The ugly results of overpopulation. [URL]

[W.T.S.]

<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/world/asia/unauthorized-colonies-dot-
new-delhi-seeking-legal-status.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_
20130428>

http://tinyurl.com/crx2ujl

This is the sort of life the pro-liars and forced-birthers want for you!

[Stanislaus Stewart]

I wonder why they don't start a movement for higher wages, and a war
to end poverty,
which in most cases lead to abortions.

[Dakota]

Given the huge number of unemployed workers in India, I don't see
higher wages in the near future. India is not a wealthy nation so
attempts to end poverty have a tough time gaining traction.

With no other way of supporting themselves when they become aged and
infirm, surviving children are the only hope for many Indians.
Abortion is less of a problem than infanticide. Prospects for marriage
for poor women are extremely limited by the dowry system. This
situation has led to the murders of countless female infants.

India could learn a lot from China which is working toward improving
the lives of its citizens. Their progress isn't rapid but it's steady.

[sugarl...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, April 28, 2013 8:09:46 PM UTC-4, Dakota wrote:
> On 4/28/2013 4:43 PM, Stanislaus Stewart wrote: > On 4/28/2013 2:15 PM, W.T.S. wrote: >> <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/world/asia/unauthorized-colonies-dot- >> >> new-delhi-seeking-legal-status.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_ >> 20130428> >> >> http://tinyurl.com/crx2ujl >> >> This is the sort of life the pro-liars and forced-birthers want for >> you! > > > I wonder why they don't start a movement for higher wages, and a > war to end poverty, > which in most cases lead to abortions. Given the huge number of unemployed workers in India, I don't see higher wages in the near future. India is not a wealthy nation so attempts to end poverty have a tough time gaining traction. With no other way of supporting themselves when they become aged and infirm, surviving children are the only hope for many Indians. Abortion is less of a problem than infanticide. Prospects for marriage for poor women are extremely limited by the dowry system. This situation has led to the murders of countless female infants. India could learn a lot from China which is working toward improving the lives of its citizens. Their progress isn't rapid but it's steady.

One gentleman and ten gentlwomen can re-populate a given area. The reverse is not true. Lots of gentlemen and few gentlewomen should hold down an overpopulation situation but it is not the case anywhere, regardless of what the party line is. We continue our mad dash to extinction.

Mater Terra needs this sooner than later.

[Stanislaus Stewart]

Actually, I was referring to the anti-abortion / pro-life movements in
the USA.

Aged and infirm.Hmm! I wonder if I'll ever see, in my lifetime, a
nation that adopts a
voluntary euthanasia policy. :-(

[Dakota]

Voluntary euthanasia is legal in the US states of Oregon and Washington.

Why the frown emoticon? I'd much rather be killed gently than die from
a debilitating and painful condition.

[SkyEyes]

Switzerland already has one.

--
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
--

[Mitchell Holman]

Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> wrote in news:klnukp$qpf$1...@dont-email.me:

Suicide is legal in every state. It is assisted
suicide that requires legislation to decriminalize.

[Stanislaus Stewart]

Nah! The frown was that I thought it was not legal anywhere. Didn't
know it was legal anywhere in the USA. As I always say-No nation is
truly civilized if it doesn't have voluntary euthanasia
as a policy.

[Dakota]

That makes sense. Thanks.

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:24:03 -0500, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com>
wrote:

I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
to humans.

I don't ever want to burden my family if I get a terminal condition...
and I'd hope that somebody would have the grace and decency to pull
the plug in the event of brain death.

Just thinking about this whole subject makes me alternately angry and
sad.

Dreamer
AA 2306

[harry k]

On Apr 30, 5:48 am, Mitchell Holman <nomailerizon.net> wrote:
> Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> wrote innews:klnukp$qpf$1...@dont-email.me:

My understanding is that assisted suicide it is legal only in the
case of terminal illness.
AS for suicide itself, it is legal everywhere, it is only unsuccessful
and attempted ones that are ilegal :)

Harry K

[Patrick]

reamer In Colore <dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>to humans.
>I don't ever want to burden my family if I get a terminal condition...
>and I'd hope that somebody would have the grace and decency to pull
>the plug in the event of brain death.
>Just thinking about this whole subject makes me alternately angry and
>sad.

Do you have a living will and/or a partner who understands your
wishes?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <0kc2o8ldpucccnlu5...@4ax.com>,

Does Canada have the equivalent of our Advanced Directives:

<http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/advancedirectives.html>

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[duke]

On Wed, 01 May 2013 11:19:29 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>to humans.

Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.

>I don't ever want to burden my family if I get a terminal condition...
>and I'd hope that somebody would have the grace and decency to pull
>the plug in the event of brain death.

Your family must make that decision.

>Just thinking about this whole subject makes me alternately angry and
>sad.

Maybe you should consider becoming a Roman Catholic.

>Dreamer
>AA 2306

The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[�RLMeasures]

In article <ijg4o81biocrkqsri...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 01 May 2013 11:19:29 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
> <dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
> >to humans.
>
> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>

� That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody crusades.

[arjay]

"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:hlwdjsd2-360273...@news.giganews.com...

It's something of a hodge-podge, given that each each Province and Territory
writes its own legislation and the fine print varies from each to each.
The concept of a living will is reasonably well understood, but the actual
term, "living will," is not enshrined in law.
A specific type of legal document is needed if you want your wishes to be
known when you can no longer speak or write them. The document can, and
often does, run to simple instructions -- 'no resuscitation,' 'no
extraordinary/heroic measures' -- but some hospitals will sometimes ignore
such instructions and defer to the wishes of a close relative present at
crunch time.
What is needed is a named and (legally) recognized individual with a defined
type of Power of Attorney which goes beyond finances and property and
embraces health care. That person would be empowered to speak for you in
areas such as the four menioned on the site you indicated. If that person
is also a family member who carries out your written instructions, his/her
directions regarding care intended to sustain life will be followed despite
any objections from any other family member -- who may wish to prolong the
agony. [By 'agony' I mean struggle, not pain.]
Follow the link below for a summary of some of the subtle regional
variations. The article may be dated 2005 but it's still accurate. (The
territory of Nunavut is not mentioned because it was newly formed at that
writing and had not yet crafted its own legislation on the problem.)
Voluntary euthanasia, or assisted suicide, is still very much illegal here.
There have been prominent challenges to the law, but none has succeeded. A
recent case, however, has brought the controversy back into public
attention.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/wills/

[duke]

On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:

>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>> >to humans.
>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>• That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody crusades.

Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and Europe.

[�RLMeasures]

In article <bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
> >> >to humans.
> >> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
> >� That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody crusades.
>
> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and Europe.
>

� The 4th Crusade was againt French men, French women, French children,
French cows, French dogs and French kittycats. 100,000 humans were
slauhtered including several thousand French Catholics who got in the way
of Pope Innocent III's butchers.

[arjay]

douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>
>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>>> >to humans.
>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.

>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody

>>crusades.
>
> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and Europe.

Bullshit.
Only the first nine crusades headed towards the middle east (not counting
the pitiable Childrens' Crusade of 1212).
They spanned the years 1096 to 1272. The only part of Europe under Muslim
control during the time of those crusades was Spain.
During that time the 'muslim hordes' had been long established in your Holy
Land -- they had controlled it for 400 years prior to the 1st Crusade -- and
were not in expansion mode. Their dominant political force came from the
Seljuq Turks, who used any willing allies -- Arabs, Kurds, Egyptians -- as
muscle in their local squabbles with such riff-raff as the Persians.
The Seljuq dynasty outlasted the first nine crusades by thirty years and
never entered Europe.
The last Seljuq ruler died around 1300, and the political power shifted to
the Ottoman Turks. ("Seljuq" and "Ottoman" referred only to the ruling
dynasties, not to succeeding invasions by Turkish tribesmen. The bosses
changed but the people didn't.)
Meanwhile the infamous Fourth Crusade of 1202-04 had been called to
"liberate" Jerusalem but the crusaders chose instead to attack Xian
Constantinople, sack it, occupy it, wreck many of its buildings and carry
many treasures away to Venice where some are still displayed as trophies,
deplete its treasury and weaken its fortifications, finally setting up a
Latin Empire which lasted a bare fifty years.
When the Latin Empire collapsed it left Constantinople, irrecoverably
diminshed and weak, all alone to fend off the Ottoman Turks when they grew
feisty.
The Ottomans finally captured Constantinople in 1453, destroying what was
left of the Byzantine Empire. To do this they had crossed into the Balkans
and, once there, they stayed.
There are your 'muslim hordes overrunning Europe,' douche. The further
expansion of the Ottomans into Hungary and Central Europe had to wait
another 70 years until the 1520s -- roughly 250 years after the last crusade
to free Jerusalem and/or the Holy Land had ended.

