"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:E%oij.33853$Ux2.25986@attbi_s22...
To steer this back to the earlier issue, science is an effort to
understand the nature of things in order to provide working tools.
Engineering takes those tools and creates those things that support our
society and by extension our economy. So, a president that has no
understanding of science, or worse, can't tell the difference between
science and religion will only do further harm to this country than the
current anti-intellectual and his faithful followers have done. Any
candidate that claims that they can maintain anti-scientific beliefs
(such
as they're not being a primate), yet can turn the downward trend in this
country around is simply lying to us.

Well put.

Good luck finding anyone amongst the current set of presidential
candidates who passes this litmus test while also offering a workable
political platform. My preliminary research shows that this candidate
does not yet exist.

Quite! They have even more troubles when ascertaining the origins of our
secular republic. The two issues are heavily intertwined and have been for
eons.

http://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/200...-chestnuts.htm

/quote

At least two presidential candidates earnestly want to recapture the land in
the name of God: Mike Huckabee, uncharismatic Baptist preacher, and Mitt
Romney, practicing Mormon, who said he wishes to banish atheists from the
country. Neither questions the morality of the secular application of his
altruist creed in any fundamental way: the welfare state. The other
presidential candidates bring God into their rhetoric only when they think
it prudent. Each wishes to subdue the kind of atheist who does not believe
in the mystical benefits of collectivism and involuntary servitude, to
indenture him to them against his will for the sake of “giving back” to the
national community, and thereby create a legacy for the candidate of being
the “savior” of the “public good” and promoter of “social justice.”

/end quote

"Marissa Reichert" wrote in message
...


Was somebody counting? Besides, did he have them killed because of their
religous beliefs or because they were a threat to his power?

Oh my Jim, recent history is so easily forgotten or ignored by some. Here
is a
little refresher on Joe Stalin:
Approximately 20 million people were killed by Stalin's reegime, including
up
to 14.5 million starved to death for political reasons. At least 1 million
were
executed for political "offences." At least 9.5 million more deported,
exiled
or imprisoned in work camps, with many of the estimated five million sent
to
the 'Gulag Archipelago' never returning alive. Other estimates place the
number
of deported at 28 million, including 18 million sent to the 'Gulag'.

What a gentleman, thank goodness he was athiest.

And as Jim pointed out, it was merely that those millions were an impediemnt
to his power.

Imagine how many people he
could have killed (and so much worse!!) had he found a religion?

Like the Borgia's?

Or maybe Uncle Joe could have ordered that "Kill them all and let god sort
them out".

How about the 80 millions killed during the heyday of Christianity, the Dark
and Middle ages. Why do you think they're called "Dark Ages" anyway?

Dig a little bit: http://preview.tinyurl.com/ys4xw2 (Links to Amazon.com) so
that you can speak with credibility.

--
Matt Barrow
Performance Homes, LLC.
Cheyenne, WY

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:18:13 -0700, "Matt W. Barrow"
wrote in
:

Mitt Romney, practicing Mormon, who said he wishes to banish atheists from the
country.

It sounds like Willard is a bigot.

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:23:51 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in
:



"The Physical Basis of the Direction of Time" by H. D. Zeh

http://www.amazon.com/Times-Arrow-Archimedes-Point-
Directions/dp/01951
17980/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_a

I still like "A Brief History of Time", but Hawking. I don't agree
with
much of it, but it is interesting reading nonetheless.


Oh you should write to him and point out his errors then.

You guys are all wrong. Douglass Addams hit it right with "The
Restaurant at the End of the Universe".


Well, Hawkings quoted Adams fairly often so he might even agree with you.

Be sure to include your views on guns. Perhaps that will help him see
the error of his ways.

Every one that thinks like I do should be able to own as many as they
want. Take 'em away from every one else. Same for universal govt and
religion. :-))


And the vote.


Amen! :-))

Roger

Bertie

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in
:

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:23:51 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in
m:



"The Physical Basis of the Direction of Time" by H. D. Zeh

http://www.amazon.com/Times-Arrow-Archimedes-Point-
Directions/dp/01951
17980/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_a

I still like "A Brief History of Time", but Hawking. I don't
agree with
much of it, but it is interesting reading nonetheless.


Oh you should write to him and point out his errors then.

You guys are all wrong. Douglass Addams hit it right with "The
Restaurant at the End of the Universe".


Well, Hawkings quoted Adams fairly often so he might even agree with
you.

Be sure to include your views on guns. Perhaps that will help him
see the error of his ways.

Every one that thinks like I do should be able to own as many as
they want. Take 'em away from every one else. Same for universal
govt and religion. :-))


And the vote.


