Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
OT: Democrat's Platform and Chances with People Who Believe in God.
97 views
Skip to first unread message
Brian
Sep 5, 2012, 9:44:21 PM9/5/12
to
There was a story about the DNC rejecting efforts from some mainline
religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
And then there is this.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/dnc-god-jerusalem-platform_n_1859200.html
Democrats Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met
With Loud Opposition
Posted: 09/05/2012 5:46 pm Updated: 09/05/2012 6:29 pm
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- A rare unscripted moment at the Democratic National
Convention here Wednesday resulted in an embarrassing moment for the
party that is certain to be used in Republican television ads over the
next two months.
After they took heat for omitting any reference to "God" in their
platform, and for eliminating language from the 2008 platform that
identified Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Democrats tried to add
the language back into their party platform with a voice vote.
A source informed on the deliberations told The Huffington Post that
President Obama personally interevened (sic) to strengthen the
language. Speaking with HuffPost, a senior Obama administration
official also confirmed the president's involvement.
But when Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villagairosa, the convention
chairman, came to the podium to ask for the approval of the delegates,
those who shouted opposition to the language change were as loud, if
not louder, than those who voiced their support.
Villagairosa, in what quickly became an awkward moment, asked for the
voice vote three times in all. After the second time, he paused for
several seconds and looked behind him for guidance from a convention
staffer -- possibly a parliamentarian -- before turning back and
asking for a third vote.
Even though the no's were again as loud if not louder than the aye's
on the third vote, Villagairosa said he had determined that two thirds
of those present had voted in favor. Boos filled the arena in
response.
Within minutes, Republican National Committee staffers had uploaded
the video to YouTube and were circulating it on Twitter.
The party platform's section on Israel, which broke with previous
years' precedent by removing the explicit reference to Jerusalem as
the capital of Israel, had sparked furious outcries among Republicans
and the pro-Israel crowd.
Sources told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the response took
party officials by surprise, since the language of the platform had
been carefully orchestrated to emphasize America's close ties to
Israel and to avoid wading into controversial "final-status" issues,
like the designation of Israel's capital.
Two sources also told HuffPost that officials with the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee, the bipartisan and staunchly pro-Israel
interest group known as AIPAC, had vetted the draft and signed off on
its provisions.
AIPAC-linked sources later vociferously denied the report, telling
reporters that the organization had initially proposed language that
included Jerusalem as the capital, and that their officials never
reviewed the "full Middle East platform."
The source informed on the internal party deliberations said the
latest change to reinsert the Jerusalem language was made in order to
calm the controversy, not to change the intent of the passage.
"Democratic party officials were and continue to be exceedingly
comfortable with the original language," the source said. "The
original language was stridently pro-Israel, and they felt that this
controversy over the Jerusalem wording was distracting from their
overall message."
But a second party source said that top leaders in the party were
"pissed" when they found out about the exact wording of the platform,
and had spent Wednesday pressing for the language to be changed.
The Jerusalem addition to the platform is below in full:
"Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have
agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It
should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."
This post has been updated to include comment from a senior Obama
administration official.
religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
And then there is this.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/dnc-god-jerusalem-platform_n_1859200.html
Democrats Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met
With Loud Opposition
Posted: 09/05/2012 5:46 pm Updated: 09/05/2012 6:29 pm
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- A rare unscripted moment at the Democratic National
Convention here Wednesday resulted in an embarrassing moment for the
party that is certain to be used in Republican television ads over the
next two months.
After they took heat for omitting any reference to "God" in their
platform, and for eliminating language from the 2008 platform that
identified Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Democrats tried to add
the language back into their party platform with a voice vote.
A source informed on the deliberations told The Huffington Post that
President Obama personally interevened (sic) to strengthen the
language. Speaking with HuffPost, a senior Obama administration
official also confirmed the president's involvement.
But when Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villagairosa, the convention
chairman, came to the podium to ask for the approval of the delegates,
those who shouted opposition to the language change were as loud, if
not louder, than those who voiced their support.
Villagairosa, in what quickly became an awkward moment, asked for the
voice vote three times in all. After the second time, he paused for
several seconds and looked behind him for guidance from a convention
staffer -- possibly a parliamentarian -- before turning back and
asking for a third vote.
Even though the no's were again as loud if not louder than the aye's
on the third vote, Villagairosa said he had determined that two thirds
of those present had voted in favor. Boos filled the arena in
response.
