All Souls Day Special
pnyikos
the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died. The
first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
Bible. Most Protestant denominations consider it one of the
Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
in the opening verses:
"The souls of the just are in the hand of God,
and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
passing away was thought to be an affliction and
their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
are in peace...
...the LORD shall be their King forever. Those who
trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
shall abide with him in love..."
I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
of viable ones, many of whom are torn limb from limb while still
alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
these unfortunates as well. For them, and to all the women who are
killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
future, I joined in the prayer:
*Pie Jesu Domine, dona eis requiem sempiternam.*
Merciful Lord Jesus, grant them rest everlasting.
Peter Nyikos
james g. keegan jr.
<56c2a303-3f64-4f3d...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
and apparently ignored all of the outstanding challenges to your
misrepresentations, whoever you are.
Ray Fischer
>I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
intent of forgetting those who die.
> The
>first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
>Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
Now explain to us why we should give a shit about Catholic church
propaganda.
[...]
>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
Sure you can, bigot. You already do. While you sit on yooiur lying,
hypocritical ass you are letting children die of hunger at the rate of
a couple every minute. While you sit in your comfortable home and
spend money to show the world how disgustingly immoral you are,
children are starving for want of $1 per day worth of food and clean
water.
The TRUTH is that you are just a control freak who wants to force
people to obey you, and you really don't care at all how many people
die so that you can get what you want.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
pnyikos
> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
> >the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>
> Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
> intent of forgetting those who die.
Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
me, Ray.
> > The
> >first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
> >Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
[...]
> >I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
> >unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>
> Sure you can, bigot. You already do. While you sit on yooiur lying,
> hypocritical ass you are letting children die of hunger at the rate of
> a couple every minute. While you sit in your comfortable home and
> spend money to show the world how disgustingly immoral you are,
As I've said several times, at least once in reply to you, I spend
about $10 per year on anti-abortion causes and over $1000 per year on
charity to help just such unfortunate souls as the ones you describe
next:
> children are starving for want of $1 per day worth of food and clean
> water.
How much do YOU contribute to charity each year, you who once said, "I
don't give a shit about women" and later lied through your teeth about
the context in which you said it?
> The TRUTH is that
you are a pathological liar, Ray, as I've demonstrated many times, as
in posts 4-7 of the following thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.abortion/browse_frm/thread/7080f944f432159f/7fcf71bc10c57632?tvc=1&q=insubject%3ASimulation+author%3Anyikos2%40bellsouth.net#7fcf71bc10c57632
[baseless libel by Fischer deleted]
Peter Nyikos
Spartakus
> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
You mean the holiday that was derived from pagan holidays like the
Celtic Samhain?
Felice Dia de los Muertos, whoever you are!
Spartakus
> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
You mean the holiday that was derived from pagan holidays like the
Mike Painter
Until recently all those aborted souls never went to heaven, now they don't
even talk about limbo.
Until recently all the bad ones went to a hell of fire and brimstone, now
they talk about it being absent from God.
What was absolute truth in the past is not talked about anymore.
About 140 years ago the pope was *not* infallible. This doctrine was defined
dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.
Basically he is infallible because he said so.
The big lie continues to work.
Smiler
> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>>> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>>
>> Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
>> intent of forgetting those who die.
>
> Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
> me, Ray.
>
Then why are you posting to a.a.?
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
Ray Fischer
>On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>> >the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>>
>> Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
>> intent of forgetting those who die.
>
>Your mindless and heartless version of atheism
So not only are you a dishonest sleazebag, you're also a senile moron.
>> >I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>> >unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>>
>> Sure you can, bigot. You already do. While you sit on yooiur lying,
>> hypocritical ass you are letting children die of hunger at the rate of
>> a couple every minute. While you sit in your comfortable home and
>> spend money to show the world how disgustingly immoral you are,
>
>As I've said several times, at least once in reply to you, I spend
>about $10 per year on anti-abortion causes and over $1000 per year on
>charity
I'll tell you the same thing you tell pregnant women:
DO MORE! DIE if necessary in order to save lives, you stinking
hypocrite.
>> children are starving for want of $1 per day worth of food and clean
>> water.
>
>How much do YOU contribute to charity each year,
More than I demand of others, hypocrite. You, on the other hand, are
an asshole who would enslave women and force them to DIE while you sit
on your lying ass and dare to pass judgement.
Your evil cult has corrupted you.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
duke
Great statement, Peter.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
duke
wrote:
Wrong on both counts, mikey. The norm was a belief that they were held "in
limbo" awaiting the day that the Lord will elevate them into the full vision of
God. Now we simply say that God's path is not revealed to us, and we live in
hope that his plan does include a "limbo" path, his being a loving God.
>About 140 years ago the pope was *not* infallible. This doctrine was defined
>dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.
>Basically he is infallible because he said so.
NO, because he is guided by the Holy Spirit.
duke
>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>unborn children
>Which do not exist.
Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
james g. keegan jr.
<190218c8-9350-4849...@a31g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> > pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > >I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
> > >the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
> >
> > Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
> > intent of forgetting those who die.
>
> Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
> me, Ray.
then why did you presume that your idol worship of a criminal sect was
of interest to anyone else?
Jimbo
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:31:53 -0800, "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
Actually, he is 100% correct.
Ray Fischer
> "Mike Painter" <md.pa...@sbcglobal.net>
>>About 140 years ago the pope was *not* infallible. This doctrine was defined
>>dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.
>>Basically he is infallible because he said so.
>
>NO, because he is guided by the Holy Spirit.
That's also what Charles Manson said.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
raven1
<nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>*Pie Jesu Domine, dona eis requiem
<whacks self in forehead with a board>
raven1
<nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day
And felt the need to share this on alt.atheism why?
elizabeth
Oh, get the fuck over yourself, fauxNy. The only reason there is an
"all souls" deal is because of Europagans. IOW, synchrotism happens,
and the Church simply modified and tried to take over the aboriginal
beliefs because that was the only way they could get converts.
As with christmas. Martin Luther had y'all pegged.
The Chief Instigator
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>
>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>unborn children
>
>>Which do not exist.
>
> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
You should know, having the requisite disability.
--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2008-09 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Texas 3, Houston 1 (October 30)
NEXT GAME:Thursday, November 5 vs. Manitoba, 5:05
The Chief Instigator
Because from all appearances, it's a fake Peter Nyikos (the real one was and
still might be faculty at The USC - that's South Carolina) who crept in to
see how much he can irritate newsgroups he doesn't agree with.
The Chief Instigator
> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>> >the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>>
>> Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
>> intent of forgetting those who die.
>
> Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
> me, Ray.
Your deepening senility (assuming it's actually you) has pretty much
deprived you of a grasp of atheism, Phony.
The Chief Instigator
> pnyikos wrote:
>> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>>>> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>>>
>>> Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
>>> intent of forgetting those who die.
>>
>> Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
>> me, Ray.
>>
>
> Then why are you posting to a.a.?
He's still whining at alt.abortion posters who slapped him silly a decade
and change ago.
thomas p.
Yes, a con artist recognizes his own kind.
duke
>On Nov 3, 6:45�ｿｽam, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:31:53 -0800, "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>> >pnyikos wrote:
>> >> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>> >> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died. �ｿｽThe
>> >> first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
>> >> Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
>> >> Bible. �ｿｽMost Protestant denominations consider it one of the
>> >> Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
>> >> in the opening verses:
>
>> >> "The souls of the just are in the hand of God,
>> >> and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
>> >> in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
>> >> passing away was thought to be an affliction and
>> >> their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
>> >> are in peace...
>> >> ...the LORD shall be their King forever. �ｿｽThose who
>> >> trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
>> >> shall abide with him in love..."
>> >> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>> >> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>> >> of viable ones, many of �ｿｽwhom are torn limb from limb while still
>> >> alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
>> >> vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
>> >> these unfortunates as well. �ｿｽFor them, and to all the women who are
>> >> killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
>> >> future, I joined in the prayer:
>> >Until recently all those aborted souls never went to heaven, now they don't
>> >even talk about limbo.
>> >Until recently all the bad ones went to a hell of fire and brimstone, now
>> >they talk about it being absent from God.
>> Wrong on both counts, mikey. �ｿｽ
>Actually, he is 100% correct.
No, he is wrong, and both of you have no idea what you're talking about
duke
Not the same Holy Spirit that I follow.
duke
>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>>
>>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>unborn children
>>
>>>Which do not exist.
>>
>> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>
>You should know, having the requisite disability.
And, I'm still your intellectual superior, west loop.
duke
Can you explain that statement?
> IOW, synchrotism happens,
>and the Church simply modified and tried to take over the aboriginal
>beliefs because that was the only way they could get converts.
Did you mean "synchrotron"
>As with christmas. Martin Luther had y'all pegged.
What did lute say?
Jimbo
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 06:46:22 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 3, 6:45 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:31:53 -0800, "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> >pnyikos wrote:
> >> >> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
> >> >> first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
> >> >> Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
> >> >> Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
> >> >> in the opening verses:
>
> >> >> "The souls of the just are in the hand of God,
> >> >> and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
> >> >> in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
> >> >> passing away was thought to be an affliction and
> >> >> their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
> >> >> are in peace...
> >> >> trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
> >> >> shall abide with him in love..."
> >> >> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
> >> >> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
> >> >> alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
> >> >> vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
> >> >> killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
> >> >> future, I joined in the prayer:
> >> >Until recently all those aborted souls never went to heaven, now they don't
> >> >even talk about limbo.
