Atheists on a Crusade

[Suffocation]

A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.
Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying
to persuade the religious to their point of view,” wrote columnist
Richard Bernstein. Even agnostics are in their sights, for these new
atheists allow no room for doubt. To them, there simply is no God. End
of story.

“The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious
belief,” said Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg. “Anything that we
scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and
may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization.” One tool
aimed at weakening that hold is the written word, which seems to be
stirring up considerable interest, for some of the new atheists’ books
have become best sellers.
Religion has aided the cause of the new atheists, as people have
become fed up with the religious extremism, terrorism, and conflict
plaguing the world. “Religion poisons everything,” says one leading
atheist. Moreover, that ‘poison’ is said to include religious beliefs
in general, not just extremist views. Core dogmas, say the new
atheists, must be exposed, abandoned, and replaced by rationality and
reason. People must be unafraid to speak frankly about the “mountains
of life-destroying gibberish” found in the Bible and the Koran, writes
atheist Sam Harris. “We can no longer afford the luxury of . . .
political correctness.”

While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science, some
even claiming that it disproves the existence of God. But does it? In
fact, can it? “In the fullness of time,” says Harris, “one side is
really going to win this argument, and the other side is really going
to lose.”
Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the
matter, ask yourself: ‘Is belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?
Would universal atheism make for a better world?’ Let us consider what
some respected scientists and philosophers have said about atheism,
religion, and science.

[Olrik]

Boo.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2011-11-05, Suffocation <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.

> [...]

So like most theists then huh?

Definitely all the trolls we get here.

--
Jews, Christians & Muslims
The content of your posts will show how much you
really believe God is looking over your shoulder

[panamfloyd@hotmail.com rade]

On Nov 4, 9:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>    A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.

Yeah, we're kinda tired of being told to go to the back of the bus.
We're here, we're freer, and we're not going back.

Choke on it, you superstitious bigot. I hope your father gives you
HIV.

-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain

Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

[Joe Bruno]

I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote:
> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.

Was this the kind of impartial research you did into other religions and
atheism?

Start with the statement "I'd rather be dead than 'x'".


What a fair trial you must have given all these different things! :-)


You're just too easy Mr Bruno.

[Davej]

On Nov 4, 7:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]

> While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science,
> some even claiming that it disproves the existence of God.

I have not heard this claim. The actual claim is that religion has
done a very poor job of providing ~any~ good evidence for the vast
number of religious claims. For example an examination of the natural
struggle for survival amongst living creatures in the wild provides no
evidence for a "loving" creator. Also a large amount of available
reliable physical evidence is directly in conflict with the Biblical
stories of creation in the chapter of Genesis. We can be certain that
Genesis is a false account unless the creator has been purposefully
seeking to deceive us by creating and planting a very, very large and
varied amount of false evidence.

[Davej]

On Nov 4, 9:11 pm, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> [...]

>
> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.

Every village needs an idiot, so you'll do fine.

[panamfloyd@hotmail.com rade]

So why are you posting to alt.atheism instead of
soc.goth.i.wish.i.was.dead?

Just curious..

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 4, 8:20 pm, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:

> On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
>
> Was this the kind of impartial research you did into other religions and
> atheism?

I read up on lots of them.

>
> Start with the statement "I'd rather be dead than 'x'".

Once again, you presume too much.You're afraid of having an open
mind?
You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.

>
> What a fair trial you must have given all these different things! :-)
>
> You're just too easy Mr Bruno.

Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>
> --

[Mike Lovell]

On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote:

> I read up on lots of them.

And then chose the one of your parents ;-)

> Once again, you presume too much.You're afraid of having an open
> mind?

What, I "presumed" your own words?

If you'd rather be dead than an atheist, you couldn't have ever
considered it - You suggested otherwise.

> You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.

I'd be worried if I could, over Usenet!

> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.

Well that wouldn't really be more specific, that would be completely
different wouldn't it? ;-)

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:17:35 -0500, Mike Lovell
<mike....@null.local> wrote:

>On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote:
>> I read up on lots of them.
>
>And then chose the one of your parents ;-)
>
>> Once again, you presume too much.You're afraid of having an open
>> mind?

What a frikking moron.

>What, I "presumed" your own words?
>
>If you'd rather be dead than an atheist, you couldn't have ever
>considered it - You suggested otherwise.
>
>> You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.
>
>I'd be worried if I could, over Usenet!

He's full of it.

>> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>
>Well that wouldn't really be more specific, that would be completely
>different wouldn't it? ;-)

He'd rather be dead than a normal human being who simply treats
bullshit as bullshit?

[Yap]

On Nov 5, 9:57 am, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>    A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.
> Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying
> to persuade the religious to their point of view,” wrote columnist
> Richard Bernstein. Even agnostics are in their sights, for these new
> atheists allow no room for doubt. To them, there simply is no God. End
> of story.

But, but....there is truly no pixie existed in this world !
Did any one see a figure sitting mid air to address his desire to
human?
Did any one ask a question in his heart that why did mass killing of
Christians in natural disasters?

>
> “The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious
> belief,” said Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg. “Anything that we
> scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and
> may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization.” One tool
> aimed at weakening that hold is the written word, which seems to be
> stirring up considerable interest, for some of the new atheists’ books
> have become best sellers.
> Religion has aided the cause of the new atheists, as people have
> become fed up with the religious extremism, terrorism, and conflict
> plaguing the world. “Religion poisons everything,” says one leading
> atheist. Moreover, that ‘poison’ is said to include religious beliefs
> in general, not just extremist views. Core dogmas, say the new
> atheists, must be exposed, abandoned, and replaced by rationality and
> reason. People must be unafraid to speak frankly about the “mountains
> of life-destroying gibberish” found in the Bible and the Koran, writes
> atheist Sam Harris. “We can no longer afford the luxury of . . .
> political correctness.”
>
> While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science, some
> even claiming that it disproves the existence of God. But does it? In
> fact, can it? “In the fullness of time,” says Harris, “one side is
> really going to win this argument, and the other side is really going
> to lose.”

Indeed, we can only sense that religion is the losing party since all
it has is "goddidit".
But no god can be produced and in its place is just mere "words" from
preachers.
All that is wanted by the Christian churches is the more the suckers,
the more the money.

> Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the
> matter, ask yourself: ‘Is belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?

Of course !!!!!!!!!
If I were to believe in a creator, why can't I wait for it to feed me,
provide me with everything?
If the parents do not care about an infant, could the baby survive?

> Would universal atheism make for a better world?’ Let us consider what
> some respected scientists and philosophers have said about atheism,
> religion, and science.

All scientists and learned people want all mankind to move forward
with new ideas, new technologies, and new development so that human
can be even more productive, happier and more knowledgeable.

The religion just wish to enrich themselves so that they can pray in a
golden church. They don't care about poverty, human misery, and
hunger.

Look at Africa....you have plenty of Christian missionaries, yet for
centuries, the Africans are as poor as they are in the beginning.
Poor idiots who sold themselves in exchange for backwardness in their
culture, education and all matters.
Even their religious knowledge is in the 1st century.

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 4, 9:34 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:17:35 -0500, Mike Lovell
>

> <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:

> >On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> >> I read up on lots of them.
>
> >And then chose the one of your parents ;-)
>
> >> Once again, you presume too  much.You're afraid of having an open
> >> mind?
>
> What a frikking moron.
>
> >What, I "presumed" your own words?
>
> >If you'd rather be dead than an atheist, you couldn't have ever
> >considered it - You suggested otherwise.
>
> >> You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.
>
> >I'd be worried if I could, over Usenet!
>
> He's full of it.
>
> >> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>
> >Well that wouldn't really be more specific, that would be completely
> >different wouldn't it? ;-)
>
> He'd rather be dead than a normal human being who simply treats
> bullshit as bullshit?

I'd rather be dead than be you, too.

[Father Haskell]

On Nov 4, 11:11 pm, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:

More pizza for the rest of us.

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 4, 9:34 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:17:35 -0500, Mike Lovell
>

> <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:

> >On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> >> I read up on lots of them.
>
> >And then chose the one of your parents ;-)
>
> >> Once again, you presume too  much.You're afraid of having an open
> >> mind?
>
> What a frikking moron.
>
> >What, I "presumed" your own words?
>
> >If you'd rather be dead than an atheist, you couldn't have ever
> >considered it - You suggested otherwise.
>
> >> You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.
>
> >I'd be worried if I could, over Usenet!
>
> He's full of it.
>
> >> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>
> >Well that wouldn't really be more specific, that would be completely
> >different wouldn't it? ;-)
>
> He'd rather be dead than a normal human being who simply treats
> bullshit as bullshit?

Normal?70% of the people in the USA are Christians.

[Joe Bruno]

I don't eat pizza.If I croak, you won't get anymore.

[SkyEyes]

On Nov 4, 6:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.

We're *not* "new" atheists, we're the same old atheists we've always
been. It's just that now we're mad as hell, and not going to take
theist bullshit anymore.

> Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying
> to persuade the religious to their point of view,” wrote columnist
> Richard Bernstein.

Which is pretty much what the theists of most flavors have been doing
to us for the last eleventy-thousand years.

> Even agnostics are in their sights, for these new
> atheists allow no room for doubt. To them, there simply is no God. End
> of story.

When you're right, you're right.

> “The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious
> belief,” said Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg. “Anything that we
> scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and
> may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization.” One tool
> aimed at weakening that hold is the written word, which seems to be
> stirring up considerable interest, for some of the new atheists’ books
> have become best sellers.

As well they should be. Not only are they cogently reasoned, they're
damn well written.

> Religion has aided the cause of the new atheists, as people have
> become fed up with the religious extremism, terrorism, and conflict
> plaguing the world. “Religion poisons everything,” says one leading
> atheist.

That would be Christopher Hitchens, and he's *right*.

> Moreover, that ‘poison’ is said to include religious beliefs
> in general, not just extremist views.

Yup, because even moderate religion is still magical thinking.

> Core dogmas, say the new
> atheists, must be exposed, abandoned, and replaced by rationality and
> reason. People must be unafraid to speak frankly about the “mountains
> of life-destroying gibberish” found in the Bible and the Koran, writes
> atheist Sam Harris. “We can no longer afford the luxury of . . .
> political correctness.”

Sing it, Sam!

> While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science, some
> even claiming that it disproves the existence of God. But does it? In
> fact, can it? “In the fullness of time,” says Harris, “one side is
> really going to win this argument, and the other side is really going
> to lose.”

Science doesn't address the question of the existence of any god,
anymore than it examines the question of the existence of any
leprechaun.

But the startling lack of evidence pointing to the existence of any
god is, well, evidence in and of itself.

> Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the
> matter, ask yourself: ‘Is belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?

Yes, because it's that pesky magical thinking again.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
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]

Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote in news:bcff7d98-ce80-4728-8a1d-
3b7b62...@u37g2000prh.googlegroups.com:

In that case we don't have to worry
about the lefist "war on Christianity".....

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 5, 5:11 am, Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:
> Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote in news:bcff7d98-ce80-4728-8a1d-
> 3b7b62740...@u37g2000prh.googlegroups.com:

The left doesn't wage a war on Christianity, just a propaganda
campaign.
You folks here are doing it, too.

[Greegor]

http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2011/papers/0782/paper0782.pdf

Religious Belief Systems of Persons with High Functioning Autism

1. Catherine Caldwell-Harris (charris AT bu.edu)
Associate Professor of Psychology

http://www.bu.edu/psych/charris/

http://www.bu.edu/psych/charris/papers/publications.html

2. Caitlin Fox Murphy (caitfoxmurphy AT gmail.com)
B.A., Developmental Therapist

http://npidb.org/doctors/respiratory_developmental_rehabilitative/developmental_therapist_222q00000x/1164738100.aspx

3. Tessa Velazquez (tessav AT bu.edu)

http://bupsychling.wordpress.com/projects/autism/

Department of Psychology, Boston University,
64 Cummington St. Boston, MA 02215 USA

4. Patrick McNamara (mcnamar AT bu.edu)

http://www.bumc.bu.edu/len/about-our-research-staff/about-dr-mcnamara/

Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine
72 E Concord St, Boston, MA 02118 USA

