OT - Posters to cycling newsgroups all seem to be atheists!
Edward Dolan
with it on these cycling newsgroups. Even though I am an atheist, I like to
defend religion because I believe most folks are better off with it than
without it.
In the real world, most cyclists that I have ever met are quite religious.
They will even take time out from a tour to attend church on Sunday
mornings. Apparently, the kind of cyclists who post to Usenet newsgroups are
a special breed.
If you are without the faith, there is no help for it, but it behooves you
never to denigrate religion. Sometimes I think it is the only thing that
saves us from ourselves. We are all of us subject to illusion of one sort or
another. Progressive liberal secularism may be the greatest illusion of them
all. And it is highly religious as any fool would recognize. All you have
done is replaced God with Man. Not a good trade in my opinion.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
Dan O
> It is quite remarkable to me how one can disrespect religion and get away
> with it on these cycling newsgroups.
<snip>
It *is* quite remarkable what one can get away with on these cycling
newsgroups.
Phil H
Disrespect religion,,,,,,,,,,sheesh. Go read Dawkins the God Delusion
then get back to us.
Phil H
Clueless
> It is quite remarkable to me how one can disrespect religion and get away
> with it on these cycling newsgroups. Even though I am an atheist, I like to
> defend religion because I believe most folks are better off with it than
> without it.
So you do NOT believe in it yourself, but you want the people to live
in hypocrisy for the hell of it? Or just to keep them in the cage for
fear of the predators and God?
One reason I've turned to attacking God is Atheists and Free Thinkers
seem to be of a better disposition to fight the lies and do something
about it.
I wished we could resolve this issue with God's or Christians' help,
but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Anyway, we should assume that God and the Christians supported the war
for a reason...
On Dec 19, 11:41 am, dillan <dferna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Liberals? Didn't they put Bush in charge of war and big business? That
> > wasn't God but the Christians themselves. ;)
>
> lol.. yes yes.. God wants all that oil..-
Let's see why God is happy with that war:
a) He wants the oil to see the Christians happy,
b) He wants the war to fight Allah, who's an impostor,
c) He wants the war to bring democracy to Iraq,
d) He wants the war to unite us in His name... "God Bless America!"
So here we are, doing God's will. ;)
Clueless
> On 19 Dec, 08:22, Doug <jag...@riseup.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 19 Dec, 04:27, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>
> > > It is quite remarkable to me how one can disrespect religion and get away
> > > with it on these cycling newsgroups. Even though I am an atheist, I like to
> > > defend religion because I believe most folks are better off with it than
> > > without it.
>
> > > They will even take time out from a tour to attend church on Sunday
> > > mornings. Apparently, the kind of cyclists who post to Usenet newsgroups are
> > > a special breed.
>
> > > If you are without the faith, there is no help for it, but it behooves you
> > > never to denigrate religion. Sometimes I think it is the only thing that
> > > saves us from ourselves. We are all of us subject to illusion of one sort or
> > > another. Progressive liberal secularism may be the greatest illusion of them
> > > all. And it is highly religious as any fool would recognize. All you have
> > > done is replaced God with Man. Not a good trade in my opinion.
>
> > interfere with my life, like try to convert me on doorsteps, impose
> > their religious instruction on my kids at school, try to dominate
> > Sunday mornings on TV and radio, interfere with my shopping hours on
> > Sundays and worst of all impose mass public holy-days like Christ-Mass
> > where the essential infrastructure is partially shut down.
>
> Although I'm an atheist, I've always rather liked Christmas. However,
> I must admit that your stance has changed my view. Now that I know
> that you hate it, and get really miserable about it, I really love
> Christmas now.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't hate the Christians, I hate their choices of transportation,
their complacency, and their politicians.
In other words, I say like Gandhi (who was a real Christian)... "I
like your Christ but not your Christians!"
Clueless
ones are CONSUMPTION, DESTRUCTION AND WAR. I call it the HUNGRY LION,
and the results are obvious for everyone to see, so much so that the
Christians say we are ruled by the Devil...