> >> >Until recently all the bad ones went to a hell of fire and brimstone, now
> >> >they talk about it being absent from God.
> >> Wrong on both counts, mikey.
>
> No, he is wrong,
Nope, he is 100% correct. You should know that you are not going to
get away with trying to revise history to suit your views. Just like
the common christer view 50 - 100 years ago was the same as the Hebrew
Torrah, that souls joined the body at the time of birth. Since the
abortion issue, christers started saying that the soul joined the body
at conception. christers have always changed their views to suit
their politics.
Jimbo
>
> >duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
>
> >>>About 140 years ago the pope was *not* infallible. This doctrine was defined
> >>>dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.
> >>>Basically he is infallible because he said so.
>
> >>NO, because he is guided by the Holy Spirit.
>
> >That's also what Charles Manson said.
>
> Not the same Holy Spirit that I follow.
I think it is. Yours is just as murderous.
Jimbo
> On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<procho...@here.now> wrote:
>
> >>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
> >>>>unborn children
>
> >>>Which do not exist.
>
> >> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>
> >You should know, having the requisite disability.
>
> And, I'm still your intellectual superior,
You have yet to prove that assertion. As far as anyone can tell,
you're a complete idiot.
Jimbo
Ray Fischer
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> "Mike Painter" <md.pa...@sbcglobal.net>
>>>>About 140 years ago the pope was *not* infallible. This doctrine was defined
>>>>dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.
>>>>Basically he is infallible because he said so.
>>>
>>>NO, because he is guided by the Holy Spirit.
>>
>>That's also what Charles Manson said.
>
>Not the same Holy Spirit that I follow.
Different name - same ideology.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>unborn children
>>>
>>>>Which do not exist.
>>>
>>> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>>
>>You should know, having the requisite disability.
>
>And, I'm still your intellectual superior,
Impossible. You have no intellect.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
pnyikos
> pnyikos wrote:
> > On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >>> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
> >>> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>
> >> intent of forgetting those who die.
>
> > Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
> > me, Ray.
>
> Then why are you posting to a.a.?
Well, duh, I was hoping some more reasonable atheists (also agnostics)
who appreciate the cultural side of things would give a more reasoned
side to the subject even while advancing their own POV.
Did you catch the implicit agnosticism in what I wrote, using the word
"hope" rather than "faith" or "belief" at critical junctions? [Ray
deleted those, so he could pretend I subscribed to the words of
triumph in the passage from Wisdom, and the prayer, rather than them
only describing what I *hope* is true.
I can really appreciate the agnosticism and skepticism of Fitzgerald's
_The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam_, for example; during long stretches of
my life it corresponded much more closely to where I was at, than the
words I quoted form the Book of Wisdom.
I see you subscribe to the old chestnut that man made the gods in his
own image. Trouble is, that is cribbed from an ancient Greek author
who was referring to gods that really WERE made in man's image.
[I sometimes joke that if doves made God in their own image, they
would picture the Holy Spirit in the form of a human.]
Peter Nyikos
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> >I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
> >> >the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>
> >> Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
> >> intent of forgetting those who die.
>
> >Your mindless and heartless version of atheism
>
TbBA.
> >> >I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
> >> >unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>
> >> Sure you can, bigot. You already do.
Exactly, and in the words Ray deleted, I explained EXACTLY the reasons
why I *can* bear it, namely the hope I have that death isn't the end
of everything.
>> > While you sit on yooiur lying,
> >> hypocritical ass you are letting children die of hunger at the rate of
> >> a couple every minute. While you sit in your comfortable home and
> >> spend money to show the world how disgustingly immoral you are,
Note the refutation below:
> >As I've said several times, at least once in reply to you, I spend
> >about $10 per year on anti-abortion causes and over $1000 per year on
> >charity
In contrast, Ray gave NO figures below on how much he contributes.
And now comes a typical Fischer one-size-fits-all screed which may fit
Judie Brown but is downright libelous where someone like myself is the
subject.
> I'll tell you the same thing you tell pregnant women:
By YOUR hate-crazed standards, Ray, it is what YOU tell women whose
fetuses are viable.
Go ahead and live by your standards if you must, but I live by
reasonable adult standards.
> DO MORE! DIE if necessary in order to save lives, you stinking
> hypocrite.
Get a life, you hate-spewing excuse for a human being.
> >> children are starving for want of $1 per day worth of food and clean
> >> water.
>
> >How much do YOU contribute to charity each year,
>
> More than I demand of others, hypocrite.
In other words, you could be contributing $1 per year while only
*demanding* that others contribute 50 cents per year, but indulging in
blatantly dishonest and hypocritical misdirection as in your screeds
above.
[hate-driven finale by Ray deleted]
Peter Nyikos
panam...@hotmail.com
snip
Okay, let's talk "reason". You compose an idiotic superstitous screed,
and then add alt.atheism to the list of groups you send it to. Now you
whine and complain when someone free from your nonsense treats your
post the way it *should* be in this group.
Why did you send it to us in the first place? We don't care about your
superstion, or the tribal chanting & shamanistic garbage surrounding
them. What are you trying to achieve? Did you think you would find a
`fellow traveler' here? And if the intent of your little post was to
impress people with your insipid fairy tales, then it was a major
failure.
Ray's replies are an adequate response to either one of these
scenarios. In fact, I admire his restraint. Personally, I would have
told you to take your moronic dead-jew-on-a-stick and shove him up
your ass.
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/Member, Knights of BAAWA!
Christopher A. Lee
You don't understand - giving these bigoted, in-your-face, idiots
the response their aggressive stupidity deserves, is unprovoked
"hatred and dishonesty" in their sociopathic wordl view.
They don't understand the difference between their action and a
reaction which wouldn't even have happened.
Nor do they understand that unlike them we are not commanded to turn
the other cheek.
Jimbo
> On Nov 4, 1:17 pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> snip
>
> Okay, let's talk "reason".
You've already lost him. :D
The Chief Instigator
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 06:46:22 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:31:53 -0800, "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
>>> wrote:
>
>>> >pnyikos wrote:
>>> >> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>>> >> first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
>>> >> Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
>>> >> Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
>>> >> in the opening verses:
>>
>>> >> "The souls of the just are in the hand of God,
>>> >> and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
>>> >> in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
>>> >> passing away was thought to be an affliction and
>>> >> their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
>>> >> are in peace...
>>> >> trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
>>> >> shall abide with him in love..."
>
>>> >> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>> >> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>>> >> alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
>>> >> vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
>>> >> killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
>>> >> future, I joined in the prayer:
>
>>> >Until recently all those aborted souls never went to heaven, now they don't
>>> >even talk about limbo.
>>> >Until recently all the bad ones went to a hell of fire and brimstone, now
>>> >they talk about it being absent from God.
>
>
>>Actually, he is 100% correct.
>
> No, he is wrong, and both of you have no idea what you're talking about
Quit talking to yourself, sorry caricature of a Catholic that you display
daily.
The Chief Instigator
> On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>unborn children
>>>
>>>>Which do not exist.
>>>
>>> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>>
>>You should know, having the requisite disability.
>
> And, I'm still your intellectual superior, west loop.
Just more Dook self-worship. Stick the Vatican where the moon don't shine,
Pope and all. (That's my opinion.)
pnyikos
>
> snip
>
> Okay, let's talk "reason". You compose an idiotic superstitous screed,
> and then add alt.atheism to the list of groups you send it to. Now you
> whine and complain when someone free from your nonsense treats your
> post the way it *should* be in this group.
Well, if you are representative of the participants in a.a. these
days, there's been a huge sea-change in the group since the early
90's. Back then, there were lots of thoughtful atheists around. I
even recall a classification of atheists, one of which was that of a
"soft atheist". I can't recall the exact definition, but it was
something like an agnostic who simply orders his life as though there
were no supernatural.
> Why did you send it to us in the first place? We don't care about your
> superstion, or the tribal chanting & shamanistic garbage surrounding
> them.
Who is "we?" Do you speak for all regulars in the newsgroup now? I've
met lots of atheists who have a decent respect for the faith of
Christians, especially the belief and/or hope in a life after death
which is what my post mostly had to do with.
Are you really happy with the idea that billions of people have died
under the most miserable circumstances, never having had the comforts
and joys that we have, and that misery was the sum total of their
experiences?
Or do you shut the idea out of your mind and act like the people
described by Mark Shea in today's _Catholic Exchange_?
-------------- begin excerpt
The world is all about trying to keep its life. So it prattles on as
though you and I are not going to die but live forever in a sort of
eternal dream of the Pepsi Generation. This is worldly hope and it
leads inevitably to worldly despair. That’s what is fueling the
present movement toward euthanasia. A post-Christian culture that
gives up on God inevitably gives up on real hope. The world says, “If
I can’t have eternal Pepsi Generation happiness then, by golly, I’m
going to assert my power one last time and end it all on my terms!”
That’s despair as old and weary as Adam.
----------------- end of excerpt from
http://catholicexchange.com/2009/11/04/114739/
Peter Nyikos
james g. keegan jr.
<744d7535-2fc5-4491...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 1:44�pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 1:17�pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > Okay, let's talk "reason". You compose an idiotic superstitous screed,
> > and then add alt.atheism to the list of groups you send it to. Now you
> > whine and complain when someone free from your nonsense treats your
> > post the way it *should* be in this group.