Within minutes, Republican National Committee staffers had uploaded
the video to YouTube and were circulating it on Twitter.
The party platform's section on Israel, which broke with previous
years' precedent by removing the explicit reference to Jerusalem as
the capital of Israel, had sparked furious outcries among Republicans
and the pro-Israel crowd.
Sources told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the response took
party officials by surprise, since the language of the platform had
been carefully orchestrated to emphasize America's close ties to
Israel and to avoid wading into controversial "final-status" issues,
like the designation of Israel's capital.
Two sources also told HuffPost that officials with the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee, the bipartisan and staunchly pro-Israel
interest group known as AIPAC, had vetted the draft and signed off on
its provisions.
AIPAC-linked sources later vociferously denied the report, telling
reporters that the organization had initially proposed language that
included Jerusalem as the capital, and that their officials never
reviewed the "full Middle East platform."
The source informed on the internal party deliberations said the
latest change to reinsert the Jerusalem language was made in order to
calm the controversy, not to change the intent of the passage.
"Democratic party officials were and continue to be exceedingly
comfortable with the original language," the source said. "The
original language was stridently pro-Israel, and they felt that this
controversy over the Jerusalem wording was distracting from their
overall message."
But a second party source said that top leaders in the party were
"pissed" when they found out about the exact wording of the platform,
and had spent Wednesday pressing for the language to be changed.
The Jerusalem addition to the platform is below in full:
"Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have
agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It
should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."
This post has been updated to include comment from a senior Obama
administration official.
X ` Man
Sep 5, 2012, 9:58:17 PM9/5/12
to
On 9/5/12 9:44 PM, Brian wrote:
> There was a story about the DNC rejecting efforts from some mainline
> religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
> local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
> didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
>
> And then there is this.
>
It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
> There was a story about the DNC rejecting efforts from some mainline
> religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
> local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
> didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
>
> And then there is this.
>
Constitution does, eh?
BAR
Sep 5, 2012, 10:09:52 PM9/5/12
to
In article <qradnTxYgb-kntXN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
Did you pay your taxes this year Harry or does the IRS have to sue you,
again, to get the money you owe them?
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
again, to get the money you owe them?
Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest
Sep 6, 2012, 12:31:04 AM9/6/12
to
Here's where the Dems made their mistake, it's "Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog...", not "Eye of frog, and toe of newt...". Easy mistake to make, something anyone could have done.
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog...", not "Eye of frog, and toe of newt...". Easy mistake to make, something anyone could have done.
David Carson
Sep 6, 2012, 12:30:27 PM9/6/12
to
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 21:58:17 -0400, X ` Man
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
>Constitution does, eh?
Most of the words in the platform aren't in the Constitution.
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
>Constitution does, eh?
X ` Man
Sep 6, 2012, 4:06:51 PM9/6/12
to
a major political party. This is not a country with a formal religion,
even though many conservative christians would like to make it one.
BAR
Sep 6, 2012, 6:58:48 PM9/6/12
to
In article <ddednf7cV4PBn9TN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
What about paying your taxes, should that be in the platform of the
Democrat party?
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
Democrat party?
David Carson
Sep 6, 2012, 8:32:33 PM9/6/12
to
On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:06:51 -0400, X ` Man
"health care", "abortion", "poor", "middle class", "wealthiest", "fair
share", etc., In fact, the entire platform could be retitled "Words,
Phrases and Ideas that Aren't In the Consitution", and that wouldn't be
far off. So please don't pretend that your anti-God stance has one thing
to do with the Consitution.
David Carson
--
Dead or Alive Data Base
http://www.doadb.com
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>On 9/6/12 12:30 PM, David Carson wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 21:58:17 -0400, X ` Man
>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
>>> Constitution does, eh?
>>
>> Most of the words in the platform aren't in the Constitution.
>>
>
>Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of
>a major political party.
So why bring the Constitution into it? It doesn't contain the phrases
>On 9/6/12 12:30 PM, David Carson wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 21:58:17 -0400, X ` Man
>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
>>> Constitution does, eh?
>>
>> Most of the words in the platform aren't in the Constitution.
>>
>
>Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of
>a major political party.
"health care", "abortion", "poor", "middle class", "wealthiest", "fair
share", etc., In fact, the entire platform could be retitled "Words,
Phrases and Ideas that Aren't In the Consitution", and that wouldn't be
far off. So please don't pretend that your anti-God stance has one thing
to do with the Consitution.
