In the post below that begins "Slammer" some of us have requested that you delete it post haste. Thank you so much.

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), October 29, 1999

Answers

GOD's first sheep--what arrogance!Elaine lets start by limiting freedom of speech and go a little further and delete all posts that don't reflect your personal spiritual understandings. Anyone who signs God's first sheep must be a prophet of our times---the first thing to die in religious fanatism is one's sense of humor,will pray for a return of yours.

-- GOD Almighty (knockingonheavensdoor@infidel.com), October 29, 1999.

The spiritual arrogance of calling oneself Gods1sheep speaks volumes. Getting into a discussion with one draped with such spiritual arrogance is an utter waste of time. You might as well try to explain algebra to to a turnip.

-- boomboom (godhas@lotsasheep.nl), October 29, 1999.

God almighty,

Lord I come humbly before you on behalf of your great daughter Elaine.

She is a fine example of citizenship and mutual respect in this community. Your daughter Elaine Lord is very sensitive to disrespectful and obnoxious individuals that attempt to take a good thing and stink it up.

Therefore Lord I beseech you to send your mighty cheribim and seraphim to her defense. Protect her Lord from all harm!!

May she rest in your mighty arms and be vindicated for her concern about her cherished community.

-- D.B. (dciinc@aol.com), October 29, 1999.

No you are wrong about that, a turnip is way too smart to use AOL.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

GOD almighty and boom boom,

Cutting and pasting subgenius rants is disruptive. If you can explain how the Subgenius theater of the absurd pertains to Y2k, such a post might be welcomed here, no matter how worthless an exercize that might be. But that's not what Elaine was objecting to.

If you want to crash in and insult people and fling your own feces randomly, and then directly attack people's religious attitudes and opinions, without bothering to address, much less further, the purpose of this forum, don't expect us to treat you like anything but the petulant children that you are.

Freedom of speech and expression is one thing. Whipping it out wherever and whenever you feel like it and urinating on anything and anyone you feel like urinating on puts you in the animal realm, and is not "freedom." If you were to examine yourself more closely, you would find that the sensation you associate with freedom is in fact compulsion. You HAVE to be disruptive and vicious. You have no choice.

Sysop, please delete this, and the "Slammer" thread. And any subsequent forum-clogging threads that resemble them.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 29, 1999.

LOL!

You got to love America.

As far as this TB2000 place goes... I think it can take a lesson from Rodney Dangerfield... it's gets no respect. But then it don't deserve any either!

-- Not that touchy "@" person (_@_._@_._._._), October 29, 1999.

Elaine,

Pay them no mind. They don't know any better.

The world is filled with all kinds of things that the faithful find abhorrent. You will not change any of it.

Just ignore their noise, focus on those you can sharpen iron with, and beware of throwing pearls before the swine, as they hastily trample it underfoot.

It's a painful lesson I've had to learn firsthand.

Time is too short to be engaged with idiots bent on disruption and ridicule.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), October 29, 1999.

Yeah, pretending you are eating the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is not the least bit abhorrant to anyone on the entire planet.

(Some cultures would consider cannabilism taboo)

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

Come to think of it, writing a gruesome story about Jimmy Bagga Donuts (INVAR knows what I mean) might not go over very well with God. Who knows...

-- (_@_._._.@._.@), October 29, 1999.

I am not a christian. But I'm alarmed at the level and intensity of hatred toward it. I interests me. Many people who would never spout their hatred directly at believers - otherwise normal, repressed liberal folks- have, once they loosened up, expressed similar feelings. It's like getting a closet racist to open up and start talking about blacks and jews - it just spills out like bile. And usually they don't know much about what they hate so intensly; they resent having to know anything about what they're trying to destroy; they just want it gone, at all costs.

I have no doubt that if and when Christianity has been sufficiently marginalized, we will see violent persecution; the western tradition of individual liberty that's been growing since the Magna Carta will be deemed the pathology of "dead white males." And as with "white males," there will be diversity, but some will be more diverse than others. The world will say: "it's your turn to suffer."

Christians, don't think your faith has any place in their rainbow of diversity. You are THE ENEMY. You will be rounded up like Falun Gong, accused of crimes against the state. Emergency anti-terrorist legislation will be tailored to do away with you. I give it ten years, to get the mainstream churches and their followers watered down sufficiently, and separated from the "extremists." As with China, no one in a "non-approved" church will be safe. The FBI has already branded you as a "threat," if you take Revelations seriously; so where else could we possibly be headed?

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 29, 1999.

Perhaps if "Christians" would stop trying to force non-Christian kids to pray to their god in public schools, people would show more tolerance towards their religion.

Liberty runs both ways, Liberty.

-- (notLiberty@thank.you), October 29, 1999.

Moderators.

While you are in the deleting mood, how bout ridding this forum from the thought challenged religious fanatics and right wing conspiracy nutsos. That might include, but not be restricted to, Elaine Seavey, Liberty, and of course Invar. Elaine, you really should listen to your doctor.

-- Had (it@with.freaks), October 29, 1999.

--,

How would you know?

Ever read the Old Testament?

Pretty gruesome stuff, and it HAPPENED.

I'd say the book of Lamentations has the JBD saga beat by a light-year or two.

But then again, those that have warned ancient kingdoms of impending Judgement and calamity have always been met with ridicule and even death.

I have noticed man has not changed a wit in almost 6,000 years of recorded history.

There's nothing new under the sun.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), October 29, 1999.

Elaine, if you dont like the free wheeling, body-slam style of TB2000 then why dont you go on over to www.michaelhyatt.com

Over there you must follow the doomer mantra. ANYONE who even dares to question anything is silenced by the almighty "Dorrit".

And yes, GODS #1 SHEEP is arrogant, who do you think you are.

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), October 29, 1999.

>trying to force non-Christian kids to pray to their god in public schools

This is what you call posting the 10 Commandments? Nowhere is any school trying to preach to kids. A "moment of silence" for the spiritual activity of one's choice has been banned. Completely voluntary and closed-door bible study clubs cannot meet on campus after school hours, as can other clubs. Kids read from "multicultural" readers containing sacred myths of other cultures, including the Hindu "Mahabarata," African creation myths, the Laws of Hammurabi, etc., (and I think this is fine), but all evidence of the EXISTENCE of Judeo-Christianity (necessary to understanding U.S. history, if for no other reason) is to be scoured from schools? "Non-establishment of religion" means "eliminate only Christianity"?! The parents of the children killed at Columbine were invited to create some tiles for a memorial wall; a few contained references to "heaven" and one contained a small christian cross, less than an inch high - they were rejected and the wall project was cancelled because of this "religious content." Children all over America have had their art class projects removed from display because they contained religious elements: crosses, pictures of churches, pictures of Jesus... Their freedom of expression is being squelched; they are being TAUGHT BY THE STATE, IN A COMPULSORY ENVIRONMENT, NOT TO BE CHRISTIANS. Christianity is not threatening you or persecuting you. Christians are not the "Crusaders." Christians are the "heretics." THEY are the ones being gassed and burned to a crisp in their churches with their children clinging to them, because the government, and all who parrot the government's lies, have decided they are "whackos."

So spare me your demonization of those big, bad Christians. Your problems with authority are better directed at the REAL authority at work here, rather than someone elses imaginary one.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 29, 1999.

It appears to me the "Y2K Christians" are heck bent on arriving at the Mount of Olives with their fists full of cash and gold coins to wait "for Jesus."

Go figure.

-- Truth (Pain@Hellawaits.com), October 29, 1999.

hamster,

This forum does not have a "freewheeling, body-slam style." Maybe YOU *want to* have such a style...