>
> Well, if you are representative of the participants in a.a. these
> days, there's been a huge sea-change in the group since the early
> 90's.
note how the person posting as peter nyikos completely ignores the fact
that several a.a. regulars said more or less the same thing to him and
then presumes to tell those readers what "he/she" thinks they should
read.
Ray Fischer
>On Nov 3, 12:22�am, "Smiler" <Smi...@joe.king.com> wrote:
>> pnyikos wrote:
>> > On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> >> pnyikos �<nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >>> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>> >>> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>>
>> >> Get real. �It's all a sham. �A charade. �Feel-good ritual with the
>> >> intent of forgetting those who die.
>>
>> > Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
>> > me, Ray.
>>
>> Then why are you posting to a.a.?
>
>Well, duh, I was hoping some more reasonable atheists (also agnostics)
>who appreciate the cultural side of things would give a more reasoned
>side to the subject even while advancing their own POV.
Smirk. "More reasoned".
That coming from someone whose best argument is to call people
atheists merely for criticizing his immoral cult.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
hypocrite whose only agenda is to subjugate women.
pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>On Nov 3, 1:11�am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> pnyikos �<nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> >> pnyikos �<nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >> >I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>> >> >unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>>
>> >> Sure you can, bigot. �You already do.
>
>Exactly, and in the words Ray deleted, I explained EXACTLY the reasons
>why I *can* bear it,
Because you're a coldhearted hypocrite whose real agenda is the
subjugation of women. Like more insane religious lunatics you think
that any crime is justified by the prospect of heaven.
> namely the hope I have that death isn't the end
>of everything.
Then why are you anti-abortion?
You can't even keep your story straight.
>>> > �While you sit on yooiur lying,
>> >> hypocritical ass you are letting children die of hunger at the rate of
>> >> a couple every minute. �While you sit in your comfortable home and
>> >> spend money to show the world how disgustingly immoral you are,
>
>> >As I've said several times, at least once in reply to you, I spend
>> >about $10 per year on anti-abortion causes and over $1000 per year on
>> >charity
>
>In contrast, Ray gave NO figures below on how much he contributes.
Notice that fauxNy thinks it's fine for HIM to let people die so long
as he makes his token payment. After all, he pays $1000 so it's okay
for him to demand that people give up their lives.
>> I'll tell you the same thing you tell pregnant women:
>
>By YOUR hate-crazed standards,
YOU are the lying hypocrite. Not me.
>> DO MORE! �DIE if necessary in order to save lives, you stinking
>> hypocrite.
>
>Get a life,
YOU are the perverted conbtrolk freak sticking your nose into people's
private affairs. Not me.
>> >> children are starving for want of $1 per day worth of food and clean
>> >> water.
>>
>> >How much do YOU contribute to charity each year,
>>
>> More than I demand of others, hypocrite.
>
>In other words, you could be contributing $1 per year while only
>*demanding* that others contribute 50 cents per year,
But I don't demand that anybody give. I'm not a sleazebag hypocrite
like you. I don't LIE to people, claiming that I care about people's
lives while callously letting them die.
You are.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>On Nov 4, 1:44�pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Why did you send it to us in the first place? We don't care about your
>> superstion, or the tribal chanting & shamanistic garbage surrounding
>> them.
>
>Who is "we?" Do you speak for all regulars in the newsgroup now? I've
>met lots of atheists who have a decent respect for the faith of
YOU don't even respect your religion, fauxNy. You're just an arrogant
hypocrite who prays on the street corners so that you might earn the
respect of others. If you do know what Jesus taught then you
certainly don't care to be bothered to follow His teachings.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
panam...@hotmail.com
> On Nov 4, 1:44 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Nov 4, 1:17 pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > snip
>
> > Okay, let's talk "reason". You compose an idiotic superstitous screed,
> > and then add alt.atheism to the list of groups you send it to. Now you
> > whine and complain when someone free from your nonsense treats your
> > post the way it *should* be in this group.
>
> Well, if you are representative of the participants in a.a. these
> days, there's been a huge sea-change in the group since the early
> 90's.
And people like you, who post nonsensical garbage about your insipid
superstitions, are the *very* reason for that change.
> Back then, there were lots of thoughtful atheists around. I
> even recall a classification of atheists, one of which was that of a
> "soft atheist". I can't recall the exact definition, but it was
> something like an agnostic who simply orders his life as though there
> were no supernatural.
The "classification" is "strong atheist" (i.e., "I think gods do not
exist") and "weak atheism" (i.e., "there may be gods, I've just not
seen any evidence for them"). This group was actually created for
those of us who actually *are* atheists to discuss such differences,
and also to discuss the difficulties of living as free people within
societies full of the slaves of supernaturalism.
Also, there is a *reason* there are two separate groups for atheism
and agnostics. Those are actually two very different topics. Atheism
is the topic of "existence", agnosticism is the topic of "knowledge".
Personally, I consider the agnostic position as a flimsy one, since
the very question of "knowledge" of gods is a version of special
pleading for the concept in the first place.
> > Why did you send it to us in the first place? We don't care about your
> > superstion, or the tribal chanting & shamanistic garbage surrounding
> > them.
>
> Who is "we?" Do you speak for all regulars in the newsgroup now?
No, I don't. But I'll betcha I come pretty close to expressing their
opinions as well.
BTW: If I had a Euro for every time one of you morons have tried to
distract me with this red herring, I could buy a new BMW. Continue to
ignore the replies you recieve from the other regulars at your own
peril.
> I've
> met lots of atheists who have a decent respect for the faith of
> Christians,
You must be living in Europe. Those of us who live in countries where
the "believers" in Christian mythology still threatens people's hopes
for building a truly modern human society have no such "respect" for
your insipid death cult.
> especially the belief and/or hope in a life after death
> which is what my post mostly had to do with.
A "life after death"? Your delusions are *your* problem, not mine.
Quit whining about my lack of respect for your idiocy. Or, as an
alternative...prove that an "afterlife" actually exists in the first
place. Your Nobel Prize awaits you.
> Are you really happy with the idea that billions of people have died
> under the most miserable circumstances, never having had the comforts
> and joys that we have, and that misery was the sum total of their
> experiences?
No, I am not. Especially since even a casual observation of
superstition should show that it's often the substitute for their
powerlessness to take action against the various social situations
that cause their misery.
> Or do you shut the idea out of your mind and act like the people
> described by Mark Shea in today's _Catholic Exchange_?
>
> -------------- begin excerpt
> The world is all about trying to keep its life. So it prattles on as
> though you and I are not going to die but live forever in a sort of
> eternal dream of the Pepsi Generation. This is worldly hope and it
> leads inevitably to worldly despair. That’s what is fueling the
> present movement toward euthanasia. A post-Christian culture that
> gives up on God inevitably gives up on real hope. The world says, “If
> I can’t have eternal Pepsi Generation happiness then, by golly, I’m
> going to assert my power one last time and end it all on my terms!”
> That’s despair as old and weary as Adam.
> ----------------- end of excerpt fromhttp://catholicexchange.com/2009/11/04/114739/
ROFL! The addicted druggie spouts garbage about why it's so cool to
keep using the drug. And does so, by framing his desire to keep
mainlining that shit with "popular culture" references!
Did you *really* think that pathetic garbage would lead anyone who
knows what kind of poison religion actually is to reconsider their
stance on your idiocy? Presupposition that your moronic superstion is
"true". Presupposition that anyone who hasn't been exposed to it
actually gives a shit about it. Presupposition that people free from
that nonsense should "respect" it any more than they "respect" the
notion that seals play Frisbee Golf on Ganymede, or that the Brooklyn
Bridge was built by UFOs.
If you *really* think there's no difference between these different
concepts, you're dumber than even *I* thought you were.
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain
Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html
Jimbo
> On Nov 4, 1:44 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Nov 4, 1:17 pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > snip
>
> > Okay, let's talk "reason". You compose an idiotic superstitous screed,
> > and then add alt.atheism to the list of groups you send it to. Now you
> > whine and complain when someone free from your nonsense treats your
> > post the way it *should* be in this group.
>
> Well, if you are representative of the participants in a.a. these
> days, there's been a huge sea-change in the group since the early
> 90's.
There's no need to sugarcoat what you are doing in alt.atheism, I've
seen your posts. You're little more than a troll.
Jimbo
> In article
> <744d7535-2fc5-4491-a24f-c1cb4d42b...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
Exactly.
x
> This is where nyikos reallly shows his credentials as an immoral
> hypocrite whose only agenda is to subjugate women.
>
> pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> On Nov 3, 1:11 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>>>>> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>>>>> Sure you can, bigot. You already do.
>> Exactly, and in the words Ray deleted, I explained EXACTLY the reasons
>> why I *can* bear it,
>
> Because you're a coldhearted hypocrite whose real agenda is the
> subjugation of women.
Not if they are in utero.
>
>> namely the hope I have that death isn't the end
>> of everything.
>
> Then why are you anti-abortion?
>
> You can't even keep your story straight.
>
>>>>> While you sit on yooiur lying,
>>>>> hypocritical ass you are letting children die of hunger at the rate of
>>>>> a couple every minute. While you sit in your comfortable home and
>>>>> spend money to show the world how disgustingly immoral you are,
>>>> As I've said several times, at least once in reply to you, I spend
>>>> about $10 per year on anti-abortion causes and over $1000 per year on
>>>> charity
>> In contrast, Ray gave NO figures below on how much he contributes.
