OT: I KNEW you' Merkans knew how to fix stuff:

Page 7 of 14  
On 4/26/2011 10:41 PM, Doug Miller wrote:

Yes, if I were god (God) I would figure you are gaming the system and I would treat you accordingly, to my diabolical pleasure.
--
Jack
You Can't Fix Stupid, but You Can Vote it Out!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/26/2011 9:48 PM, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

I thing ALGOL came before Pascal:-)
Besides, I myself argued this very view long before Pascal was invented.
--
Jack
You Can't Fix Stupid, but You Can Vote it Out!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/27/2011 12:12 PM, Jack Stein wrote:

Perhaps you could have created a language called SHEOL ...
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Apr 26, 3:18 pm, snipped-for-privacy@example.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

I don't think that's entirely fair. He goes on the attack / defence when some religious try to meddle with science, etc, but I wouldn't say he has an out-and-out disdain and contempt for believers. He's known to attend ceremonies which include religious aspects.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message

Did he say that after knocking on your door? No? You mean you had to make an effort to read or listen to what he said, but you're still complaining that it was an unwelcome intrusion? Well then no, I didn't mean Steven Gould etc., and acting as if that is equivalent to what I posted is you trying to move the goalposts.

I'm not exactly a fan of the ACLU, but rather than claiming they are "pro-atheist" it would probably be more accurate to say they are opposed to the religion camel getting its nose into the state tent. The ACLU has no problem with you wearing a religious symbol, or displaying one in your home, or on your gravestone even in a state-owned cemetery--the problem arises when the govt. finances or endorses or promotes the display of a religious symbol.
Besides, if you contend that the ACLU never acts on behalf of those wishing to express their religious faith within constitutional bounds, you are simply wrong.
http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20061019084307/http://www.aclu.org/religion/tencomm/16254res20050302.html
September 20, 2005: ACLU of New Jersey joins lawsuit supporting second-grader's right to sing "Awesome God" at a talent show.
August 4, 2005: ACLU helps free a New Mexico street preacher from prison.
May 25, 2005: ACLU sues Wisconsin prison on behalf of a Muslim woman who was forced to remove her headscarf in front of male guards and prisoners.
February 2005: ACLU of Pennsylvania successfully defends the right of an African American Evangelical church to occupy a church building purchased in a predominantly white parish.
December 22, 2004: ACLU of New Jersey successfully defends right of religious expression by jurors.
December 14, 2004: ACLU joins Pennsylvania parents in filing first-ever challenge to "Intelligent Design" instruction in public schools.
November 20, 2004: ACLU of Nevada supports free speech rights of evangelists to preach on the sidewalks of the strip in Las Vegas.
November 12, 2004: ACLU of Georgia files a lawsuit on behalf of parents challenging evolution disclaimers in science textbooks.
November 9, 2004: ACLU of Nevada defends a Mormon student who was suspended after wearing a T-shirt with a religious message to school.
August 11, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska defends church facing eviction by the city of Lincoln.
July 10, 2004: Indiana Civil Liberties Union defends the rights of a Baptist minister to preach his message on public streets.
June 9, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska files a lawsuit on behalf of a Muslim woman barred from a public pool because she refused to wear a swimsuit.
June 3, 2004: Under pressure from the ACLU of Virginia, officials agree not to prohibit baptisms on public property in Falmouth Waterside Park in Stafford County.
May 11, 2004: After ACLU of Michigan intervened on behalf of a Christian Valedictorian, a public high school agrees to stop censoring religious yearbook entries.
March 25, 2004: ACLU of Washington defends an Evangelical minister's right to preach on sidewalks.
February 21, 2003: ACLU of Massachusetts defends students punished for distributing candy canes with religious messages.
October 28, 2002: ACLU of Pennsylvania files discrimination lawsuit over denial of zoning permit for African American Baptist church.
July 11, 2002: ACLU supports right of Iowa students to distribute Christian literature at school.
April 17, 2002: In a victory for the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the ACLU of Virginia, a federal judge strikes down a provision of the Virginia Constitution that bans religious organizations from incorporating.
January 18, 2002: ACLU defends Christian church's right to run "anti-Santa" ads in Boston subways.

Oh oh, we're back to that dimly-remembered non-example.

Again, they come to your door to do this?

Your problem seems to be that you reject the idea that there is a constitutional separation of church and state and thus anything that serves that end is automatically invalid. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. If the Supreme Court says there is an individual right to firearms ownership, then that's the law. Likewise if the court says there is a wall between religion and the state and a particular policy violates that wall, again, that's the way it is. We all have our views, but in the end there are nine people who decide what the Constitution does or does not say, and they seem to think that separation between church and state is real whether you agree with them or not.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
DGDevin wrote the following:

for office. Is that a religion?
--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"willshak" wrote in message

If they claim they speak for God, it might as well be.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/25/2011 1:58 PM, willshak wrote:

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Just Wondering" wrote in message

If you can find any, sure. But don't forget the ones carrying placards reading, "The Anti-Christ is in the White House"--they have their own brand of nutcase religious foolishness to bring to the table.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/26/2011 12:14 PM, DGDevin wrote:

True. Obama is not a Messiah. Obama is not the anti-Christ. Obama is a post turtle. http://www.flickr.com/photos/eric_tank/2678855518 /
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Just Wondering" wrote in message

Don't forget he's responsible for that new mental illness, Obama Derangement Syndrome. It's an interesting condition, in the mind of the sufferer if the stock market goes down it's because of Obama, if the stock market goes up it's in spite of Obama--so no matter what happens or doesn't happen, the ODS sufferer's delusions remain intact.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/27/2011 11:49 AM, DGDevin wrote:

There's an number of people who think, no matter what's the actual cause, if the market goes up it's because of Obama and if it goes down it's in spite of him. And that whatever bad happened in 2010 or will happen in 2012, it's all Bush's fault.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/26/2011 2:14 PM, DGDevin wrote:

Anti-American for sure! Anti-Christ you would have to take on faith...
--
Jack
We have elected the enemy!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/25/2011 11:52 AM, DGDevin wrote:

Atheism is not a religion. It is simply a belief in the nonexistence of deity. As a belief, it is based on faith, something many atheists are unwilling to admit. However, faith in the existence or non-existence of a thing, without more, is not a religion.
I did a search on "Is atheism a religion?" and found these:
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/ath/blathm_rel_religion.htm
Strange but true: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId1895
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Just Wondering wrote:

Atheism denies the existence of God. Inasmuch as you can't prove a negative, atheists just have to take God's nonexistence on faith.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No! It doesn't accept the existence of a deity. There's no active denial involved! We're not even in Egypt for god's sake! (sorry)
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/26/2011 6:15 AM, HeyBub wrote:

certainly agree that atheists take the nonexistence of God on faith.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/26/2011 11:20 AM, Just Wondering said this:

Hence its status as a religion.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message

By that standard a disbelief in the Tooth Fairy amounts to a religion.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/26/2011 10:55 AM, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

on faith does not make atheism a religion, any more than believing in the heavenly father of Jesus as God, makes a Muslim a Christian.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.