Most on this forum are courteous. They are concerned and caring people, who stick (more or less) to the topic at hand, and refrain from spitting on eachother or twisting the knife. They are not venting; they are trying to communicate, and they realize that this requires a modicum of common decency from everybody.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 29, 1999.

Thank all of you decent people for your comments.

It is interesting to note that those who wish to tar others read into even their e-mail names just what they wish to assume that person had in mind. It is also interesting to find out that the person accused of thinking she is Gods First or Gods Best or Gods Special sheep took that name for JUST THE OPPOSITE REASON>

I replied two days ago to one of these creeps the following on the thread about Poland:

"And no, you are wrong again when YOU put words into my mouth and say that YOU imagine I think I am God's #1 sheep. I have NO #1 in there. If you know about suggested e-mail addys, you know they suggest a number in there. When I put the numeral 1 in there it didn't mean that I was #1. In fact, I intended JUST THE OPPOSITE, as my many friends and family will tell you: I was that one lost sheep going the wrong way when the Good Shepherd found me and brought me to where the other 99 were doing what they were supposed to be doing."

That is a humbling admission, not a proud boast!

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), October 29, 1999.

Like I said, a lot of antichrist wannabes go off like a bomb on Christianity and Christians, without stopping to learn more about what they're trying to tear down. There's some great poetry in the Bible, some great stories, and wisdom both practical and profound. I'm not a believer, but I can appreciate this, and understand that if I want to understand my culture's history, I must understand something of christianity.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 29, 1999.

Liberty, most of the people making noise are not trolls. Sure we got them and they post pointless crap or attack for no reason, but this place gets very testy and argumentative, as it should be. I would hate it to end up like Michael Hyatts where you cant argue about anything. Here if someone posts an idiotic statement you get hammered, which is well deserved. I dont condone idiots, and we know then when we see them, but I do support people knocking down the know-it-alls when they are wrong or debunking the true-doomers when they deserve it.

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), October 29, 1999.

Liberty, In all due respect, attempting an intelligent conversation with people who are not protesting a post like this:

"Elaine -- [actually, that was worthy of deletion. Sysop #2]"

is, at best, a serious waste of time. It's a sad day if the sysops don't find this worthy of deletion.

-- (RUOK@yesiam.com), October 29, 1999.

Hey there #1 Sheep. Wazzat you we saw in the back room with Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggert, couple of fine upstanding Christian leaders.

-- get (a@grip.fool), October 29, 1999.

Here again, on another thread, Elaine Seavey is proving to the forum members that she is nothing but a "trouble maker". God Elaine, we've got a little over 60 days left and all you can think of is causing trouble.

-- say it (say it @as.itis), October 29, 1999.

This is what you call posting the 10 Commandments?

I never said anything about the 10 Commandments

Nowhere is any school trying to preach to kids.

Wrong again. From an article in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel...

Wayne and Sue Willis were the only Jewish family they knew of in Troy, Ala., but their religion didn't seem to matter until Sue's oldest son refused to participate in a "Happy Birthday Jesus" party at his public elementary school.

That's when things started to get ugly, they said.

The issue went to court, and the Willis' neighbors began to shun them. Some of the more demonstrative ones spit on them. They concluded that they had to leave.

Looking for a fresh start, the Willises moved their family here two weeks ago in search of a respite from religious intolerance.

"After 7 1/2 years of hatred, it's surprising and refreshing here. Wisconsin has a reputation for being a very friendly and wholesome place," Wayne Willis said Tuesday at a community reception for his family at Union Congregational Church.

"We all recognize the plight you've been through," Mayor Paul Jadin said while addressing the reception. "Coming here at the coldest time of the year, I think you'll find Green Bay is a very warm community."

The family's plight made national news. Last year, Wayne and Sue Willis, aided by the American Civil Liberties Union, filed suit in federal court in Alabama against the Pike County Public School District, alleging the schools violated their children's religious freedom and persecuted them for being Jewish.

They claimed in their suit that teachers and staff not only led students in religious services but also tried to convert their children to Christianity.

Sue Willis' children from her first marriage, Paul Herring, 16, David Herring, 14, and Sarah Herring, 12 1/2, bore the brunt of the persecution over their Jewish faith, said the Willises, who also have a daughter, Rachel, 7.

Paul was sent to the school office to be disciplined for disrupting class and was ordered to write an essay on "Why Jesus Loves Me." When David did not bow his head during a school prayer, a teacher reached over and lowered it for him, the family said.

Christianity is not threatening you or persecuting you.

It sure persecuted THEM.

So spare me your demonization of those big, bad Christians.

Spare me your whining for those poor unfortunate Christians.

Your problems with authority are better directed at the REAL authority at work here, rather than someone elses imaginary one.

There's nothing imaginary about what happened to them. But since that doesn't fit into your narrow little view, I'm sure you'd rather just deny anything like that can happen in your world. Maybe you need to open your eyes.

-- (notliberty@thank.you), October 29, 1999.

Good grief, I can hardly believe this whole thread.

Thank you, Liberty.

Elaine, those of us who are Christians always knew who God's one sheep meant - "There were ninety and nine that safely lay, all sheltered in the fold, But one was out on the hills away ---" Bless you, dear lady. I was a one sheep, too.

-- Scat (sgcatique@webtv.net), October 29, 1999.

What those teachers ALLEGEDLY did was in violation of the Constitution, as it would represent a clear "establishment of religion." The parents have a fat lawsuit on their hands, and I wish them well. We had a similar case in the Northwest where a State Trooper detained a preganant woman and her boyfriend on their way to an abortion clinic, and made them follow him to a christian counseling center where they attempted to convince the woman to keep the baby. That officer was sued and lost, and I celebrate that victory for individual liberty.

But isolated incidents like this are not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about Constitutional law barring the establishment of religion, as currently interpreted. It prevents christians from practicing or expressing their religious THOUGHTS and OPINIONS in an environment in which they are compelled by the State to attend. I invite you to consider the distinction that I've just made. I'm now going to restate it, because this is a hot topic, and it's easy to give or take offense without meaning to, which obscures reason. Again, I'm not talking about isolated breaches of the law which result in persecution on the basis of religion. I'm talking about the law as it is interpreted, to SELECTIVELY prohibit religious expression ON THE PART OF STUDENTS, not on the part of teachers; the latter is a clear violation of the establishment clause. When a kid can't pray - is actually halted and prohibited from making a simple prayer over his cafeteria slop - then things have become distorted. When kids' art, in an art class, contains religious themes, and that artwork is censored because of those themes, things have become very distorted. These are not isolated incidents. They are matters of law, and national policy. They are happening everywhere, much like the confiscations and suspensions for bringing nailfiles and butter knives to school are happening everywhere as a result of policy making on a national level.

So do you see where I'm coming from? Your example is horrific: teachers, as representatives of the state, are telling people what and what not to think and believe, in an environment in which they are compelled by law to attend. My example is horrific for the same reason: teachers, as representatives of the state, are telling people what and what not to think and believe, in an environment in which they are compelled by law to attend.

Suprise: we agree completely.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 29, 1999.

By their fruits, ye shall know them.

-- Wilferd (WilferdW@aol.com), October 29, 1999.

blah blah god blah blah blah ...
Yards and yards of brain-dead middle eastern monotheistic BS.

-- D E F (eattherich@mailcity.com), October 29, 1999.

>blah blah god blah blah blah ... Yards and yards of brain-dead middle eastern monotheistic BS.