>
> Notice that fauxNy thinks it's fine for HIM to let people die so long
> as he makes his token payment.
I noticed no such thing
>>> I'll tell you the same thing you tell pregnant women:
>> By YOUR hate-crazed standards,
>
> YOU are the lying hypocrite. Not me.
>
>>> DO MORE! DIE if necessary in order to save lives, you stinking
>>> hypocrite.
>> Get a life,
>
> YOU are the perverted conbtrolk freak sticking your nose into people's
> private affairs. Not me.
Stop trying to control anti-abortionists.
>
>>>>> children are starving for want of $1 per day worth of food and clean
>>>>> water.
>>>> How much do YOU contribute to charity each year,
>>> More than I demand of others, hypocrite.
>> In other words, you could be contributing $1 per year while only
>> *demanding* that others contribute 50 cents per year,
>
> But I don't demand that anybody give. I'm not a sleazebag hypocrite
> like you.
You are in a league of your own.
duke
>pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>>the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>
>Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
>intent of forgetting those who die.
No thanks, fishboy. We'll stick with reality.
duke
>On Nov 4, 7:10�ｿｽam, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 06:46:22 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Nov 3, 6:45�ｿｽam, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:31:53 -0800, "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >pnyikos wrote:
>> >> >> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>> >> >> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died. �ｿｽThe
>> >> >> first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
>> >> >> Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
>> >> >> Bible. �ｿｽMost Protestant denominations consider it one of the
>> >> >> Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
>> >> >> in the opening verses:
>>
>> >> >> "The souls of the just are in the hand of God,
>> >> >> and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
>> >> >> in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
>> >> >> passing away was thought to be an affliction and
>> >> >> their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
>> >> >> are in peace...
>> >> >> ...the LORD shall be their King forever. �ｿｽThose who
>> >> >> trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
>> >> >> shall abide with him in love..."
>> >> >> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>> >> >> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>> >> >> of viable ones, many of �ｿｽwhom are torn limb from limb while still
>> >> >> alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
>> >> >> vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
>> >> >> these unfortunates as well. �ｿｽFor them, and to all the women who are
>> >> >> killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
>> >> >> future, I joined in the prayer:
>> >> >Until recently all those aborted souls never went to heaven, now they don't
>> >> >even talk about limbo.
>> >> >Until recently all the bad ones went to a hell of fire and brimstone, now
>> >> >they talk about it being absent from God.
>> >> Wrong on both counts, mikey. �ｿｽ
>> >Actually, he is 100% correct.
>> No, he is wrong,
>Nope, he is 100% correct.
Wrong on both counts. Limbo was a guess as to the eternal future of the infants
that died without baptism. Therefore neither heaven nor hell is a valid
assumption.
Only God knows.
>You should know that you are not going to
>get away with trying to revise history to suit your views.
History. Haahaahaahaa. You're an idiot.
> Just like
>the common christer view 50 - 100 years ago was the same as the Hebrew
>Torrah, that souls joined the body at the time of birth. Since the
>abortion issue, christers started saying that the soul joined the body
>at conception. christers have always changed their views to suit
>their politics.
The Dukester, American-American
duke
My Holy Spirit is all love, vacant lot.
duke
>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> "Mike Painter" <md.pa...@sbcglobal.net>
>
>>>>>About 140 years ago the pope was *not* infallible. This doctrine was defined
>>>>>dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.
>>>>>Basically he is infallible because he said so.
>>>>
>>>>NO, because he is guided by the Holy Spirit.
>>>
>>>That's also what Charles Manson said.
>>
>>Not the same Holy Spirit that I follow.
>
>Different name - same ideology.
There is only one HOly Spirit, fishboy. And you can choose to say "yes" to the
him or "no" to him.
duke
>On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 06:10:59 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> in
>alt.abortion with message-id
><0qr2f5dd0vv4jvcot...@4ax.com> wrote:
>
>>On 03 Nov 2009 17:55:52 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> "Mike Painter" <md.pa...@sbcglobal.net>
>>>
>>>>>About 140 years ago the pope was *not* infallible. This doctrine was defined
>>>>>dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.
>>>>>Basically he is infallible because he said so.
>>>>
>>>>NO, because he is guided by the Holy Spirit.
>>>
>>>That's also what Charles Manson said.
>>
>>Not the same Holy Spirit that I follow.
>>
>
>You can't even prove it exists.
He does.
duke
>On Nov 4, 7:12�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<procho...@here.now> wrote:
>>
>> >>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>> >>>>unborn children
>>
>> >>>Which do not exist.
>>
>> >> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>>
>> >You should know, having the requisite disability.
>>
>> And, I'm still your intellectual superior,
>
>You have yet to prove that assertion. As far as anyone can tell,
>you're a complete idiot.
And, I'm still your intellectual superior.
duke
Then why is it so easy for me to put you down?
duke
>On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 06:12:13 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>>unborn children
>>>>
>>>>>Which do not exist.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>>>
>>>You should know, having the requisite disability.
>>
>> And, I'm still your intellectual superior, west loop.
>
>Just more Dook self-worship. Stick the Vatican where the moon don't shine,
>Pope and all. (That's my opinion.)
Nobody cares what your opinion is, west loop.
duke
>On Nov 4, 7:19嚙窮m, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:50:50 -0800 (PST), elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Nov 2, 6:41嚙緘m, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
>> >> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died. 嚙確he
>> >> first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
>> >> Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
>> >> Bible. 嚙瞎ost Protestant denominations consider it one of the
>> >> Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
>> >> in the opening verses:
>>
>> >> "The souls of the just are in the hand of God,
>> >> and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
>> >> in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
>> >> passing away was thought to be an affliction and
>> >> their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
>> >> are in peace...
>> >> ...the LORD shall be their King forever. 嚙確hose who
>> >> trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
>> >> shall abide with him in love..."
>>
>> >> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>> >> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>> >> of viable ones, many of 嚙緩hom are torn limb from limb while still
>> >> alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
>> >> vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
>> >> these unfortunates as well. 嚙瘤or them, and to all the women who are
>> >> killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
>> >> future, I joined in the prayer:
>>
>> >> *Pie Jesu Domine, dona eis requiem sempiternam.*
>> >> Merciful Lord Jesus, grant them rest everlasting.
>>
>> >> Peter Nyikos
>> >Oh, get the fuck over yourself, fauxNy. 嚙確he only reason there is an
>> >"all souls" deal is because of Europagans.
>>
>> Can you explain that statement?
>Why? You can never explain your statements.
Sure I do. I just don't make stupid statements like you do, such as like the
one above.
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> This is where nyikos reallly shows his credentials as an immoral
>> hypocrite whose only agenda is to subjugate women.
>>
>> pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>> On Nov 3, 1:11 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>>> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>>>>>> Sure you can, bigot. You already do.
>>> Exactly, and in the words Ray deleted, I explained EXACTLY the reasons
>>> why I *can* bear it,
>>
>> Because you're a coldhearted hypocrite whose real agenda is the
>> subjugation of women.
>
>Not if they are in utero.
1) That's a tacit admission that you care only about fetuses.
2) There are no women in utero - never have been.
>>> namely the hope I have that death isn't the end
>>> of everything.
>>
>> Then why are you anti-abortion?
>>
>> You can't even keep your story straight.
>>
>>>>>> While you sit on yooiur lying,
>>>>>> hypocritical ass you are letting children die of hunger at the rate of
>>>>>> a couple every minute. While you sit in your comfortable home and
>>>>>> spend money to show the world how disgustingly immoral you are,
>>>>> As I've said several times, at least once in reply to you, I spend
>>>>> about $10 per year on anti-abortion causes and over $1000 per year on
>>>>> charity
>>> In contrast, Ray gave NO figures below on how much he contributes.
>>
>> Notice that fauxNy thinks it's fine for HIM to let people die so long
>> as he makes his token payment.
>
>I noticed no such thing
That's because you're an insane cultist.
>>>> I'll tell you the same thing you tell pregnant women:
>>> By YOUR hate-crazed standards,
>>
>> YOU are the lying hypocrite. Not me.
>>
>>>> DO MORE! DIE if necessary in order to save lives, you stinking
>>>> hypocrite.
>>> Get a life,
>>
>> YOU are the perverted conbtrolk freak sticking your nose into people's
>> private affairs. Not me.
>
>Stop trying to control anti-abortionists.
Stop being a terrorist.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 05:22:24 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 4, 7:10�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On 03 Nov 2009 17:55:52 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>
>>> >duke �<duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> >> "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
>>>
>>> >>>About 140 years ago the pope was *not* infallible. This doctrine was defined
>>> >>>dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.
>>> >>>Basically he is infallible because he said so.
>>>
>>> >>NO, because he is guided by the Holy Spirit.
>>>
>>> >That's also what Charles Manson said.
>>>
>>> Not the same Holy Spirit that I follow.
>>
>>I think it is. Yours is just as murderous.
>
>My Holy Spirit is all love,
Your hate and your lies prove you to be a liar.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>On 04 Nov 2009 17:45:18 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>>>unborn children
>>>>>
>>>>>>Which do not exist.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>>>>
>>>>You should know, having the requisite disability.
>>>
>>>And, I'm still your intellectual superior,
>>
>>Impossible. You have no intellect.
>
>Then why is it so easy for me to put you down?