But there were more than a dozen campaigns of conquest and slaughter raised
to do Gawd's work within the borders of Europe.
That's right, earl -- no Muslim hordes. These campaigns didn't involve
Muslims at all.

I'll spare you the list of the six crusades mounted in Southern Europe (no
Holy Land involved) called by several Popes between 1198 and 1285 against
_Europeans_, and the other list of seven _groups_ of crusades mounted in
Northern Europe, also against Europeans. My favourites from that bunch were
the so-called Stedinger Crusades, called by the Archbishop of Bremen against
a cohesive group of independent peasants -- Xians -- who had dared to refuse
paying either allegiance or taxes to the good archbishop.

> earl weber, German - American
>
> ********************************************

[arjay]

"�RLMeasures" <r...@somis.org> wrote in message
news:r-0205130...@10.0.1.3...

(Pssst! RL --- there was another 4th Crusade. It went on at roughly the
same time as the one you describe. I'm afraid the number 4 is attached to
it, and never to the one you mean -- which, as you know, is usually
identified by a name.)

[Patrick]

The Fourth Crusade (1202–1204) was originally intended to conquer
Muslim-controlled Jerusalem by means of an invasion through Egypt.
Instead, in April 1204, the Crusaders of Western Europe invaded and
sacked the Christian (Eastern Orthodox) city of Constantinople,
capital of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire).

The majority of the crusading army that set out from Venice in October
1202 originated from areas within France.

When Innocent III heard of the conduct of his pilgrims he was filled
with shame and rage, and strongly rebuked them.

The prominent medievalist Steven Runciman, writing in 1954, stated
that "There was never a greater crime against humanity than the Fourth
Crusade."[44] The controversy that has surrounded the Fourth Crusade
has led to diverging opinions in academia on whether its objective was
indeed the capture of Constantinople.

[Patrick]

arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:

>I'll spare you the list of the six crusades mounted in Southern Europe (no
>Holy Land involved) called by several Popes between 1198 and 1285 against

>_Europeans_, and the other list of seven _groups_..............

Oh, please.
Tell us all about what happened 900 years ago.
It is so relevent to what is happening today in the Church.

[W.T.S.]

In article <ijg4o81biocrkqsri...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...

> On Wed, 01 May 2013 11:19:29 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
> <dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
> >to humans.
>
> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>
> >I don't ever want to burden my family if I get a terminal condition...
> >and I'd hope that somebody would have the grace and decency to pull
> >the plug in the event of brain death.
>
> Your family must make that decision.
>
> >Just thinking about this whole subject makes me alternately angry and
> >sad.
>
> Maybe you should consider becoming a Roman Catholic.

Why pour gasoline all over your home and then strike a match. That's
what Catholicism does to people's lives. How would you like your family
to get the "Terry Shivo treatment"? The Church can and has been very,
very nasty on this subject.
>
> >Dreamer
> >AA 2306

Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/print/14481
>
http://www.jennyjerrome.org/
>
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22270271
>
http://tinyurl.com/anghyfr
>
http://tinyurl.com/a887er9
>
http://tinyurl.com/c4thugl
>
http://tinyurl.com/3j3fkch
>
http://www.egalitarian.biz/Plan-B--Remedy-of-a-Lifetime.html
>
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm
>
Breed like rabbits, live like pigs, die like rats!
>
Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out from
complaining about "welfare mothers popping out babies we
have to feed" to complain about welfare mothers getting
abortions that PREVENT more babies to be raised at public
expense.
>
http://www.imnotsorry.net
>
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17gbnyv0yzhevjpg/original.jpg
>
http://tinyurl.com/7q2ft38
>
http://tinyurl.com/7hk9gk8
>
http://tinyurl.com/ybmwsk4
>
http://tinyurl.com/ayk7czf
>
http://tinyurl.com/43hp62x
>
http://tinyurl.com/b29z62n
>

[W.T.S.]

In article <bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...

>
> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
> >> >to humans.
> >> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.

> >? That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody crusades.

>
> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and Europe.

We're talking about the current crusades against women.

[W.T.S.]

In article <s825o89q8rouj1ivq...@4ax.com>, pbarker001
@woh.rr.com says...

Yes, it is relevant. The Catholic Church is just as ugly and nasty
today as it ever was. The latest victim of the Church are women who the
Church wishes to turn into gender slaves and brood sows.
>

As always, organized religion opposes progress -

See what RELIGION does to peoples' minds?

Adults no longer believe in the Tooth Fairy - but they still torture and
kill each other over ancient myths and superstitions.

"We all remember how many religious wars were fought for a religion of
love
and gentleness; how many bodies were burned
alive with the genuinely kind intention of saving souls from the eternal
fire of hell." --- Karl Popper

"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When
many
people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
--- Robert M. Pirsig

Either God wants to abolish evil and cannot, or he can but does not want
to.
If he wants to but cannot he is impotent. If he can
but does not want to, he is wicked. If he neither can nor wants to, then
he
is both powerless and wicked.
--- Epicurus, Greek philosopher, circa 300 B.C.

"Act of God" disasters like the Japanese earthquake expose the myth.
Either
God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like
this, or he doesn't care to, or he doesn't exist. He is thus either
impotent, evil, or imaginary.
--- CNN Belief Blog, 3-20-11

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things
and
evil people doing evil things. But for good people
to do evil things, that takes religion."
--- Steven Weinberg, quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." --- Blaise Pascal.

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
false,
and by rulers as useful."
--- Seneca the Younger (4? BC - 65 AD)

"Religion once ruled the world. It was called the Dark Ages." --- Ruth
Green.

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." ---
Victor Stenger.

"I don't believe in God because I don't believe in Mother Goose." ---
Clarence Darrow

"As my ancestors are free from slavery, I am free from the slavery of
religion." --- Butterfly McQueen

"Religion was invented when the first con-man met the first fool." -
Mark
Twain

"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --- Mark Twain

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character
in
all fiction." --- Richard Dawkins

"Cult today, religion tomorrow."

The Freedom From Religion Foundation: http://ffrf.org/
The Secular Coalition for America: www.secular.org
Secular Student Alliance: www.secularstudents.org
www.infidels.org
www.humaniststudies.org
www.atheistalliance.org
www.americanhumanist.org

[Paul Duca]

On Thursday, May 2, 2013 7:08:35 AM UTC-4, •RLMeasures wrote:
> In article <ijg4o81biocrkqsri...@4ax.com>, duke
>
> <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 01 May 2013 11:19:29 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>
> > <dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>
> > >to humans.
>
> >
>

> > Being a Republican Catholic, I've never been kind to animals
>
> > (or people who won't bow down to me).

[arjay]

"Patrick" <pbark...@woh.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4p15o8pf760ef2l0r...@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 02 May 2013 07:42:27 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>In article <bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com>, duke
>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>
>>> >> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>>> >> >to humans.
>>> >> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.

>>> >. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody

>>> >crusades.
>>>
>>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
>>> Europe.
>>>

>>. The 4th Crusade was againt French men, French women, French children,

>>French cows, French dogs and French kittycats. 100,000 humans were
>>slauhtered including several thousand French Catholics who got in the way
>>of Pope Innocent III's butchers.
>

> The Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) was originally intended to conquer

> Muslim-controlled Jerusalem by means of an invasion through Egypt.
> Instead, in April 1204, the Crusaders of Western Europe invaded and
> sacked the Christian (Eastern Orthodox) city of Constantinople,
> capital of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire).
>
> The majority of the crusading army that set out from Venice in October
> 1202 originated from areas within France.
>
> When Innocent III heard of the conduct of his pilgrims he was filled
> with shame and rage, and strongly rebuked them.
>
> The prominent medievalist Steven Runciman, writing in 1954, stated
> that "There was never a greater crime against humanity than the Fourth
> Crusade."[44] The controversy that has surrounded the Fourth Crusade
> has led to diverging opinions in academia on whether its objective was
> indeed the capture of Constantinople.

[duke]

The goal of this expedition, this Fourth Crusade, was to win back the holy city
of Jerusalem. Conquered by Islamic armies in the 7th century, it had been
regained for Christendom by the First Crusade in 1099. In 1187, during the
Second Crusade and just 15 years before the doge's fleet set sail, Jerusalem
fell to the Muslim Saladin, who then stalemated a recovery attempt by the Third
Crusade (1189-92). The Fourth Crusade was to follow a new strategy: strike at
Egypt, the base of Muslim power. But it never reached its goal. Instead, a
bizarre twist of fate turned the latest crusaders in a totally unexpected
direction — toward the greatest Christian city in the world — Constantinople,
capital of the Byzantine (or Eastern Roman) Empire.