Your mind is closed, and you condemn what you don't understand. Why is your closed-mindedness and condemnation different from that of a religious fanatic? Aren't you two of a kind?

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 29, 1999.

If Christians were not such frickin moral busybodies and such true believers, it is possible they might find a little more willingness of people to listen to some of the political views.

But most people rightly believe that if the bible-thumpers are so wrong on the RELATIVELY more easy to understand areas like love, sex, drugs, homosexuality, they are probably wrong on the economics and politics, also.

Now, for the record, I am not a fag or a speed freak, etc., but I'M WILLING TO MIND MY OWN FRICKIN' BUSINESS and not put people in jail (or burn them at the stake, or rip their guts out ...) which the bible thumpers are not -- in the present as well as demonstrably in the past. That's why you are hated. Deal with it.

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 30, 1999.

A,

Beware of generalizations, which your post is. Not all Christians are what you speak of. It's easy to want to lump all the people under the same lable, but it's not logical or right. Yes, there are more than a few Christians out there who don't follow a word of the Bible, but there are some who do.

Remember, the greatest laws Jesus gave are: "Honor thy God above all others." and "Do unto others as you would have done unto you.", meaning, respect God above anything earthly and treat others as you'd like to be treated.

Keep this in mind in your daily actions and thoughts. You'll find that you'll soon find like people. You can set a good example by your actions for those you dislike. "Lighting a candle" instead of "cursing the darkness" will get you more mileage in the long run.

For those who love evil, then there is nothing you can do about it except pray for them. Lead your own life towards goodness and God and try to be content - it's the only way you will have peace in your life.

-- Deb (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), October 30, 1999.

Elaine, Your posts show courtesy and class.

Liberty...Have I told you lately that I love you? :0)

To the Christian Haters...It isn't really Christians you hate, but Christ. You hate the Light. Read the New Testament, find out who hated Jesus the most, and you will see that it was self-righteous, arrogant, hypocritical and judgemental people. You are the accusations that you spew out.

"If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, 'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also. But all these things they will do to you for My name's sake, because they do not know Him who sent Me. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. He who hates Me hates My Father also. If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father. But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, 'They hated Me without a cause.' " ~ Jesus John 15:18-25

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), October 30, 1999.

Deb, Mumsie, Elaine -- You just don't get it. Smugmness and self-righteousness prevents you from getting the simple fact that more and more of us are realizing the stupidity of believing in a "Big Brother in the sky" and his/her/its purported pronouncements. You don't get it that though YOU may BELIEVE -- WE DON'T.

Repeat -- we don't believe your biblical rantings. They do not compute. The are immaterial, superfluous to those of us who have "seen the vista from the other side of the mountain."

You believe that the "beliefs of your tribe and nation are the laws of nature." We don't.

As long as you keep blathering about posting or not posting the 10 commandments in schools, prayer in schools, burning the flag, abortion, butt-f*ing fags, porno corrupting the little virgins, the evil weed, etc., the more the reaction of more people is gonna be: "Oh, shut up, already."

As far as I'm concerned, there are enough real-life problems like gvoernment power that if you framed the problem without bringing in your wacko mythology, you might find a wider audience.

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 30, 1999.

Mumsie? Mumsie? Naw cant be the real Mumsie can it? Didnt Mumsie give us her tearful adios jest a few days ago? Who can blame her for coming back here to the land of the zealots. You disturbed religious fanatics must be addicted to this gathering of kindred souls, a place where you can co-exist with other crazies. Here you can bask in the light without the scorn of your neighbors. Must be wonderful to be so righteous.

-- Tired (of@you.freaks), October 30, 1999.

Y2K WILL CRUSH THE CONSPIRACY AND RESTORE SLACK TO ALL!!! NOTE TO LOVING CHRISTIANS WHO WANT TO KILL US: Look, we're for peaceful co-existence. We're not really that far apart. You worship the Vindictive Crybaby SchoolMarm Jesus -- many Subs worship the Live-It-Up, Hell-Raisin', FIGHTIN' JESUS. You worship a dead guy on a stick, we worship a chopped-off head that gets hit with a stick. Isn't there some common ground? (The Founder of Christianity wans't as asqueamish as his modern fan club. He was compassionate towards the weirdos, sinners, and victims of his day, and he was also PISSED at the NORMALS of his day. And, like "Bob," he didn't want to KILL them, but merely to LEAD them, as a shepherd leads his flock. Keeping them happy until the slaughter. The Harvest...ahhh, yes... THE HARVEST!!!)

-- PRAISE "BOB"!!!! (ganja man@subgenious.com), October 30, 1999.

A,

I wonder what happened in your life to be so bitter and hateful towards others? I've certainly done nothing to harm you. People who read both your posts and mine will be able to tell who is more rational and content with their life. I'm not casting judgement on you - yet, you see, I don't know you, so I can't... God says to forgive, and I will, to a point, forgive just about anyone, I hope you'll remember that God will forgive you too, if you're sincere. I believe that God will save others of different faiths, as long as their actions are those of good.

Turn away from God if you will. I hope that your possessions and your money will keep you happy, though I think you'll find that you'll have a difficult, lonely, and possibly fruitless journey finding contentment.

-- Deb (v.mcclell@columbus.rr.com), October 30, 1999.

A,

Does schizoaffective ring a bell? How about anti-social psychotic!

Let's put it this way, if there is a God, I'm set, but WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO? If there is no God no one will ever know, so I've got nothing to lose, loser.

-- Val (what_is_your@problem.com), October 30, 1999.

"Sysop, please delete this, and the "Slammer" thread. And any subsequent forum-clogging threads that resemble them.

Liberty "

Liberty, because I respect you and your views so much, I will reply to this. What you just said evokes a cognitive disconnect in my mind. You have stated well the problem in your post (i.e., people smearing their urine and feces around indiscriminately), and then you ask to have it deleted. Your post is valuable to many, and should not be deleted, as well as Elaine's post is valuable to many others.

The theory of Freedom of Speech is madening in itself, and this forum is becoming more madening because of it and its ever increasing population. But fortunately it is still relatively a good place for the free flow of ideas and opinions.

I call for people to try to get used to the changes on this forum for as long as the server shall be able to handle it, and let Ed Yourdon and MIT pull the plug on it when they feel the necessity, as they are the enablers of this forum in the first place.

-- Chris (#$%^&@pond.com), October 30, 1999.

As it is documented elsewhere, a man once ask Jesus about the law. Poorly paraphrased here, his answer was that he had come to provide a way better than the law. That where were only two laws. The first was to love God with all of your being. The second was like the first, to love others as you love yourself. He said that was the sum total of the law.

Christians are as diverse as any other group. It is not fair for anyone of any group to lump all "bible thumpers" into one basket. Just as it is not fair to lump all of any stereotype into one basket.

What I can't understand is why so many folks can clearly see bigotry when it comes to "color" or "sex" or what-have-you and yet participate in name calling and hatered towards all "Christians".

I also have problems with the misguided amoung us who would attempt to require others to follow our customs and beliefs. My Lord teaches that each person must CHOOSE to come to him. This must be a personal choice and not a legislated or forced choice. Democracy was founded upon Christian principles by Christian men and women, denying that exhibts ignorance of history. Still these same men and women were very much afraid of a "Church State", theoracy as it were.

Yes you and your children have a right gauranteed by our Constitution to be free from any "religious" requirements. SO DO WE. If I wish to pray or establish a prayer group at my school and someone wishes to "FREELY, PERSONALLY, WILLINGLY" choose to attend. That is as much the right of Christians as of any other socially bonded group in this society. The idea was to reduce religion to the same common denominator that we reduce social standing. In other words, there should be NONE persecuted and NONE favored.