Amen! :-))


One newspaper sub, one vote!


Bertie

Marissa Reichert wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote:
Was somebody counting? Besides, did he have them killed because of
their religous beliefs or because they were a threat to his power?

Oh my Jim, recent history is so easily forgotten or ignored by some.
Here is a little refresher on Joe Stalin:
[Stalin's atrocities elided for brevity...]

No disagreement on that account of history.

Nice diversion attempt with the motives for his unthinkable
horror, but the discussion was about making the bible unwelcome,
perhaps with the threat of law, because of all the "negatives."

Thomas Borchert mentioned the "negatives" of biblical beliefs and appears
to have already replied. My own view is that to the extent beliefs (or
non-beliefs) are not imposed on others by force or otherwise infringe on
the life and liberty of others, the government should stay out of
people's lives.

Stopping religion doesn't stop bad people.

Agreed.

In fact, attempting to stop religion would
put you in fundamental agreement with Matthew Murray, who in December
2007 started shooting in a Denver church, slaughtering people in the
name of athiesm because he proclaimed to hate religion.
tinyurl.com/282qtx

That was a tragedy. The fellow appeared to have mental health problems.
While I'd like to see less superstition in the world, I happen to think
that appeal to rationality is key to that goal; using force is a losing
proposition.

Since people change their views all the time without being threatened by
force, I disagree that wanting to reduce religion and superstition in the
world puts me in fundamental agreement with a nut case.

Well that begs the question whether the Bible is a work of God or a
work of men.

"Begs the question??" How so?

First my own (possibly erroneous) summary of the thread so far and an
extension of my own brief come-back:

Bertie: 'The Bible is a harmless set of fairytales.'
Borchert: 'Belief in the Bible has caused more harm than good.'
Gig: 'Don't blame God or a belief in God for people's actions.'

Me: 'But Gig, we haven't established whether the Bible is a set of fairy
tales or the Word of God. You've implicited established as a premise one
of the propositions under question.'

Implicitly putting one of the propostions to be proved or shown as one of
the premises is a logical fallacy that also goes by the name "begging the
question." There's more involved than that, but that's why I used "begs
the question."

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:40:10 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Jan 8, 9:08 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Gig601XLBuilder wrote :
snip
The really interesting deal with the Wx is insurance and floods...if
everyone in the country (seen the Midwest recently?) is subject to
flooding and is required to purchase flood insurance that will be


And where pray tell, is this flood insurance going to come from?
We are unable to get flood insurance because we don't live in a flood
plane. On a flood plane Govt insurance is available which of course
comes from everyone. So if we get one of those heavy rains that the
ditches can not take care of it's SOL. OTOH if our sump pump quits
they'll cover that.

If you live along the Gulf coast, including most of Florida... Good
luck.

another bit of money out of circulation or do with out and then depend
upon the largess of strangers to help you rebuild. Either way the
economy takes a hit. People seem to think that agencies like FEMA
somehow appear out of thin air and don't realize that they are part of
'we the people'.

That's how we get rid of the toxic laden mobile homes.

Roger

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 19:01:15 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

I thinnk so. Our Wx has been insane this winter. OTOH I have been
getting very little x-wind practice in the las few years..

Come to Midland. Most days 18/36 and 06/24 do anything except line up
with the winds at 3BS. Hurry though, were getting AWOS and the airport
identifier is going to change.

Roger (K8RI)


Bertie

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in
:

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:40:10 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Jan 8, 9:08 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Gig601XLBuilder wrote
:
snip
The really interesting deal with the Wx is insurance and floods...if
everyone in the country (seen the Midwest recently?) is subject to
flooding and is required to purchase flood insurance that will be


And where pray tell, is this flood insurance going to come from?
We are unable to get flood insurance because we don't live in a flood
plane. On a flood plane Govt insurance is available which of course
comes from everyone. So if we get one of those heavy rains that the
ditches can not take care of it's SOL. OTOH if our sump pump quits
they'll cover that.


That's "flood plain"



You can get insurance for anything you like, really. Someone somewhere will
cover anything. The fact that it's less likely for a given event to occur
in your area only means it's even easier to get coverage, even though it
may not be on your local broker's "menu".

Bertie

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in
:

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 19:01:15 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

I thinnk so. Our Wx has been insane this winter. OTOH I have been
getting very little x-wind practice in the las few years..

Come to Midland. Most days 18/36 and 06/24 do anything except line up
with the winds at 3BS. Hurry though, were getting AWOS and the airport
identifier is going to change.

Roger (K8RI)


What's the pavement strength like?


Bertie