[duke]

On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:

>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>
>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>>>> >to humans.
>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
>>>crusades.
>>
>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and Europe.
>
>Bullshit.

The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow, to
deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.

[W.T.S.]

In article <woCdnaxgHOVcER7M...@supernews.com>,
ar...@hobbiton.net says...

Actually, it is. The mind set and thought processes that allowed the
RCC to inflict death and suffering in the past are all still here today,
and still allowing the RCC to inflict death and suffering. That will
never change.

[W.T.S.]

In article <jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...

>
> On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>
> >douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>
> >>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
> >>>> >to humans.
> >>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
> >>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
> >>>crusades.
> >>
> >> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and Europe.
> >
> >Bullshit.
>
> The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow, to
> deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.

Then, to impose Vatican tyranny.

[�RLMeasures]

In article <woCdnaxgHOVcER7M...@supernews.com>, "arjay"

� What happened in the past in not important if it embarrasses the org
that so hubristically claims to be "God's Holy Church"?

[�RLMeasures]

In article <t967o8t6hbmqb9bql...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 02 May 2013 07:42:27 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>
> >> >> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
> >> >> >to humans.
> >> >> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
> >> >� That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
crusades.
> >>
> >> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and Europe.
> >>
> >� The 4th Crusade was againt French men, French women, French children,
> >French cows, French dogs and French kittycats. 100,000 humans were
> >slauhtered including several thousand French Catholics who got in the way
> >of Pope Innocent III's butchers.
>
> The goal of this expedition, this Fourth Crusade, was to win back the
holy city

> of Jerusalem. ...

� So how did 100,000 French get dead?

[duke]

No getting with a frenchman.

[•RLMeasures]

In article <ptl7o8hkfj2rscclh...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 03 May 2013 07:09:57 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <t967o8t6hbmqb9bql...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 02 May 2013 07:42:27 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com>, duke
> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
> >> >> >> >to humans.
> >> >> >> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
> >> >> >• That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
> >crusades.
> >> >>
> >> >> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
Europe.
> >> >>
> >> >• The 4th Crusade was againt French men, French women, French children,
> >> >French cows, French dogs and French kittycats. 100,000 humans were
> >> >slauhtered including several thousand French Catholics who got in the way
> >> >of Pope Innocent III's butchers.
> >>
> >> The goal of this expedition, this Fourth Crusade, was to win back the
> >holy city
> >> of Jerusalem. ...
> >
> >• So how did 100,000 French get dead?
>
> No getting with a frenchman.
>

• the Duke dodge.

[Paul Duca]

Not that he wouldn't accept getting with a Frenchwoman...


Paul

[Andrew W]

>"Patrick" wrote in message
>news:s825o89q8rouj1ivq...@4ax.com...

It simply shows that the church was never guided by God from the start.


--
Forcing someone to either worship or burn is called tyranny.
My motto: Never follow any leader who gives lifelong (or eternal) torture in
a fire as one of your 'free' choices, because that is a despot.

Religions breed hypocrisy, ignorance and self-righteousness.

[Patrick]

On Sat, 4 May 2013 19:40:00 +1000, "Andrew W"
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>>news:s825o89q8rouj1ivq...@4ax.com...
>>
>>arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>
>>>I'll spare you the list of the six crusades mounted in Southern Europe (no
>>>Holy Land involved) called by several Popes between 1198 and 1285 against
>>>_Europeans_, and the other list of seven _groups_..............
>>
>>Oh, please.
>>Tell us all about what happened 900 years ago.
>>It is so relevent to what is happening today in the Church.
>>
>
>It simply shows that the church was never guided by God from the start.

If your child does something wrong, do you always claim the parents
aren't guiding them?

[Andrew W]

>"Patrick" wrote in message
>news:c8r9o8503b1nn7kse...@4ax.com...

No, but I simply don't follow such children.

[Andrew W]

>"duke" wrote in message news:jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com...

>
>On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>
>>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>
>>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>>>>> >to humans.
>>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>>>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
>>>>crusades.
>>>
>>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
>>> Europe.
>>
>>Bullshit.
>
>The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow,
>to
>deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.
>

The majority of Muslims were/are peaceful and religious people.

[duke]

You brought it up, not me.

[duke]

On Sat, 4 May 2013 21:22:17 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:

>>"duke" wrote in message news:jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>
>>>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>>>>>> >to humans.
>>>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>>>>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
>>>>>crusades.
>>>>
>>>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
>>>> Europe.
>>>
>>>Bullshit.
>>
>>The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow,
>>to
>>deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.

>The majority of Muslims were/are peaceful and religious people.

How can you tell a peaceful muslim from a killer muslim? You can't. The bomb
is in his backpack.

[�RLMeasures]

In article <pas9o8tepdt0aqhn9...@4ax.com>, duke

� and he chose the alias Innocent III, a pope who went on to murder 100,000.

[John Ritson]

Maybe now you appreciate how we feel when believers insist on telling us
all about what allegedly happened two thousand years ago.

--
John Ritson

[�RLMeasures]

In article <Rc9ht.115198$to7.1...@fx26.fr7>, John Ritson

� chortle. good one JR.

[harry k]

On May 4, 4:22 am, "Andrew W" <spam_ajwer...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >"duke"  wrote in messagenews:jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com...

>
> >On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>

> >>douche <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote in message

> >>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
> >>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
> >>>>> >to humans.
> >>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
> >>>>.  That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
> >>>>crusades.
>
> >>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
> >>> Europe.
>
> >>Bullshit.
>
> >The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow,
> >to
> >deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.
>
> The majority of Muslims were/are peaceful and religious people.
>
>

> Religions breed hypocrisy, ignorance and self-righteousness.

But remain remarkedly silent when it comes to criticizing the
terrorists. Especially so in the case of the Imams.

Harry K

[Patrick]

On Sat, 4 May 2013 21:16:28 +1000, "Andrew W"

<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>>news:c8r9o8503b1nn7kse...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Sat, 4 May 2013 19:40:00 +1000, "Andrew W"
>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>>>>news:s825o89q8rouj1ivq...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I'll spare you the list of the six crusades mounted in Southern Europe
>>>>>(no
>>>>>Holy Land involved) called by several Popes between 1198 and 1285
>>>>>against
>>>>>_Europeans_, and the other list of seven _groups_..............
>>>>
>>>>Oh, please.
>>>>Tell us all about what happened 900 years ago.
>>>>It is so relevent to what is happening today in the Church.
>>>>
>>>
>>>It simply shows that the church was never guided by God from the start.
>>
>>If your child does something wrong, do you always claim the parents
>>aren't guiding them?
>>
>
>No, but I simply don't follow such children.

Do you know ANYTHING about kids?

[Patrick]

Stop asking then.

[Andrew W]

>"Patrick" wrote in message
>news:14gao85f4e571em7k...@4ax.com...

The issue is who or what to follow.
Its best not to follow authoritarian human religions.

[Andrew W]

>"duke" wrote in message news:4cs9o8ld9gpqo4cn5...@4ax.com...

So just wipe them all out then?
What ever happened to thou shalt not kill?
If you don't stir a hornet's nest then you don't get stung.

[Patrcik]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 08:28:00 +1000, "Andrew W"

You just can't make up your own rules.
The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
guided by God.
Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
He left a human in charge.

[Andrew W]

>"Patrcik" wrote in message
>news:4r6bo89uddm5dd8cf...@4ax.com...

Rubbish.
Christ is always with us in spirit and always helps us.
We need no human middleman.

[duke]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 08:31:32 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>

Strawman

>What ever happened to thou shalt not kill?
>If you don't stir a hornet's nest then you don't get stung.

[arjay]

douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message

news:jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>
>>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>>>>> >to humans.
>>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>>>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
>>>>crusades.
>>>
>>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
>>> Europe.
>>
>>Bullshit.
>
> The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow,
> to
> deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.

That was nominally so for the first nine only. The others -- more than a
dozen of them -- were mounted inside the geographical boundaries of Europe,
never went anywhere near the so-called Holy Places, and (except for one)
were against other Christians.
Had it not been for the example of these later "crusades" and the fact that
they were indeed called by that sullied term, Ike could never have addressed
the troops on D-Day and told them they were 'embarking on a great crusade.'
And that gave Bush 43 the precedent to call his Iraq disaster a 'crusade.'

> earl weber, German - American
>
> ********************************************

[arjay]

douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message

news:r0gco8d1arc91v64b...@4ax.com...