But, wait a minute, we don't have a single member of Congress who says
he's an atheist, or at least that he doesn't believe in God. It would,
in all likelihood, ruin their careers. So it must be that every stupid
policy out there, from environmental destruction to the war on drugs,
from the lack of universal healthcare to the lack of room to ride a
mundane bike, are the direct result of the Christians, their elected
representatives --or God, if there's any.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"My land, the power of training! Of influence! Of education! It can
bring a body up to believe anything."
- A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
OUT OF THE MIDDLE AGES!
semi-ambivalent
I've seen that attributed to Goethe, too.
sa
Clueless
> > In other words, I say like Gandhi (who was a real Christian)... "I
> > like your Christ but not your Christians!"
>
> I've seen that attributed to Goethe, too.
I like coming from Gandhi because he really tried to live like Jesus
and was influenced by his nonviolence.
By those standards, there's probably vew Christians out there, maybe
the Amish. Any Christian that rides a bike for practical purposes
would qualify too, I think.
landotter
> On Dec 19, 11:00 pm, semi-ambivalent <thefro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > In other words, I say like Gandhi (who was a real Christian)... "I
> > > like your Christ but not your Christians!"
>
> > I've seen that attributed to Goethe, too.
>
> I like coming from Gandhi because he really tried to live like Jesus
> and was influenced by his nonviolence.
>
Both Gandhi and Jesus were naive, navel gazing assholes.
Clueless
Of course they were. They didn't know about the human jungle, and they
both died because of it without really changing the world. Of course,
Jesus never died but was risen, so he's coming back to wipe out all
evil and SUVs... Just kidding.
Is any idealist naive?
'MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON'
"This is a truly magnificent movie. I watched it for the first time
just a few months ago and then rented it again. This movie does a
great job of showing how Congress is constantly on the take and how
they are completely controlled by outside influences...and how those
outside influences control the media also. Jimmy Stewart does an
outstanding job of playing the All-American young man, with great
reverence for our Founding Fathers and all that he's learned about the
rich history of our country. But when he becomes a Senator, he
discovers how corrupt the system is, and how the politicians and the
media completely have their own agenda. In short, Jimmy Stewart
represents so many of us individual Americans, wanting so much to make
a difference in our country. I really think that this is one of the
best movies ever made. And in reading more about the movie online,
I've learned that Joe Kennedy, Sr., the father of JFK, tried to
persuade Frank Capra to not release this movie in Europe, fearing that
it would cause Europeans to have a much lower opinion of our country
and of our politicians..."
landotter
> On Dec 19, 11:37 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 19, 10:11 pm, Clueless <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 19, 11:00 pm, semi-ambivalent <thefro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > In other words, I say like Gandhi (who was a real Christian)... "I
> > > > > like your Christ but not your Christians!"
>
> > > > I've seen that attributed to Goethe, too.
>
> > > I like coming from Gandhi because he really tried to live like Jesus
> > > and was influenced by his nonviolence.
>
> > Both Gandhi and Jesus were naive, navel gazing assholes.
>
> Of course they were. They didn't know about the human jungle, and they
> both died because of it without really changing the world. Of course,
> Jesus never died but was risen, so he's coming back to wipe out all
> evil and SUVs... Just kidding.
>
> Is any idealist naive?
Many times, yes. Ideological purity makes for great Disney and
horrible leadership with mustaches and epaulets. We live in a world of
gradients for the most part, not Randian binary.
The problem with Jesus and Gandhi aren't necessarily about naiveté,
but about classical in-group morality. Gandhi was a Hindu for Hindus
and Jesus was a Jew for Jews.
LionTeaser
>
> - Show quoted text -
So we live in in-group immorality. Gandhi, Jesus and Mr. Smith are out
of place.
Pity they didn't know this world is a jungle, so they could have saved
their effort that cost them their lives.
landotter
Oh cry me a fucking river. At least you have the legacy of your
idolized uber-schmucks. Jesus died as a scapegoat--the most primitive
of ancient religious concepts. Gandhi gave us Pakistan and the
Taliban--because non-violence can be excised from religious nuttery
with ease. Mr. Smith begat Sara Palin, the American idolization of the
sincere idiot.
Parts of the world are jungles, around the equator last I checked.