David Carson
--
Dead or Alive Data Base
http://www.doadb.com
X ` Man
Sep 6, 2012, 8:40:18 PM9/6/12
to
religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
abortion, et cetera.
Mcafee
Sep 6, 2012, 9:12:12 PM9/6/12
to
yourselves, even more than you do now.
Mcafee
Sep 6, 2012, 9:12:40 PM9/6/12
to
Mcafee
Sep 6, 2012, 9:13:58 PM9/6/12
to
On 9/5/2012 9:31 PM, Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest wrote:
> Here's where the Dems made their mistake, it's "Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
> Wool of bat, and tongue of dog...", not "Eye of frog, and toe of newt...". Easy mistake to make, something anyone could have done.
>
Dems don't care as long as it kills babies.
> Here's where the Dems made their mistake, it's "Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
> Wool of bat, and tongue of dog...", not "Eye of frog, and toe of newt...". Easy mistake to make, something anyone could have done.
>
Brian
Sep 6, 2012, 9:32:24 PM9/6/12
to
On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:06:51 -0400, X ` Man
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of
>a major political party. This is not a country with a formal religion,
>even though many conservative christians would like to make it one.
I am perfectly happy having an election where the atheists and
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of
>a major political party. This is not a country with a formal religion,
>even though many conservative christians would like to make it one.
non-believers vote for Obama and those who believe in religion vote
for Romney. And apparently the Democrats are seeking that also.
~M~
Sep 6, 2012, 10:54:33 PM9/6/12
to
"X ` Man" wrote in message
news:ddednf7cV4PBn9TN...@earthlink.com...
>Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of a
>major political party.
I agree with you on this, but if your party is named for democracy, and you
say amendments to your platform must be approved in a democratic way, you
shouldn't have your decision made before a democratic vote is held, and you
shouldn't ignore the democratic vote you hold to take the politically
expedient path of reinserting God into your platform.
I was embarrassed for them when they did this. I can only imagine how I
would feel if I didn't already think they were idiots.
>This is not a country with a formal religion, even though many conservative
>christians would like to make it one.
So now the conservative Christians are running the Democratic party? The
Democrats decided to make the initial platform changes, and the Democrats
decided to make the amendments. Don't lay this on the Republicans, or the
any one elses out there.
--
"Yes, they talk about the dirt streets of Cuba and the old cars and whatever
else they see as poverty - while others such as myself see it as paradise"
- Tommy Joe, 4/14/2012
news:ddednf7cV4PBn9TN...@earthlink.com...
>Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of a
>major political party.
say amendments to your platform must be approved in a democratic way, you
shouldn't have your decision made before a democratic vote is held, and you
shouldn't ignore the democratic vote you hold to take the politically
expedient path of reinserting God into your platform.
I was embarrassed for them when they did this. I can only imagine how I
would feel if I didn't already think they were idiots.
>This is not a country with a formal religion, even though many conservative
>christians would like to make it one.
Democrats decided to make the initial platform changes, and the Democrats
decided to make the amendments. Don't lay this on the Republicans, or the
any one elses out there.
--
"Yes, they talk about the dirt streets of Cuba and the old cars and whatever
else they see as poverty - while others such as myself see it as paradise"
- Tommy Joe, 4/14/2012
Gern Blanston
Sep 7, 2012, 2:30:15 AM9/7/12
to
On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:30:27 -0500, David Carson <da...@neosoft.com>
are not the Constitution Party.
http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php
wrote:
> >It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
> >Constitution does, eh?
>
> Most of the words in the platform aren't in the Constitution.
But it's importatnt to be the party of the Constitution, even if you
> >It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
> >Constitution does, eh?
>
> Most of the words in the platform aren't in the Constitution.
are not the Constitution Party.
http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Meteorite Debris
Sep 7, 2012, 10:47:18 AM9/7/12
to
Last time that great scribe Brian <drmorri...@comcast.net> chipped
away at his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
> There was a story about the DNC rejecting efforts from some mainline
> religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
> local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
> didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
>
> And then there is this.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/dnc-god-jerusalem-platform_n_1859200.html
>
> Democrats Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met
> With Loud Opposition
If I was a voting American the last person I would vote for is the one
who wears his god on his sleeve, who prays in public places so that he
can be seen praying as rebuked by Jesus. No I wouldn't trust the god
botherer as far as he could be thrown.