We have managed to get away from that concept over the years. No, it is definatly wrong to refuse to allow someone with whom you vehemently disagree the right to speak. That goes for ALL of us, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Satan Worshipers, et. all.

Were I a Christian who dumped whole hearted upon anyone who disagreed with me in this forum, I would be as ashamed as those who have so clearly done precisely the same to Christians on this thread should be.

Hypocracy is not something only Christians do.

-- (hypocracy@allsides.here), October 30, 1999.

Mumsie is back,

What a moron. She gave us her whiny good-bye only to return. Go back in your hole Mumsie.

-- (ThisIS@unreal.com), October 30, 1999.

Liberty -- It seems to me that you have a better understanding of certain issues which the Bible mentions than many Christians. Yes one day they will be rounding us up. That is what it says and that is what many of us believe. I for one expect it roughly in the same time frame that you expect it, or perhaps a bit sooner. But at best that is only a guess. In some parts of the world Christians are being killed up as I write. Indeed it wasn't that long ago that Christians were killing each other in N. Ireland.

This coming persecution is a frustration for those who feel we are moving into what we call "the end times". On the one hand we believe that "the author of our faith" is returning to gather us to Him. On the other we believe He has told us there will be "a time of evil" such as the world has never known before, at time so bad that if His return did not stop it "no flesh" would survive. We believe there will come a time when one third of the water on the earth will be unfit for any use, when there will be earthquakes in unusual places, when disease and famine will be killing many more than they are today. Some of us think y2k may be the beginning of such a time.

Our holy book tells us at some point Christians will be despised as scum of the earth. It won't be the first time it has ever happened. First century Christians lived in the sewers to avoid being fed to the lions. They were truly despised. Indeed the apostole Paul (author of much of the new testament) was commissioned by the Jews to arrest and kill Christians and was QUITE successfull at his work, before he was "blinded by the light". It is funny how closely the Jews and Christians hold each other 2000 years later. I guess the Lion eventually lies down with the Lamb after all.

To all of you who hate us already, I want to say something. One day you very likely will see Christians dragged into the street and told to renounce their faith. If they refuse, they will be executed. If they renounce their faith, they are probably the sort of Christian you describe when you say, "bible thumper". When you see that, when it comes to pass, stop for a moment and remember what I have written here. Remember that I told you my Lord has foretold the events of that day. Remember that I said you would see us killed in the streets. At that time stop but a moment and ask yourself, what makes them willing to lay their heads upon the block for a God they can't prove exists. Ask yourself how things could have gotten so far away from, "love others as you love yourself."

When I was a young Christian, I was going to fight them. I was going to take violence to violence and protect my rights. As I matured as a Christian, I started to understand more and more what, "father forgive them for they know not what the do" really means.

When and if I am right about my beliefs, if they come to me and take me into the street. I pray that He will give me the courage to bow my neck to the sword as a witness of the one who forgives anyone who asks.

You see the true essence of Christianity can be said in one sentence. It is a sentence so simple to say and so difficult to understand that it takes the young ones years and years to grasp it. Because they have this trouble understanding that which they believe, they offend you who choose not to believe. Because they don't understand the simplicity of this statement, they think they can somehow MAKE you come to the God they believe loves you. Such folly is common amoung new converts to any line of thinking. It might be those who "get it". It might be those who join the KKK. It is this attitude that drives you away from the one described by the apostle when he said:

"For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten son, Jesus Christ that whomsoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life."

That is an all inclusive forgivness, if the one who beheads me, decides to believe in Him because of what I say at that moment, then he will receive everlasting life.

That is the essence.

-- (...@......), October 30, 1999.

To all of you who hate us already, I want to say something. One day you very likely will see Christians dragged into the street and told to renounce their faith.

Why?? Why on earth would you ever see this?? Do you know how many Christians there are in this country? Do you know the religion of what, like just about every president of the United States?? Do you know how well the Pope (just one sect of Christianity) is revered throughout the entire WORLD???

Nobody's going to be dragging any Christians anywhere, no matter how much of a martyr complex you seem to have for them. The incidents you see regarding kids not being allowed to pray over their lunch, artwork being censored, and prayer groups not being allowed are just as isolated as the incident above where the Jewish family was spit on because they dared challenge the town that wanted their son to write an essay on "Why Jesus Loves Me." In my community, the public school choir sings Christmas carols, lets anyone pray silently, and doesn't concern itself with religious imagery in artwork.

Tell me the last time you heard of a non-Christian community that forced their religion upon Christians in the public school system. Know of anyone forced to pray in Hebrew? Turn towards Mecca? Pray to Shiva, Vishnu, or seek wisdom from the Buddha? Write a paper on "Why Allah Loves Me?"

If you're looking for answers to why some people view Christians in a dim light, try looking in the mirror. You set an example for your people, just as we all do. It's never fair that all Christians be seen as "bible-thumpers" just because of a few isolated incidents. However, that's usually the way it is with humanity. Instead of whining about it and making up ridiculous fantasies about how Christians will be persecuted in the future, perhaps you should stop your own people from persecuting others. That would go a long way towards improving tolerance on both sides, don't you think?

-- (notLiberty@thank.you), October 30, 1999.

notLiberty -- I am responsible for myself. I am able to control my actions and accept the consequences of those. I don't have a persecution complex. I merely observe what is written above in this thread where hypocracy and bigotry exist on both sides... I don't like it, but I certainly have NO control of it. You would order me to CONTROL Christians as if I somehow had the power.

You say where in the world do I see Christians persecuted, my friend, put your crucifix on and walk the streets or Ryiad in Saudi Arabia. Then come to me and tell me all you have observed. Better yet take your Bible into China and start handing out leaflets on a street corner.

Now as to persecution. This is what WE believe. How is it going to come about? I don't know. I simply accept on faith the idea that it will because my Holy Book says it will. Do you have a problem with what I believe?

-- (...@.......), October 30, 1999.

Tolerance? They dont want no stinking tolerance. They want you to sink to their level of darkness and religious fanaticism. Their angry God can not tolerate our world and demands radical reaction to every perceived evil. How dare we offer an opposing view to the righteous right? There may be some people dragged into the street and many of them are the all too familiar crazies posting on this forum.

-- Sick (of@the.freaks), October 30, 1999.

notLiberty -- you deserve a more complete answer.

Why?? Why on earth would you ever see this??

It is written in Revelations. It is not written that it will be this country or even this millenium. It is only my belief.

Do you know how many Christians there are in this country?

No but I do know that there are less every day.

Do you know the religion of what, like just about every president of the United States??

I do, and I also make a distinction between being 'religious' and being Christian, but that is an equally long and convoluted topic.

Do you know how well the Pope (just one sect of Christianity) is revered throughout the entire WORLD???

I do and he is. There are many Christianity is the second largest faith in the world behind Islam.

Nobody's going to be dragging any Christians anywhere, no matter how much of a martyr complex you seem to have for them.

I hope you are correct. If you don't mind though I will lend slightly more creedence to the words of my God. For as I have already pointed out, sometimes 'so called' Christians persecute each other.

The incidents you see regarding kids not being allowed to pray over their lunch, artwork being censored, and prayer groups not being allowed are just as isolated as the incident above where the Jewish family was spit on because they dared challenge the town that wanted their son to write an essay on "Why Jesus Loves Me."

I believe that is correct.

In my community, the public school choir sings Christmas carols, lets anyone pray silently, and doesn't concern itself with religious imagery in artwork. Good.