Abstract
The cognitive science of religion is a new field which
explains religious belief as emerging from normal cognitive
processes such as inferring others' mental states, agency
detection and imposing patterns on noise. This paper
investigates the proposal that individual differences in belief
will reflect cognitive processing styles, with high functioning
autism being an extreme style that will predispose towards
nonbelief (atheism and agnosticism). This view was
supported by content analysis of discussion forums about
religion on an autism website (covering 192 unique posters),
and by a survey that included 61 persons with HFA. Persons
with autistic spectrum disorder were much more likely than
those in our neurotypical comparison group to identify as
atheist or agnostic, and, if religious, were more likely to
construct their own religious belief system. Nonbelief was
also higher in those who were attracted to systemizing
activities, as measured by the Systemizing Quotient.
Keywords: Cognitive science of religion; autism; cognitive
styles; individual differences
Introduction
On a discussion forum for Christian parents, a mother
conveys her frustration because her 14 year-old high
functioning autistic (HFA) son does not believe in God and
refuses to write a paper for his confirmation class. On
wrongplanet.net and other discussion boards for autistic
spectrum individuals, posters denounce supernaturalism,
proclaim the merits of their self-constructed theistic belief
systems and argue the logical appeal of Buddhism. These
observations, combined with recent commentaries about the
likely religious beliefs of HFA individuals (Delay, 2009;
Graetz & Durbin, 2008), suggest that these individuals’
beliefs may be influenced by their intellectual strengths (e.g.
emphasis on logic and attraction to systematizing
observables) and their social-emotional deficits (e.g.
reduced automatic inferences about mental states and
decreased orientation to social rewards).
There is currently no systematic study of the religious
beliefs of autistic spectrum individuals who have normal or
near-normal intelligence (i.e., those with high functioning
autism and Asperger's disorder, which we jointly label HFA
for descriptive convenience, following Attwood, 2001).
Current research is limited to personal observations (Isanon,
2006), case studies (Graetz & Durbin, 2006) and
extrapolation informed by a clinical knowledge of HFA
(Graetz & Durbin, 2009; Deeley, 2009).
Given this gap in the literature, two studies examined the
thesis that HFA people's unique cognitive and socioemotional
profile influences their religious behaviors and
beliefs. In Study 1, content analysis was conducted of
online discussion forum postings. Study 2 consisted of a
Questionnaire which directly asked questions about
religious belief and included scales measuring thinking
styles.
Prior findings in cognitive science of religion
• These exploratory studies are grounded on the
following assumptions.
• Religiosity is a multidimensional phenomenon
encompassing behaviors, beliefs, and experiences
(Fetzer, 1999). Religiosity is thus diverse enough to be
a meaningful descriptor for people possessing a range
of intellectual abilities, emotional sensitivities, and
learning styles.
• Individual religious beliefs are the outcome of multiple
causes, including personality, reasoning style, family
socialization, and views of larger society (Caldwell-
Harris et al., 2008).
• The diversity of individuals’ religious beliefs reflects
evolved psychological mechanisms, with at least some
differences representing diverse tools in humanity's
adaptive tool kit.
• The thinking styles of individuals with HFA are on a
continuum with normal functioning and represent a
difference, not a deficit (Atwood, 2006).
Table 1 lists some specific ways in which known
characteristics of HFA may co-occur with distinctive
patterns of religiosity.
To avoid oversimplifying HFA, religion, and the
interactions between HFA and religion, our research will be
exploratory, rather than hypothesis-driven. Our framework
recognizes the potential for diversity in religious beliefs
among HFA individuals, while still supporting the claim
that HFA makes a distinctive, measurable, and predictable
difference in religiosity.
To guide us in the investigation of these hypotheses, we
developed a set of "Thinking Traits" that have been shown
3362
by researchers to be typical of the HFA population (Baron-
Cohen et al. 2003; De Martino et al. 2008; Frith 1991; Frith
and Happe 2005; Kohls 2009; Shore 2001). Prominent
among these is systemizing, which Baron-Cohen (2003)
defines as the drive to analyze, explore and construct a
system. Others are norm-rejection (Frith 1991), emphasis
on rationality, social disinterest, social discomfort, literal
mindedness, and need for structure.
Table 1: Correlations predicted from the literature
Characteristics of High
Functioning Autistics
Correlated pattern of
religiosity
Hypoactive agency detection Avoid supernaturalism
(Deeley, 2009)
Concrete; literal-minded;
discomfort with symbolic
fluidity; local processing bias;
attraction to scientism
Preference for logical
beliefs; avoid metaphoric
construals of religious
texts
Need for sameness and
predictability
Rigid and doctrinaire
(Graez & Dubin, 2009)
Difficulty navigating new
social relations
Appreciation of socially
welcoming religious
community (Graez &
Dubin, 2009)
Personality psychologists have identified two styles of
reasoning: emphasis on logic and emphasis on intuition
(Demaria, Kassinove & Dill 1989). As the Autism Spectrum
Disorder (ASD) thinking traits are indicative of a logical
cognitive style, we developed a set of thinking traits that
would be represented in postings by neurotypical (NT)
individuals. The NT thinking traits embody the
complimentary attributes of the ASD thinking traits. For
example the NT thinking trait "emphasis on intuition" was
developed to compliment the ASD thinking trait "emphasis
on logic". The NT thinking traits looked for in the postings
were emphasis on intuition, oriented towards social rewards,
empathizing, symbolic fluidity/gestalt thinking, and
openness to experience. The presence or absence these
thinking traits are proposed to influence the religious beliefs
of individuals across both populations, placing individuals
on a continuum of cognitive styles that influence religiosity.
Study 1: Analysis of Discussion Forums
Method
The public discussion forum wrongplanet.net was
designed for persons with autistic spectrum disorder (HFA).
It currently has over 25,000 members from English
speaking countries, although the majority are located in the
United States. The forum boards have topics specific to
autism, such as General Autism Discussion; Autism
Politics, Activism, and Media Representation; Adult Autism
Issues; Adolescent Forum. The site allows users to post
profiles including a "diagnostic description" category;
possible descriptions include : AS Diagnosed, AS
undiagnosed, "not sure if I have it or not", Other HFA, NT
(Neurotypical).
The neurotypical forum analyzed was golivewire.com/
teen forums. Because discussion forum websites are usually
formed on the basis of some common interest (such as cat
lovers, sports, political affiliations) we needed to find a
website that was likely to share a common age demographic
with wrongplanet.net but did not otherwise specify a
specific group; golivewire.com/teenforums fit this criteria.
The population of this website was mainly based in the
United States.
On each of these two forums, the authors and research
assistants read through the forums for discussions about
religion. On wrongplanet the forum that was analyzed was
titled Religion/Philosophy/Politics; on golivewire the one
analyzed was titled Religion and Philosophy.
Participants
To ensure that posts were analyzed in a systematic
fashion, we planned to included in our content analysis 200
consecutive posts. We ended up with 192 posts from
different users who identified themselves as individuals
with HFA, and 195 users from golivewire.com (the NT
group). All posts were collected within a year time frame
(February 2009-March 2008). For each user, we included
the first post containing a clear expression of religious
beliefs, as defined by a coding protocol (more details below;
full protocol available from the authors).
Coding Religious Beliefs
Users from the discussion forums were coded for
religious categories using the method of ethnographic
content analysis (Altheide, 1987). Each individual was
assigned one of the following categories: Agnosticism,
Atheism, Christianity, Other Theistic, Own Construction,
Neo-Pagan, Non-theistic, and Other. Coding was easiest
when users explicitly used one of these labels or a related
term (e.g., it is straightforward to coded "I'm Catholic" as
Christian). Due to the debates over conceptual overlap
between non-belief categories, our group developed a series
of semantic clarifications between atheist, agnostic, and
"nontheistic not further specified". Coders were trained
through practice with example quotes from discussion
forums that were not used in the final forum analysis. Upon
completion of the practice quotes, coders met together to
resolve discrepancies. Coders were blinded to the diagnosis
category of each user during all coding. Inter-rater
reliability for religious beliefs was 93%.
Coding Thinking Traits
It was not required that each participant be assigned a
thinking trait as it is expected that these will be exhibited
spontaneously. Because the length and depth of religious
description varied among the users, it was possible for some
users to be assigned no thinking traits while others
demonstrated multiple thinking traits. Coders were trained
with practice quotes from online forums that were not used
in the forum analysis portion of our experiment. Group
discussions followed the completion of practice quotes to
3363
ensure a full understanding of the thinking trait categories.
Inter-rater reliability was 90%.
Data Analysis
The distribution of religious orientations across the NT
and HFA samples were analyzed using a Chi Square test.
The distribution of HFA and NT thinking traits were
analyzed across populations using the Mann Whitney U test.
Results
Religious Beliefs
Religious beliefs were found to differ significantly
between the HFA and NT populations, ?² (12, N=387)=
43.69, p < .01. As shown in Figure 1, individuals with HFA
were less likely to belong to an organized religion than their
NT counterparts and were more likely to create their own
religious belief system. The "own-construction" category
comprised 16% of the HFA population as compared to only
6% of the NT population. HFA individuals also
demonstrated higher rates of non-belief identities such as
Atheism (26%) and Agnosticism (17%). In the NT group,
only 17% of the population were Atheists and 10% were
Agnostic.
Figure 1: Religious Belief by Group, Forum Analysis
Thinking Traits
The Mann Whitney U comparison between groups was
significant for emphasis on rationality, (z=-5.26, p<.05),
social discomfort (z=-2.27, p<.05), and social disinterest
(z=-2.02, p<.05), but not for any other thinking trait
category, although the trend was in the expected direction
for literal mindedness see Figure 2). NT thinking traits did
not vary across the two groups.
Figure 2: Thinking Traits by Group, Forum Analysis
Summary
We hypothesized that traits typically displayed among
HFA individuals such as attraction to scientism and hyper
rationality would render these individuals less likely to
embrace supernaturalism and religious belief. Consistent
with this, Atheism and Agnosticism were more frequent in
the HFA group than the NT group. Previous research has
established systemizing (Baron-Cohen et al. 2003) and lowconformity
(Frith 1991) as prominent traits among HFA
individuals. We proposed that HFA individuals would be
likely to construct their own belief systems, drawing on
their interest in systemizing and lack of need to conform to
approved social behaviors. The belief orientation category
of "own Construction" was more frequently endorsed by
individuals in the HFA sample as compared to the NT
sample.
Although most of the Autism Spectrum Disorder
Thinking Traits did not differ between the two groups,
emphasis on rationality was notably higher for wrongplanet
users. Social discomfort and social disinterest was also
slightly higher for the HFA and NT populations.
Study 2: Internet Questionnaire
Method
Participants
Sixty-one participants who identified themselves as
individuals with an Autism Spectrum Disorder completed
our survey. Respondents gained access to our survey from
links posted on popular online autism communities and did
so on a voluntary basis. One hundred-and-five individuals
consisting mainly of undergraduates at a northeastern
university taking psychology classes comprised our
neurotypical (NT) comparison group. Demographically, the
HFA and NT populations were similar except greater ethnic
diversity was demonstrated by the NT population in
comparison to the HFA group which included primarily
Caucasian participants. Although participants in the HFA
group demonstrated a wider age range than the NT group,
the majority of both populations were younger than 30 years
old.
Questionnaire
Diagnostic Information. Participants were asked whether
they had obtained a diagnoses of Autism Spectrum
Disorders as well as any other emotional, behavioral, or
cognitive conditions they might have.
Religious Belief. Participants wrote their religious
orientation, briefly described their beliefs and rated the
intensity of their beliefs on a scale of 1 to 5. (1 = only
slightly, 2 = somewhat, 3 = moderately, 4 = quite religious,
5= deeply religious). Questions included the presence and
frequency of the individual's current and childhood religious
practices, including education. Information regarding
parent's religious beliefs and practices both presently and
during the participants' childhood was also collected.
3364
Autism Quotient. Baron-Cohen's Autism Quotient is
comprised of 50 Likert statements. This measure can be
used to define a continuum between autism and
neurotypicals, with prior data on AQ scores showing that
autism > Asperger’s > mathematicians > scientists > college
professors > all males > all females (Baron-Cohen et al,
2001a).
Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test. Participants were
presented with 36 different photos of eyes and asked to
identify the emotion from a set of 4 choices (Baron-Cohen
et al., 2001b). This test measures facial affect recognition
and is considered a sensitive index of emotional
intelligence, including theory of mind.
Systemizing Quotient Revised. This scale requires
participants to rate their degree of interest in different types
of systemizing including collecting facts and figuring out
how mechanical objects work (Baron-Cohen, Richler,
Bisarya, Gurunathan, & Wheelwright, 2003).
Data Analysis
Religion between populations. Frequencies of religious
orientations for each population were compared using a Chi
Square analysis. One way ANOVAs were used to compare
mean scores for each measure across religious categories,
followed up by Tukey post hoc comparisons to detect
specific differences between the religious categories.
AQ, SQ and Reading the Mind in the Eyes. The scores of
each participant for the AQ, SQ, and Reading the Mind in
the Eyes test were all correlated to determine the feasibility
of a continuum from neurotypical to autism.
Results
Religious beliefs were found to differ significantly
between the HFA and NT populations, __ (12, N= 166) =
22.698, p < .01. As was found in the content analysis of
discussion forums, HFA questionnaire respondents were
less likely than their NT counterparts to belong to an
organized religion. HFA individuals were more likely to be
atheist than were NT individuals. The "own construction"
belief category was also found to be proportionally greater
in the HFA population than in the NT population (see
Figure 3).
Figure 3: Religious Belief by Group, Questionnaire
To further investigate these findings, chi square tests were
used to detect differences between populations regarding
specific religious orientation pairings that were of "a priori"
interest. A significant difference was found between HFA
and NT groups when comparing distribution of Christian
and Atheist groups, ?² (1, N= 86) = 12.65, p< .001, and
Atheist and Jewish groups, ?² (1, N= 47) = 11.47.
One way ANOVAs were used to test for significant
differences in scores between religious categories.
Autism quotient. Across both populations AQ scores
differed significantly between religious categories, F (7,141)
= 4.33, p < .001 (see Figure 4). Tukey post hoc comparisons
of the religious categories indicate that Atheists (M = 32.89,
95% CI [28.55, 37.23]) scored significantly higher on the
AQ than Christians (M = 22.98, 95% CI [19.91, 26.04]) and
Jewish individuals (M= 15.57, 95% CI [10.82, 20.33]). In
addition, individuals in the Own Construction category (M
=28.07, 95% CI [22.12, 34.01]) scored significantly higher
than Jewish individuals (M= 15.57, 95% CI [10.82, 20.33]).
Figure 4: Autism Quotient for Religious Identity
Systemizing quotient. Atheists had higher SQ scores (M=
44.38, 95% CI [36.69, 52.06]) scores than other respondents
(M=27.61, 95% CI [20.63, 34.6]).
Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test. Although scores on
the Eyes Test were higher for neurotypicals than for HFA
respondents, no significant differences were found between
religious categories within the HFA and NT populations.
AQ, SQ, Reading the Mind in the Eyes Task. A Pearson
correlation was conducted among the three quantitative
measures to demonstrate internal validity. Results indicated
a significant relationship between the AQ and the Reading
the Mind in the Eyes Task, r = -.36, n= 153, p < .001, as
well as between the AQ and the SQ, r =.47, n=153, p <.001.
No significant relationship was found between the SQ and
the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Task.
Summary
Results were consistent with the content analysis of the
forum postings. In addition, we demonstrated that the
autism quotient covaries with religious belief, combining
over the HFA and NT groups, consistent with the proposal
of a continuum in thinking styles from NT to high
functioning autism.
Conclusions
Historically the study of religious belief was as far from
the purview of cognitive science as any topic in human
behavior could be. This has changed over the last decade as
cognitive science has come to be the field where it is
legitimate to combine in a single research program disparate
3365
disciplines, even when they are outside the traditional
cognitive science area of computer modeling of information
processing tasks. Recently, the "cognitive science of
religion" has emerged as a research program in which
religion is understood as a product of cognitive aspects of
the mind, such as an exaggeration of the normal human
ability to infer agency, impose patterns on noise, and infer
others mental states (Guthrie, 1993; Barrett, 2004). We
suggest that individual differences in cognitive styles is an
important predictor of human belief systems, including
religious belief. An extreme type of cognitive style is high
functioning autism. The 2 studies reported here found that
individuals with HFA have a higher rate than neurotypicals
of endorsing atheism and agnosticism. HFA individuals
thus resemble another group of high-systemizers
(scientists), who also reject religious belief at a relatively
high rate.
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by a grant from Boston
University to the first author to support undergraduate
teaching and research (GUTS award). BU’s UROP program
gave grants to Caitlin Fox Murphy and Tessa Velazquez.
References
Altheide, D. L. (1987). Ethnographic content analysis.
Qualitative Sociology, 10 (1), 65-77.
Attwood, T.(2003). Learning and behaviour problems in
Aspergers syndrome. New York: Guilford Press
Baron-Cohen, S. (2003). The essential difference: The truth
about the male and female brain. New York: Basic
Books.
Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., Frith, U. (1985). Does the
autistic child have a “Theory of Mind”? Cognition, 21,
37-46.
Baron-Cohen., S. et al. (2001a). The autism-spectrum
quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger syndrome/ highfunctioning
autism, males and females, scientists and
mathematicians. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 31, 5-17.
Baron-Cohen, S., Richler, J., Bisarya, D., Gurunathan, N., &
Wheelwright, S. (2003). The systemizing quotient: An
investigation of adults with Asperger’s syndrome or high
functioning autism, and normal sex differences.
Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society, 358,
361-374.
Baron-Cohen, S., et al. (2001b). The “reading the mind in
the eyes” test revised version: A study with normal adults
and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning
autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 42,
241-251.
Barrett, Justin. (2004). Why would anyone believe in God?
Lanham MD: Altamira.
Demaria, T. P., Kassinove, H., Dill, C. D. (1989).
Psychometric properties of the questionnaire of personal
beliefs: A rational emotive measure of irrational thinking.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 53 (2) 329-341.
Dewey, M. (1992). “Living with Asperger syndrome.
Autism and Asperger Syndrome. (pp. 185-206).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
De Martino, B., Harrison, N.A., Knafo, S., Bird, G., &
Dolan, R.J. (2008). Explaining enhanced logical
consistency during decision making in autism. Journal of
Neuroscience, 28, 10746-10750.
Frith, U. (1991). Asperger and his syndrome. In U. Frith
(Ed.), Autism and Asperger Syndrome (pp. 1-36).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Frith U, Happe F (2005). Autism spectrum disorder.
Current Biology, 15, 786-90.
Guthrie, S. (1993). Faces in the clouds: A new theory of
religion. New York: Oxford University Press
Heider, F., Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of
apparent behavior. The American Journal of Psychology,
57(2), 243-259.
McCrae, R.R. (1999). Mainstream personality psychology
and the study of religion. Journal of Personality, 133,
631-640.
Rue, L. (2006). Religion is not about God: How spiritual
traditions nurture our biological nature and what to
expect when they fail, Rutgers University Press.
Saroglou, V. (2002). Religion and the five factors of
personality: A meta-analytic review. Personality and
Individual Differences, 32, 15-25.
3366