LionTeaser
>
> - Show quoted text -
Are you accepting violence as part of life in the jungle? Hey, they
Taliban may be listening and getting the hint. I really believe though
we can fix the world with a banana... and a whip. But we don't need to
turn to a nuke either. Simply refuse to feed the beast until he eats
the banana. Classical nonviolent strategy, which proved effective in
taming the South African lion.
By the way, WHEREVER THE PREDATORS RUN LOOSE is a jungle. Feel right
at home.
LionTeaser
stay away from enjoying cycling because of the lack of medical
insurance. You fall, then what? Even your wife would call you stupid
and leave you... ;)
Other democratic countries have adopted some sort of Single Payer
insurance or whatever guarantees Universal Healthcare.
Maybe they did it too because of the pressure from greater democracy.
Switzerland and Taiwan jumped on the wagon last, but still here they
reject Single Payer.
The only thing that would be passed here is Single Prayer. ;)
LionTeaser
'What we need is Single Prayer not Single Payer, say the Christians'
I bet any candidate out there that runs on such platform would make it
all the way to the White House. The Christians are low on social
issues, but high on faith issues, so there's a hint for the next
president.
Then proclaim this a Christian Republic, and bring back the
Inquisition!
I would run on a platform of free bananas for the monkeys, but there
are fewer monkeys than sheep.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Christians and the Taliban should sit down and talk because they
really have a lot in common"
Edward Dolan
"landotter" <land...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cf16ba7d-1b21-43a6...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
[...]
> Many times, yes. Ideological purity makes for great Disney and
horrible leadership with mustaches and epaulets. We live in a world of
gradients for the most part, not Randian binary.
> The problem with Jesus and Gandhi aren't necessarily about naivet�,
but about classical in-group morality. Gandhi was a Hindu for Hindus
and Jesus was a Jew for Jews.
Landotter has got it almost right. The fact is there are no universals.
There are only groups and the groups will determine the prevailing morality
for one and all. Diversity is an illusion. Sooner or later, a dominant group
will always force its morality on everyone subject to that group.
Christianity, a supposedly universal religion, undergoes transformation in
every society in which it becomes a force. How could it possibly be
otherwise. I assure you, American Catholics are nothing like Mexican
Catholics.
Progressive liberal secularists are as religious as any others ever to come
down the pike. Like all religions, they have their standards of what they
think is right and just and good. And it is based on premises no more
substantial than Hinduism or Judaism. It is just another form of in-group
morality. And it often leads to figures like Hitler and Stalin, both of whom
were progressive liberal secularists.
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> "landotter" <landot...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:cf16ba7d-1b21-43a6...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> [...]> Many times, yes. Ideological purity makes for great Disney and
>
> horrible leadership with mustaches and epaulets. We live in a world of
> gradients for the most part, not Randian binary.
>
>
> but about classical in-group morality. Gandhi was a Hindu for Hindus
> and Jesus was a Jew for Jews.
>
> Landotter has got it almost right. The fact is there are no universals.
> There are only groups and the groups will determine the prevailing morality
> for one and all. Diversity is an illusion. Sooner or later, a dominant group
> will always force its morality on everyone subject to that group.
> Christianity, a supposedly universal religion, undergoes transformation in
> every society in which it becomes a force. How could it possibly be
> otherwise. I assure you, American Catholics are nothing like Mexican
> Catholics.
>
> Progressive liberal secularists are as religious as any others ever to come
> down the pike. Like all religions, they have their standards of what they
> think is right and just and good. And it is based on premises no more
> substantial than Hinduism or Judaism. It is just another form of in-group
> morality. And it often leads to figures like Hitler and Stalin, both of whom
> were progressive liberal secularists.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
So you think this is morality, prosecuting prostitution and drugs but
doing it under the table?
IS SEX WITH ANIMALS A SIN?
You know, is it written anywhere in the Bible that you not should lay
a pig or sheep? I hear farmers and shepherds, particularly the latter,
tend to get the most juicy sheep and...
I guess if it's not condemned anywhere then it's good.