Tell me the last time you heard of a non-Christian community that forced their religion upon Christians in the public school system. Know of anyone forced to pray in Hebrew? Turn towards Mecca? Pray to Shiva, Vishnu, or seek wisdom from the Buddha? Write a paper on "Why Allah Loves Me?"

I will address this differently than I did above. Wherever you see one religious doctrine predominate, you will see persecution of other competing doctrines. It is human nature that causes this and NOT necessairly the tenents of the doctrine. The ignorant and the evil will always seek to elevate themselves over others by hypocracy and bigotry, no matter what faith they claim.

If you're looking for answers to why some people view Christians in a dim light, try looking in the mirror.

I am looking in my mirror, I see a man. Some people view in a dim light because they associate the actions of a vocal minority of that group with the group or the tenets of that group. In other words, some people hate other people because they fail to understand that individual members of a group do not always represent the group itself.

You set an example for your people, just as we all do.

I wish I could set the example, I am far to human to be much of an example for anyone. I have my lucid moments. This feels like it might be one of them.

It's never fair that all Christians be seen as "bible-thumpers" just because of a few isolated incidents. However, that's usually the way it is with humanity.

Agreed.

Instead of whining about it and making up ridiculous fatasies about how Christians will be persecuted in the future,

If you would like to know more about what John (Revelations), Daniel, Ezekiel, and others have said. You should read their works and not simply take my word for what I believe.

perhaps you should stop your own people from persecuting others.

Adressed in my previous posts... hypocracy@bothsides.here.

That would go a long way towards improving tolerance on both sides, don't you think?

No sir, it sadly will not. As with two five year old children, "he started it first." Does not make things better. When both sides are wrong BOTH sides must change.

-- (...@.......), October 30, 1999.

Am I a bible thumper? Yes, absolutely, sometimes. Our bible, God's "WORD" is our only plumb line for right and wrong, how to live and conduct our selves. It tells us about God and the mighty works and wonders that He has wrought and how we are to think about God. It tells us about when God came to live among men, clothed in flesh and how we can find salvation for our souls.

Liberty: Thank you for the great posts. I couldn't have said it better.

I resent being left out of any who's who list of radical nutsos for Jesus.

Elaine: I've always liked your "Gods1sheep". Would that we all had that kind of closeness to our Lord. As another brother put it: We know what it means.

Mumsie: Good to see you again. As usual, your posts are on point and when you quote the WORD HIMSELF they can only run and flee and change the subject.

Liberty: Don't you feel the Lord calling you?

blessings to all

sdb

-- S. David Bays (SDBAYS@prodigy.net), October 30, 1999.

"Yes, absolutely, sometimes. Our bible, God's "WORD" is our only plumb line for right and wrong, how to live and conduct our selves."

Then if you really believe that the bible is YOUR only plumb line for right and wrong, perhaps you could see that some of us have discovered another plumb line that shows us the right and wrong just as well, and that we don't need to be "thumped" on by the bible?

I respect people's beliefs, it's what we all choose for moral stability. I have a hard time respecting people hammering me with their own religious beliefs, and that's what I myself call "bible thumpers".

-- Chris (#$%^&@pond.com), October 31, 1999.

Deb, Val, ...@..., David Bays -- I repeat -- YOU DON'T GET IT. You BELIEVE. I and many others don't. You can thump the bible (throw biblical quotes at us), and warn us that "God's gonna get you", and "repent sinners", and "open your heart (or mind)", all day long and it means NOTHING. NOTHING, DO YOU UNDERSTAND? YOU BELIEVE IN YOUR SILLY SUPERSTITIONS. WE DON'T.

Your are like those silly vegan/vegetarians babbling about the unhealthiness or meat and/or animal rights. YOU IGNORE REALITY.

One last shot: We are ALL born atheists. Most of us, you and I, are indoctrinated into ONE OR ANOTHER religion when young and innocent. I was bamboozled into "accepting Jesus Christ as my saviour" when I was about 11 or 12. BUT I GREW UP. WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO GROW UP?

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 31, 1999.

...@.... : Blah blah -- you still don't get it -- I don't believe in nor am I concerned with hell. Your implied threat that if I don't shape up that I'll rot in hell MEANS NOTHING. And neither does your concern for or lack of concern for my "soul."

And what does anything I said to do with chairman Mao. I am probably more free enterprise, and consistently, than you. The only thing communism got right was "Relgion is the opiate of the masses." Of course, they decided to try to replace that with the opiate of the state. You religious wackos and commie pinkos have exactly the same psychology -- true believers -- only your "gods" are different. Don't think -- obey, submit to the "wisdom" of your "superiors" be they a priest or a commisar.

And all the red type font -- you think that will make a believer of me? You are ridiculous. A mental infant, psychologically infantile. You are a sheep. Like I said, GROW UP. Time to put away childish things.

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 31, 1999.

These "personal relationships with Jesus" amuse me. If not just plain psychotic hallucinations, holding a two-sided conversation with oneself like a bag-lady, was Jesus over for a beer, or did he go out and chase tail with good ole boy J.C., or did they get it on together, or what?

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 31, 1999.

Uh, folks

Doesn't it seem a tad obvious that those who are frustrated by religious intolerance should set a good example by being tolerant?

Yes some horrible things have been done in the name of Chrisitanity.

Yes, I am tired of having allegedly "Christian" values rammed down my throat.

However there is a phenomenol difference between individual Christians and the abuses of power done under the guise of Christianity.

Judgemental people will do judgemental things and will use whatever paradigm is dominant at the time to wield their abuse.

Atrocities have been committed in the name of every religion, belief system, political ideology and bizarre fad in this whole freakin history of the world.

We all got the same guts inside. We all gotta breathe, gotta eat, gotta pee, gotta stay warm and get some lovin.

You never know when your gonna need the help of someone who you claim to despise because of their attitude/beliefs/ethnicity etc.. a cross- dressing anarchist atheist on welfare might save your child's life. A right-wing bigot might rescue your beloved.

No one can afford to hate anyone.

Compassion and tolerance are potent skills for survival. If there was ever a time to cultivate them it is now.

-- Dolma Lhamo (I'm@nonymous.now), October 31, 1999.

How can I resist?

OK, folks, here it is in a nutshell, neatly summed up for you. The problem of Christian "bashing" and dislike for and intolerance of "Christians" is a direct result of "Christians" who ignore the words of the very man they pretend to honor. TRUE!

Since all "Christians" will agree that all "Christians" are sinners, where do "Christians" get off by casting the first stone? Why do they attend to the speck in their brother's eye, while ignoring the plank in their own eye? Since none of them are perfect, why is it that so many of them see fit to work on the sins of others, instead of righting their own sins?

And were does the hatred of "Christians" come in? When they attend to the sins of others through the force of law. Not content to lead by example, "they" legislate their ideas of morality upon others, and jail the ones who do not conform. Jesus was followed and loved by his example, why cannot his modern day followers do the same?

Beats me, but so long as "Christians" lead with a stick, rather than a carrot, they will find resistance, distrust, and outright hatred, and their self-fulfilling prophecy of persecution will come true.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), October 31, 1999.

notLiberty -- you deserve a more complete answer.

Thanks. Most of your post made sense to me, but I had some responses to the following:

<>

I wish I could set the example, I am far to human to be much of an example for anyone. I have my lucid moments. This feels like it might be one of them.

This is where you are wrong. Everyone sets an example in some way. You set an example for those around you, just as those teachers set an example for their community. By denouncing the antics of such "Christians" as the moral majority and the KKK, you can make a difference in the way Christians are viewed.