Learn a new knee-jerk reaction. That one doesn't fit here.
Had it been Andrew's only response to your backpack jibe, and expressed as a
statement, you would have had a case in suggesting a straw man argument.
But it's a question, earl, a rhetorical question leading to a second,
non-rhetorical question which you decided to ignore.
Carving up and distorting another poster's comments by interjecting your own
bleats into the prose flow is an old trick.
You've used it for at least a dozen years. And never very well.

>>What ever happened to thou shalt not kill?
>>If you don't stir a hornet's nest then you don't get stung.
>

[Patrick]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 10:47:54 +1000, "Andrew W"

And that excuse is why we have 5000+ denominations in the USA. All
you heathens think you have the answer to what God has said.

[Patrick]

arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message

>> Strawman
>
>Learn a new knee-jerk reaction. That one doesn't fit here.
>Had it been Andrew's only response to your backpack jibe, and expressed as a
>statement, you would have had a case in suggesting a straw man argument.
>But it's a question, earl, a rhetorical question leading to a second,
>non-rhetorical question which you decided to ignore.
>Carving up and distorting another poster's comments by interjecting your own
>bleats into the prose flow is an old trick.

Uh oh, Duke.
You've made the teacher angry again.
He is preaching one more time, ensuring everyone knows who is in
charge when a lesson needs to be taught.
Hold out your hands.
He is bringing the ruler out next.

[duke]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 10:59:37 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:

>>>>How can you tell a peaceful muslim from a killer muslim? You can't.
>>>>The
>>>>bomb
>>>>is in his backpack.
>>
>>>So just wipe them all out then?
>>
>> Strawman

>Learn a new knee-jerk reaction. That one doesn't fit here.

Of course it does.

[duke]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 10:59:37 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:

>>>>How can you tell a peaceful muslim from a killer muslim? You can't.
>>>>The
>>>>bomb
>>>>is in his backpack.

>>>So just wipe them all out then?

>> Strawman

>Learn a new knee-jerk reaction. That one doesn't fit here.

Yes it does.

>Had it been Andrew's only response to your backpack jibe, and expressed as a
>statement, you would have had a case in suggesting a straw man argument.

He may have formed it as a question, but the premise of his comment was totally
out of line what I said. That make it a strawman. It was a truly spurious
comment completely away from what I said.

>But it's a question, earl, a rhetorical question leading to a second,
>non-rhetorical question which you decided to ignore.
>Carving up and distorting another poster's comments by interjecting your own
>bleats into the prose flow is an old trick.
>You've used it for at least a dozen years. And never very well.
>
>>>What ever happened to thou shalt not kill?
>>>If you don't stir a hornet's nest then you don't get stung.
>>
>> earl weber, German - American
>>
>> ********************************************
>

[duke]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 10:58:58 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:

>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>>>>>> >to humans.
>>>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>>>>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
>>>>>crusades.
>>>>
>>>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
>>>> Europe.
>>>
>>>Bullshit.
>>
>> The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow,
>> to
>> deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.
>
>That was nominally so for the first nine only. The others -- more than a
>dozen of them -- were mounted inside the geographical boundaries of Europe,
>never went anywhere near the so-called Holy Places, and (except for one)
>were against other Christians.

And totally directed at the muslim hordes trying to overrun Europe now.

[W.T.S.]

In article <h77do89274ik9195b...@4ax.com>, pbarker001
@woh.rr.com says...

Think of it as religious democracy. The first amendment is alive and
well.
>

As always, organized religion opposes progress -
>
See what RELIGION does to peoples' minds?
>
Adults no longer believe in the Tooth Fairy - but they still torture and
kill each other over ancient myths and superstitions.
>
"We all remember how many religious wars were fought for a religion of
love
and gentleness; how many bodies were burned
alive with the genuinely kind intention of saving souls from the eternal
fire of hell." --- Karl Popper
>
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When
many
people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
--- Robert M. Pirsig
>
Either God wants to abolish evil and cannot, or he can but does not want
to.
If he wants to but cannot he is impotent. If he can
but does not want to, he is wicked. If he neither can nor wants to, then
he
is both powerless and wicked.
--- Epicurus, Greek philosopher, circa 300 B.C.
>
"Act of God" disasters like the Japanese earthquake expose the myth.
Either
God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like
this, or he doesn't care to, or he doesn't exist. He is thus either
impotent, evil, or imaginary.
--- CNN Belief Blog, 3-20-11
>
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things
and
evil people doing evil things. But for good people
to do evil things, that takes religion."
--- Steven Weinberg, quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999
>
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." --- Blaise Pascal.
>
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
false,
and by rulers as useful."
--- Seneca the Younger (4? BC - 65 AD)
>
"Religion once ruled the world. It was called the Dark Ages." --- Ruth
Green.
>
"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." ---
Victor Stenger.
>
"I don't believe in God because I don't believe in Mother Goose." ---
Clarence Darrow
>
"As my ancestors are free from slavery, I am free from the slavery of
religion." --- Butterfly McQueen
>
"Religion was invented when the first con-man met the first fool." -
Mark
Twain
>
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --- Mark Twain
>
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character
in
all fiction." --- Richard Dawkins
>
"Cult today, religion tomorrow."
>
The Freedom From Religion Foundation: http://ffrf.org/
The Secular Coalition for America: www.secular.org
Secular Student Alliance: www.secularstudents.org
www.infidels.org
www.humaniststudies.org
www.atheistalliance.org
www.americanhumanist.org
>

[Andrew W]

>"Patrick" wrote in message
>news:h77do89274ik9195b...@4ax.com...

No, the Bible becoming widespread is to blame for that.
All those denominations are Bible zealot denominations.
Seeking Christ within creates no denomination, because its personal.
But who compiled the Bible into one book in the first place? The RCC.

>
> All you heathens think you have the answer to what God has said.
>

And many of us do.
Your church doesn't but thinks it does. All it has is old entrenched
doctrines, dogma, tradition, and sacraments that have lost their original
meaning and potency.

[Andrew W]

>"duke" wrote in message news:r0gco8d1arc91v64b...@4ax.com...

Nope. You said it was "in fulfillment (sic) of a solemn vow".
That CAN lead to the wipe out of an entire race.

By the way, can you quote this alleged vow?

>
>>What ever happened to thou shalt not kill?
>>If you don't stir a hornet's nest then you don't get stung.
>

No response here? Why am I not surprised?

[Andrew W]

>"Patrick" wrote in message
>news:2a7do8pjk7n5gig2m...@4ax.com...

Yes you need a teacher Patrick, a high school one.
As for duke, its way too late.

[duke]

Well, the comment re "just wipe them all out" is just that - a knee jerk
reaction.

>Had it been Andrew's only response to your backpack jibe, and expressed as a
>statement, you would have had a case in suggesting a straw man argument.

It was a very, very poor non-response to the issue in question.

>But it's a question, earl, a rhetorical question leading to a second,
>non-rhetorical question which you decided to ignore.

A totally false conclusion. It was a strawman.

[duke]

On Mon, 6 May 2013 09:23:54 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>

It was George Bush 1 that said "saddam would not be allowed to annex Kuwait.
That's not a threat. That's just the way it's going to be".

>By the way, can you quote this alleged vow?

No, I never made it. What cheap wine are you own today?

[PATRICK]

"Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message

>>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
>>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
>>>>guided by God.
>>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
>>>>He left a human in charge.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Rubbish.
>>>Christ is always with us in spirit and always helps us.
>>>We need no human middleman.
>>
>>And that excuse is why we have 5000+ denominations in the USA.
>>
>
>No, the Bible becoming widespread is to blame for that.
>All those denominations are Bible zealot denominations.
>Seeking Christ within creates no denomination, because its personal.
>But who compiled the Bible into one book in the first place? The RCC.

Yes, and you may thank us for that.

>
>>
>> All you heathens think you have the answer to what God has said.
>>
>
>And many of us do.
>Your church doesn't but thinks it does. All it has is old entrenched
>doctrines, dogma, tradition, and sacraments that have lost their original
>meaning and potency.

How does the Word of God lose its meaning?

[W.T.S.]

In article <rskfo8hr38u44bb4j...@4ax.com>, pbarker001
@woh.rr.com says...

> "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>
> >>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
> >>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
> >>>>guided by God.
> >>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
> >>>>He left a human in charge.
> >>>>
> >>>Rubbish.
> >>>Christ is always with us in spirit and always helps us.
> >>>We need no human middleman.
> >>
> >>And that excuse is why we have 5000+ denominations in the USA.
> >>
> >
> >No, the Bible becoming widespread is to blame for that.
> >All those denominations are Bible zealot denominations.
> >Seeking Christ within creates no denomination, because its personal.
> >But who compiled the Bible into one book in the first place? The RCC.
>
> Yes, and you may thank us for that.