You only believe that because you're insane.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
pnyikos
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 18:41:43 -0800 (PST), pnyikos
> <nyik...@bellsouth.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
> <56c2a303-3f64-4f3d-9f97-e750302a1...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating AllSoulsDay,
> >first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
> >Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
> >Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
> >in the opening verses:
>
> >and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
> >in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
> >passing away was thought to be an affliction and
> >their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
> >are in peace...
> >trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
> >shall abide with him in love..."
>
> >unborn children
>
> Which do not exist.
Prepare for a shocker: the Oxford English Dictionary lists, as the
first meaning of "child," a meaning that explicitly includes unborn
human beings, and even lists "foetus" as one of the synonyms. The
Merriam-Webster Collegiate dictionary does the same, except that the
word that should shock you is spelled "fetus".
The real shocker, for you, is that neither definition is labeled
"obsolete" or even "archaic."
> >who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
> >of viable ones
>
> A fetus is not a child
False, see above.
>ant viability is irrelevant.
Even Ray Fischer recognizes it as relevant. And the reason it is
relevant is that if the woman wants to terminate the pregnancy after
the fetus becomes viable, she can do it by having labor induced, and
then it is not even an abortion but a (usually premature) live birth.
And, usually, the induction of labor method is at least as safe as the
other methods, one of which is described below and called "D&E",
variously expanded as "dilation and evacuation" and (more accurately)
as "dismemberment and evacuation."
> >, many of whom are torn limb from limb while still
> >alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
> >vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
> >these unfortunates as well. For them, and to all the women who are
> >killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
> >future, I joined in the prayer:
>
> >*Pie Jesu Domine, dona eis requiem sempiternam.*
> >Merciful Lord Jesus, grant them rest everlasting.
>
> Prove any such person ever existed.
You are missing the point. In the prayer, the way I mean it, is
implicit the conditional, "if a merciful entity named Jesus can hear
this and can do it, ..." and if you hadn't deleted so much, it would
be clear that it is included.
[Actually the historical figure was called something like Yeshua, but
saying "Jesu" or "Jesus" is like calling me Pedro or Piotr instead
of Peter--I don't mind it at all, I'll answer to it.]
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:15:33 -0500, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 18:41:43 -0800 (PST), pnyikos
> ><nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >>I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating AllSoulsDay
>
>
> Because from all appearances,
Hogwash.
>it's a fake Peter Nyikos (the real one was and
> still might be faculty at The USC
What do you, a stalker from way back, mean by saying "might"? The
merest neophyte at using Google or Yahoo internet searches can find
the website for the Department of Mathematics at the University of
South Carolina, and click on "Departmental Directory," and find my
name and e-mail address listed under Faculty.
You certainly have been earning the nickname "Chief Idiot" lately. I
found it especially hilarious how you didn't even recognize something
Boo Radley posted as satire--even though it was the kind of satire you
would indulge in, if you had more upstairs.
Was Spartakus telling everyone a tall tale by saying that you could
figure out his location within one second of an arc of the earth's
circumference, both latitude and longitude, just by the information in
the headers of Spartakus's posts?
>- that's South Carolina) who crept in to
> see how much he can irritate newsgroups he doesn't agree with.
I happened to agree with a lot of atheists, back when I was within a
hair's breadth of becoming one. I admit, the All Souls Day special
wasn't the most diplomatic thing to crosspost there, but I've been
involved in LOTS of crossposts to a.atheism in the past year, and no
one batted an eye until now.
> --
> Patrick L. "The Chief
Idiot" Humphrey
Peter Nyikos
Instigator" Humphrey (patr...@io.com) Houston, Texas
> www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php(TCI's 2008-09 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
> LAST GAME: Texas 3, Houston 1 (October 30)
> NEXT GAME:Thursday, November 5 vs. Manitoba, 5:05
pnyikos
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:13:00 -0800 (PST), pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >> >I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating AllSoulsDay,
> >> >the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>
> >> intent of forgetting those who die.
>
> > me, Ray.
There are lots of versions of atheism, some of them deserving of great
respect . [Even Chesterton agreed in the midst of a brilliant essay
explaining why he was a Christian.] But Ray's version is both
mindless and heartless.
> Your deepening senility (assuming it's actually you) has pretty much
> deprived you of a grasp of atheism, Phony.
On the contrary, it is you whose grasp of atheism is slipping away,
Chief Idiot. How else to explain the following post?
Note how it was crossposted to alt.atheism and how, even though you
and Boo Radley are kindred spirits where Christianity is concerned,
even he agreed that you were dumb enough to miss the point of his
satire.
=============== begin included post
Newsgroups: alt.abortion, alt.atheism, alt.religion.christian.roman-
catholic, soc.culture.jewish
From: "Boo Radley" <Kill...@mockingbird.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 19:25:27 -0400
Local: Fri, Oct 30 2009 6:25 pm
Subject: Re: Urinating On Jesus
"pnyikos" <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:059d58b3-e02c-4da7-
b692-080...@p35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> On Oct 30, 1:39 am, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 10:50:38 -0400, Boo Radley <Kill...@mockingbird.com>
>> wrote:
>> > "The Chief Instigator" <patr...@io.com> wrote in message
>> >news:slrnheiarp....@eris.io.com...
>> >> On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 01:45:27 -0400, J <Jvisi...@live.com> wrote:
>> >>> URINATING ONJESUS
>> >>> October 26, 2009
>> >> [typical Junkie Young feigned outrage given a game misconduct]
>> >> If there ever was such a person, he's only been dead about 1980 years
>> >> by
>> >> now, so maybe you should pick a saner cause to whore for.
>> >Jesuscame back in Missouri and he smited the Indians for killing the
>> >real
>> > Native Americans that were white so he blighted them with red skin. He
>> > is
>> > risen, I read it on a license plate so it's real. Wear your magic
>> > underwear and you can ride the Unicorn
>> Too bad you're full of your own delusions...
> Incredible. You can't recognize satire even when it favors your own
> attitude!
> Looks like Osprey hit the nail on the head when he called you "Chief
> Idiot."
>>I spent six and a half years out
>> of my first seven and a half in a north Tulsa neighborhood that had quite
>> a
>> few members of a couple of tribes, and we had no problems. (This was
>> from
>> early 1956 to about six weeks before Christmas in 1962...not very long
>> after
>> the Russian missiles in Cuba international controversy finally was
>> concluded, and we were only about 140 kilometers ENE of Tinker AFB, which
>> was a SAC base.) Some of my classmates when I started school were Osage,
>> a
>> Sac and Fox or two, a few Cherokees, and probably a few more tribes.
>> Enjoy
>> your doomed fantasy, since I got moved to Houston two and a half years
>> later, and I'm used to living in a city and metro that has about every
>> nationality and race on the planet. Thanks for your futile fantasy.
> Thanks for the demonstration of how hypocritical your allies,
> especially Ray Fischer, are. They eat up personal accounts like this
> by YOU, but when I tried to broaden their horizons by mentioning a
> whistling language of the Canary Islanders, I got dumped on by
> Fischer.
> Peter Nyikos
He's just as dumb as Chilton, J and Osprey so don't burst his bubble.
I like
messing with stupid people, it justifies all the things I do to
oppress
Christians, glamorize abortion and spread indecency on the airwaves.
-------------------------------------- end of included post
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:22:26 -0000, Smiler <Smi...@joe.king.com> wrote:
> > pnyikos wrote:
> >> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>>> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating AllSoulsDay,
> >>>> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>
> >>> Get real. It's all a sham. A charade. Feel-good ritual with the
> >>> intent of forgetting those who die.
>
> >> Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
> >> me, Ray.
>
Here a.a. obviously means alt.atheism, but the Chief Idiot was
apparently too dumb to pick up on that:
> He's still whining at alt.abortion posters who slapped him silly a decade
> and change ago.
The only alt.abotion posters still around who got slapped silly (in
talk.abortion, twit: alt.abortion was in an embryonic state back then)
in the 1990's were Keegan and Fischer, slapping each other silly and
being slapped silly by the allies of the other one, especially Keegan.
The one who slapped Keegan silliest was Larry Margolis. Keegan
persisted in what I call The Mother of All Flamewars, destroying his
credibility by denouncing something as a forgery in hundreds if not
thousands of posts, when in reality it was taken right out of a post
by Keegan, and identified as such, with a message-ID posted by
Margolis in all his .sigs for quite a while.
Here is that message-id: 2ct2o5$b...@usenet.rpi.edu
With the knowledge that the three symbols before the @ are b36, anyone
who knows how to use Google Advanced Search can look up that post.
Even Chief Idiot Humphrey, who up to then had been a staunch ally of
both, was disgusted over how Keegan and Margolis were behaving like a
pair of children, flaming each other back and forth over an utter
triviality, ignoring posters who were so tired of it all that they
posted threads with titles like, "Keegan, take the fucking bet!" and
"Larry, post the fucking article!"
Evidently Keegan had no clue as to what to do with the message-id, and
he now has a protege, IAAH, who keeps demanding message-ids but I
suspect he has no more idea what to do with them than Keegan did back
then.
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 06:46:22 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 3, 6:45 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:31:53 -0800, "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating AllSoulsDay,
> >> >> first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
> >> >> Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
> >> >> Bible. Most Protestant denominations consider it one of the
> >> >> Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
> >> >> in the opening verses:
>
> >> >> "Thesoulsof the just are in the hand of God,
> >> >> and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
> >> >> in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
> >> >> passing away was thought to be an affliction and
> >> >> their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
> >> >> are in peace...