<>

No sir, it sadly will not. As with two five year old children, "he started it first." Does not make things better. When both sides are wrong BOTH sides must change.

Every journey begins with a first step, and somebody has to make it. However, if you are really determined to become a martyr rather than try to change the way things are, then that's certainly up to you. Perhaps Revalations was speaking about those Christians who sat idly by while other Christians were being slaughtered and took no action to prevent it.

In the US, the vocal minority of Christians is determined to control the lives of everyone else in the nation, if not the world. The biggest reason they can even begin to be as successful as they have been is due to the large population of Christians who do nothing while they try to usurp control. Get off your butts and fight back for your religion and your people. Don't let the vocal hate-preaching minority speak for you. Stand up and denounce them for the frauds that they are. Do it for yourself, your country, your religion, and your God.

-- (notLiberty@thank.you), October 31, 1999.

For those who would persecute Christians:

Don't lump us all together. Would you do the same to all Buddhists, Muslims or Hindus? Of course not!

As I Christian, I do the best I can and hope to influence others (Christian and non-) by my actions. I don't force ANYONE to do anything. - that has never beeen my way or the way in the Bible either.

If you're going to critcize one religion, then read up a bit about other cultures as well. Try reading about people who HAVE seen other cultures and interacted in them. There is cruelty EVERYWHERE friends, not just in the U.S.A., and not just Christian-sponsored either. Ever seen the caste system in India? Do you know that slavery still exists in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries? Have you seen what some other African religous cultures do to make their young women more "sexually attractive" - cutting out parts of their sexual internal organs?! Hello! Know what you're talking about BEFORE you criticize people. Use a little logic. Just because you're upset with one or a few examples DOES NOT mean that all Christians are the same. Think people, think...

...@......,

God bless you for your patient way of trying to explain Christianity to someone who is obviously very disturbed. If he wishes to be agnostic, then that is his right, no one will stop him. It seems that his persecution of Christianity is just an outlet for his mental illness. He could very well have turned his hatred towards race instead of religion and ended up as a mass-murderer. (Think of the Synagogue in Cal...) A has been arguing without logic, just wild rambling and spewing vile. It seems he doesn't really know why he's angry, just looking for a politically acceptable outlet - Christians, to take it out on.

-- Deb (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), October 31, 1999.

Deb and other pyschological "experts": Ever ask yourself why you are so gullible and/or stupid, and so needy of someone to provide you ready made answers instead of determining them yourself? Sheep. The authors of your "book" consider you sheep. Your priests and ministers consider you sheep. You accept that you are sheep ("The Lord is my shepherd, I SHALL NOT WANT.") Just like in communisim, some kind of Big Brother is going to provide all the answers and your sustenance. Like I said, no difference in your psychology from a communist zealot, just different gods. Baa, baa!

If you would mind your own f*ing business, not trying to shove your views and morality down my and others' throats, all this would be moot. But you push, I'm gonna push back. More and more of us are gonna push back. No turning the cheek. That is the reality of the world. The way to get along is MIND YOUR OWN F*ING BUSINESS. You can be as deluded as you want to be, just keep out of my face. That's it for this thread.

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 31, 1999.

I put the word Christian in quotes to indicate that I am not including all Christians, too many of them, but not all.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), October 31, 1999.

Succeeding in political activity is NOT usurping controll.

If their "political activity" is designed to force the entire population of this country to submit to their idea of God, then it is usurping control.

The Constitution gaurantees ALL these organizations the RIGHT to exist. Defines those rights to be INALIENABLE and, to quote another thread, "God given rights that can not be legislated away." The issue you seem to have here is that you don't want to hear what you don't want to hear but don't mind my having to listen to what I don't want to hear.

This is very sad. You started out with such an open mind and a reasonable approach, and now you are completely twisting what I have said, setting up ridiculous straw man arguments, and babbling incoherently about quantum mechanics. Maybe you need to take a rest or something.

If by "you don't want to hear what you don't want to hear" you mean that I don't want to hear "Your child has been expelled from public school because he wouldn't pray to Jesus," then yes, you're right, I don't want to hear that.

I don't care what the moral majority says, as long as they stop trying to force me and my family to practice their ridiculous ideas of morality. Where in your examples does the NRA force people to carry a gun? Where does the homosexual lobby force straight people to engage in homosexual activity?

Perhaps you don't see the difference and perhaps you never will. As "A" has said, we are a people who do not respond kindly to force. As long as the moral majority continues to support the idea that the entire country should be forced to become "good Christians," there will be resistance and anger towards them and those who support them. If true Christians will not stand up and denounce them for what they are, the anger will continue and possibly build. Perhaps this was the future that you saw, but if so, then you have brought it upon yourselves and you have only yourselves to blame.

-- (notLiberty@thank.you), November 01, 1999.

You're not getting it....@......

In this country we have a system which allows the PEOPLE (those who vote) to decide how they want their government run.

True, but the Constitution was drafted to PROTECT the minority from the errant will of the majority. That is why America was designated a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.

Usurping to me implys the theft of power from the system by illegal means.

Usurpation of INALIENABLE rights can also come from "legal" means....see 1930s Germany for a fine example of this concept in action.

I would be standing shoulder to shoulder with you in front of the superintendents desk to discuss the issue AND I would be confident that God was on our side.

That is the crux of your problem Laddie, out of your own mouth. I'm wondering when you will allow the same degree of freedom to those folks who DO NOT have "God" on their side.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

Umm, well, maybe it is ONLY my opinion that you're not getting it, but you're not getting it still, despite your smug, obtuse answers, Laddie. (insert chuckle here)

I suppose we could drag out Websters and check our facts...

Which ones do you need help with? Forgive me, but so neatly did you sidestep my example of INALIENABLE rights being trampled by "legal means", I'm at a loss.

Uncle, I sort of think it is time for you to go back and read and understand what we have written... Start looking around the point where you find the following. The Constitution gaurantees ALL these organizations the RIGHT to exist.

HOLY COW MAN! Where did I say that they don't have a right to exsist? I, in case you missed it, was talking about why "Christians" end up being despised by those who do not agree with them. As in when you shove your morality upon others by force of law, do not be surprised when you are resented for it. Go back and check, it's true, that's what I was talking about.

(cont)Defines those rights to be INALIENABLE and, to quote another thread, "God given rights that can not be legislated away."

Precisely the point of my Nazi example. Were not God given rights legislated away in Nazi Germany? Yes? No?

The issue you seem to have here is that you don't want to hear what you don't want to hear but don't mind my having to listen to what I don't want to hear. Equality, like truth, is an absolute.

Agreed, about equality, that is. OTOH, If you have been around these parts you should know that there is not a more STRIDENT voice for freedom of expression on this board than mine. I don't mind hearing what I don't like, but I RESENT being FORCED to DO as I don't like. You and your ilk cannot see past the end of your nose on these matters, and I supose you never will.

You should stop at that point, unless you have a degree in physics, as you will not follow the rest of the paragraph.

No, I do not have a degree in physics. And even thus, a simple minded man, I'll refrain myself from returning your insult.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

Crap

Try the rest again...

Precisely the point of my Nazi example. Were not God given rights legislated away in Nazi Germany? Yes? No?

The issue you seem to have here is that you don't want to hear what you don't want to hear but don't mind my having to listen to what I don't want to hear. Equality, like truth, is an absolute.

Agreed, about equality, that is. OTOH, If you have been around these parts you should know that there is not a more STRIDENT voice for freedom of expression on this board than mine. I don't mind hearing what I don't like, but I RESENT being FORCED to DO as I don't like. You and your ilk cannot see past the end of your nose on these matters, and I supose you never will.