Yes, thank you for compiling a book of lying bull shit that's far too
stiff to be used as toilet paper.

> >>
> >> All you heathens think you have the answer to what God has said.
> >
> >And many of us do.
> >Your church doesn't but thinks it does. All it has is old entrenched
> >doctrines, dogma, tradition, and sacraments that have lost their original
> >meaning and potency.
>
> How does the Word of God lose its meaning?

What makes you think it ever had any meaning?

[duke]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 15:11:09 -0400, Pabro <Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org> wrote:

>On Sun, 05 May 2013 14:03:23 -0500, duke wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 5 May 2013 10:58:58 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>
>>>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>>>>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we are
>>>>>>>> >to humans.
>>>>>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>>>>>>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
>>>>>>>crusades.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
>>>>>> Europe.
>>>>>
>>>>>Bullshit.
>>>>
>>>> The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow,
>>>> to
>>>> deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.
>>>
>>>That was nominally so for the first nine only. The others -- more than a
>>>dozen of them -- were mounted inside the geographical boundaries of Europe,
>>>never went anywhere near the so-called Holy Places, and (except for one)
>>>were against other Christians.
>>
>> And totally directed at the muslim hordes trying to overrun Europe now.
>>
>

>Muslims or so-called Christians or Atheists. What does it matter to us who
>follow Christ Jesus?

We are called to help the needy, and being overrun by muslims is a need.

[Andrew W]

>
>
>Forcing someone to either worship or burn is called tyranny.
>My motto: Never follow any leader who gives lifelong (or eternal) torture
>in a fire as one of your 'free' choices, because that is a despot.
>
>Religions breed hypocrisy, ignorance and self-righteousness.

>"PATRICK" wrote in message
>news:rskfo8hr38u44bb4j...@4ax.com...

>
>"Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>
>>>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
>>>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
>>>>>guided by God.
>>>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
>>>>>He left a human in charge.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Rubbish.
>>>>Christ is always with us in spirit and always helps us.
>>>>We need no human middleman.
>>>
>>>And that excuse is why we have 5000+ denominations in the USA.
>>>
>>
>>No, the Bible becoming widespread is to blame for that.
>>All those denominations are Bible zealot denominations.
>>Seeking Christ within creates no denomination, because its personal.
>>But who compiled the Bible into one book in the first place? The RCC.
>
>Yes, and you may thank us for that.
>

The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.

>>
>>>
>>> All you heathens think you have the answer to what God has said.
>>>
>>
>>And many of us do.
>>Your church doesn't but thinks it does. All it has is old entrenched
>>doctrines, dogma, tradition, and sacraments that have lost their original
>>meaning and potency.
>
>How does the Word of God lose its meaning?
>

Through human misinterpretation, mistranslation, loss of context and
misunderstanding of divine principles.

But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for themselves.

[Silen...@hotmail.com]

On Sat, 04 May 2013 19:38:26 -0400, Patrcik <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:

Then why are you a Catholic, rightard?

You just acknowledged that the Roman Catholic Church is a fully human
institution, with no more wisdom and all of the flaws of the people
who run it.

You're a cult member, and nothing more.

Heh heh...

Lying racist rightard socialists...

Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.

[Silen...@hotmail.com]

On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:55:51 -0400, Patrick <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:

No, rightard...

We heathens recognize that we're the one's running the show here on
earth, and that we'd best get it right because there isn't any God
that's going to rescue us from ourselves if we fuck it up.

That's why we think reproductive control is important.

That's why we think that preserving the environment is important.

That's why we think it's a stupid, idea to kill one another in the
name of various interpretations of God, and that the sooner we make
religion a laughing stock, the better off we'll be.

[Silen...@hotmail.com]

On Mon, 06 May 2013 12:01:46 -0400, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:

>"Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>
>>>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
>>>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
>>>>>guided by God.
>>>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
>>>>>He left a human in charge.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Rubbish.
>>>>Christ is always with us in spirit and always helps us.
>>>>We need no human middleman.
>>>
>>>And that excuse is why we have 5000+ denominations in the USA.
>>>
>>
>>No, the Bible becoming widespread is to blame for that.
>>All those denominations are Bible zealot denominations.
>>Seeking Christ within creates no denomination, because its personal.
>>But who compiled the Bible into one book in the first place? The RCC.
>
>Yes, and you may thank us for that.

Yep.

And we'll blame you for all the evil man uses the Bible to justify.

>>> All you heathens think you have the answer to what God has said.
>>>
>>
>>And many of us do.
>>Your church doesn't but thinks it does. All it has is old entrenched
>>doctrines, dogma, tradition, and sacraments that have lost their original
>>meaning and potency.
>
>How does the Word of God lose its meaning?

People stop believing it.

And, we're making good progress.

Fewer and fewer believe every day.

[Silen...@hotmail.com]

On Sat, 04 May 2013 13:09:12 -0400, Patrick <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 04 May 2013 15:48:20 +0100, John Ritson
><j.ri...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>
>>On 02/05/2013 16:42, Patrick wrote:
>>> arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'll spare you the list of the six crusades mounted in Southern Europe (no
>>>> Holy Land involved) called by several Popes between 1198 and 1285 against
>>>> _Europeans_, and the other list of seven _groups_..............
>>>
>>> Oh, please.
>>> Tell us all about what happened 900 years ago.
>>> It is so relevent to what is happening today in the Church.
>>>

>>Maybe now you appreciate how we feel when believers insist on telling us
>>all about what allegedly happened two thousand years ago.
>
>Stop asking then.

Stop trying to cram your religion down our throats and we will.

[PATRICK]

On Tue, 7 May 2013 08:47:56 +1000, "Andrew W" wrote:


>>>All those denominations are Bible zealot denominations.
>>>Seeking Christ within creates no denomination, because its personal.
>>>But who compiled the Bible into one book in the first place? The RCC.
>>
>>Yes, and you may thank us for that.
>>
>
>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.

If you want it to.
You must be very weak.

>>>> All you heathens think you have the answer to what God has said.
>>>>
>>>
>>>And many of us do.
>>>Your church doesn't but thinks it does. All it has is old entrenched
>>>doctrines, dogma, tradition, and sacraments that have lost their original
>>>meaning and potency.
>>
>>How does the Word of God lose its meaning?
>>
>
>Through human misinterpretation, mistranslation, loss of context and
>misunderstanding of divine principles.

And THAT is why the Roman Catholic Church does not change its dogmas
or doctrines, no matter how immoral the society becomes.

>But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
>Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for themselves.

Well then. MAN UP. Start thinking for yourself.
Stop depending on me to 'splain the world to you.

[Dakota]

No intelligent god would claim the nonsense found in the Bible as it's
word.

[Andrew W]

>"PATRICK" wrote in message
>news:dllho898m6o3mlr0l...@4ax.com...

>
>On Tue, 7 May 2013 08:47:56 +1000, "Andrew W" wrote:
>
>

>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>
>>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
>>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
>>>>guided by God.
>>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
>>>>He left a human in charge.
>>>>

If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims about
God?
Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.

>
>>>>All those denominations are Bible zealot denominations.
>>>>Seeking Christ within creates no denomination, because its personal.
>>>>But who compiled the Bible into one book in the first place? The RCC.
>>>
>>>Yes, and you may thank us for that.
>>>
>>
>>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
>
>If you want it to.
>You must be very weak.
>

This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.

>
>>>>> All you heathens think you have the answer to what God has said.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>And many of us do.
>>>>Your church doesn't but thinks it does. All it has is old entrenched
>>>>doctrines, dogma, tradition, and sacraments that have lost their
>>>>original
>>>>meaning and potency.
>>>
>>>How does the Word of God lose its meaning?
>>>
>>
>>Through human misinterpretation, mistranslation, loss of context and
>>misunderstanding of divine principles.
>
>And THAT is why the Roman Catholic Church does not change its dogmas
>or doctrines, no matter how immoral the society becomes.
>

But it should change its dogmas because it got things wrong about God and
Christ from the start.
The only reason it doesn't change anything is 1/ it can't because its
dogmas have been canonised, 2/ its errors would become obvious and the
parishioners would leave.

>
>>But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
>>Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for themselves.
>
>Well then. MAN UP. Start thinking for yourself.
>

I do think for myself. That's why I'm not a Catholic any more, dummy.

When are you going to start thinking for yourself? Of course we know the
answer is never.

>
>Stop depending on me to 'splain the world to you.
>

Lol. Give your ego a rest.
You've never explained anything, not without copying and pasting some crap
you found, or recalling what your priests told you.