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote in news:58de99ee-723a-4a66-bc43-
93c5cd...@z22g2000prd.googlegroups.com:

You hang out in an atheist newsgroup and
complain about the opinions of atheists?

You have way too much time on your hands.....

[Syd M.]

So??

PDW

[B.B. Johnson]

"Suffocation" <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f1319b6b-9a8f-4fa3...@l12g2000vby.googlegroups.com...

A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new

atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves..........


No reason to keep TRUTH to oneself.

[B.B. Johnson]

<panam...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e82964a0-54f3-4052...@er6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

On Nov 4, 9:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.

Yeah, we're kinda tired of being told to go to the back of the bus.
We're here, we're freer, and we're not going back.

Choke on it, you superstitious bigot. I hope your father gives you
HIV.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is how Jabriol gets people to read the Watchtower and Awake Watchtower
magazines. He plagiarizes them from the net no less.....

--
"John Baker" <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:9dvv371vkf4arkgac...@4ax.com...
>
> It isn't your beliefs that are the problem, Jabbers. It's your
> antisocial behavior (i.e. your incessant trolling), and an atheist
> might write to your church leaders in the hope they might be able to
> put a stop to it.
>
> Of course, that's probably a vain hope, since a psychopath like you
> isn't going to care what your church elders say in any case.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[B.B. Johnson]

"Joe Bruno" <ajt...@att.net> wrote in message
news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Why?

--
But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be
liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the
council; and whoever says, �You fool!� will be liable to the hell of
fire. Matthew 5:22
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[B.B. Johnson]

"SkyEyes" <skye...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:bd281a34-153d-40f3...@q35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 4, 6:57 pm, Suffocation (JABRIOL/Antonio)<jabriol2...@gmail.com>

wrote:
> A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.

We're *not* "new" atheists, we're the same old atheists we've always
been. It's just that now we're mad as hell, and not going to take
theist bullshit anymore.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RIGHT ON! :-) It's about time we all spoke up.

--
"John Baker" <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote in message

news:kqs3t2lq5svvtqinr...@4ax.com...
> On 13 Feb 2007 04:29:53 -0800, "PonderKoi"
> (Antonio/JABRIOL)<JhemH...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>And here is the evidence, I guess Jayne should feel like an
>>incompetent fool about now. Rec.ponds.moderated is being created to
>>get rid of Carol.
>
> You're a lying sack of shit, Jabbers. It's to get rid of *you.*
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[The Magpie]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/11/2011 03:11, Joe Bruno wrote:
>
> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.

Eventually, your wish will be granted.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOtUw3AAoJEKy1URILypCG4LsIALBzMx8G4bEyHlBXiciaSLMq
0RCW3C966uKfCCagJmua1vOkvvdLHAk9Hql7/9C3vnUrk2WUWbBGyHEc07SOb6Hy
+qavR8t26vXF2r99d69FBNh2JZaOecvkL6O9gRV09CX4eJDKETbrRl95RP9TJAvt
Zs0HNTklJe/MdlJFc49Ue0fSJ3jkJhPk3f06sb4BzdfcNLW7T5u3RdhSFf5sdXm8
816AI3bfAoTTvky0VTMhrlebLSXXm6tMMJGmwOdq+F3sI5Ez+FNTt6QFWhl2kL4f
BEbwDVdcBc0xE/kO3QGFqj/N71v+uhnVGaeRBw+AwMnDXNZblUIk1VlbdOSpjoo=
=ClkE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 08:58:46 -0500, Mitchell Holman

Once again the paranoid liar lies through his teeth.

Bruno/Tandy/Murdoch thinks anybody who knows about Christianity's
bloody history only mentions it out of hatred, not to refute his
rose-tinted views of it.

Or who points out their less bad but still appalling behaviour, today.

He's obviously never heard of the pedophile priest scandal,
interference in the democratic process, getting fundamentalist
religion taught as fact in science classes, bigotry against minorities
they don't like, etc.

> You hang out in an atheist newsgroup and
>complain about the opinions of atheists?

He has a psychological need to be reviled. But he can't grasp that it
is for being a jerk.

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 5, 6:58 am, Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:
> Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote in news:58de99ee-723a-4a66-bc43-
> 93c5cd707...@z22g2000prd.googlegroups.com:

It was a an observation, not a complaint.

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 5, 7:59 am, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 08:58:46 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:

> >Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote in news:58de99ee-723a-4a66-bc43-
> >93c5cd707...@z22g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>

You are a sick motherfucker.I'd label you a sociopath.
You have no morals and you are evil.

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message

>
> news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Why?

Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.

>
> --
> But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be
> liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the

> council; and whoever says, You fool! will be liable to the hell of

[Budikka666]

On Nov 4, 8:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science, some
> even claiming that it disproves the existence of God.

It's not up to science to disprove something which has never been
proved. It's up to believers to show that there is a god if they want
us to believe. So tell me: why are you RUNNING from doing that and
instead whining abotu how powerful atheism is becoming?

Clearly you are terrified, but you should not be so scared of the
truth - the truth that your blind beliefs are being routinely
overturned as a new enlightenment dawns.

Budikka

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 08:06:49 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net>
wrote in alt.atheism:

>On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> Why?
>
>Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.

No, it is not.

[choke]

On Nov 5, 1:12 am, Yap <hhyaps...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 9:57 am, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >    A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> > atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.
> > Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying
> > to persuade the religious to their point of view,” wrote columnist
> > Richard Bernstein. Even agnostics are in their sights, for these new
> > atheists allow no room for doubt. To them, there simply is no God. End
> > of story.
>
> But, but....there is truly no pixie existed in this world !
> Did any one see a figure sitting mid air to address his desire to
> human?
> Did any one ask a question in his heart that why did mass killing of
> Christians in natural disasters?
>
>

All correct questions... no such thing as pixies.

> Indeed, we can only sense that religion is the losing party since all
> it has is "goddidit".

Not all religion believes in a God. Buddhism for example.

[choke]

On Nov 5, 2:13 am, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 6:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >    A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> > atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.
>
> We're *not* "new" atheists, we're the same old atheists we've always
> been.  It's just that now we're mad as hell, and not going to take
> theist bullshit anymore.
>

And what are you going to do? Occupy Wall Street?

> > Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying
> > to persuade the religious to their point of view,” wrote columnist
> > Richard Bernstein.
>
> Which is pretty much what the theists of most flavors have been doing
> to us for the last eleventy-thousand years.
>

true

> > Even agnostics are in their sights, for these new
> > atheists allow no room for doubt. To them, there simply is no God. End
> > of story.
>
> When you're right, you're right.
>

Interesting.

> > “The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious
> > belief,” said Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg. “Anything that we
> > scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and
> > may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization.” One tool
> > aimed at weakening that hold is the written word, which seems to be
> > stirring up considerable interest, for some of the new atheists’ books
> > have become best sellers.
>
> As well they should be.  Not only are they cogently reasoned, they're
> damn well written.
>

Thanks

> > Religion has aided the cause of the new atheists, as people have
> > become fed up with the religious extremism, terrorism, and conflict
> > plaguing the world. “Religion poisons everything,” says one leading
> > atheist.
>
> That would be Christopher Hitchens, and he's *right*.
>

So I wasn't misquoting?

> > Moreover, that ‘poison’ is said to include religious beliefs
> > in general, not just extremist views.
>
> Yup, because even moderate religion is still magical thinking.
>

I don't believe in Magic.

> > Core dogmas, say the new
> > atheists, must be exposed, abandoned, and replaced by rationality and
> > reason. People must be unafraid to speak frankly about the “mountains
> > of life-destroying gibberish” found in the Bible and the Koran, writes
> > atheist Sam Harris. “We can no longer afford the luxury of . . .
> > political correctness.”
>
> Sing it, Sam!
>
> > While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science, some
> > even claiming that it disproves the existence of God. But does it? In
> > fact, can it? “In the fullness of time,” says Harris, “one side is
> > really going to win this argument, and the other side is really going
> > to lose.”
>
> Science doesn't address the question of the existence of any god,
> anymore than it examines the question of the existence of any
> leprechaun.
>

Well.... there was a Show on the Discovery channel.

> But the startling lack of evidence pointing to the existence of any
> god is, well, evidence in and of itself.
>

As abiogenesis?

> > Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the
> > matter, ask yourself: ‘Is belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?
>
> Yes, because it's that pesky magical thinking again.
>

Sorry I don't believe in Magic

[choke]

On Nov 5, 10:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message

>
> news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Why?
>
> --
> But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be
> liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the

> council; and whoever says, You fool! will be liable to the hell of

> fire.    Matthew 5:22
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Then he would be like you and end up like truthseeker.