And the stories I hear about serpents and lapdogs are just too much
for me. Is it extended practice among the Christians with repressed
sex? Just wondering.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT:
"All you hear is SEX, SEX, SEX, and then we prosecute prostitution,
resulting in all this raping of animals"
Edward Dolan
"TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle"
<nolionn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bc91857a-8622-4f7e...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 20, 9:19 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> "landotter" <landot...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:cf16ba7d-1b21-43a6...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> [...]> Many times, yes. Ideological purity makes for great Disney and
>
> horrible leadership with mustaches and epaulets. We live in a world of
> gradients for the most part, not Randian binary.
>
>
> but about classical in-group morality. Gandhi was a Hindu for Hindus
> and Jesus was a Jew for Jews.
>
> Landotter has got it almost right. The fact is there are no universals.
> There are only groups and the groups will determine the prevailing
> morality
> for one and all. Diversity is an illusion. Sooner or later, a dominant
> group
> will always force its morality on everyone subject to that group.
> Christianity, a supposedly universal religion, undergoes transformation in
> every society in which it becomes a force. How could it possibly be
> otherwise. I assure you, American Catholics are nothing like Mexican
> Catholics.
>
> Progressive liberal secularists are as religious as any others ever to
> come
> down the pike. Like all religions, they have their standards of what they
> think is right and just and good. And it is based on premises no more
> substantial than Hinduism or Judaism. It is just another form of in-group
> morality. And it often leads to figures like Hitler and Stalin, both of
> whom
> were progressive liberal secularists.
>> So you think this is morality, prosecuting prostitution and drugs but
doing it under the table?
>> IS SEX WITH ANIMALS A SIN?
>> You know, is it written anywhere in the Bible that you not should lay
a pig or sheep? I hear farmers and shepherds, particularly the latter,
tend to get the most juicy sheep and...
>> I guess if it's not condemned anywhere then it's good.
>> And the stories I hear about serpents and lapdogs are just too much
for me. Is it extended practice among the Christians with repressed
sex? Just wondering.
You are the expert on sex with animals. Frankly, I have never given the
subject a second of thought in my entire life. I think you have been
consorting with animal imagery too much. TibetanMonkey indeed!
Tom Sherman °_°
> "TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle"
> <nolionn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bc91857a-8622-4f7e...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>>> IS SEX WITH ANIMALS A SIN?
>
>>> You know, is it written anywhere in the Bible that you not should lay
> a pig or sheep? I hear farmers and shepherds, particularly the latter,
> tend to get the most juicy sheep and...
>
>>> I guess if it's not condemned anywhere then it's good.
>
>>> And the stories I hear about serpents and lapdogs are just too much
> for me. Is it extended practice among the Christians with repressed
> sex? Just wondering.
>
> You are the expert on sex with animals. Frankly, I have never given the
> subject a second of thought in my entire life. I think you have been
> consorting with animal imagery too much. TibetanMonkey indeed!
>
Exodus 22:18 - 'Any man who has sex with an animal, is certainly to be
put to death.'
Leviticus 20:15 - 'Put the animal to death as well.'
Leviticus 20:16 - 'If a woman approaches an animal to have sex with it,
kill the woman and the animal. They are certainly to be put to death.
Their blood is on their own heads.'
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.
Edward Dolan
"Tom Sherman �_�" <twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote in message
news:hgnbc3$sdm$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I don't see what the poor animal has to do with any of it. Only the human
should be put to death. The animal can go on living since it is innocent and
blameless.
I understand there are now pythons roaming the wetlands of South Florida. I
hope CB will avail himself of these creatures and attempt sex with one of
them. That would put us all out of our misery.
Tom Sherman °_°
See
<http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/following_your_own_moral_compass/dt29_19.html>.
Deuteronomy 29:19 - 'If anyone should think to himself, "I will do well
enough if I follow the dictates of my heart,"...'
Deuteronomy 29:20 - '...Yahweh will not pardon him. His wrath shall burn
against him.'
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
<twshermanREM...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> > "TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle"
>
> - Show quoted text -
Are ALL Christians compulsive liars?
New International Version (©1984)
"Do not allow a sorceress to live."