[Andrew W]

>"Patrcik" wrote in message
>news:4r6bo89uddm5dd8cf...@4ax.com...
>
>On Sun, 5 May 2013 08:28:00 +1000, "Andrew W"

><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>>>"Patrick" wrote in message

>>>news:14gao85f4e571em7k...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Sat, 4 May 2013 21:16:28 +1000, "Andrew W"

>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message

>>>>>news:c8r9o8503b1nn7kse...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 4 May 2013 19:40:00 +1000, "Andrew W"

>>>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message

>>>>>>>news:s825o89q8rouj1ivq...@4ax.com...

>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I'll spare you the list of the six crusades mounted in Southern
>>>>>>>>Europe
>>>>>>>>(no
>>>>>>>>Holy Land involved) called by several Popes between 1198 and 1285
>>>>>>>>against
>>>>>>>>_Europeans_, and the other list of seven _groups_..............
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Oh, please.
>>>>>>>Tell us all about what happened 900 years ago.
>>>>>>>It is so relevent to what is happening today in the Church.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>

>>>>>>It simply shows that the church was never guided by God from the
>>>>>>start.
>>>>>
>>>>>If your child does something wrong, do you always claim the parents
>>>>>aren't guiding them?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No, but I simply don't follow such children.
>>>
>>>Do you know ANYTHING about kids?
>>>
>>
>>The issue is who or what to follow.
>>Its best not to follow authoritarian human religions.
>

>You just can't make up your own rules.
>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
>guided by God.
>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
>He left a human in charge.
>

Duke says he talks with God every day.
Why on earth can't the Pope?

Maybe duke is deluded, which means that every Catholic/Christian is equally
prone to delusion, including the Pope.

[W.T.S.]

In article <kmcf20$sta$1...@dont-email.me>, spam_a...@optusnet.com.au
says...

Because it looks funny when you talk to your own sock puppet.

>
> Maybe duke is deluded, which means that every Catholic/Christian is equally
> prone to delusion, including the Pope.

Believing your own propaganda is the worst thing any organization can
do. The most famous case was Nazi Germany. The second most famous was
the late, unlamented Soviet Union. In both cases, the result was their
consignment to the trash bin of history. If the Catholic Church
actually believes it's own propaganda and disinformation, then it's
walking around with its eyes closed near a very high cliff.

[duke]

On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:29:46 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:

>If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims about
>God?
>Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
>men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.

all humankind is called to follow God in his teachings.

>>>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
>>If you want it to. You must be very weak.
>This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.

We who follow God are free and happy. You who follow yourself are the ones in
trouble.

>>And THAT is why the Roman Catholic Church does not change its dogmas
>>or doctrines, no matter how immoral the society becomes.

>But it should change its dogmas because it got things wrong about God and
>Christ from the start.

Actually, dogma means "truth from God". We don't change God's mind. If you
can't follow, satan says "thank you".

>The only reason it doesn't change anything is 1/ it can't because its
>dogmas have been canonised, 2/ its errors would become obvious and the
>parishioners would leave.

Well, that's 2 really stupid comments. You really should review your beliefs
before you show your ass this way.

>>>But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
>>>Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for themselves.
>>Well then. MAN UP. Start thinking for yourself.

>I do think for myself. That's why I'm not a Catholic any more, dummy.

And why I came back and am absolutely sure I made the right decision.

[duke]

On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:06:33 -0500, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> wrote:

>No intelligent god would claim the nonsense found in the Bible as it's
>word.

Well, now we understand why your name isn't in the book.

[duke]

On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:06:33 -0500, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> wrote:

Well, now we know why you left.

[PATRICK]

On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:29:46 +1000, "Andrew W"

>>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>>
>>>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
>>>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
>>>>>guided by God.
>>>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
>>>>>He left a human in charge.
>>>>>
>
>If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims about
>God?

What does it "claim" that you have a problem with?

>Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
>men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.

That has happened since the beginning of time.
The protestant Reformation actually woke the church up. So did the
clergy child abuse crisis.

>>>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
>>
>>If you want it to.
>>You must be very weak.
>
>This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.

These are sometimes two very different things.

>>>>How does the Word of God lose its meaning?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Through human misinterpretation, mistranslation, loss of context and
>>>misunderstanding of divine principles.
>>
>>And THAT is why the Roman Catholic Church does not change its dogmas
>>or doctrines, no matter how immoral the society becomes.
>>
>
>But it should change its dogmas because it got things wrong about God and
>Christ from the start.

Huh?

>The only reason it doesn't change anything is 1/ it can't because its
>dogmas have been canonised, 2/ its errors would become obvious and the
>parishioners would leave.

Christ started a revolution. And, he left Peter in charge of His
church when He left. Parisioners leave all the time. Mostly because
they know that the RCC will not approve of their poor decisions and
lifestyles. People seem to "hang" with people of like minds. Look at
any high school lunch room.

>>>But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
>>>Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for themselves.
>>
>>Well then. MAN UP. Start thinking for yourself.
>>
>
>I do think for myself. That's why I'm not a Catholic any more, dummy.

Catholics do NOT teach that the Bible is infallible.
Why do you think this?

>When are you going to start thinking for yourself? Of course we know the
>answer is never.

"we?"

>
>>Stop depending on me to 'splain the world to you.

>Lol. Give your ego a rest.
>You've never explained anything, not without copying and pasting some crap
>you found, or recalling what your priests told you.

When someone asks a specific question about Catholic doctrine or
dogma, I try to provide the best answer possible. When someone asks
me for my opinion, I also provide that.

As I always say, don't ask the question if you can't stand the answer.

[�RLMeasures]

In article <kmc2im$7p3$1...@dont-email.me>, "Andrew W"

<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> >"PATRICK" wrote in message
> >news:dllho898m6o3mlr0l...@4ax.com...
> >
> >On Tue, 7 May 2013 08:47:56 +1000, "Andrew W" wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
> >
> >>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
> >>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
> >>>>guided by God.
> >>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
> >>>>He left a human in charge.
> >>>>
>
> If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims about
> God?
> Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
> men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.
>
> >
> >>>>All those denominations are Bible zealot denominations.
> >>>>Seeking Christ within creates no denomination, because its personal.
> >>>>But who compiled the Bible into one book in the first place? The RCC.
> >>>
> >>>Yes, and you may thank us for that.
> >>>
> >>
> >>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
> >
> >If you want it to.
> >You must be very weak.
> >
>
> This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.
>

� Bible believers are weak minded if they believe it is 100% true.

[W.T.S.]

In article <33bko8pgnbim7mhrc...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...

> On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:29:46 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims about
> >God?
> >Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
> >men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.
>
> all humankind is called to follow God in his teachings.

No, I'd rather follow myself that the Pope's sock puppet.

>
> >>>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
> >>If you want it to. You must be very weak.
> >This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.
>
> We who follow God are free and happy. You who follow yourself are the ones in
> trouble.

You can't imagine how you look, going down a road, following a funny old
man wearing a sock puppet on his hand.

>
> >>And THAT is why the Roman Catholic Church does not change its dogmas
> >>or doctrines, no matter how immoral the society becomes.
>
> >But it should change its dogmas because it got things wrong about God and
> >Christ from the start.
>
> Actually, dogma means "truth from God". We don't change God's mind. If you
> can't follow, satan says "thank you".

It's not truth, it's lies. It's not a "God", it's a sock puppet. Satan
is the sock puppet the Pope wears on his other hand, sort of a carrot
and stick con game.

>
> >The only reason it doesn't change anything is 1/ it can't because its
> >dogmas have been canonised, 2/ its errors would become obvious and the
> >parishioners would leave.
>
> Well, that's 2 really stupid comments. You really should review your beliefs
> before you show your ass this way.

If you fully understood how stupid Catholic Dogma is and always will be,
you'd vomit. Catholic Dogma is pure degeneracy, refined and force fed
to the congregation.

>
> >>>But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
> >>>Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for themselves.
> >>Well then. MAN UP. Start thinking for yourself.
>
> >I do think for myself. That's why I'm not a Catholic any more, dummy.
>
> And why I came back and am absolutely sure I made the right decision.

No, "duke", you no longer think for yourself, you're just another
Catholic turd that dropped out of the Pope's anus.
>
> The pukester, CatholiKKK Stool.
> ********************************************
> Repudiate Catholicism!