[tirebiter]

On Nov 5, 11:06 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > Why?
>
> Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>
>

Is it the only thing keeping you from going on a mass murder spree?

I've actually had christians actually say so. Not that I believed
them as they usually were showing how they were unable to support the
assertion that anyone who doesn't believe in *their* god is so immoral
that they'd have no reason to not go on a killing spree.

Nonetheless, a psychological dependency for having to believe in a god
is scary. Unless it's the thin thread that is keeping off the 6
o'clock news.

---
a.a. #2273

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 5, 8:40 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 08:06:49 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net>

> wrote in alt.atheism:
>
> >On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> >> Why?
>
> >Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>
> No, it is not.

Speak for yourself.

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 5, 9:50 am, tirebiter <dontspamme...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 11:06 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> > >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > > Why?
>
> > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>
> Is it the only thing keeping you from going on a mass murder spree?

No.

>
> I've actually had christians actually say so.  Not that I believed
> them as they usually were showing how they were unable to support the
> assertion that anyone who doesn't believe in *their* god is so immoral
> that they'd have no reason to not go on a killing spree.
>
> Nonetheless, a psychological dependency for having to believe in a god
> is scary.  Unless it's the thin thread that is keeping off the 6
> o'clock news.

Actually, I could survive without it, but I wouldn't be happy.
To each his own.You do your thing and I'll do mine.OK?

[tirebiter]

On Nov 5, 1:10 pm, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 9:50 am, tirebiter <dontspamme...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 5, 11:06 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > > > Why?
>
> > > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>
> > Is it the only thing keeping you from going on a mass murder spree?
>
> No.
>
>
>
> > I've actually had christians actually say so.  Not that I believed
> > them as they usually were showing how they were unable to support the
> > assertion that anyone who doesn't believe in *their* god is so immoral
> > that they'd have no reason to not go on a killing spree.
>
> > Nonetheless, a psychological dependency for having to believe in a god
> > is scary.  Unless it's the thin thread that is keeping off the 6
> > o'clock news.
>
> Actually, I could survive without it, but I wouldn't be happy.
> To each his own.You do your thing and I'll do mine.OK?
>
>

Getting a bit touchy aren't you? I just wondered why, with all the
many reasons people have for believing in what at best is a totally
inert god, yours is to satisfy a psychological dependency. After all,
the purpose of NGs is to promote dialog. It may be best for you to
stay away from sharp things and power tools for a while until your
psyche heals.

---
a.a. #2273

[B.B. Johnson]

"Joe Bruno" <ajt...@att.net> wrote in message

news:8366e880-3f55-4c7c...@s32g2000prj.googlegroups.com...

On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Why?

Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.

~~~~~~~

OK, that was an honest reply. :)
--
"'But I have long regretted that I
truckled to public opinion, and used
the Pentateuchal term for creation,
by which I really meant "appeared"
by some wholly unknown process.'"

--- Darwin, in a letter to Hooker ---

[B.B. Johnson]

"choke" (JABRIOL/Antonio)<jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f7fcf92c-1bb7-429b...@v5g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

He's better off being a sociopath like you Jabriol? Is that what you're
saying?

--
"Michael Gray" <mike...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:fp3qv29180agurd8k...@4ax.com...
> You are talking jabriol.
> He is pathalogically incapable of complying with your wise advice.

-----------------------------------------

[B.B. Johnson]

"Davej" <gal...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a0af2666-8229-4d48...@gy7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 4, 7:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]

> While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science,
> some even claiming that it disproves the existence of God.

I have not heard this claim. The actual claim is that religion has
done a very poor job of providing ~any~ good evidence for the vast
number of religious claims. For example an examination of the natural
struggle for survival amongst living creatures in the wild provides no
evidence for a "loving" creator. Also a large amount of available
reliable physical evidence is directly in conflict with the Biblical
stories of creation in the chapter of Genesis. We can be certain that
Genesis is a false account unless the creator has been purposefully
seeking to deceive us by creating and planting a very, very large and
varied amount of false evidence.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jabriol aka Suffocation (maybe his wife this time) claims he doesn't believe
in the supernatural - i.e. gods and demons yet claims to be a Jehovah's
Witness. There's no making sense of his claims.
--

God teaches man genocide and savagery man would not have thought of:

This is what the Lord Almighty says... Now go and strike Amalek and
devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill
both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.
(1 Samuel 15:3)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mike Lovell]

On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote:
> Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.

Because Mommy and Daddy told him so.

A Jew from Jewish parents who claims he researched other religions
before (as per usual) deciding on the one of his parents :-)

In his mind, it's all impartial! :-)

--
Jews, Christians & Muslims
The content of your posts will show how much you
really believe God is looking over your shoulder

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 10:07:55 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net>

wrote in alt.atheism:

>On Nov 5, 8:40 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 08:06:49 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net>
>> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>> >On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> >> "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>>
>> >>news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
>> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> >> Why?
>>
>> >Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>>
>> No, it is not.
>
>Speak for yourself.

I was disagreeing with the excuse you were making for yourself.

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 10:10:36 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net>
wrote in alt.atheism:

>On Nov 5, 9:50 am, tirebiter <dontspamme...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 5, 11:06 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>> > On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>>
>> > >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
>> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> > > Why?
>>
>> > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>>
>> Is it the only thing keeping you from going on a mass murder spree?
>
>No.
>>
>> I've actually had christians actually say so.  Not that I believed
>> them as they usually were showing how they were unable to support the
>> assertion that anyone who doesn't believe in *their* god is so immoral
>> that they'd have no reason to not go on a killing spree.
>>
>> Nonetheless, a psychological dependency for having to believe in a god
>> is scary.  Unless it's the thin thread that is keeping off the 6
>> o'clock news.
>
>Actually, I could survive without it, but I wouldn't be happy.
>To each his own.You do your thing and I'll do mine.OK?

Why does the illusion that some god or other exists make you happy?

[tirebiter]

On Nov 5, 2:27 pm, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> news:8366e880-3f55-4c7c...@s32g2000prj.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > Why?
>
> Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
> ~~~~~~~
>
> OK, that was an honest reply.  :)

Really? I felt it was a bit of a backpedal. Consider how adverse
you'd have to be towards something, to prefer death rather than be
it. Regardless of what "it" is. Then to admit a psychological
dependency to not be "it" is the root of that aversion and the
preference for death goes far beyond a mere affectation. It becomes
obsessive, bordering on pathological.

This is a bit different from when christians project their own
impulses on atheists for the singular reason of not being constrained
by a fear of divine retribution. It isn't about keeping or losing
control. It's about a well considered yet visceral hatred.

That is the unsaid and honest reply.

---
a.a. #2273

[choke]

On Nov 5, 2:31 pm, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "choke" (JABRIOL/Antonio)<jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>
> news:f7fcf92c-1bb7-429b...@v5g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 5, 10:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > Why?
>
> > --
> > But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be
> > liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the
> > council; and whoever says, You fool! will be liable to the hell of
> > fire. Matthew 5:22
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Then he would be like you and end up like truthseeker.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> He's better off being a sociopath like you Jabriol?  Is that what you're
> saying?
>

Better than being a stalker like you.

[choke]

On Nov 5, 12:50 pm, tirebiter <dontspamme...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 11:06 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> > >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > > Why?
>
> > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>
> Is it the only thing keeping you from going on a mass murder spree?
>
>

Is that a Bad thing?

[B.B. Johnson]

"choke" <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:aaeee199-f784-44bf...@ht6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You're the one who got the visit from the Police, not me. Short memory
Jabbers?

--
"Sharon B" <sha...@lart.com> wrote in message
news:5e1dv2ho1ol6u380m...@4ax.com...
>>>> On 10 Mar 2007 03:27:45 -0800, "Zëbulon" impersonated by Antonio L
>>>> Santana/JABRIOL <JhemHad...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> in <1173526065.100443.127...@30g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>:
>> Did you know her husband download
>> porn? [ That Antonio Santana sent him.]

> What is obvious is that you care a great deal about
> her husband downloading pr0n.
> Seems kinda GAY to me, not that there's anything wrong with that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[choke]

On Nov 5, 2:33 pm, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jabriol aka Suffocation (maybe his wife this time) claims he doesn't believe
> in the supernatural - i.e. gods and demons yet claims to be a Jehovah's
> Witness. There's no making sense of his claims.
> --
>

Very true except one thing my wife..name... I wonder your daughter Moe
Bob, feels about you attacking women who are not here on the net to
defend themselves. Is that why you removed AFBL from the headers Carol?

[tirebiter]

As I said, usually when a theist (most often a christian) paints his/
herself into a corner trying to defend the argument that anyone who
doesn't have a fear of divine judgement can resist the slightest
impulse to engage in any behavior, it escalates to the most extreme
example. Usually that is mass murder, or the like.

The theist is then in the difficult position to either admit that this
notion is wrong, or agree that without their belief in a judgemental
god,, they'd succumb to any whim that came to them, including murder.
I've had this conversation with a number of christians and this
happened well over half the time.

I always say that under no circumstances, should they ever stop
believing in their god.

---
a.a. #2273

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 5, 11:33 am, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:

> On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>
> Because Mommy and Daddy told him so.

Nope.I'm very independent and have defied their advice and wishes many
times.

They were opposed to me joining the Navy, but I went anyway.
They always wanted me to get married and have children, but I didn't
want to.

[Joe Bruno]

On Nov 5, 11:48 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 10:10:36 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net>

It's not an illusion to me.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote:

>> Because Mommy and Daddy told him so.
>
> Nope.I'm very independent and have defied their advice and wishes many
> times.
>
> They were opposed to me joining the Navy, but I went anyway.
> They always wanted me to get married and have children, but I didn't
> want to.

Well, were Mommy and Daddy Jewish or not?

What's told to you at a young age sticks more. I'm sure when you were 5
they never regularly said to you "Don't join the Navy, get married and
have children" - Unless they could foresee the future :-)


Some are strong enough to see reason, others not so much so. You can't
escape, you are Jewish because of your parents and up the line in a
similar fashion.


Where does it all end??? Well, with atheism.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote:

> It's not an illusion to me.

Indeed, he was told it was true so it's true. The fact there's no
evidence and it is just a matter of faith that it's not an illusion
means nothing to him.

He should be sitting down and examining his own beliefs rather than
coming here and trolling alt.atheism

[raven1]

On Fri, 4 Nov 2011 18:57:56 -0700 (PDT), Suffocation
<jabri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
>atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.

>Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying
>to persuade the religious to their point of view,”

So they're just like Jehovah's Witnesses? That must really annoy you.

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:33:36 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net>

You have no evidence.

[Uncle Vic]

Suffocation <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in news:f1319b6b-9a8f-4fa3-976e-
60e645...@l12g2000vby.googlegroups.com:

> A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> atheists

Couldn't your new atheists have thought of a better name for themselves?
Or are you just lying again?

--
Uncle Vic

Visit my You Tube Channel!
http://www.youtube.com/user/Vicman6311?feature=mhee

[Father Haskell]

On Nov 5, 11:06 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > Why?
>
> Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.

IOW, you're an addict.

[Father Haskell]

On Nov 5, 2:25 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 10:19 pm, Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 4, 11:11 pm, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:

>
> > > On Nov 4, 6:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >    A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new

> > > > atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.
> > > > Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying

> > > > to persuade the religious to their point of view,” wrote columnist
> > > > Richard Bernstein. Even agnostics are in their sights, for these new
> > > > atheists allow no room for doubt. To them, there simply is no God. End
> > > > of story.
>
> > > > “The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious
> > > > belief,” said Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg. “Anything that we
> > > > scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and
> > > > may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization.” One tool
> > > > aimed at weakening that hold is the written word, which seems to be
> > > > stirring up considerable interest, for some of the new atheists’ books
> > > > have become best sellers.
> > > > Religion has aided the cause of the new atheists, as people have
> > > > become fed up with the religious extremism, terrorism, and conflict
> > > > plaguing the world. “Religion poisons everything,” says one leading
> > > > atheist. Moreover, that ‘poison’ is said to include religious beliefs
> > > > in general, not just extremist views. Core dogmas, say the new
> > > > atheists, must be exposed, abandoned, and replaced by rationality and
> > > > reason. People must be unafraid to speak frankly about the “mountains
> > > > of life-destroying gibberish” found in the Bible and the Koran, writes
> > > > atheist Sam Harris. “We can no longer afford the luxury of . . .
> > > > political correctness.”

>
> > > > While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science, some

> > > > even claiming that it disproves the existence of God. But does it? In
> > > > fact, can it? “In the fullness of time,” says Harris, “one side is
> > > > really going to win this argument, and the other side is really going
> > > > to lose.”
> > > > Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the
> > > > matter, ask yourself: ‘Is belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?
> > > > Would universal atheism make for a better world?’ Let us consider what
> > > > some respected scientists and philosophers have said about atheism,
> > > > religion, and science.

>
> > > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
>

> > More pizza for the rest of us.
>
> I don't eat pizza.

That's because you're beneath human.

[Father Haskell]

"Man is the only animal who can lie to himself and
believe it." -- LaVey.

[B.B. Johnson]

"choke" <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:233f0b0f-46dd-4b0f...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I said nothing derogatory about your wife in that post, nor did I libel her,
but your mental disorder can't see and accept that. You see what you want
to see, not what is.

Why do you want AFBL included when they have no interest in your Watchtower
cult Antonio? Why are you not adding alt.dogs or rec.radio or
talk.show-biz?

--
"Annointed Remnant" <Annointe...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:j2tmv...@drn.newsguy.com...
> In article
> <5ae00523-7b51-4178...@m38g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
> Fianchetto (Antonio/JABRIOL) says...
>>Besides all you do is attack JW's You think they are going to give you
>>any credibility to what you say and write?
>
> It's not about Carol, Antonio. It's about you. You are the one claiming
> to be
> a spotlessly clean JW while you post your nasty disgusting words. You are
> a
> disgusting excuse for a human being, nevermind being a Jehovah's Witness.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[choke]

On Nov 5, 5:40 pm, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "choke" <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>
> news:233f0b0f-46dd-4b0f...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 5, 2:33 pm, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Jabriol aka Suffocation (maybe his wife this time) claims he doesn't
> > believe
> > in the supernatural - i.e. gods and demons yet claims to be a Jehovah's
> > Witness. There's no making sense of his claims.
> > --
>
> Very true except one thing my wife..name... I wonder your daughter Moe
> Bob, feels about you attacking women who are not here on the net to
> defend themselves. Is that why you removed AFBL from the headers Carol?
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> I said nothing derogatory about your wife in that post, nor did I libel her,
> but your mental disorder can't see and accept that.  You see what you want
> to see, not what is.
>
> Why do you want AFBL included when they have no interest in your Watchtower
> cult Antonio?
>

You did both. And are you saying, Moe, Kent, Gregoor has made you
their spokesperson? I see Moe participating in a very interesting way
in some of these threads. So does Greegor.

Admit it all you want to do is stalk me, as you have done in the past
and you are doing Now. Also my wife name is not Suffocation and you
know this, since you used here name in the past to harass me as well,
all of your action violate the law.

Admit it you don't want your daughter Moe to see how evil you really
are. Moe made a post and ask why is it that, if I was a true JW, why
not leave you alone, she may realize that the reverse is true. I
intentionally started various subjects not relate to you and you
pathetic group of sock puppets, and what do you do? As always, you
start with attacking me and then my wife.

Why don't You attack MM wife or family, Carol? are you that much of a
coward?

[Dakota]

On 11/5/2011 11:11 AM, Rob Par wrote:

> No crusade simply, resistance to the movement of some Christian to return to the theocracy type of
> oppressive government. With the constant bickering and warfare that is inevitably within religions.
> Ireland has been in a turmoil between Christians sects for a century over Protestant VS Catholic.
> Many perhaps all Protestant cults have split over often minor cases of bigotry. My battle is
> against organized religion that wants their religious stance to be enforced by civil law. The only
> thing that will make a better world is a universal acceptance of every bodies right to his/her own
> belief. As long as any group tries to force others to live according to their beliefs, we will not
> have peace.

The word 'crusade' has its roots in the cross on which the Christian
namesake was allegedly killed. That is one reason that atheists would
not be on a crusade. Another is that the original crusaders used their
religious beliefs to justify atrocities on their way to their ultimate
defeat. Crusaders were losers. I find it amusing that a local Catholic
high school uses the name 'Crusaders' for their athletic teams. That
school should really do a better job teaching history.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article
<c1ed72c6-eb69-4370...@o19g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>,
choke <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Nov 5, 2:13 am, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 6:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Moreover, that Śpoisoną is said to include religious beliefs

> > > in general, not just extremist views.
> >

> > Yup, because even moderate religion is still magical thinking.
> >
>
>
> I don't believe in Magic.


So you are an atheist, right? Must be, because to believe in any god is
to believe in magic.

--
JD

"the lybian lier"

[SkyEyes]

On Nov 5, 10:10 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 9:50 am, tirebiter <dontspamme...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 5, 11:06 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > > > Why?