You should stop at that point, unless you have a degree in physics, as you will not follow the rest of the paragraph.

No, I do not have a degree in physics. And even thus, a simple minded man, I'll refrain myself from returning your insult.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

Look I don't want to hear what you have to say.

Perhaps you should stop reading it then.

I am sorry you did not understand the part about quantum mechanics, I just expected AofA to wander of into a technical discussion trying to argue the point that truth is in the eye of the beholder.

But you weren't addressing AofA in that section, you were addressing me.

I did not want to get to far off on that tangent.

And yet, that's exactly what you did.

And were I in a town where it happened I would be standing shoulder to shoulder with you in front of the superintendents desk to discuss the issue AND I would be confident that God was on our side. But I would NOT let the actions of an idiot make me hate Christians or blame ALL Christians for the actions of a few.

First of all, this was an entire town full of "idiots" along with a vocal and politically powerful group of "idiots" who claim to represent an entire religion, most of whom are not idiots. I've already agreed that it's not fair for the actions of a few to "spoil the whole batch" as it were. But that, as I said, is the nature of humanity.

Do you not detest it when some gun-hating person blames violence on guns and says that the NRA is evil or that gun manufacturers are evil people and then points to the actions of sick people to justify their position?

Except the NRA and the gun manufacturers don't force people to carry guns.

Has someone bent your knee and forced you to worship their God?

Someone bent that family's son's head and forced him to worship their God.

Have you been required to submit to confession of a Sunday. Are you being dragged to Church on Sunday. Is there some grand conspiracy of which I should know?

Their son was required to submit a paper on "Why Jesus Loves Me" in a public school.

I do not perceive a difference and I never will. I am convinced I am being fair and objective here.

That much is obvious. And unfortunate.

I honestly hope that I am correct in that conviction.

Keep hoping.

You are a rational man, it is not prudent to quote those who are so full of hate that it clouds their thought processes and forced them to resort to name calling and threats.

I quote based on the ideas I read, not on the person who writes them. Perhaps you should try it sometime. Look beyond the personalities and read the content within. It may help you understand it better.

You know I bet I know more about the moral majority than you do and I have never had the slightest interest in their activities.

I am not surprised. And yet you wonder why there is so much hatred towards Christianity in the world.

My guess is you know only that which the very same press that sold you Bill Clinton has told you. Maybe we both need to look into their activities but I strongly suspect that they are not violating the Constitution or any laws because if they were, we would have seen arrests long ago.

I never said that they were doing anything illegal. However, if all of their activities are legal, does that automatically make them right? Does it make them moral and true to your God, just because they satisfy our earthly law?

I will not stand up and denounce them, or you.

I have no doubt about that. You will simply sit idly by and watch the prophecy unfold.

I don't have enough facts about them one way or the other. My opinion is neither do you. If you are so distrustfull of them, research them, study their published docmentation, see what the say they want to do - - THEN we will have something to talk about.

Their position is obvious, they do not try to hide it. They are quite proud of it, in fact. Feel free to read up on it yourself if you like.

Propaganda and hate mongering will cause that to happen amoung the ill informed and unstable elements.

Yes, and it is those people that the moral majority targets.

I did not see the future. I referenced my understanding of a future someone else saw.

Then that is the future they saw.

He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

If you insist.

We must all accept responsibility for our own actions, what will you choose?

I choose "actions" as opposed to "inaction."

-- (notLiberty@thank.you), November 01, 1999.

You are absolutly correct... so I guess the above explaination can be ammended to read, "I am sorry you did not understand the part about quantum mechanics, I just expected YOU to wander of into a technical discussion trying to argue the point that truth is in the eye of the beholder. "

Why would you expect this of me? Clearly you expected it of AofA, as you said, and now you're just lumping my comments in with his. No generalization going on there eh?

That tangent refers to a discussion of whether truth is relative or not... did you fail to get the point, so sorry, perhaps if you tried a bit harder to follow the conversation ... aw, you know, you are getting to me. I have to admit it. I have spent hours in an attempt to have civil discourse with you. I honestly have. I have tried not to offend, when I did (even where none was meant) I have offered my apology... You truly don't want to hear what I am trying to get across, do you?

Which one of us said "Look I don't want to hear what you have to say?"

How can you fail to read what I wrote, how can you so clearly fail to understand that I AGREED WITH YOU. Do you take particular pleasure in being difficult? Is it that our language is so very different that YOU simply can't understand what I am trying to get across to you.... Have I judged YOU? Whom have I judged with the sentence above? Who am I SAYING VERY CLEARLY I THINK WAS WRONG. Is your prejudice so completely blinding that you can not understand an HONEST attempt at me agreeing with you?

Relax, you're ranting again. You half-agreed in your statement, and then threw in a remark about how you wouldn't judge people by the actions of one person. I pointed out that the situation was more complex than that. Go back and read it again.

Okay, where is your BIBLE, I know there is a law that we have had passed saying you have to carry it at all times..

I don't recall ever saying that there was such a law, so your sarcastic comment is meaningless.

Nice bit of selective editing above...

I quoted your comment in its entirety. How was that "selective editing?"

Nope, I am done hoping on that particular issue. I have become certain. You have helped me there.

No, you were done hoping a long time before you ever came here. That much is certain.

No insult intended here, eh?

No more than your comments about my apparent inability to grasp the concepts your are speaking of.

No, I have yet to say I don't understand why there is so much hatred towards Christianity in the world.

And yet it is clear that you don't understand why there is so much hatred towards Christianity in the world.

Excuse me at this point, you seem to be doing the very thing you say you hate. I must be off a bit for I am certain you would not be making a MORAL JUDGEMENT against a group of people BECAUSE of YOUR BELIEF structure... surely not... I am obviously wrong here somehow.

You are. I was referring to YOUR belief structure and questioned whether the actions of the moral majority were consistent with them.

So a kindness is offered and the hand is slapped? Ok... so sorry, I still will not denounce them or you.

You were not offering a "kindness." You were simply pointing out that you will take no action to stop the hatred towards Christians.

It is not an issue to me... it is your issue. Last I heard the task of gathering evidence belonged to the prosecutor.

It is clear that no amount of such evidence would convince you in any case, as you have already addressed above. If you wish to remain in your ignorance and lament your sad situation, that is your choice. You and your people may indeed suffer the consequences of such inaction.

Which? Propagandists or hate mongers? OOOPPPPSSS sorry, a snide comment slipped out... I realize that I must play by a different set of rules than you do... I have sinned.

You're ranting again. I never referred to any rules we are playing by. Your point above makes no sense.

And your point is?

That the future seen by those whose prophecies you quote may be based on the knowledge that there will be those like you who will choose not to act in order to save their religion.

You would be hard pressed... The sword I refer to is one you will never beat... You may have misunderstood a few things I have said.

Not for lack of trying.

This has gone on long enough. I have certainly had ample room to have my say. Without a doubt most have gone on to other threads which are more interesting and less repetitive.

Zing.

I yeild the floor to the two remaining antagonists.

LOL, we're the PROtagonists.

I humbly wander away, beaten and bruised, suffering for my God. If you detect a slight not of sarcasm here, it is intended in jest.

No doubt. It appears you are doing your best to avoid suffering for your God, especially if it involves any action to save your religion.

It was fun, but it runs very long. I will never convince those who do not want to be convinced, but I gave it a good shot.

No, you simply narrowed your view and tossed out some thinly-veiled insults while simultaneously exclaiming "Who ME?" when you were called on it. Better luck next time.