> You simply can't fix stupid.
> ********************************************

[Silen...@hotmail.com]

On Sun, 05 May 2013 06:19:17 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 5 May 2013 08:31:32 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>

>>>"duke" wrote in message news:4cs9o8ld9gpqo4cn5...@4ax.com...
>>>

>>>On Sat, 4 May 2013 21:22:17 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>"duke" wrote in message

>>>>>news:jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>douche <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
>>>>>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we
>>>>>>>>> >are
>>>>>>>>> >to humans.
>>>>>>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
>>>>>>>>. That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
>>>>>>>>crusades.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
>>>>>>> Europe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Bullshit.
>>>>>
>>>>>The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow,
>>>>>to
>>>>>deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.
>>>

>>>>The majority of Muslims were/are peaceful and religious people.
>>>
>>>How can you tell a peaceful muslim from a killer muslim? You can't. The
>>>bomb
>>>is in his backpack.
>
>>So just wipe them all out then?
>
>Strawman

If that wasn't your implication, Dook, then why did you make the
comment?

What were we supposed to take away from what you wrote, if not that we
should kill them all?

After all, it was the Crusader/Catholic sack of the City of Béziers
that gave rise to the phrase; "Kill Them All; God Will Know His Own".

You holding the view that we should kill all Muslims 'just in case'
would hardly be unique among Catholics, would it?

Your protestations of innocence ring hollow, Dook.

One scarcely know's who's more blood thirsty, Catholics or Muslims....

[Andrew W]

>"duke" wrote in message news:33bko8pgnbim7mhrc...@4ax.com...

>
>On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:29:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims
>>about
>>God?
>>Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
>>men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.
>
>all humankind is called to follow God in his teachings.
>

Kind of impossible if he doesn't talk to us.
Any more useless mantras for today?

>
>>>>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
>>>If you want it to. You must be very weak.
>>This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.
>
>We who follow God are free and happy.
>

You don't follow God, twit. You follow men's traditions and dogmas.

>
> You who follow yourself are the ones in
>trouble.
>

Your brain is in trouble if you can't even run your OWN life.

>
>>>And THAT is why the Roman Catholic Church does not change its dogmas
>>>or doctrines, no matter how immoral the society becomes.
>
>>But it should change its dogmas because it got things wrong about God and
>>Christ from the start.
>
>Actually, dogma means "truth from God".
>

Bahaha! Fool!
Dogma means old religious beliefs.

>
> We don't change God's mind. If you
>can't follow, satan says "thank you".
>

<groan>

>
>>The only reason it doesn't change anything is 1/ it can't because its
>>dogmas have been canonised, 2/ its errors would become obvious and the
>>parishioners would leave.
>
>Well, that's 2 really stupid comments. You really should review your
>beliefs
>before you show your ass this way.
>

Can't handle the cold truth duke?

>
>>>>But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
>>>>Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for
>>>>themselves.
>>>Well then. MAN UP. Start thinking for yourself.
>
>>I do think for myself. That's why I'm not a Catholic any more, dummy.
>
>And why I came back and am absolutely sure I made the right decision.
>

Bahaha!
You're a monumental fool!
And completely deluded and hoodwinked!

You're the best entertainment in these groups ever.

[Andrew W]

>"PATRICK" wrote in message
>news:f2dko8lst2f0ir6md...@4ax.com...

>
>On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:29:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>>>
>>>>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
>>>>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
>>>>>>guided by God.
>>>>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
>>>>>>He left a human in charge.
>>>>>>
>>
>>If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims
>>about
>>God?
>
>What does it "claim" that you have a problem with?
>

Where should I start.
- that God is somehow angry with us.
- that only a bloody death on a cross/sacrifice could satisfy him.
- that we humans are just physical objects that are disposable.
- that there is an eternal hell waiting for those who simply don't repent
from even petty sins.
- that God needs a middle man to talk to us (even though God doesn't even
talk to him).
- that the Bible contains God's very words.
The list is too long.

>
>>Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
>>men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.
>
>That has happened since the beginning of time.
>The protestant Reformation actually woke the church up. So did the
>clergy child abuse crisis.
>

So why do you still follow a sleepy and corrupt religion?

>
>>>>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
>>>
>>>If you want it to.
>>>You must be very weak.
>>
>>This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.
>
>These are sometimes two very different things.
>

The Bible endeavours to enslave both.

>
>>>>>How does the Word of God lose its meaning?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Through human misinterpretation, mistranslation, loss of context and
>>>>misunderstanding of divine principles.
>>>
>>>And THAT is why the Roman Catholic Church does not change its dogmas
>>>or doctrines, no matter how immoral the society becomes.
>>>
>>
>>But it should change its dogmas because it got things wrong about God and
>>Christ from the start.
>
>Huh?
>

Yes.
God is not really angry with us.
And there's no eternal hell.
And we need no Pope (Christ needs no flawed human deputies).

>
>>The only reason it doesn't change anything is 1/ it can't because its
>>dogmas have been canonised, 2/ its errors would become obvious and the
>>parishioners would leave.
>
>Christ started a revolution. And, he left Peter in charge of His
>church when He left.
>

Lol. Rubbish.
Christ requires no such petty silliness.
That's the RCC's contrivance based on one vague Bible verse.

>
Parisioners leave all the time. Mostly because
>they know that the RCC will not approve of their poor decisions and
>lifestyles.
>

I most cases those lifestyle decisions are of no problem or business to
anyone.

>
> People seem to "hang" with people of like minds. Look at
>any high school lunch room.
>

Just more excuses to try to make the RCC look good.
Don't be a sycophant.

>
>>>>But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
>>>>Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for
>>>>themselves.
>>>
>>>Well then. MAN UP. Start thinking for yourself.
>>>
>>
>>I do think for myself. That's why I'm not a Catholic any more, dummy.
>
>Catholics do NOT teach that the Bible is infallible.
>Why do you think this?
>

? I didn't say infallible.
That's the the Pope's area.

>
>>When are you going to start thinking for yourself? Of course we know the
>>answer is never.
>
>"we?"
>>

Yes. In case you didn't know there are others in these groups.

>
>>>Stop depending on me to 'splain the world to you.
>
>>Lol. Give your ego a rest.
>>You've never explained anything, not without copying and pasting some crap
>>you found, or recalling what your priests told you.
>
>When someone asks a specific question about Catholic doctrine or
>dogma, I try to provide the best answer possible.
>

By copying and pasting.

>
> When someone asks
>me for my opinion, I also provide that.
>

Not very useful.

>
>As I always say, don't ask the question if you can't stand the answer.
>

You're incapable of giving useful or remarkable answers.
You have none of your own.

[�RLMeasures]

In article <kmen31$j6n$1...@dont-email.me>, "Andrew W"

<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> >"duke" wrote in message news:33bko8pgnbim7mhrc...@4ax.com...
> >
> >On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:29:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
> ><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims
> >>about
> >>God?
> >>Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
> >>men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.
> >
> >all humankind is called to follow God in his teachings.
> >
>
> Kind of impossible if he doesn't talk to us.
> Any more useless mantras for today?
>
> >
> >>>>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
> >>>If you want it to. You must be very weak.
> >>This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.
> >
> >We who follow God are free and happy.
> >
>
> You don't follow God, twit. You follow men's traditions and dogmas.

>...
� indeed Andrew W., and he follows them blindly, knee-jerk style. .

[Dakota]

The RCC may have written that particular verse when they were voting
on what to include in the New Testament.

[nature bats last]

On May 8, 2:09 pm, SilentO...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 06:19:17 -0500, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 08:31:32 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_ajwer...@optusnet.com.au>
> >wrote:
>
> >>>"duke"  wrote in messagenews:4cs9o8ld9gpqo4cn5...@4ax.com...

>
> >>>On Sat, 4 May 2013 21:22:17 +1000, "Andrew W"

> >>><spam_ajwer...@optusnet.com.au>

> >>>wrote:
>
> >>>>>"duke"  wrote in message
> >>>>>news:jc67o89bkgfpg5cof...@4ax.com...
>
> >>>>>On Thu, 2 May 2013 11:03:59 -0400, "arjay" <ar...@hobbiton.net> wrote:
>

> >>>>>>douche <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote in message

> >>>>>>news:bcm4o8l61msm3dvbq...@4ax.com...
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 04:08:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (.RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>> >I've never understood why we're more merciful to animals than we
> >>>>>>>>> >are
> >>>>>>>>> >to humans.
> >>>>>>>>> Being a Roman Catholic, I've never experienced that.
> >>>>>>>>.  That's because you were not a victim of one of church's bloody
> >>>>>>>>crusades.
>
> >>>>>>> Those were against the muslim hordes overrunning the Holy Land and
> >>>>>>> Europe.
>
> >>>>>>Bullshit.
>
> >>>>>The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow,
> >>>>>to
> >>>>>deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.
>
> >>>>The majority of Muslims were/are peaceful and religious people.
>
> >>>How can you tell a peaceful muslim from a killer muslim?   You can't.  The
> >>>bomb
> >>>is in his backpack.
>
> >>So just wipe them all out then?
>
> >Strawman
>
> If that wasn't your implication, Dook, then why did you make the
> comment?
>
> What were we supposed to take away from what you wrote, if not that we
> should kill them all?
>

;

> After all, it was the Crusader/Catholic sack of the City of B?ziers

> that gave rise to the phrase; "Kill Them All; God Will Know His Own".