>
> > > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>
> > Is it the only thing keeping you from going on a mass murder spree?
>
> No.
>
>
>
> > I've actually had christians actually say so.  Not that I believed
> > them as they usually were showing how they were unable to support the
> > assertion that anyone who doesn't believe in *their* god is so immoral
> > that they'd have no reason to not go on a killing spree.
>
> > Nonetheless, a psychological dependency for having to believe in a god
> > is scary.  Unless it's the thin thread that is keeping off the 6
> > o'clock news.
>
> Actually, I could survive without it, but I wouldn't be happy.
> To each his own.You do your thing and I'll do mine.OK?

Do you know why you hang out on alt.atheism, Joe? It's because you're
an atheist-in-training. Oh, you *think* you believe in God, and you
hang out here to reinforce that notion in your own mind. But you
really don't believe in God. Sooner or later, you'll admit it to
yourself.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
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

[SkyEyes]

On Nov 5, 11:33 am, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:

> On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>
> Because Mommy and Daddy told him so.
>
> A Jew from Jewish parents who claims he researched other religions
> before (as per usual) deciding on the one of his parents :-)
>
> In his mind, it's all impartial! :-)

Well, he's kind of invested in the notion of God, being Jewish. After
all, if there is no god, then the Jews cease being "chosen people,"
don't they? You can't be "chosen" if there's nobody doing the
choosing. He'd have to 'fess up to being just a normal Joe like the
rest of us.

[SkyEyes]

On Nov 5, 9:13 am, choke <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 2:13 am, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 4, 6:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > >    A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> > > atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.
>

> > We're *not* "new" atheists, we're the same old atheists we've always
> > been.  It's just that now we're mad as hell, and not going to take
> > theist bullshit anymore.
>
> And what are you going to do? Occupy Wall Street?

Some of us are, yes.

>
> > > Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying
> > > to persuade the religious to their point of view,” wrote columnist
> > > Richard Bernstein.
>

> > Which is pretty much what the theists of most flavors have been doing
> > to us for the last eleventy-thousand years.
>
> true

>
> > > Even agnostics are in their sights, for these new
> > > atheists allow no room for doubt. To them, there simply is no God. End
> > > of story.
>

> > When you're right, you're right.
>
> Interesting.

>
> > > “The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious
> > > belief,” said Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg. “Anything that we
> > > scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and
> > > may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization.” One tool
> > > aimed at weakening that hold is the written word, which seems to be
> > > stirring up considerable interest, for some of the new atheists’ books
> > > have become best sellers.
>

> > As well they should be.  Not only are they cogently reasoned, they're
> > damn well written.
>
> Thanks

>
> > > Religion has aided the cause of the new atheists, as people have
> > > become fed up with the religious extremism, terrorism, and conflict
> > > plaguing the world. “Religion poisons everything,” says one leading
> > > atheist.
>

> > That would be Christopher Hitchens, and he's *right*.
>
> So I wasn't misquoting?
>
> > > Moreover, that ‘poison’ is said to include religious beliefs

> > > in general, not just extremist views.
>
> > Yup, because even moderate religion is still magical thinking.
>
> I don't believe in Magic.

You do if you believe in any gods or any religion. The base of the
whole construct is magical thinking.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Core dogmas, say the new
> > > atheists, must be exposed, abandoned, and replaced by rationality and
> > > reason. People must be unafraid to speak frankly about the “mountains
> > > of life-destroying gibberish” found in the Bible and the Koran, writes
> > > atheist Sam Harris. “We can no longer afford the luxury of . . .
> > > political correctness.”
>

> > Sing it, Sam!

>
> > > While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science, some
> > > even claiming that it disproves the existence of God. But does it? In
> > > fact, can it? “In the fullness of time,” says Harris, “one side is
> > > really going to win this argument, and the other side is really going
> > > to lose.”
>

> > Science doesn't address the question of the existence of any god,
> > anymore than it examines the question of the existence of any
> > leprechaun.
>
> Well.... there was a Show on the Discovery channel.

The Discovery Channel? You're using that as your authority?
>
> > But the startling lack of evidence pointing to the existence of any
> > god is, well, evidence in and of itself.
>
> As abiogenesis?

As abiogenesis...what? Abiogenesis occurred, that we know because
hey, we're here. What we *don't* know is the process by which it came
about, although we're rapidly closing in on an answer.

>
> > > Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the
> > > matter, ask yourself: ‘Is belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?
>

> > Yes, because it's that pesky magical thinking again.
>
> Sorry I don't believe in Magic

You do if you believe in a "creator."

[SkyEyes]

On Nov 5, 6:41 am, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2011/papers/0782/paper07...
>
> Religious Belief Systems of Persons with High Functioning Autism
>
> 1. Catherine Caldwell-Harris (charris AT bu.edu)
> Associate Professor of Psychology
>
> http://www.bu.edu/psych/charris/
>
> http://www.bu.edu/psych/charris/papers/publications.html
>
> 2. Caitlin Fox Murphy (caitfoxmurphy AT gmail.com)
> B.A., Developmental Therapist
>
> http://npidb.org/doctors/respiratory_developmental_rehabilitative/dev...
>
> 3. Tessa Velazquez (tessav AT bu.edu)
>
> http://bupsychling.wordpress.com/projects/autism/
>
> Department of Psychology, Boston University,
> 64 Cummington St. Boston, MA 02215 USA
>
> 4. Patrick McNamara (mcnamar AT bu.edu)
>
> http://www.bumc.bu.edu/len/about-our-research-staff/about-dr-mcnamara/
>
> Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine
> 72 E Concord St, Boston, MA 02118 USA
>
> Abstract
> The cognitive science of religion is a new field which
> explains religious belief as emerging from normal cognitive
> processes such as inferring others' mental states, agency
> detection and imposing patterns on noise. This paper
> investigates the proposal that individual differences in belief
> will reflect cognitive processing styles, with high functioning
> autism being an extreme style that will predispose towards
> nonbelief (atheism and agnosticism). This view was
> supported by content analysis of discussion forums about
> religion on an autism website (covering 192 unique posters),
> and by a survey that included 61 persons with HFA. Persons
> with autistic spectrum disorder were much more likely than
> those in our neurotypical comparison group to identify as
> atheist or agnostic, and, if religious, were more likely to
> construct their own religious belief system. Nonbelief was
> also higher in those who were attracted to systemizing
> activities, as measured by the Systemizing Quotient.
> Keywords: Cognitive science of religion; autism; cognitive
> styles; individual differences
> Introduction
> On a discussion forum for Christian parents, a mother
> conveys her frustration because her 14 year-old high
> functioning autistic (HFA) son does not believe in God and
> refuses to write a paper for his confirmation class. On
> wrongplanet.net and other discussion boards for autistic
> spectrum individuals, posters denounce supernaturalism,
> proclaim the merits of their self-constructed theistic belief
> systems and argue the logical appeal of Buddhism. These
> observations, combined with recent commentaries about the
> likely religious beliefs of HFA individuals (Delay, 2009;
> Graetz & Durbin, 2008), suggest that these individuals’
> beliefs may be influenced by their intellectual strengths (e.g.
> emphasis on logic and attraction to systematizing
> observables) and their social-emotional deficits (e.g.
> reduced automatic inferences about mental states and
> decreased orientation to social rewards).
> There is currently no systematic study of the religious
> beliefs of autistic spectrum individuals who have normal or
> near-normal intelligence (i.e., those with high functioning
> autism and Asperger's disorder, which we jointly label HFA
> for descriptive convenience, following Attwood, 2001).
> Current research is limited to personal observations (Isanon,
> 2006), case studies (Graetz & Durbin, 2006) and
> extrapolation informed by a clinical knowledge of HFA
> (Graetz & Durbin, 2009; Deeley, 2009).
> Given this gap in the literature, two studies examined the
> thesis that HFA people's unique cognitive and socioemotional
> profile influences their religious behaviors and
> beliefs. In Study 1, content analysis was conducted of
> online discussion forum postings. Study 2 consisted of a
> Questionnaire which directly asked questions about
> religious belief and included scales measuring thinking
> styles.
> Prior findings in cognitive science of religion
> • These exploratory studies are grounded on the
> following assumptions.
> • Religiosity is a multidimensional phenomenon
> encompassing behaviors, beliefs, and experiences
> (Fetzer, 1999). Religiosity is thus diverse enough to be
> a meaningful descriptor for people possessing a range
> of intellectual abilities, emotional sensitivities, and
> learning styles.
> • Individual religious beliefs are the outcome of multiple
> causes, including personality, reasoning style, family
> socialization, and views of larger society (Caldwell-
> Harris et al., 2008).
> • The diversity of individuals’ religious beliefs reflects
> evolved psychological mechanisms, with at least some
> differences representing diverse tools in humanity's
> adaptive tool kit.
> • The thinking styles of individuals with HFA are on a
> continuum with normal functioning and represent a
> difference, not a deficit (Atwood, 2006).
> Table 1 lists some specific ways in which known
> characteristics of HFA may co-occur with distinctive
> patterns of religiosity.
> To avoid oversimplifying HFA, religion, and the
> interactions between HFA and religion, our research will be
> exploratory, rather than hypothesis-driven. Our framework
> recognizes the potential for diversity in religious beliefs
> among HFA individuals, while still supporting the claim
> that HFA makes a distinctive, measurable, and predictable
> difference in religiosity.
> To guide us in the investigation of these hypotheses, we
> developed a set of "Thinking Traits" that have been shown
> 3362
> by researchers to be typical of the HFA population (Baron-
> Cohen et al. 2003; De Martino et al. 2008; Frith 1991; Frith
> and Happe 2005; Kohls 2009; Shore 2001). Prominent
> among these is systemizing, which Baron-Cohen (2003)
> defines as the drive to analyze, explore and construct a
> system. Others are norm-rejection (Frith 1991), emphasis
> on rationality, social disinterest, social discomfort, literal
> mindedness, and need for structure.
> Table 1: Correlations predicted from the literature
> Characteristics of High
> Functioning Autistics
> Correlated pattern of
> religiosity
> Hypoactive agency detection Avoid supernaturalism
> (Deeley, 2009)
> Concrete; literal-minded;
> discomfort with symbolic
> fluidity; local processing bias;
> attraction to scientism
> Preference for logical
> beliefs; avoid metaphoric
> construals of religious
> texts
> Need for sameness and
> predictability
> Rigid and doctrinaire
> (Graez & Dubin, 2009)
> Difficulty navigating new
> social relations
> Appreciation of socially
> welcoming religious
> community (Graez &
> Dubin, 2009)
> Personality psychologists have identified two styles of
> reasoning: emphasis on logic and emphasis on intuition
> (Demaria, Kassinove & Dill 1989). As the Autism Spectrum
> Disorder (ASD) thinking traits are indicative of a logical
> cognitive style, we developed a set of thinking traits that
> would be represented in postings by neurotypical (NT)
> individuals. The NT thinking traits embody the
> complimentary attributes of the ASD thinking traits. For
> example the NT thinking trait "emphasis on intuition" was
> developed to compliment the ASD thinking trait "emphasis
> on logic". The NT thinking traits looked for in the postings
> were emphasis on intuition, oriented towards social rewards,
> empathizing, symbolic fluidity/gestalt thinking, and
> openness to experience. The presence or absence these
> thinking traits are proposed to influence the religious beliefs
> of individuals across both populations, placing individuals
> on a continuum of cognitive styles that influence religiosity.
> Study 1: Analysis of Discussion Forums
> Method
> The public discussion forum wrongplanet.net was
> designed for persons with autistic spectrum disorder (HFA).
> It currently has over 25,000 members from English
> speaking countries, although the majority are located in the
> United States. The forum boards have topics specific to
> autism, such as General Autism Discussion; Autism
> Politics, Activism, and Media Representation; Adult Autism
> Issues; Adolescent Forum. The site allows users to post
> profiles including a "diagnostic description" category;
> possible descriptions include : AS Diagnosed, AS
> undiagnosed, "not sure if I have it or not", Other HFA, NT
> (Neurotypical).
> The neurotypical forum analyzed was golivewire.com/
> teen forums. Because discussion forum websites are usually
> formed on the basis of some common interest (such as cat
> lovers, sports, political affiliations) we needed to find a
> website that was likely to share a common age demographic
> with wrongplanet.net but did not otherwise specify a
> specific group; golivewire.com/teenforums fit this criteria.
> The population of this website was mainly based in the
> United States.
> On each of these two forums, the authors and research
> assistants read through the forums for discussions about
> religion. On wrongplanet the forum that was analyzed was
> titled Religion/Philosophy/Politics; on golivewire the one
> analyzed was titled Religion and Philosophy.
> Participants
> To ensure that posts were analyzed in a systematic
> fashion, we planned to included in our content analysis 200
> consecutive posts. We ended up with 192 posts from
> different users who identified themselves as individuals
> with HFA, and 195 users from golivewire.com (the NT
> group). All posts were collected within a year time frame
> (February 2009-March 2008). For each user, we included
> the first post containing a clear expression of religious
> beliefs, as defined by a coding protocol (more details below;
> full protocol available from the authors).
> Coding Religious Beliefs
> Users from the discussion forums were coded for
> religious categories using the method of ethnographic
> content analysis (Altheide, 1987). Each individual was
> assigned one of the following categories: Agnosticism,
> Atheism, Christianity, Other Theistic, Own Construction,
> Neo-Pagan, Non-theistic, and Other. Coding was easiest
> when users explicitly used one of these labels or a related
> term (e.g., it is straightforward to coded "I'm Catholic" as
> Christian). Due to ...
>
> read more »

You know what the dead giveaway is in this whole synopsis? The use of
the word "scientism."

[Tronscend]

"Mike Lovell" <mike....@null.local> skrev i melding
news:slrnjb9e6v.oh...@usenet.home.b0h0.com...

>
>> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>

If I were you, I'd also prefer ... other outcomes than having to know that
one is like JB.

T

[Tronscend]

"Christopher A. Lee" <ca...@optonline.net> skrev i melding
news:fdjab7tj8f071id71...@4ax.com...
>
> He has a psychological need to be reviled.

I don't think they do.
I think that in order to obtain the full benefits of belief,
the most important person to convince is oneself.
They have to be able to repress the insight that
religion is just all pretend; like trying to administer
sugar pills to yourself to profit from the placebo effect.
You somehow have to forget all you know about placebo
effects, and you have to not remember the plan,
and not remember taking the pills.
But then the existence of even one person who says:
"But he doesn't wear any clothes" becomes
a massive threat to a cherished psychological asset,
which must be eliminated with extreme prejudice;
witness the savagery of religious persecution and conflict.

They just can't forgive that somebody pulled up the blinds
in the middle of their shadow puppet performance.

T

[Tronscend]

"SkyEyes" <skye...@cox.net> skrev i melding
news:bd281a34-153d-40f3...@q35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

> Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the

> matter, ask yourself: 選s belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?

> Yes, because it's that pesky magical thinking again.

Yaynay ...
I don't think the belief in a Creator is more harmful than a lot of other
fuddle people believe. It's when they start to stone people and burn
people - i.e. applied theology - that the issue becomes iffy.

T

[B.B. Johnson]

"choke" (what Jabriol does to women) <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in
message
news:d3c83d02-b699-4152...@n18g2000vbv.googlegroups.com...

Why don't You attack MM wife or family, Carol? are you that much of a
coward?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why should I attack a total stranger? Your son no less. Why would anyone?
Why add a NG with no interest in your cult scumbag?


This is what usenetters think of you Antonio/Jabriol:

"Gary L. Burnore" <gbur...@databasix.com> wrote in message
news:eridvk$a71$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
> On 19 Feb 2007 04:35:21 -0800, "Nekojin" JABRIOL <ztr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>If you knew about about Internet, you would know why My IP changes.
>
> Your IP changes for the same reason your nic changes. You're a net
> abusing little puke.
> --
> gburnore at DataBasix dot Com

========================================
"Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.kos...@xortec.fi> wrote in message
news:L6KFh.6002$5V4....@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
> On 2007-03-01, PondMeister *JABRIOL* <zod...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> NGP moderators won't allow me to post.
>
> Really? Post something on-topic and civil and you might be surprised.
>
> --
> Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.kos...@xortec.fi)
>
> "Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
> - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
========================================
"Martin" <use...@etiqa.co.uk> wrote in message
news:45baacfd$0$2444$db0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
> Zhadow [Antonio Jabriol Santana] wrote:
>> Many of you on the ARJW new group were surprised to lern; Carol husband
>> downloads porn.
>> even though she accuse jw's of being perverts.
>
> I'm much more concerned about you being interested in someone else's sex
> life.
>
> Oh, I'm NOT suprised about a guy downloading porn lol
>
> JWs are sexual perverts, we all know that :) Maybe they should stick to
> downloading porn
=================================================
"John Baker" <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:5149u2d40u4vgqn63...@4ax.com...