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> "Tom Sherman °_°" <twshermanREM...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote in messagenews:hgnbc3$sdm$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> >> "TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle"
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't go to the Everglades where they are, but we do find a lot of
iguanas roaming around.
But I'd think of them as rather cold.
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
<twshermanREM...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >news:hgnbc3$sdm$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> >> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >>> "TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle"
> >>>news:bc91857a-8622-4f7e...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> >>> [...]
> >>>>> IS SEX WITH ANIMALS A SIN?
> >>>>> You know, is it written anywhere in the Bible that you not should lay
> >>> a pig or sheep? I hear farmers and shepherds, particularly the latter,
> >>> tend to get the most juicy sheep and...
>
> >>>>> I guess if it's not condemned anywhere then it's good.
> >>>>> And the stories I hear about serpents and lapdogs are just too much
> >>> for me. Is it extended practice among the Christians with repressed
> >>> sex? Just wondering.
>
> >>> You are the expert on sex with animals. Frankly, I have never given the
> >>> subject a second of thought in my entire life. I think you have been
> >>> consorting with animal imagery too much. TibetanMonkey indeed!
>
> >> See <http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/beastiality/lv18_23a.html>.
> >> Exodus 22:18 - 'Any man who has sex with an animal, is certainly to be put
> >> to death.'
> >> Leviticus 20:15 - 'Put the animal to death as well.'
> >> Leviticus 20:16 - 'If a woman approaches an animal to have sex with it,
> >> kill the woman and the animal. They are certainly to be put to death.
> >> Their blood is on their own heads.'
>
> > I don't see what the poor animal has to do with any of it. Only the human
> > should be put to death. The animal can go on living since it is innocent and
> > blameless.[...]
>
> See
> Deuteronomy 29:19 - 'If anyone should think to himself, "I will do well
> enough if I follow the dictates of my heart,"...'
> Deuteronomy 29:20 - '...Yahweh will not pardon him. His wrath shall burn
> against him.'
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
>
> - Show quoted text -
OK, we finally got it right. It's not OK with the Bible, but it's not
that bad either...
("unclean" is not such a bad word, is it?)
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/beastiality/lv18_23a.html
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> TheTibetanMonkey wrote:
>
> LOL, if the animal is OK with that, why should it be a sin?
> Ah, yeah, for the wedding: you can't have sex with your sheep if you don't
> marry her, and looks like they didn't provide a man/animal kind of marriage,
> so... no way.
> Go to an atheist centre and bring your sheeps along!
I don't if that falls under fornication or if the Bible prescribes
castration, but they do rhyme. ;)
I say, it's better for a priest to do that than to do it to the altar
boy.
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
masters...
SOMETHING FUNNY:
Now I'm up there with the masters, the Tibetan Monks, to learn about
the ways to enlightenment as well as to show my own jungle wisdom...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan/topics?msg=subscribe&hl=en
TheTibetanMonkey
On Dec 21, 4:10 pm, whistler <azwhist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2:42 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>
> > One fine day in alt.atheism, TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-
>
> > The bible is like a comic book in a way.
>
> So is $#it-flinging Monkey-Boy
>
More respect, please. "Tibetan Monkey," they call me.
Anyways, and this is a new theory I put forth, Eve didn't eat the
fruit the serpent told her. Eve had sex with the snake! They couldn't
tell that openly (like the DaVinci code) because it would turn the
world upside down.
Then God got so enraged (who wouldn't) with the affair that he doomed
all of us to eternal sexual desire. Of course, bestialism was the
event.
noego
news:GOGdndmwsLyHy7HW...@prairiewave.com...
> It is quite remarkable to me how one can disrespect religion and get away
> with it on these cycling newsgroups. Even though I am an atheist, I like
> to defend religion because I believe most folks are better off with it
> than without it.
>
> In the real world, most cyclists that I have ever met are quite religious.
> They will even take time out from a tour to attend church on Sunday
> mornings. Apparently, the kind of cyclists who post to Usenet newsgroups
> are a special breed.