Now, now Otto -- has not Our Dook informed us that,
although from time to time some of the "employees of
the Church" "did bad things"...hey: you can hardly
expect the Body of Christ here on Earth, ruled by the
Vicar of Christ, to behave any more morally than the
rest of the people did at that time.


NBL

[PATRICK]

On Thu, 9 May 2013 10:22:47 +1000, "Andrew W"
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>>"PATRICK" wrote in message
>>news:f2dko8lst2f0ir6md...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:29:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>>>>>>>>>"Patrick" wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>>>>You just can't make up your own rules.
>>>>>>>The issue was some bogus claim of yours that the RCC is supposedly
>>>>>>>guided by God.
>>>>>>>Perhaps you forget that the Messiah has left the building.
>>>>>>>He left a human in charge.
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>If the RCC is not guided by God then why do you believe all it claims
>>>about
>>>God?
>>
>>What does it "claim" that you have a problem with?
>>
>
>Where should I start.
>- that God is somehow angry with us.

He is?
Why do you think the RCC claims this?

>- that only a bloody death on a cross/sacrifice could satisfy him.

All people have sinned against God. But, God is infinitely holy and
righteous. He must punish the sinner, the Law- breaker. If He
didn't, then His law is not Law for there is no law that is a law
without a punishment. The punishment for breaking the Law is death,
separation from God. Therefore, we sinners need a way to escape the
righteous judgment of God. Since we are stained by sin and cannot
keep the Law of God, then the only one who could do what we cannot is
God Himself. That is why Jesus is God in flesh. He is both divine
and human. He was made under the Law (Gal. 4:4) and He fulfilled it
perfectly. Therefore, His sacrifice to God the Father on our behalf
is of infinite value and is sufficient to cleanse all people from
their sins and undo the offense to God.

>- that we humans are just physical objects that are disposable.

We are?
Where does the RCC teach this?

>- that there is an eternal hell waiting for those who simply don't repent
>from even petty sins.

"If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them;
if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained." King James
Bible (Cambridge Ed.) ...

>- that God needs a middle man to talk to us (even though God doesn't even
>talk to him).

"If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them;
if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained." King James
Bible (Cambridge Ed.) ...

>- that the Bible contains God's very words.

"If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them;
if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained." King James
Bible (Cambridge Ed.) ...

>The list is too long.

Stop trying to equate Catholics with Protestants.
We are different.

>>>Humans corrupt and lose meanings over time. So you're actually following
>>>men's traditions and doctrines instead of God.
>>
>>That has happened since the beginning of time.
>>The protestant Reformation actually woke the church up. So did the
>>clergy child abuse crisis.
>>
>
>So why do you still follow a sleepy and corrupt religion?

Why do you stop at stop lights?

>>>>>The Bible enslaves and narrows the mind and spirit.
>>>>
>>>>If you want it to.
>>>>You must be very weak.
>>>
>>>This is about Bible believers and Catholics, twit.
>>
>>These are sometimes two very different things.
>
>The Bible endeavours to enslave both.

The bible is an inanimate object.
Yiu are listening to too many TV evangelists.

>God is not really angry with us.

Yup

>And there's no eternal hell.

Why not?
Do you feel that God would set up laws and not have a punishment
system? Who put you in charge of what God says?

>And we need no Pope (Christ needs no flawed human deputies).

You don't. However, without a central authority, the RCC would have
splintered denominations that would still claim to be Catholic. Kinda
like the Baptists or Anglicans or Church of God folks. Catholics like
having a unified religion, a unified doctrine and belief system. I
especially like being able to attend Mass in any Catholic Church
around the world and KNOW that it is the same everywhere.

>>>The only reason it doesn't change anything is 1/ it can't because its
>>>dogmas have been canonised, 2/ its errors would become obvious and the
>>>parishioners would leave.
>>
>>Christ started a revolution. And, he left Peter in charge of His
>>church when He left.
>>
>
>Lol. Rubbish.
>Christ requires no such petty silliness.
>That's the RCC's contrivance based on one vague Bible verse.

Try it. You'll like it.

>
>>
>Parisioners leave all the time. Mostly because
>>they know that the RCC will not approve of their poor decisions and
>>lifestyles.
>>
>
>I most cases those lifestyle decisions are of no problem or business to
>anyone.

Not even to God or society?

>> People seem to "hang" with people of like minds. Look at
>>any high school lunch room.
>
>Just more excuses to try to make the RCC look good.
>Don't be a sycophant.

Look at your own friends.
Who are they?
What do they believe?
What color are they?
How do they earn a living?
What clubs do they belong to?

>>>>>But who says the Bible is God's word anyway?
>>>>>Only uneducated religious zealots who don't want to think for
>>>>>themselves.
>>>>
>>>>Well then. MAN UP. Start thinking for yourself.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I do think for myself. That's why I'm not a Catholic any more, dummy.
>>
>>Catholics do NOT teach that the Bible is infallible.
>>Why do you think this?
>>
>
>? I didn't say infallible.
>That's the the Pope's area.

You just claimed above that Catholics think the Bible is God's word.
Have you forgotten your worthless claims?

>
>>
>>>When are you going to start thinking for yourself? Of course we know the
>>>answer is never.
>>
>>"we?"
>>>
>
>Yes. In case you didn't know there are others in these groups.

Are they your "friends?"
Who are they?
What do they believe?
What color are they?
How do they earn a living?
What clubs do they belong to?

>>>>Stop depending on me to 'splain the world to you.
>>
>>>Lol. Give your ego a rest.
>>>You've never explained anything, not without copying and pasting some crap
>>>you found, or recalling what your priests told you.
>>
>>When someone asks a specific question about Catholic doctrine or
>>dogma, I try to provide the best answer possible.
>>
>
>By copying and pasting.

And..................?
If you want the exact doctrine or dogma, why not provide it?
In case you didn't realize it, your silly arguments have been made by
much smarter people than you.

>> When someone asks
>>me for my opinion, I also provide that.
>>
>
>Not very useful.

Stop asking then.

>
>>
>>As I always say, don't ask the question if you can't stand the answer.
>>
>
>You're incapable of giving useful or remarkable answers.
>You have none of your own.

You just claimed they weren't very useful.
Make up my mind.

[PATRICK]

akota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
>On 5/8/2013 7:22 PM, Andrew W wrote:

>>> Christ started a revolution. And, he left Peter in charge of His
>>> church when He left.
>>>
>>
>> Lol. Rubbish.
>> Christ requires no such petty silliness.
>> That's the RCC's contrivance based on one vague Bible verse.
>>
>The RCC may have written that particular verse when they were voting
>on what to include in the New Testament.

Ahhh, lookie here. The puppet speaks.

[duke]

On Thu, 9 May 2013 09:32:05 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:

>>all humankind is called to follow God in his teachings.
>Kind of impossible if he doesn't talk to us.
>Any more useless mantras for today?

I listen to him.

[duke]

On Wed, 08 May 2013 17:09:55 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>>How can you tell a peaceful muslim from a killer muslim? You can't. The
>>>>bomb
>>>>is in his backpack.
>>>So just wipe them all out then?
>>Strawman
>If that wasn't your implication, Dook, then why did you make the
>comment?

Truth is beyond you.

[Silen...@hotmail.com]

On Thu, 09 May 2013 06:47:12 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 08 May 2013 17:09:55 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>>>>How can you tell a peaceful muslim from a killer muslim? You can't. The
>>>>>bomb
>>>>>is in his backpack.
>>>>So just wipe them all out then?
>>>Strawman
>>If that wasn't your implication, Dook, then why did you make the
>>comment?
>
>Truth is beyond you.

Evasion noted, Dook.

I think "kill them all" is -exactly- what you meant when you wrote
what you did.

And, you've not disabused me of that notion.

Heh heh...

Lying racist rightard socialists...

Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.

[Andrew W]

>"duke" wrote in message news:403no8ldikil7t30o...@4ax.com...

>
>On Thu, 9 May 2013 09:32:05 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>all humankind is called to follow God in his teachings.
>>Kind of impossible if he doesn't talk to us.
>>Any more useless mantras for today?
>
>I listen to him.
>

You're listening to another part of your own mind plus old church dogmas.