> >> >> ...the LORD shall be their King forever. Those who
> >> >> trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
> >> >> shall abide with him in love..."
> >> >> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
> >> >> of viable ones, many of whom are torn limb from limb while still
> >> >> alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
> >> >> vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
> >> >> these unfortunates as well. For them, and to all the women who are
> >> >> killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
> >> >> future, I joined in the prayer:
There were a lot of misconceptions spread around in the Catholic
schools when I was growing up, one of which was:
> >> >Until recently all those aborted souls never went to heaven,
>>> >now they don't
> >> >even talk about limbo.
It never was part of Catholic dogma in the first place.
> >> >Until recently all the bad ones went to a hell of fire and brimstone,
Some evangelicals still believe this terrible idea.
> >> >they talk about it being absent from God.
That's what limbo was supposed to be about, but now the Magisterium
has made it clear that what happens to them is a mystery, but it
trusts in the mercy of God on them.
> >> Wrong on both counts, mikey.
> >Actually, he is 100% correct.
>
> No, he is wrong, and both of you have no idea what you're talking about
They are hardly to blame for not keeping up with developments, Duke.
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:50:50 -0800 (PST), elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> Merciful Lord Jesus, grant them rest everlasting.
>
"elizabeth"s morality and almost everything else is relationship-
oriented. Trying to get a point about unborn babies across, to the
abortion newsgroups, and about Christians in general and Catholics in
particular across to the other three newsgroups, somehow is perceived
by her mentality as some sort of an ego-trip by me:
> >Oh, get the fuck over yourself, fauxNy.
>> The only reason there is an
> >"allsouls" deal is because of Europagans.
"elizabeth" has been reading boilerplate propaganda about Christian
holidays. Even Wikipedia could have made it clear that the situation
is a lot more complicated than 'e seems to think.
Also, "elizabeth" is so enamored of boilerplate abortion-rights
propaganda that 'e simply concludes that Medline and Medicinenet HAVE
to be wrong about the uses of the word "baby" to denote a fetus:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/MEDLINEPLUS/ency/article/002398.htm
http://www.medicinenet.com/pregnancy/page2.htm#1j
"elizabeth" has, accordingly earned a berth in:
THE INCORRIGIBLES
These are posters who keep repeating falsehoods or foolish assertions
as though they were truisms or obvious conclusions to draw, despite
massive
volumes of posts, including follow-ups to their own posts,
that refute or at least seriously undermine what they say.
"elizabeth" Ray Fischer James G. Keegan, Jr.
"Spartakus" Patrick "The Chief I..." Humphrey
Promising candidates include "J Young," Galen Hekhuis, Gwen Bennett
and Craig Chilton, *inter alia*
> > IOW, synchrotism happens,
> >and the Church simply modified and tried to take over the aboriginal
> >beliefs because that was the only way they could get converts.
Even more propagandistic than the first statement.
> Did you mean "synchrotron"
'e meant "syncretism," but there is no syncretism involved in
modifying mere custom. The Catholic Church was at its best when not
modifying nonessentials of other religions. For instance, the Jesuits
were doing well in China when the Franciscans and Dominicans butted in
and wanted to do away with all ceremonies honoring ancestors, on the
grounds that they were pagan practices.
The Jesuits argued that there was nothing in Christian doctrine that
forbade those particular ceremonies, but the Dominicans and
Franciscans prevailed, to the great detriment of Catholic missions in
China.
> >As with christmas. Martin Luther had y'all pegged.
>
> What did lute say?
I'm curious about that, myself. The legend that he initiated the
custom of Christmas trees is almost surely false, and there is severe
skepticism about him being the composer of "Away in a manger" (German
version) but even so, I wonder what "elizabeth" had in mind here.
Peter Nyikos
Spartakus
> Was Spartakus telling everyone a tall tale by saying that you could
> figure out his location within one second of an arc of the earth's
> circumference, both latitude and longitude, just by the information
> in the headers of Spartakus's posts?
No.
Never made that claim. You're either making things up or
hallucinating.
As you once said,
"Got any more diversionary red herrings [do you
realize I am being redundant here?] to entertain
us with?"
-- Message-ID: <a127e556-1988-4ef0-91f6-
fe9233...@x1g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
pnyikos
> On Nov 4, 7:10 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 06:46:22 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >On Nov 3, 6:45 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:31:53 -0800, "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >even talk about limbo.
> > >> >Until recently all the bad ones went to a hell of fire and brimstone, now
> > >> >they talk about it being absent from God.
> > >Actually, he is 100% correct.
>
> > No, he is wrong,
See my own follow-up to Duke. Neither he nor they are 100% right or
wrong.
> Just like
> the common christer view 50 - 100 years ago was the same as the Hebrew
> Torrah, that souls joined the body at the time of birth.
100% wrong where the Roman Catholic Church is concerned. There was
some dispute about ensoulement in the Middle Ages, but the most common
view among RC theologians is that it happens at conception. Certainly
the official dogma is that it one must err on the side of caution and
behave as though it did happen at conception.
>Since the
> abortion issue,
Abortion was an issue from the earliest days of the Way. Several
Church Fathers wrote about it, saying it is a terrible sin and that
Christians just did not do it.
>christers started saying that the soul joined the body
> at conception. christers have always changed their views to suit
> their politics.
What is YOUR source for this boilerplate propaganda?
I'm surprised, by the way, to see you talk like this. You and Osprey
seemed to be on good terms back in July, and he certainly does not
think like this.
Peter Nyikos
Peter Nyikos
x
> x <x...@y.com> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> This is where nyikos reallly shows his credentials as an immoral
>>> hypocrite whose only agenda is to subjugate women.
>>>
>>> pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>> On Nov 3, 1:11 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>>>> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>>>>>>> Sure you can, bigot. You already do.
>>>> Exactly, and in the words Ray deleted, I explained EXACTLY the reasons
>>>> why I *can* bear it,
>>> Because you're a coldhearted hypocrite whose real agenda is the
>>> subjugation of women.
>> Not if they are in utero.
>
> 1) That's a tacit admission that you care only about fetuses.
Liar
> 2) There are no women in utero - never have been.
Half the fetuses are female. Let's not split hairs.
>
>>>> namely the hope I have that death isn't the end
>>>> of everything.
>>> Then why are you anti-abortion?
>>>
>>> You can't even keep your story straight.
>>>
>>>>>>> While you sit on yooiur lying,
>>>>>>> hypocritical ass you are letting children die of hunger at the rate of
>>>>>>> a couple every minute. While you sit in your comfortable home and
>>>>>>> spend money to show the world how disgustingly immoral you are,
>>>>>> As I've said several times, at least once in reply to you, I spend
>>>>>> about $10 per year on anti-abortion causes and over $1000 per year on
>>>>>> charity
>>>> In contrast, Ray gave NO figures below on how much he contributes.
>>> Notice that fauxNy thinks it's fine for HIM to let people die so long
>>> as he makes his token payment.
>> I noticed no such thing
>
> That's because you're an insane cultist.
>
You're the insane cultist.
>>>>> I'll tell you the same thing you tell pregnant women:
>>>> By YOUR hate-crazed standards,
>>> YOU are the lying hypocrite. Not me.
>>>
>>>>> DO MORE! DIE if necessary in order to save lives, you stinking
>>>>> hypocrite.
>>>> Get a life,
>>> YOU are the perverted conbtrolk freak sticking your nose into people's
>>> private affairs. Not me.
>> Stop trying to control anti-abortionists.
>
> Stop being a terrorist.
Stop being ridiculous.
pnyikos
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 10:44:55 -0800 (PST), panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >On Nov 4, 1:17 pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >snip
>
> >Okay, let's talk "reason". You compose an idiotic superstitous screed,
> >and then add alt.atheism to the list of groups you send it to. Now you
> >whine and complain when someone free from your nonsense treats your
> >post the way it *should* be in this group.
>
> >Why did you send it to us in the first place? We don't care about your
> >superstion, or the tribal chanting & shamanistic garbage surrounding
> >them. What are you trying to achieve? Did you think you would find a
> >`fellow traveler' here? And if the intent of your little post was to
> >impress people with your insipid fairy tales, then it was a major
> >failure.
>
> >Ray's replies are an adequate response to either one of these
> >scenarios. In fact, I admire his restraint. Personally, I would have
> >told you to take your moronic dead-jew-on-a-stick and shove him up
> >your ass.
>
> You don't understand - giving these bigoted, in-your-face, idiots
> the response their aggressive stupidity deserves, is unprovoked
> "hatred and dishonesty" in their sociopathic wordl view.
Hey, listen, if you don't like talking about the things I wrote about,
I can understand that. When I lost my faith, aged 23, in the
caricature of what I believe the Catholic Church to represent, I would
have been very impatient with almost anyone exhibiting even that much
hope. I was mostlly interested in talking about what I call the
Achilles' Heel of Christianity, the belief that Hell is a place of
everlasting torment where many unfortunate souls go.
My current view of Hell is very different from that, and I think most
sophisticated Christians either share it or disbelieve in Hell
altogether. The latter view, however, is so much at odds with the New
Testament that I don't think it is compatible with a long-term hope in
the existence of heaven.
> They don't understand the difference between their action and a
> reaction which wouldn't even have happened.
> Nor do they understand that unlike them we are not commanded to turn
> the other cheek.
