15:12:59 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 14:15:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Bacon References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E76122FBE17spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > LOL... now she tells me... after I set light to the balcony the other day > heheheheh What did you try to do, grill it? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 15:34:18 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 14:40:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: has anyone tried sparkling red wine? References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E758F42DC32spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > Yes I did. We drank a bottle of it on Tuesday night. Slept very well that > night LOL. It doesn't tell you what the grape is and the name on the bottle > is Enrico Mercuri Estates (their website seems to be dead), based in > Adelaide. It's imported by Kiwi Distributing of Gardena, CA. I guess I > could call them and ask them where else I might find it. Here's someone carrying another of their wines: http://www.joshuatreeimports.com/Mango.aspx Did you see the cache? http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:BM29_mVb_VYJ:mercuriestates.com/AboutUs.htm+%22Enrico+Mercuri+Estates%22+&hl=en From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 15:43:55 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 14:45:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E75EDECA980spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > actually that's incorrect.. it is learned as far as actually being able to > survive is concerned... certainly a baby can move around underwater but > they can't make it to the surface and they will drown if you don't fish > them out They have baby swimming classes where they teach them to hold their breaths - fascinating how unafraid they are! http://www.babyswimming.com/whatlearn.htm http://www.babyswimming.co.uk/what.html Babies are born with the 'diving reflex', which means that when their heads are fully submerged they breath hold. This ability is intrinsic to our teaching program. Babies lose the diving reflex somewhere between 12 and 18 months. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 15:50:43 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 14:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: I guess they won't always have Paris References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E764B83F97Bspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > > Can you believe it? I'm agog, the engagement of Paris and man Paris has > > broken up. Now I've slowly accepted the breakup of Drew Barrymore and > > Tom Green, but this one has really shaken my faith in love and marriage. > > > > What about Nick and Jessica? Can THAT be possible? And Tom and Katie are > having a sprog!? Save me from this insanity! If I were Nick and Jessica I would sue every last one of the tabloids for printing such blatantly false things, jesus, the media is pathetic in this country. Even my local news station has started quoting things from the National Enquirer, which I sent them a snarky email about. Not enough LEGIT news that they have to stoop to that level of hearsay gossip? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 15:51:22 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 14:55:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E762DF332A0spamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > > I have a nasty feeling it's going to be a disappointment. Why would you say that? How could one be disappointed in Gromit? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 15:51:58 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 14:55:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433C2B19.EEDB82AE@spamcop.net> <434190B1.A79071AA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Sylvesterthekat" wrote in message news:Xns96E755D9DA1EEspamalyzerluzernet@216.154.195.61... > > Hey! You said the same thing yourself with 'mare'! I see they're coming > here for a visit next month. Should be interesting. Are they making the Lincoln bedroom into a stall? From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 17:23:40 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Oct 6 16:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] God told him to do it.... Message-ID: http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml This press release is embargoed until 2230 hours on Thursday 6 October. Before that time it is only available through the link which you have been sent. President George W. Bush told Palestinian ministers that God had told him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq - and create a Palestinian State, a new BBC series reveals. In Elusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs, a major three-part series on BBC TWO (at 9.00pm on Monday 10, Monday 17 and Monday 24 October), Abu Mazen, Palestinian Prime Minister, and Nabil Shaath, his Foreign Minister, describe their first meeting with President Bush in June 2003. Nabil Shaath says: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq ." And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, "Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East." And by God I'm gonna do it.'" Abu Mazen was at the same meeting and recounts how President Bush told him: "I have a moral and religious obligation. So I will get you a Palestinian state." From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 17:25:56 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Oct 6 16:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Cold weather, time for soup! References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:di1cs4$idd$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > > Speaking of Wallets.....guess what movie is finally being released!? > > http://www.wandg.com/ > > > > > I have a nasty feeling it's going to be a disappointment. 5 years in the making, I doubt it. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 17:28:01 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Oct 6 16:30:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: About Ronnie References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:di18ec$fdb$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > >> > The Two Ronnies, Open All Hours, and Porridge. Some of my > >> > favourite programmes from my childhood. > >> > >> For some reason that's not made it over here, maybe it will replace > >> Benny Hill eventually.... > > > > They predated Benny, didn't they? In any case, they were a hell of > > lot more clever (I know, not hard to do). > > > > > > > > You've seen them?! Course I have! Don't recall on what station though, maybe comedy clip shows? There's one famous skit in particular they were known for, but it's subject escapes me at the moment. Ah, I think they were in that Monty Python movie "Live at the Hollywood Bowl"? From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 17:43:39 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Oct 6 16:45:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: has anyone tried sparkling red wine? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Don Wannit wrote in > news:dhvrn6$lio$2@news.spamcop.net: > > > > Are they still making Ripple? Found a big market down under, eh? > > > > What's Ripple? Sheesh, S-kat, that's two jokes that flew right over your head --- mine and Don's! Google Ripple and Bartles and Jaymes already, will ya? Get with the program! ;-) From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 18:01:18 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Oct 6 17:05:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: is he grieving... or something else? References: Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > JohnL wrote in > news:Xns96E66AB2AC49Binnewsgrouponly@216.154.195.61: > > >> Leading of course, to the question "what do you call a man with no > >> arms and no legs floating in the surf?" ;-) > > > > "Bob" > > > > LOL You never heard that one? Geez, that joke is older than......JohnL! ;-) From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Thu Oct 6 18:03:29 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Thu Oct 6 17:05:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In article , Sylvesterthekat wrote: > Why was 'at will' thought up and who thought it would be a good idea? > Didn't anyone get to vote on it? Why would the public support such a thing? > It treats people like machine parts instead of human beings with lives and > families. The idea behind it was that in the absence of a contract an employee could not bar you from quitting a job. You were free to leave a job at will. Likewise you could not require an employer to hire you. It was meant to equalize things on both sides. However, over the years and through various court decisions (and as mentioned elsewhere, so-called "right-to-work" laws), employment at will gives the employer far more protection than the employee. -- D.F. Manno | dfm2a3l0t2@spymac.com The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression.--H.L. Mencken, "Minority Report" (1956) From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 18:05:17 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Oct 6 17:10:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <1126724022.421219.169680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433D3FD3.97F3CE62@spamcop.net> <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Sylvesterthekat wrote: > "indigo" wrote in > news:dhulgs$l0$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Still pissed us off -- it had taken several months of negotiations > > for the rest of us to decide on a common music channel! > > > > LOL. That's what headphones are for. This was not "sit in front of a computer" type work. It was fabrication work in a machine shop, basically. Hate to get headphone cords caught in a lathe...... From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Oct 6 18:06:42 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Oct 6 17:10:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: Defenders of "under god" are ... mislead or misleading (pick one) References: <4341500F.484E4BAC@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Loafman wrote: > To most companies, people are resources, nothing more. They are > replaceable, interchangeable, parts that get things done. > The PC word for that is "matrixed organization" ;-) From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Thu Oct 6 18:08:06 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Thu Oct 6 17:10:19 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Social] Re: How long is he going to beat this dead horse? References: Message-ID