I yield, you boys win.

Zing!

I agree with you.

No you don't.

I will comply with your wishes, I am not going to talk about God in this thread any longer.

That was certainly never MY wish. But feel free to lie if it helps you to sleep at night. I can't see how that would be honoring your god, though.

-- (NotLiberty@thank.you), November 02, 1999.

Haw haw, you're good, no doubt about that....@...., wonderfully done.

Firstly, forgive my frustration induced insulting manner in my above post.

Now,

For an example of a law that demands conformity to your "religion" seek no further than ANY law governing the so-called "vices".

For a lesson in INALIENABLE rights being usurped by moralist busybodies using "legal" means, read about Prohibition, both past and present.

INALIENABLE rights are rights that cannot be legislated away, BUT, they are being legislated away in this country, with the consent of the majority. I used the extreme example of Nazi Germany to show how rights can be trampled and usurped by "legal" means, and how most people go along with it, that's all.

That is also why I say you still don't get, because you don't. All is fine and dandy for you because mother culture fits your perceived notion of how it should be, therefore you cannot see "past the end of your nose" in these matters.

And, finally, we come to ...You should stop at that point, unless you have a degree in physics, as you will not follow the rest of the paragraph.

Your are right, that was NOT an insult to me, it was merely prejudice.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), November 02, 1999.

notLiberty; I might as well answer you also. Your comments in the above post speak for themselves. Where you deliberatly rip a statement from it's context, which I believe I am within my rights to opine, you defeat your own argument. Where you insult and call names (without remorse) you invalidate your logic. Where you fail to acknowledge a won point by your antagonist (that would be me in this case), you fail to rise to the nobility of your position. In my opinion, those have been your failings here. In certain instances, they have been mine as well, for those I humbly appologize. In all the debate has been satisfying and stimulating. I have run very long. It is time for me to yield the floor. I do so without malice. There is nothing more I feel I need to say and I now think there are others who have thought long and hard about what we have written. It would be nice to hear their opinions, if they would so favor us.

Good Day notLiberty.

-- (...@.......), November 02, 1999.

Where you deliberatly rip a statement from it's context, which I believe I am within my rights to opine, you defeat your own argument.

Where have I ripped any of your statements from it's context?

Where you insult and call names (without remorse) you invalidate your logic.

What names have I called you?

Where you fail to acknowledge a won point by your antagonist (that would be me in this case), you fail to rise to the nobility of your position.

What would you have me acknowlege that I have not already acknowledged in previous posts?

In my opinion, those have been your failings here.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion. It is unfortunate that it appears to be based on lies and misleading statements. Such is the way of things.

-- (notLiberty@thank.you), November 02, 1999.

In the above post, I wish to retract, "Where you deliberatly rip context." The word deliberatly should not be in that sentence. I have no assurance the gentleman has deliberatly ripped context. I maintain, "Where you rip context" would be a more fair statement.

-- (...@.......), November 02, 1999.

You have not really resorted to calling names.

Thank you.

Not trying to be snippy. Simply that with which you agree. I am not going to read and re-read, yet another time. Perhaps there is nothing for you to acknowledge, perhaps there is.

I acknowledged what I agreed with when I posted this:

Thanks. Most of your post made sense to me, but I had some responses to the following:

After that was when you started accusing me of only wanting to hear what I want to hear and our viewpoints diverged after that.

You seem to have overlooked the following portion of the above statement or perhaps removed a portion of context to support your point, in what I consider to be an unfair manner. In EVERY post I have included ALL of your context. I realize this makes these very long. I do this because I want to reread every word as I respond. I want ALL of your context available at the point of argument so that I do not shoot myself in the foot. This segment of the above statement is critical to my postition that I am trying to be fair minded here. You removed it in your quote. At this point I want to believe it was an oversight. It was wasn't it?

It was neither an oversight nor an attempt to remove the meaning from your statement or "rip" it from its context. Your additional statement was an apology for having the same failings that I did. I didn't include it because it was irrelevant to my response which was about your opinion of my failings, which were based on false and/or misleading accusations. Whether you choose to admit to the same failings doesn't change the fact that they were still based on false and/or misleading accusations, nor does it, in my opinion, add to any sense of "fair-mindedness" in your position.

When challenged to support your accusations, you retracted one completely, admitted that another was based more on my view of our difference of opinion and was not as easily defined, and radically modified the third. Subsequently admitting guilt for the same infractions for which I am, by your own admission, not guilty of, is hardly fair, in my opinion. I fail to see why including such an admission in a quote would make any difference. I should point out that, in this instance, you did "shoot yourself in the foot" by making these accusations without really reading what I wrote. So, keeping all of the context available is no guarantee that mistakes won't still be made. Normally, I would make this comment directly after you stated why you want all of my context available, but I'll try it your way and leave all of your quote above in one big block. You can scroll back up and see the relevant statement I am referring to.

You should be aware that I don't quote to change the meaning of your statements, and just as I said with your "selective editing" comment (for which you never offered further explanation of what was "edited"), you are welcome to point out what I removed from its context and why you feel the meaning was changed. In this case, I don't feel the meaning was changed at all.

I completely agree, we are both entitled to our own opinion. Thank you for agreeing with my entire premise.

This didn't appear to be your "entire premise" previous to this message, but perhaps your premise has changed. In that case, I will agree with you that we our entitled to our own opinion.

Yes, sir, It frequently is the way of things, is it not? Now that we agree, may we cease?

Certainly.

-- (notLiberty@thank.you), November 02, 1999.

nutLiberty; I suppose I could continue this indefinatly by simply answering, yet another post. It is clear that you want the last word, please, for the love of God, take the last post. Enjoy it.

-- (...@.......), November 02, 1999.

nutLiberty;

Looks like you're not above name-calling when the time is right. How very sad.

I suppose I could continue this indefinatly by simply answering, yet another post.

That's up to you, except that you have already said "It is time for me to yield the floor." and "There is nothing more I feel I need to say" Still, you're welcome to change your mind.

It is clear that you want the last word,

And yet another false accusation. What is clear is that I am answering your statements and questions presented in your last post, specifically:

At this point I want to believe it was an oversight. It was wasn't it?

and

Now that we agree, may we cease?

although the second question was probably more rhetorical. In addition, it was necessary to respond to the false and misleading accusations you leveled against me, which I also felt I had a right to address. Perhaps you felt that I should not answer your questions or address your false and misleading accusations. That's certainly your choice, however I did not agree. Why ask a question, for example, if you don't want an answer to it?

Posting questions, inflammatory statements, and now, of course, name- calling, and then expecting the other party to simply remain silent is just about the most arrogant position I have seen so far on this thread. It doesn't appear to do much to support what appears to be your ever-changing "premise". I think you'll find that if you answered me with a more concilliatory post such as you did with Uncle Deedah, I would not have found it necessary to respond. Why you chose to continue with your false and misleading accusations and now name-calling when I have not engaged in any such behavior will remain a mystery to me. Perhaps there is some truth to what I have been saying after all.

please, for the love of God, take the last post. Enjoy it.

Thank you. I will.

-- (notLiberty@thank.you), November 03, 1999.

sORRY foOLisH oNES!!!!! dIETeR WIsHES To haVe tHE LAsT WOrD, doES He nOT?????? oF COurSE!!!! aND THe wORD Is.....

enoUGh!!!!!

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), November 03, 1999.

that is really very interseting post thank you vey much

http://www.phonecardspin.com

-- Manisha Patel (batt@batt.net), September 07, 2003.