I saw the film, "Demetrius and the Gladiators" when still a teenager,
and if I ever did NOT understand that, I have understood it ever
since.
On the other hand, it was only after I turned 30 that I came to find
out what "turning the other cheek" really means.
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
> On Nov 4, 1:44 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Nov 4, 1:17 pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > snip
>
> > Okay, let's talk "reason".
>
Say...are you the same Jimbo who had a nice online chat with Osprey
this summer? I even sent you an e-mail to someone calling himself
Jimbo, but never got a reply.
Does your laughing smiley mean that you mean what you say, and are
laughing at me?
If so, I wouldn't in my wildest dreams have imagined that that Jimbo
would subscribe to such an infantile stereotype of someone about whom
he knew next to nothing.
If not, please disregard that last sentence and explain what the
smiley signifies.
Peter Nyikos
Mark Sebree
> On 04 Nov 2009 17:45:18 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>
> >>>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<procho...@here.now> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
> >>>>>>unborn children
>
> >>>>>Which do not exist.
>
> >>>> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>
> >>>You should know, having the requisite disability.
>
> >>And, I'm still your intellectual superior,
>
> >Impossible. You have no intellect.
>
> Then why is it so easy for me to put you down?
Because putdowns are simple and any idiot can do them, especially when
the supposed putdown is a lie from the start. They also serve as a
distraction from the fact that you have nothing to support your
claims, not that the distraction actually works.
If you want to be perceived as intelligent, you have to present
yourself as being intelligent. That means refraining from constant
and gratuitous insults, especially when that is the only thing in your
post. It means actually trying to support your claims in an
intelligent, logical, and reasoned manner. It means supporting your
claims with independent and objective sources. It means taking the
time to explain your claims fully and completely, which means more
than one sentence statements. It means not expecting people to accept
your claims just because you make them, nor does it mean expecting
that others will accept your opinions just because you subscribe them
to your deity.
Currently, you are not perceived as being very intelligent because you
do not present yourself as being intelligent. That is why nobody
believes your claims that you are the intellectual superior of anyone.
Mark Sebree
>
> Duke
Mark Sebree
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 05:23:17 -0800 (PST), Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 4, 7:19 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:50:50 -0800 (PST), elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Nov 2, 6:41 pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> >> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating All Souls Day,
> >> >> first reading was from the opening verses of Chapter 3 of the Book of
> >> >> Wisdom, which the Roman Catholic Church includes in the canon of the
> >> >> Apocrypha, but I think all officially subscribe to the hope expressed
> >> >> in the opening verses:
>
> >> >> "The souls of the just are in the hand of God,
> >> >> and no torment shall touch them. They seemed,
> >> >> in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their
> >> >> passing away was thought to be an affliction and
> >> >> their going forth to death, utter destruction. But the
> >> >> are in peace...
> >> >> trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful
> >> >> shall abide with him in love..."
>
> >> >> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
> >> >> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
> >> >> alive, were it not for the hope (sometimes strong, sometimes almost
> >> >> vanishingly faint) that this passage is not only true but applies to
> >> >> killed in abortion, and indeed for all the dead, past, present, and
> >> >> future, I joined in the prayer:
>
> >> >> *Pie Jesu Domine, dona eis requiem sempiternam.*
> >> >> Merciful Lord Jesus, grant them rest everlasting.
>
> >> >> Peter Nyikos
> >> >"all souls" deal is because of Europagans.
>
> >> Can you explain that statement?
> >Why? You can never explain your statements.
>
> Sure I do.
No, you do not. People have asked you to do so many, many times, and
you refuse to do so.
> I just don't make stupid statements like you do, such as like the
> one above.
You make stupid statements all the time. Your posts are generally
filled with them, even when you are shown that the statement is stupid
and you are completely wrong.
An example of you making stupid statements using one that you have
made many times: You have claimed that there is only one deity,
yours. This is a stupid statement since is it trivial to show that
there are thousands of deities in existence which have just as much
objective evidence supporting their existence as yours does, i.e. the
writings of believers and nothing else. And you have been shown this
many, many times.
You have also claimed that the existence of your deity is the "default
position" in a debate because you made the claim, even when you can be
shown that this is NEVER the "default position" for this time of
logical argument/debate and that this is a classic example of the
logical fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. It is the person
that claims that something exists who has the responsibility of
supporting their claim that it exists
Mark Sebree
>
> Duke
james g. keegan jr.
<eb6bf15b-b6d0-4cdc...@g31g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,
pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> "elizabeth"s
>
> "elizabeth"
> Also, "elizabeth"
> "elizabeth" has, accordingly earned a berth in:
> "elizabeth" had in mind here.
it appears that the person posting as peter nyikos has developed quite
an obsession.
Don Martin
>> I've
>> met lots of atheists who have a decent respect for the faith of
>> Christians,
>
>You must be living in Europe. Those of us who live in countries where
>the "believers" in Christian mythology still threatens people's hopes
>for building a truly modern human society have no such "respect" for
>your insipid death cult.
I have a "decent respect for the faith of" decent Christians, but around here we
do not see many decent Christians--only religious assholes like this one who
merit no respect whatsoever.
-
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
james g. keegan jr.
<8c632d8a-fbda-4c8f...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
[...]
> The one who slapped Keegan silliest was Larry Margolis. Keegan
> persisted in what I call The Mother of All Flamewars, destroying his
> credibility by denouncing something as a forgery
ibm verified margolis' forgery and disallowed him from using their
servers to post from them
i'm amused that you'd so blatantly lie about that.
i'm more amused that you offered no support for your remarks.
no wonder readers do not believe you are peter nyikos.
panam...@hotmail.com
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 23:17:16 -0800 (PST), panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> I've
> >> met lots of atheists who have a decent respect for the faith of
> >> Christians,
>
> >You must be living in Europe. Those of us who live in countries where
> >the "believers" in Christian mythology still threatens people's hopes
> >for building a truly modern human society have no such "respect" for
> >your insipid death cult.
>
> I have a "decent respect for the faith of" decent Christians, but around here we
> do not see many decent Christians--only religious assholes like this one who
> merit no respect whatsoever.
I must admit, I'm a little different. There are individual Christians
I know who are decent, intelligent people. Which actually makes me
hate their virus a little more. I respect *them*, but not their faith.
I see them struggle with the pain and uncertainty, and curse their
parents for ever pouring that shit into their heads.
And yes, they know it's not a good idea to talk seriously about that
stuff with me. <g>
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/Member, Knights of BAAWA!
Jimbo
No, I was 100% correct.
pnyikos
> On Nov 5, 7:44 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 04 Nov 2009 17:45:18 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> > >duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> > >>On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>
> > >>>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> > >>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<procho...@here.now> wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
> > >>>>>>unborn children
>
> > >>>>>Which do not exist.
>
> > >>>> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>
> > >>>You should know, having the requisite disability.
>
> > >>And, I'm still your intellectual superior,
>
> > >Impossible. You have no intellect.
>
> > Then why is it so easy for me to put you down?
>
> Because putdowns are simple and any idiot can do them, especially when
> the supposed putdown is a lie from the start.
Now, why can't more people say such things to Ray Fischer and Patrick
Humphrey and James Keegan? They are at least as guilty of this
behavior as Duke.
> They also serve as a
> distraction from the fact that you have nothing to support your
> claims, not that the distraction actually works.
It seems to work for Fischer and Humphrey and Keeagn, because they are
backed up by other members of their cozy clique (including "Spartakus"
that dominates talk.abortion by sheer weight of numbers.
> If you want to be perceived as intelligent, you have to present
> yourself as being intelligent.
Ah,there's the ticket: none of the three I mention gives a fig about
being perceived as intelligent by objective observers, although
they'll swap gossippy messages putting others down to make it look
like they think they are intelligent.
> That means refraining from constant
> and gratuitous insults, especially when that is the only thing in your
> post. It means actually trying to support your claims in an
> intelligent, logical, and reasoned manner.
The trio I've named knows these things, but they think they have a
better thing going.
> It means supporting your
> claims with independent and objective sources. It means taking the
> time to explain your claims fully and completely, which means more
> than one sentence statements. It means not expecting people to accept
> your claims just because you make them, nor does it mean expecting
> that others will accept your opinions just because you subscribe them
> to your deity.
For "deity" substitute "other members of the cozy clique" where the
above three are concerned.
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
> In article
> <8c632d8a-fbda-4c8f-93f9-5ac75e2f4...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > The one who slapped Keegan silliest was Larry Margolis. Keegan
> > persisted in what I call The Mother of All Flamewars, destroying his
> > credibility by denouncing something as a forgery
>
> ibm verified margolis' forgery
> and disallowed him from using their
> servers to post from them
Are you still repeating this tired old never-supported claim? It was
already old when Ralph Taite posted the following over 13 years ago:
---------------------- begin included post
Path: usceast!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!panix!not-for-mail
From: ta...@panix.com (Ralph Taite)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: In which Nyikoos calls me an asshole
Date: 10 Mar 1996 09:43:24 -0500
Organization: Panix
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <4hupqc$n...@panix2.panix.com>
References: <4hkfpf$a...@azure.acsu.buffalo.edu>
<jkeeganD...@netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix2.panix.com
In article <jkeeganD...@netcom.com>,
james g. keegan jr. <jke...@netcom.com> wrote:
>yes, PHoney insults readers in just about every post he
>makes. yes, he denies doing so.
>it appears that he just doesn't have any idea what he
>posts.