>
> If you are without the faith, there is no help for it, but it behooves you
> never to denigrate religion. Sometimes I think it is the only thing that
> saves us from ourselves. We are all of us subject to illusion of one sort
> or another. Progressive liberal secularism may be the greatest illusion of
> them all. And it is highly religious as any fool would recognize. All you
> have done is replaced God with Man. Not a good trade in my opinion.
>
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
>
probably also an atheist. I also believe that we are better off with
religion than without it - as long as the religion is used for doing good.
There are atheists in many if not most newsgroups. They very ready to accuse
religious people of a large variety of evils, some true and some not. What
intrigues me is that they get quite vicious in their attacks, in my opinion
exhibiting the lack of tolerance they acribe to those who are religious.
This, of course, is a topic which always starts a good flame war.
When six weeks ago I saw that front of a car coming at me at about 20 miles
per hour, and I knew I'd be either dead or seriously injured, but got up not
even feeling the cracked ribs - I thought ever so briefly that there may
have been "someone looking after me" at that time.
Henry
TheTibetanMonkey
>
> - Show quoted text -
You must be some special guy to God because he lets die children and
women to die in wars, automobile accidents, etc. Maybe the fact that
the car was coming so slowly had to do with it. But for me riding on
the road means dealing with cars going over 40miles per hour and I
don't think God can help me with that.
What worries me about God is that people often use him as an excuse
not to do something because everything is "God's will." Besides they
were active supporters of the Iraq war while more often than not are
"happy drivers." They also support the war on drugs (the same one
overpopulating our prisons and killing Mexicans), then prosecute
prostitution, euthanasia, gays, DUIs, and DENY CLIMATE CHANGE AND
SINGLE PAYER INSURANCE FOR ALL...
So yes, there's something out there... A LOT OF EVIL. ;)
SEE NO EVIL, HEAR NO EVIL, TALK NO EVIL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The three wise monkeys were Christian"
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
They are classified as DARWINISTIC AND NON-DARWINISTIC (HUMANISTS).
That's an oversimplification, of course, but it helps also classify
the Christians the same way. Actually more Christians are DARWINISTIC
(SOCIAL DARWINISTIC, that is) than HUMANIST. So we make sense of all
this talk of classifying the world in BELIEVERS AND NON-BELIEVERS,
which is fatally flawed. In what practical way that helps us undertand
the world? Not much. But being on the side of the LITTLE FISH AGAINST
THE BIG FISH has a lot of practical applicattions.
I, for one, try to ride a bike and feel as threatened by the Christian
fish as I do by the Atheists behind the wheel. Actually it seems like
the Atheists are more inclined to be the little fish on the bike while
the Christian seem more inclined to be behind the wheel of the SUV. At
least I don't see many Darwinistic fish on their bumper stickers nor
do I see many bikes at church.
It may seem odd that a monkey may propose HUMANISM, but hey this is a
TIBETAN MONKEY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The struggle for survival is behind EVOLUTION... and the rest is BS"
HUMANISM (COMING OUT OF THE DARK AGES)
http://webspawner.com/users/DONQUIJOTE1
TheTibetanMonkey
I don't want to spoil Christmas for Christians, but there's this
question of shopping being a major form of worshipping...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypgs2s3lEzs
As you may have noticed, there's a HUNGRY LION, which is a central
character of my jungle stories, that they are feeding.
I will go now back to watching the movie since there's not much else
to do, and RIDING A BIKE is out of the question when so many
Christians are out there driving in a rush and minding their own
materialistic world.
I do like to think that by riding a bike I'm feeding bananas to the
lion, and that gets us one step closer toward a frugal, vegetarian
world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bananas and peanuts are all you need, the rest you must do in
moderation"
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> you should not lie an so insane lie that all athest here think you are
> completely nuts in the head about....only a complete insane person
> think athest don't use SUV's and Thest do use them....it is as insane
> as thinking ants secretly run the planet economy.
Since atheists believe in Darwinism, it would kind of natural for them
to try to be the biggest vehicle on the road... and yet most don't. It
happens they also have a moral commitment NOT to destroy the planet
and put others at risk for selfish reasons, I guess.
Christians however expect god to be in charge of things and dodge any
accusation of immorality. Often they deny Climate Change, as good
SneakySnakes that they are.