>>"ZeroPoint" sock of (Antonio Santana/JABRIOL - net-stalker and sociopath)
>><zod...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1172579899.8...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>>On Feb 26, 9:28 pm, DärFläken <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> "ZeroPoint" <zodr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>
>>Ah yes another attempt from Carol in busting a thread. Is this subject
>>to complex ............ /snip!
>
> Shut the fuck up, Jabbers.
>
> <PLONK!> for the hundredth time.

=================================================
"K. A. Cannon" <kca...@insurgent.orgy> wrote in message
news:erc3lu$rur$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
> On 19 Feb 2007 02:24:09 -0800, "Nekojin"JABRIOL <ztr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>>Your Kill file is broken again?
>

> Nope.
> This IP - 71.169.70.112 is your third new one in as many weeks.
> You've made a point to change IP's quite regularly. Why is that?
> You change IP's and change nym's so often it's impossible to keep you
> in a killfile.
>

> You are an unrepentant and unremorseful serial abuser of the net.
>
>>what a screwed up net-admin. Gary
>>needs to hire someone who knows what he is doing.
>
> You really are one head fucked and ignorant little man,

========================================
On Sun, 7 Aug 2011 08:19:30 -0700 (PDT), Ghent Antonio L
Santana<jab...@hotmail.com>
wrote:


Talking to yourself, Jabbers? Isn't that a sign of mental illness?

========================================
"SeppoP" <seppo_pi...@xyahoox.com> wrote in message
news:53bgk4F...@mid.individual.net...
>
>>> On 11 Feb., 15:52, "Nekojin" JABRIOL<ztr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> having city destroyed is not the same as "cease to exist". Okinawa was
>> destroyed by an a-bomb. The city is still there.

> When the hell did A-bomb destroy Okinawa?
>
> Jabbers is still as brainless as ever, most probably even more, he/it
> won't get any better...
>

========================================
"stoney" <sto...@the.net> wrote in message
news:ign4s2p9shecs8m4r...@4ax.com...
> On 23 Jan 2007 14:54:51 -0800, "JABRIOL" <JhemH...@gmail.com> wrote in
> alt.atheism <snip>

> Go fuck yourself asshole.

----------------------------------------

"Michael Gray" <mike...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:2ugds216su2mq538e...@4ax.com...
> On 4 Feb 2007 15:24:57 -0800, "Ghent" JABRIOL <jab...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> - Refer: <1170631497.6...@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>
> :
>
> Go and suck an Elder's dick, jabriol.

----------------------------------------

"Ralph" <mmma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_Htzh.2503$p9....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Nekojin" JABRIOL<ztr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1171137589.4...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> On Feb 10, 12:54 pm, SeppoP <seppo_pietikai...@xyahoox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You know jack shit about the scientific method, and never will.
>
> FOAD, you mindless fool!

----------------------------------------
"Phil MacDouglass" <Jerem...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:5212-45B...@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net...
> you PERVERT!!!!
>
> why the sex obsession antoio:

-----------------------------------------

"Teh Secretary to Teh Imperial Court of MEOW" <BiGWhi...@yahoo.com> wrote
in message news:pan.2007.02.20....@meow.fuckhead...
>> RICHARD M NIXON MEMORIAL "PATHOLOGICAL LIAR" AWARD
>> (Vote for one, none of the above, or abstain)
>>
>> David Tholen
>> Dr. Andrew B. Chung
>> Ernie Primeau
>> Jabriol, a.k.a. Antonio L. Santana.........

-----------------------------------------
"Phil MacDouglass" <Jerem...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:11411-45...@storefull-3332.bay.webtv.net...
> i'm not jabriol! i'm not some baby-raper!
>
> ~Mary Stewart
> ~Phil MacDouglass

-----------------------------------------
"Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote in message
news:xKadnet76ZkFMSXY...@giganews.com...
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:33:07 -0800, ~Sable~ JABRIOL wrote:
>
>> As you all know...
>
> Jabbers is an idiot.
>
> --
> Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
> EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
----------------------------------------
"K. A. Cannon" <kca...@insurgent.orgy> wrote in message
news:ep17d5$s4d$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
> On 21 Jan 2007 06:41:08 -0800, "Nekojin" JABRIOL
> <ztr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> <snip>
>
> I didn't reject it you simple minded pathetic semi-literate dick
> dripping.
----------------------------------------

"SeppoP" <seppo_pi...@xyahoox.com> wrote in message
news:4uadbiF...@mid.individual.net...
>
> Jabriol? Empathy for your fellow man? Hardly likely...

----------------------------------------
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:5q71o2h0diiea2nif...@4ax.com...
> On 13 Dec 2006 10:19:19 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
> "Shadow" JABRIOL <vorl...@gmail.com> wrote in
> <1166033959.6...@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>:
>>
>>Of course it does. It is about survival of the fittest.
>
> As has been pointed out to you, you dishonest slimeball, fitness is
> related to populations, not individuals.
>
> Why are you so evil? Why would anyone worship the god you worship? Why
> would anyone want to follow the evil, immoral path that you have
> followed?
----------------------------------------

"Meat Plow" <me...@meatplow.local> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.22....@nntp.sun-meatplow.local...
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:21:57 -0800, Nekojin [JABRIOL] Has Frothed: <SNIP>
.
> So your new shtick is to post to NGP and then run here in NG and whine
> when the posts are rejected?
>
> What a fucking joke you are.

----------------------------------------

"John Baker" <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:5lvv37944rop0egfs...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 7 Aug 2011 08:19:30 -0700 (PDT), Ghent <jab...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Talking to yourself, Jabbers? Isn't that a sign of mental illness?
>
----------------------------------------

"SeppoP" <seppo_pi...@xyahoox.com> wrote in message
news:514a25F...@mid.individual.net...
> Köi-Lö impersonated by Antonio L Santana [jabriol] wrote:
>> I dunno, but when I fix up my back yard, I am interested in maintaining
>> it to my heart content, the way I wish to see it. therefore I would
>> checking out the ant hills, birds nests, etc...
>>
>
> Hey Jabby, why don't you just crawl into your sewer, cuddle up and die,
> like any decent vermin does?

----------------------------------------
John Baker" <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:8md2r212ld1f04q4f...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 13:50:06 -0600, "Ips-Switch" <Ips...@spamnot.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"John Baker" <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote in message
>>news:to01r25r5ci42isdq...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> It apparently washed away your brain, Jabbers.
>>>
>>
>>I'm still boggled by the fact he told the posters on news.groups he had 94
>>sock-puppets to get past Google's posting limits! I think he has them to
>>get
>>past everyone's killfile.
>
> My killfile is bursting at the seams with Antonio Santana aliases.

----------------------------------------
"K. A. Cannon" <kca...@insurgent.orgy> wrote in message
news:ep5kk2$pdn$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
> "Lieken" [JABRIOL] <darth...@gmail.com> posted
> <1169550140.3...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> in news.groups
> on 23 Jan 2007 03:02:20 -0800:
>
> <SNNNIP>

> Huh what?
> I am sorry I can't parse the preceding sentence, it was written in
> fuckhead-ese.
>
> You prove your that your idiocy is unique everyday Jabbers.

----------------------------------------

[choke]

On Nov 5, 6:04 pm, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 9:13 am, choke <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > But the startling lack of evidence pointing to the existence of any
> > > god is, well, evidence in and of itself.
>
> > As abiogenesis?
>
> As abiogenesis...what?  Abiogenesis occurred, that we know because
> hey, we're here.  What we *don't* know is the process by which it came
> about, although we're rapidly closing in on an answer.
>
>

You know Brenda that is about as bad as ..God did it...

[Don Martin]

On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 13:48:28 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote to
that notable imbecile, Joe Bruno:

>>Actually, I could survive without it, but I wouldn't be happy.
>>To each his own.You do your thing and I'll do mine.OK?
>

>Why does the illusion that some god or other exists make you happy?

I suspect that illusions are more "interesting" than everyday reality. They
terrify or delight, but never bore. The notion that some omni^3 being actually
gives a shit about an individual would make that individual very special. Rare
is the teenager who masturbates without the illusion of some other person (or in
Joe's case, goat) involved in the act.

--

aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/

[Don Martin]

On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 15:56:29 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Nov 5, 11:33 am, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
>> On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>>
>> Because Mommy and Daddy told him so.
>>
>> A Jew from Jewish parents who claims he researched other religions
>> before (as per usual) deciding on the one of his parents :-)
>>
>> In his mind, it's all impartial! :-)
>
>Well, he's kind of invested in the notion of God, being Jewish. After
>all, if there is no god, then the Jews cease being "chosen people,"
>don't they? You can't be "chosen" if there's nobody doing the
>choosing. He'd have to 'fess up to being just a normal Joe like the
>rest of us.

Have you any idea how painful it is to have a bris erased?

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 10:50:40 -0500, Don Martin
<drdon...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 15:56:29 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 5, 11:33 am, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
>>> On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>>>
>>> Because Mommy and Daddy told him so.
>>>
>>> A Jew from Jewish parents who claims he researched other religions
>>> before (as per usual) deciding on the one of his parents :-)
>>>
>>> In his mind, it's all impartial! :-)
>>
>>Well, he's kind of invested in the notion of God, being Jewish. After
>>all, if there is no god, then the Jews cease being "chosen people,"
>>don't they? You can't be "chosen" if there's nobody doing the
>>choosing. He'd have to 'fess up to being just a normal Joe like the
>>rest of us.
>
>Have you any idea how painful it is to have a bris erased?

Use a rubber.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 10:50:40 -0500, Don Martin
<drdon...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 13:48:28 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote to
>that notable imbecile, Joe Bruno:
>
>>>Actually, I could survive without it, but I wouldn't be happy.
>>>To each his own.You do your thing and I'll do mine.OK?
>>
>>Why does the illusion that some god or other exists make you happy?
>
>I suspect that illusions are more "interesting" than everyday reality. They
>terrify or delight, but never bore. The notion that some omni^3 being actually
>gives a shit about an individual would make that individual very special. Rare
>is the teenager who masturbates without the illusion of some other person (or in
>Joe's case, goat) involved in the act.

At least they don't have staples through their navels these days.

[Zebulon's Spade]

"SkyEyes" <skye...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:2208c82e-3422-4e5e...@s35g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 5, 9:13 am, choke (his poor wife) JABRIOL<jabriol2...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Sorry I don't believe in Magic

You do if you believe in a "creator."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jabriol has claimed he doesn't believe in the supernatural, which anyone
would agree, is what a God is. How can a God not be supernatural? So then,
how can he believe in a supernatural creation by a supernatural God if he
doesn't believe in the supernatural? People either believe in the
supernatural or they don't. They believe in these magical beings or they do
not.

--
"‘But I have long regretted that I
truckled to public opinion, and used
the Pentateuchal term for creation,
by which I really meant “appeared”
by some wholly unknown process.’”

--- Darwin, in a letter to Hooker ---






--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ne...@netfront.net ---

[RedFireWhite]

On Nov 6, 12:01 pm, "Zebulon's Spade" <Inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "SkyEyes" <skyey...@cox.net> wrote in message

>
> news:2208c82e-3422-4e5e...@s35g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 5, 9:13 am, choke (his poor wife) JABRIOL<jabriol2...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sorry I don't believe in Magic
>
> You do if you believe in a "creator."
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jabriol has claimed he doesn't believe in the supernatural, which anyone
> would agree, is what a God is.

Who is "anyone?" Kook...

>How can a God not be supernatural?

He is not.

 >So then,
> how can he believe in a supernatural creation by a supernatural God if he
> doesn't believe in the supernatural?

That is easy.

> People either believe in the
> supernatural or they don't. They believe in these magical beings or they do
> not.
>
> -

Maybe in Gulley World. But in the real world, well..you don't have a
clue about the real world.

[Zebulon's Spade]

"RedFireWhite" is JABRIOL in hiding from the elders with new nyms every few
posts: <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:de7194a3-169f-4093...@r2g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...

On Nov 6, 12:01 pm, "Zebulon's Spade" <Inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "SkyEyes" <skyey...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:2208c82e-3422-4e5e...@s35g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 5, 9:13 am, choke (his poor wife) JABRIOL<jabriol2...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sorry I don't believe in Magic
>
> You do if you believe in a "creator."
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jabriol has claimed he doesn't believe in the supernatural, which anyone
> would agree, is what a God is.

Who is "anyone?" Kook...

Who isn't everyone, sociopath?

>How can a God not be supernatural?

He is not.

Then what is he? Mineral? Plant matter? A bird?

>So then,
> how can he believe in a supernatural creation by a supernatural God if he
> doesn't believe in the supernatural?

That is easy.

For who? If you believed in a God you wouldn't be such a scumbag nor would
you have dragged your son here to harass those who exposé you and your cult.

> People either believe in the
> supernatural or they don't. They believe in these magical beings or they
> do
> not.
>

Maybe in Gulley World. But in the real world, well..you don't have a
clue about the real world.

Says the man in Santana Land who claimed he posted here because he's
housebound and bored out of his miserable depressed mind.

--
The excerpts below were written by you Antonio/Jabriol. You
are indeed a filthy little pervert.
****
"she don't want revealed how her husband, banged son and
grand son in her own bed, while she was feeding her fish. Unlike her I
have no need to hide behind a remailer, and if what I say is not true,
they can come to camden and sue... if they survive the night."

"you are really mad that you have a bastard negro child, a dishonor to
the lithuanian community. everyone know that you grandchild is a result of
your
son raping a crack-whore.."

"As long as he can bang her, again and again and again, and then once
he tires of her, he dumps her for the slut that she is.
also ask her if her son is a real man, and pay child support so that
us taxpayers won't have to pay for his african american wanna be
child."
****
--
The above excerpts posted by Jabriol/Antonio of the
Spanish Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses
South Camden Kingdom Hall
1584 8th Street
Camden NJ 08104
Phone: (856)365-0655
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ><>

[RedFireWhite]

And there you have it. Once again Carol goes into Stalking mode to
distract her knowledge of the subject at hand. I guees your Daughter
Moe feel proud.

On Nov 6, 12:34 pm, "Zebulon's Spade" <Inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "RedFireWhite" is JABRIOL in hiding from the elders with new nyms every fewposts: <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to n...@netfront.net ---

[Mike Painter]

On 11/5/2011 7:31 AM, B.B. Johnson wrote:
>
> "Suffocation" <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f1319b6b-9a8f-4fa3...@l12g2000vby.googlegroups.com...

>
> A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> atheists, they are not content to keep their views to

> themselves..........
>
>
> No reason to keep TRUTH to oneself.

I don't see that there is a new group, it's just that religion has
weakened enough to allow us to express ourselves openly without fear of
reprisal - at least in most places.

Christians today practice a weakened version of what they practiced even
50 years ago.
Compared with what it was at the start of the reformation, it is empty.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article
<dca3bb05-0974-4366...@v5g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,

Why?

[Sharpie]

On Nov 6, 2:07 pm, Mike Painter <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 11/5/2011 7:31 AM, B.B. Johnson wrote:
>
>
>

> > "Suffocation" <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> >news:f1319b6b-9a8f-4fa3...@l12g2000vby.googlegroups.com...
>
> >   A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> > atheists, they are not content to keep their views to
> > themselves..........
>
> > No reason to keep TRUTH to oneself.
>
> I don't see that there is a new group

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism


New Atheism is the name given to a movement among some early-21st-
century atheist writers who have advocated the view that "religion
should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized,
and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises."[1]
New atheists argue that recent scientific advancements demand a less
accommodating attitude toward religion, superstition, and religious
fanaticism than had traditionally been extended by many secularists.
[citation needed] The movement is commonly associated with Richard
Dawkins, Daniel C. Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and
Victor J. Stenger. Several best-selling books by these authors,
published between 2004 and 2007, form the basis for much of the
discussion of New Atheism.[2]
Contents
[hide]

1 History
1.1 "Four Horsemen"
2 Perspective
2.1 Scientific testing of religion
2.2 Logical arguments
2.3 Views on NOMA
3 Criticisms
4 See also
5 References

[edit] History

The "New Atheism" and "New Atheists" nomenclature appeared in the
November 2006 issue of Wired magazine.[3]

The movement's origins are often traced to the 2004 publication of The
End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason by Sam
Harris, a bestseller in the USA. This marked the first of a series of