Did you have any idea that you were lying when you wrote:
"do you think readers forget that margolis got caught forging that
quote
and lost his net access as the result of that forgery?"
"james g. keegan jr." <kee...@wizvax.wizvax.net>
in Message ID: <4gb0d5$j...@wizvax.wizvax.net>
Date: 19 Feb 1996 18:16:53 GMT
I suppose if you claim that you were just mistaken, some might
forgive this lie, but that leaves the other 999,999 other ones to deal
with.
Ralph D. Taite
---
Visit Susan Garvin's favorite web site: http://joc.mit.edu/attack.html
"I recommend that people visit the 'joke' site - it's a masterpiece of
half-truths, outright libel, and bizarre reasoning that ranks right up
there with right-to-lie websites."
---Susan Garvin
------------------------- end included post
By the way, the Garvin link no longer works, but the message-ID Taite
gave ought to work. If anyone wants to check it out, it helps to know
that the three symbols preceding the @ are jkq. There are plenty of
other message-Ids up there, and I suppose Google will replace the
three symbols before the @ with ellipses there too, but I'm quite able
to provide those if clicking on the blue line below them doesn't work.
>
> i'm amused that you'd so blatantly lie about that.
See Mark Sebring's astute observations about insults and my reply to
him. Margolis actually posted once, months after you first started
making that tired old claim, to let people know it was false. But
since he didn't pop in every time you repeated your unsupported claim,
you figured you could get away with it.
> i'm more amused that you offered no support for your remarks.
I gave a message-id, twit, and I can back up what I say. You are just
trying to goad me into doing 1,000+ line posts that nobody will take
the trouble to read.
I will back up what I say, though, in good time, in readable
installments. Can you say ANY of the same for yourself?
++++++++++++++++ Mark Cochran posting style on
I didn't think so.
++++++++++++++++ Mark Cochran posting style off
[garbage out by Keegan, to go with the above garbage in, deleted]
Peter Nyikos
pnyikos
Repeating unsupported claims is not the same as supporting them. Just
ask Mark Sebree. [I may have misspelled his name in my reply to
Keegan, and if so I apologize.]
The Torah never comes out and says what you say it does, it says life
is in the blood, and it also talks about the children in Rebekah's
womb, Esau and Jacob, struggling with each other.
I do believe that you got confused and took the account of Adam's
creation to be definitive in respect of first breath for all humans,
but then why don't you say that the Torah says all children are molded
from the dust of the earth?
As for MY claim, I can point to encyclicals and other documents that
confirm what I wrote. Do you have any sources to support your claim
besides this one passage from Genesis 2?
Peter Nyikos
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> x <x...@y.com> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> This is where nyikos reallly shows his credentials as an immoral
>>>> hypocrite whose only agenda is to subjugate women.
>>>>
>>>> pnyikos <nyi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 3, 1:11 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>> pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>>>>> unborn children who are aborted each year, including tens of thousands
>>>>>>>> Sure you can, bigot. You already do.
>>>>> Exactly, and in the words Ray deleted, I explained EXACTLY the reasons
>>>>> why I *can* bear it,
>>>> Because you're a coldhearted hypocrite whose real agenda is the
>>>> subjugation of women.
>>> Not if they are in utero.
>>
>> 1) That's a tacit admission that you care only about fetuses.
>
>Liar
You just stated that you don't want to subjugate "women" in the uterus.
>> 2) There are no women in utero - never have been.
>
>Half the fetuses are female.
"Female" is not "woman", pro-liar idiot.
>>>> Notice that fauxNy thinks it's fine for HIM to let people die so long
>>>> as he makes his token payment.
>>> I noticed no such thing
>>
>> That's because you're an insane cultist.
>
>You're the insane cultist.
"I know you are but what am I?"
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>There are lots of versions of atheism, some of them deserving of great
>respect . [Even Chesterton agreed in the midst of a brilliant essay
>explaining why he was a Christian.] But Ray's version is both
>mindless and heartless.
YOU are mindless and heartless.
>> Your deepening senility (assuming it's actually you) has pretty much
>> deprived you of a grasp of atheism, Phony.
>
>On the contrary, it is you whose grasp of atheism is slipping away,
"I know you are but what am I?"
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>100% wrong where the Roman Catholic Church is concerned. There was
>some dispute about ensoulement in the Middle Ages, but the most common
>view among RC theologians is that it happens at conception.
Patent bullshit.
> Certainly
>the official dogma is that it one must err on the side of caution and
>behave as though it did happen at conception.
Because the RCC has no regard for people or for liberty.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>On Nov 5, 8:00�pm, Jimbo <ckdbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 5, 4:18�pm, pnyikos <nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> > > �Just like
>> > > the common christer view 50 - 100 years ago was the same as the Hebrew
>> > > Torrah, that souls joined the body at the time of birth.
>>
>> > 100% wrong where the Roman Catholic Church is concerned. �
>>
>> No, I was 100% correct.
>
>Repeating unsupported claims is not the same as supporting them.
Then we shall be seeing you support your claims about ensoulment and
the RCC's position?
[...]
>As for MY claim, I can point to encyclicals and other documents that
>confirm what I wrote.
And yet you don't.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>> > Then why is it so easy for me to put you down?
>>
>> Because putdowns are simple and any idiot can do them, especially when
>> the supposed putdown is a lie from the start.
>
>Now, why can't more people say such things to Ray Fischer and Patrick
>Humphrey and James Keegan? They are at least as guilty of this
>behavior as Duke.
Smirk. fauxNy resorts to a put down, doubtless because has nothing
better.
>> �They also serve as a
>> distraction from the fact that you have nothing to support your
>> claims, not that the distraction actually works.
>
>It seems to work for Fischer and Humphrey and Keeagn,
Whine, whine, whine.
The difference between me and puke is that I CAN use logic and reason
to justofy my position. You can't.
>, because they are
>backed up by other members of their cozy clique (including "Spartakus"
The usual conspiracy idiocy.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>On Nov 3, 9:41 pm, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:15:33 -0500, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 18:41:43 -0800 (PST), pnyikos
>> ><nyik...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>> >>I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating AllSoulsDay
>>
>>
>> Because from all appearances,
>
>Hogwash.
>
>>it's a fake Peter Nyikos (the real one was and
>> still might be faculty at The USC
>
>What do you, a stalker from way back, mean by saying "might"?
Why do you, a pedophile supporter, not understand simple sentences?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
The Chief Instigator
> On 04 Nov 2009 22:09:38 GMT, The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 06:12:13 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On 04 Nov 2009 02:38:58 GMT, The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:46:09 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:24 -0500, Attila <<proc...@here.now> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>I don't think I could long bear to contemplate the fate of millions of
>>>>>>>unborn children
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, the challenge to the mentally ill.
>>>>
>>>>You should know, having the requisite disability.
>>>
>>
>>Just more Dook self-worship. Stick the Vatican where the moon don't shine,
>>Pope and all. (That's my opinion.)
>
> Nobody cares what your opinion is, west loop.
...and you're goddamned certified as nobody, Dumbass Dook (IMO, as always).
--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2008-09 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Houston 4, Manitoba 1 (November 5)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, November 7 vs. San Antonio, 7:35
The Chief Instigator
Phony's one singularly sorry SOB, in my book.
The Chief Instigator
> On Nov 3, 9:44 pm, The Chief Instigator <patr...@io.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:22:26 -0000, Smiler <Smi...@joe.king.com> wrote:
>> > pnyikos wrote:
>> >> On Nov 2, 9:53 pm, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> >>>> I returned about an hour ago from a Mass celebrating AllSoulsDay,
>> >>>> the day Catholics the world over remember all who have died.
>>
>> >>> intent of forgetting those who die.
>>
>> >> Your mindless and heartless version of atheism is of no interest to
>> >> me, Ray.
>>
>> > Then why are you posting to a.a.?
>
> Here a.a. obviously means alt.atheism, but the Chief Idiot was
> apparently too dumb to pick up on that:
>
>> He's still whining at alt.abortion posters who slapped him silly a decade
>> and change ago.
>
> The only alt.abotion posters still around who got slapped silly (in
> talk.abortion, twit: alt.abortion was in an embryonic state back then)
> in the 1990's were Keegan and Fischer, slapping each other silly and
> being slapped silly by the allies of the other one, especially Keegan.
>
> The one who slapped Keegan silliest was Larry Margolis. Keegan
> persisted in what I call The Mother of All Flamewars, destroying his
> thousands of posts, when in reality it was taken right out of a post
> by Keegan, and identified as such, with a message-ID posted by
> Margolis in all his .sigs for quite a while.
>
> Here is that message-id: 2ct2o5$b...@usenet.rpi.edu
> With the knowledge that the three symbols before the @ are b36, anyone
> who knows how to use Google Advanced Search can look up that post.
>
> Even Chief Idiot Humphrey, who up to then had been a staunch ally of
> both, was disgusted over how Keegan and Margolis were behaving like a
> pair of children, flaming each other back and forth over an utter
> triviality, ignoring posters who were so tired of it all that they
> posted threads with titles like, "Keegan, take the fucking bet!" and
> "Larry, post the fucking article!"
>
> Evidently Keegan had no clue as to what to do with the message-id, and
> he now has a protege, IAAH, who keeps demanding message-ids but I
> suspect he has no more idea what to do with them than Keegan did back
> then.
Kindly restore your head up your senile ass and exercise your right to
ignore me.