In other words, Christians are polluters and evil as well as
hypocrites while the Atheists would be acting their predation, and
must answer to the name of "predator."
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
cyclists as they wish, since they must stay off the roads in the first
place. Then drivers can keep burning gas and threatening others and
the planet without any opposition, even if it means denying the small
and moral cyclist to have a small share of the road.
This is the personification the HUNGRY LION displayed in the movie.
Some Christians though are not that stupid to openly admit their
predation... while others truly refuse to be part of the lie. The
movie ('What would Jesus buy?') is about the few moral Christians who
stand up to the lie-on.
NOTE: He encourages us to ride a bike path... which is the very thing
we are asking for. WE NEED OUR OWN SPACE IN THIS JUNGLE!
On Dec 26, 2:44 am, STB <Savingthefut...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> you must be insane to think it is the christians that drive bad when
> we know it is your kind that does not care and so by not caring also
> do not care about others on the road... your kind are VAIN and they
> are as VAIN AS YOU ARE... so point not to they given teaching to care
> for others but they that are not given such teachings and plain are so
> vain they might kill you and not even notice...facts are facts...you
> are flaky and no one see why you cry about bike for if you were not a
> bit inane.
> IT IS NOT THE RIDING OF BIKES BUT TO MIX THEM WITH OTHERS LIKE YOU DO
> THAT MAKES YOU LOOK SO INSANE...bikes were never made to be on the
> road with cars and only FOOLS do it and only idiots complain cars have
> more rights on roads than they as if they do not have more rights on
> BIKE PATHS on and off the road of the USA and CANADA in most major
> cities so you can cross countries and never share a road with a car.
> So if you ride a boke on roads of cars or sidewalks of people you sure
> don't have any rights of way or passage and steal that by putting
> yourself and others in dangers...most evil thing on a road for cars is
> a biker and most evil for bikers is a car on the bike path... so dummy
> complaiun you don't have bike path and not that you are dumb and try
> to foce cars off or that religions are linked to bad drivers for you
> are the fool and too dumb to see basics of basics...do not share then
> complain they have shares!!!! stay off the roads fool you are a danger
> to cars and the poor victims of you vanity. Do like most of the planet
> is doing...........USE A BIKE PATH!
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
encouraging signs coming from the Atheists and Free Thinkers. Maybe
it's because they don't want to live in hypocrisy any more... Whatever
the reason, they say it like it is --and how it should be)
On Dec 26, 7:42 pm, Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bike paths create conflict points at intersections. It's not
> bikes that should be segregated to narrow deathtrap lanes,
> it's the cars.
Having being a cyclist and having debated in the bike forums for
years, I can tell all the pros and cons of bike paths. They are good
in one sense though: BRING PEOPLE OUT... AND THERE'S SAFETY IN
NUMBERS. They are also good for families if they are separated from
traffic.
Being realistic in America, and knowing how the money is short, I have
another solution: GIVE THE LANE TO CYCLISTS AND LET CARS GO AROUND
THEM. No money invested, but that would also take bringing order to
our chaotic jungle.
TheTibetanMonkey
> On Dec 27, 12:43 pm, TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-
> > Being realistic in America, and knowing how the money is short, I have
> > another solution: GIVE THE LANE TO CYCLISTS AND LET CARS GO AROUND
> > THEM.
>
> Learn when to take control of a traffic lane, and when to yield.
>
> > No money invested, but thatwouldalso take bringing order to
> > our chaotic jungle.
>
> The only authority worth a damn:
>
> http://www.johnforester.com
Yeah, then it comes to a point that you know you can fight more
effectively through the Internet without all the personal risk,
conflict and humiliation involved. The only way I will take the lane
head on is if it is part of a coordinated campaign. The sidewalk is
the worst and the edge of the road offers not much improvement. Taking
the lane sends a strong message though.
The solution is taking the lane similar to Critical Mass, but in an
orderly way and keeping the other lanes open. And then we can take the
lane every day like a vehicle, not like CM every three months. Any
conflict would be quickly reported to the world. We can't possibly
lose that one. The hungry lion will have to bite the banana. ;)