bestsellers that took a harder line against religion. Harris was
motivated by the events of September 11, 2001, which he laid directly
at the feet of Islam, while also directly criticizing Christianity and
Judaism. Two years later Harris followed up with Letter to a Christian
Nation, which was also a severe criticism of Christianity. Also in
2006, following his television documentary The Root of All Evil?,
Richard Dawkins published The God Delusion, which was on the New York
Times bestseller list for 51 weeks. Other milestone publications from
New Atheism leaders include Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural
Phenomenon by Daniel C. Dennett (2006); God: The Failed Hypothesis–How
Science Shows That God Does Not Exist by Victor J. Stenger (2007); God
is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens
(2007); Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and
Islam by Michel Onfray (2007); Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher
Became One of America's Leading Atheists by Dan Barker (2008)
[edit] "Four Horsemen"

Referring to a 2007 debate, Dawkins' website refers to four members of
the movement - himself, Harris, Dennett, and Hitchens - as "The Four
Horsemen", alluding to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.[4]
[edit] Perspective

The New Atheists write mainly from a scientific perspective. Unlike
previous writers, many of whom thought that science was indifferent,
or even incapable of dealing with the "God" concept, Dawkins argues to
the contrary, claiming the "God Hypothesis" is a valid scientific
hypothesis,[5] having effects in the physical universe, and like any
other hypothesis can be tested and falsified. Other New Atheists such
as Victor Stenger propose that the personal Abrahamic God is a
scientific hypothesis that can be tested by standard methods of
science. Both Dawkins and Stenger conclude that the hypothesis fails
any such tests,[6] and argue that naturalism is sufficient to explain
everything we observe in the universe, from the most distant galaxies
to the origin of life, species and even the inner workings of the
brain and consciousness. Nowhere, they argue, is it necessary to
introduce God or the supernatural to understand reality. Many New
Atheists argue that "absence of evidence is evidence of absence" when
evidence can be expected, using the Argument from divine hiddenness.
They conclude rather that the universe and life do not look at all
designed by a God or any supernatural being, but look just as they
would if they were not designed at all.
[edit] Scientific testing of religion

The New Atheists assert that many religious or supernatural claims
(such as the virgin birth of Jesus and the afterlife) are scientific
claims in nature. They argue, for instance, that the issue of Jesus'
supposed parentage is not a question of "values" or "morals", but a
question of scientific inquiry.[7] The New Atheists believe science is
now capable of investigating at least some, if not all, supernatural
claims[8] and many scientists are investigating the possibility of
supernatural causes. Reputable institutions such as the Mayo Clinic
and Duke University are attempting to find empirical support for the
healing power of intercessory prayer.[9] So far, these experiments
have found no evidence that intercessory prayer works.[10]
[edit] Logical arguments

Victor Stenger also argues in his book, God: The Failed Hypothesis,
that a God having omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent
attributes, which he termed a 3O God, cannot logically exist.[11] A
similar series of logical disproofs of the existence of a God with
various attributes can be found in Michael Martin and Ricki Monnier's
The Impossibility of God,[12] or Theodore M. Drange's article,
"Incompatible-Properties Arguments".[13]
[edit] Views on NOMA

The New Atheists are particularly critical of the two non-overlapping
magisteria (NOMA) view advocated by Stephen Jay Gould regarding the
existence of a "domain where one form of teaching holds the
appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution."[14] In
Gould's proposal, science and religion should be confined to distinct
non-overlapping domains: science would be limited to the empirical
realm, including theories developed to describe observations, while
religion would deal with questions of ultimate meaning and moral
value. The New Atheism leaders contend that NOMA does not describe
empirical facts about the intersection of science and religion. In an
article published in Free Inquiry magazine,[7] and later in his 2006
book The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins writes that the Abrahamic
religions constantly deal in scientific matters. Massimo Pigliucci, in
his book Nonsense on Stilts, wrote that Gould attempted to redefine
religion as moral philosophy. Matt Ridley notes that religion does
more than talk about ultimate meanings and morals, and science is not
proscribed from doing the same. After all, morals involve human
behavior, an observable phenomenon, and science is the study of
observable phenomena. Ridley notes that there is substantial
scientific research on evolutionary origins of ethics and morality.
[15]

[Smiler]

The Playboys and Penthouses of my youth were very tame compared to what is
available on the internet now...so I hear ;-)

--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

[Smiler]

On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 10:50:40 -0500, Don Martin wrote:

> On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 15:56:29 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 5, 11:33 am, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
>>> On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.
>>>
>>> Because Mommy and Daddy told him so.
>>>
>>> A Jew from Jewish parents who claims he researched other religions
>>> before (as per usual) deciding on the one of his parents :-)
>>>
>>> In his mind, it's all impartial! :-)
>>
>>Well, he's kind of invested in the notion of God, being Jewish. After
>>all, if there is no god, then the Jews cease being "chosen people,"
>>don't they? You can't be "chosen" if there's nobody doing the
>>choosing. He'd have to 'fess up to being just a normal Joe like the
>>rest of us.
>
> Have you any idea how painful it is to have a bris erased?

Have you?
:-)

[B.B. Johnson]

"Mike Painter" <md.pa...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:F-ydnWr26pyVRivT...@giganews.com...

> On 11/5/2011 7:31 AM, B.B. Johnson wrote:
>>
>> "Suffocation" <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:f1319b6b-9a8f-4fa3...@l12g2000vby.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
>> atheists, they are not content to keep their views to
>> themselves..........
>>
>>
>> No reason to keep TRUTH to oneself.
>
> I don't see that there is a new group, it's just that religion has
> weakened enough to allow us to express ourselves openly without fear of
> reprisal - at least in most places.

This is true, but they would still love to silence us. ;-) If they could.
The churches are getting worried with so many people leaving the fold. Some
have nothing but the elderly in the pews. When they pass away............

>
> Christians today practice a weakened version of what they practiced even
> 50 years ago.
> Compared with what it was at the start of the reformation, it is empty.
>

--
(Mk. 3:210) and that among Jesus' last words was the pained outburst: 'My
God my God, Why hast thou forsaken me? -- a poignant lament of a man who had
deluded himself and had at last come to realize it -- if you ask me.(Credit
Graywolf)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mickey]

On Nov 4, 10:11 pm, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 6:57 pm, Suffocation <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> >    A NEW group of atheists has arisen in society. Called the new
> > atheists, they are not content to keep their views to themselves.

> > Rather, they are on a crusade, “actively, angrily, passionately trying
> > to persuade the religious to their point of view,” wrote columnist

> > Richard Bernstein. Even agnostics are in their sights, for these new

> > atheists allow no room for doubt. To them, there simply is no God. End
> > of story.
>

> > “The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious
> > belief,” said Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg. “Anything that we
> > scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and
> > may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization.” One tool
> > aimed at weakening that hold is the written word, which seems to be
> > stirring up considerable interest, for some of the new atheists’ books
> > have become best sellers.

> > Religion has aided the cause of the new atheists, as people have
> > become fed up with the religious extremism, terrorism, and conflict
> > plaguing the world. “Religion poisons everything,” says one leading

> > atheist. Moreover, that ‘poison’ is said to include religious beliefs
> > in general, not just extremist views. Core dogmas, say the new

> > atheists, must be exposed, abandoned, and replaced by rationality and
> > reason. People must be unafraid to speak frankly about the “mountains
> > of life-destroying gibberish” found in the Bible and the Koran, writes
> > atheist Sam Harris. “We can no longer afford the luxury of . . .
> > political correctness.”
>

> > While the new atheists reproach religion, they revere science, some
> > even claiming that it disproves the existence of God. But does it? In
> > fact, can it? “In the fullness of time,” says Harris, “one side is
> > really going to win this argument, and the other side is really going
> > to lose.”

> > Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the

> > matter, ask yourself: ‘Is belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?
> > Would universal atheism make for a better world?’ Let us consider what
> > some respected scientists and philosophers have said about atheism,
> > religion, and science.
>

> I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.-

Don't let us stop you.

[Mickey]

On Nov 5, 12:18 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 9:34 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:17:35 -0500, Mike Lovell

>
> > <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
> > >On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:

> > >> I read up on lots of them.
>
> > >And then chose the one of your parents ;-)
>
> > >> Once again, you presume too  much.You're afraid of having an open
> > >> mind?
>
> > What a frikking moron.
>
> > >What, I "presumed" your own words?
>
> > >If you'd rather be dead than an atheist, you couldn't have ever
> > >considered it - You suggested otherwise.
>
> > >> You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.
>
> > >I'd be worried if I could, over Usenet!
>
> > He's full of it.
>
> > >> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>
> > >Well that wouldn't really be more specific, that would be completely
> > >different wouldn't it? ;-)
>
> > He'd rather be dead than a normal human being who simply treats
> > bullshit as bullshit?
>
> Normal?70% of the people in the USA are Christians.

Used to be a higher percentage. Why should that concern
you, if you really are Jewish?

[Mickey]

On Nov 5, 8:24 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 5:11 am, Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:
> > Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote in news:bcff7d98-ce80-4728-8a1d-
> > 3b7b62740...@u37g2000prh.googlegroups.com:

>
> > > On Nov 4, 9:34 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:17:35 -0500, Mike Lovell
>
> > >> <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
> > >> >On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> > >> >> I read up on lots of them.
>
> > >> >And then chose the one of your parents ;-)
>
> > >> >> Once again, you presume too  much.You're afraid of having an open
> > >> >> mind?
>
> > >> What a frikking moron.
>
> > >> >What, I "presumed" your own words?
>
> > >> >If you'd rather be dead than an atheist, you couldn't have ever
> > >> >considered it - You suggested otherwise.
>
> > >> >> You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.
>
> > >> >I'd be worried if I could, over Usenet!
>
> > >> He's full of it.
>
> > >> >> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>
> > >> >Well that wouldn't really be more specific, that would be completely
> > >> >different wouldn't it? ;-)
>
> > >> He'd rather be dead than a normal human being who simply treats
> > >> bullshit as bullshit?
>
> > > Normal?70% of the people in the USA are Christians.
>

> >     In that case we don't have to worry
> > about the lefist "war on Christianity".....
>
> The left doesn't wage a war on Christianity, just a propaganda
> campaign.
> You folks here are doing it, too.-

You still alive? Tsk!

[Mickey]

On Nov 5, 10:06 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 7:39 am, "B.B. Johnson" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > "Joe Bruno" <ajta...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:14e713bc-db1b-4e6e...@e5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I'd rather be dead than be an atheist.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > Why?

>
> Because a belief in God is essential to me psychologically.

Then there is no you, only a mind slave. Art Tandy/Joe Bruno
no longer exists - just a playback machine.

[SkyEyes]

You do know, Jabbers, that even *if* there is a god, and even *if* it
somehow created life, that *still* qualifies as "abiogenesis," right?

And short of you providing some hard evidence that a god actually
exists, I'm sticking with "natural chemical processes" as the best
working explanation of how life got started.

[Mickey]

On Nov 5, 12:17 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 9:34 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:17:35 -0500, Mike Lovell
>
> > <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
> > >On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
> > >> I read up on lots of them.
>
> > >And then chose the one of your parents ;-)
>
> > >> Once again, you presume too  much.You're afraid of having an open
> > >> mind?
>
> > What a frikking moron.
>
> > >What, I "presumed" your own words?
>
> > >If you'd rather be dead than an atheist, you couldn't have ever
> > >considered it - You suggested otherwise.
>
> > >> You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.
>
> > >I'd be worried if I could, over Usenet!
>
> > He's full of it.
>
> > >> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>
> > >Well that wouldn't really be more specific, that would be completely
> > >different wouldn't it? ;-)
>
> > He'd rather be dead than a normal human being who simply treats
> > bullshit as bullshit?
>

> I'd rather be dead than be you, too.

Yeah, yeah, we know. You'd rather be dead than
be any of us. Go right ahead.

[SkyEyes]

On Nov 6, 10:15 am, RedFireWhite <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 6, 12:01 pm, "Zebulon's Spade" <Inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > "SkyEyes" <skyey...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:2208c82e-3422-4e5e...@s35g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> > On Nov 5, 9:13 am, choke (his poor wife) JABRIOL<jabriol2...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Sorry I don't believe in Magic
>
> > You do if you believe in a "creator."
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Jabriol has claimed he doesn't believe in the supernatural, which anyone
> > would agree, is what a God is.
>
> Who is "anyone?" Kook...
>
> >How can a God not be supernatural?
>
> He is not.

If a god exists and is *not* supernatural, then he is by definition
not in control of natural forces.

>
>  >So then,
>
> > how can he believe in a supernatural creation by a supernatural God if he
> > doesn't believe in the supernatural?
>
> That is easy.

So explain it in detail, please. Show your work. Put it here:

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

>
> > People either believe in the
> > supernatural or they don't. They believe in these magical beings or they do
> > not.
>
> > -
>
> Maybe in Gulley World. But in the real world, well..you don't have a
> clue about the real world.

As Conan the Bacterium frequently points out, you just can't *buy*
entertainment this good!

Thanks for the belly laugh. I needed that.

[thomas p.]

"Mitchell Holman" <nomailcomcast.net> skrev i meddelelsen
news:Xns9F945AE6BC896...@216.196.121.131...
> Joe Bruno <ajt...@att.net> wrote in news:58de99ee-723a-4a66-bc43-
> 93c5cd...@z22g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Nov 5, 5:11 am, Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:
>>> Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote in news:bcff7d98-ce80-4728-8a1d-
>>> 3b7b62740...@u37g2000prh.googlegroups.com:

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Nov 4, 9:34 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>> >> On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:17:35 -0500, Mike Lovell
>>>
>>> >> <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
>>> >> >On 2011-11-05, Joe Bruno <ajta...@att.net> wrote:
>>> >> >> I read up on lots of them.
>>>
>>> >> >And then chose the one of your parents ;-)
>>>
>>> >> >> Once again, you presume too much.You're afraid of having an
> open
>>> >> >> mind?
>>>
>>> >> What a frikking moron.
>>>
>>> >> >What, I "presumed" your own words?
>>>
>>> >> >If you'd rather be dead than an atheist, you couldn't have ever
>>> >> >considered it - You suggested otherwise.
>>>
>>> >> >> You won't intimidate me, no matter what you try.
>>>
>>> >> >I'd be worried if I could, over Usenet!
>>>
>>> >> He's full of it.
>>>
>>> >> >> Let me be more specific. I'd rather be dead than be like you.
>>>
>>> >> >Well that wouldn't really be more specific, that would be
> completely
>>> >> >different wouldn't it? ;-)
>>>
>>> >> He'd rather be dead than a normal human being who simply treats
>>> >> bullshit as bullshit?
>>>

>>> > Normal?70% of the people in the USA are Christians.
>>>
>>> In that case we don't have to worry
>>> about the lefist "war on Christianity".....
>>
>> The left doesn't wage a war on Christianity, just a propaganda
>> campaign.
>> You folks here are doing it, too.
>
>

> You hang out in an atheist newsgroup and
> complain about the opinions of atheists?


Not only that, he also claims that he is not interested in what atheists
have to say, yet he reads a great number of posts from atheists every day
and replies to many of them. Joe is very strange.

>
> You have way too much time on your hands.....
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



--
thomas p

I bring you the stately matron Christendom, returning bedraggled, besmirched
and dishonored from pirate raids in Kiao-Chow, Manchuria, South Africa and
the Philippines, with her soul full of meanness, her pocket full of boodle,
and her mouth full of pious hypocrisies. Give her soap and a towel, but hide
the looking-glass.

Mark Twain

[SkyEyes]

On Nov 5, 4:54 pm, "Tronscend" <tronf...@frizurf.no> wrote:
> "SkyEyes" <skyey...@cox.net> skrev i meldingnews:bd281a34-153d-40f3...@q35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

>
> > Which side do you think time will vindicate? While considering the

> > matter, ask yourself: ‘Is belief in a Creator intrinsically harmful?

> > Yes, because it's that pesky magical thinking again.
>
> Yaynay ...
> I don't think the belief in a Creator is more harmful than a lot of other
> fuddle people believe. It's when they start to stone people and burn
> people - i.e. applied theology - that the issue becomes iffy.

Yes: stoning people, or burning people, or (as is happening in the
USA) passing laws to get your religious prejudices enshrined into the
legal system. And feeling justified for doing so, with complete
disregard for anyone else's rights or beliefs.

Brenda