--
Remove both YOUR_SHOES before replying
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet
Jason Gastrich prayed for me on 8 January 2009 and nothing happened.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make
you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
away at his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
> There was a story about the DNC rejecting efforts from some mainline
> religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
> local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
> didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
>
> And then there is this.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/dnc-god-jerusalem-platform_n_1859200.html
>
> Democrats Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met
> With Loud Opposition
who wears his god on his sleeve, who prays in public places so that he
can be seen praying as rebuked by Jesus. No I wouldn't trust the god
botherer as far as he could be thrown.
--
Remove both YOUR_SHOES before replying
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet
Jason Gastrich prayed for me on 8 January 2009 and nothing happened.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make
you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
X ` Man
Sep 7, 2012, 10:54:33 AM9/7/12
to
On 9/7/12 10:47 AM, Meteorite Debris wrote:
> Last time that great scribe Brian <drmorri...@comcast.net> chipped
> away at his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
>
>> There was a story about the DNC rejecting efforts from some mainline
>> religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
>> local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
>> didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
>>
>> And then there is this.
>>
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/dnc-god-jerusalem-platform_n_1859200.html
>>
>> Democrats Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met
>> With Loud Opposition
>
> If I was a voting American the last person I would vote for is the one
> who wears his god on his sleeve, who prays in public places so that he
> can be seen praying as rebuked by Jesus. No I wouldn't trust the god
> botherer as far as he could be thrown.
>
The more candidates, a party or its supporters talk up their religion,
> Last time that great scribe Brian <drmorri...@comcast.net> chipped
> away at his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
>
>> There was a story about the DNC rejecting efforts from some mainline
>> religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
>> local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
>> didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
>>
>> And then there is this.
>>
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/dnc-god-jerusalem-platform_n_1859200.html
>>
>> Democrats Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met
>> With Loud Opposition
>
> If I was a voting American the last person I would vote for is the one
> who wears his god on his sleeve, who prays in public places so that he
> can be seen praying as rebuked by Jesus. No I wouldn't trust the god
> botherer as far as he could be thrown.
>
the less likely I am to vote for them.
Scott Brady
Sep 7, 2012, 3:35:25 PM9/7/12
to epicur...@your_shoesaapt.net.au
On Friday, September 7, 2012 9:47:27 AM UTC-5, Meteorite Debris wrote:
> If I was a voting American the last person I would vote for is the one
> who wears his god on his sleeve, who prays in public places so that he
> can be seen praying as rebuked by Jesus. No I wouldn't trust the god
> botherer as far as he could be thrown.
Thanks for making that public.
> If I was a voting American the last person I would vote for is the one
> who wears his god on his sleeve, who prays in public places so that he
> can be seen praying as rebuked by Jesus. No I wouldn't trust the god
> botherer as far as he could be thrown.
Roy, Roy, the Asperger Boy
Sep 7, 2012, 4:35:44 PM9/7/12
to
Roy DeLoon
Sep 7, 2012, 4:44:50 PM9/7/12
to
Message has been deleted
?
Sep 7, 2012, 10:01:30 PM9/7/12
to
although Obama thinks he is God.
?
Sep 7, 2012, 10:02:09 PM9/7/12
to
Meteorite Debris
Sep 7, 2012, 10:04:03 PM9/7/12
to
Last time that great scribe Brian <drmorri...@comcast.net> chipped
away at his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
away at his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
> There was a story about the DNC rejecting efforts from some mainline
> religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
> local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
> didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
>
> And then there is this.
>
> religious groups to give welcome baskets to delegations that contained
> local candy, maps, directions, etc. It was rejected because they
> didn't share the beliefs of the convention.
>
> And then there is this.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/dnc-god-jerusalem-platform_n_1859200.html
>
> Democrats Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met
> With Loud Opposition
>
> Democrats Efforts To Reinsert 'God' And 'Jerusalem' Into Platform Met
> With Loud Opposition
If I was a voting American the last person I would vote for is the one
who wears his god on his sleeve, who prays in public places so that he
can be seen praying as rebuked by Jesus. No I wouldn't trust the god
botherer as far as he could be thrown.
who wears his god on his sleeve, who prays in public places so that he
can be seen praying as rebuked by Jesus. No I wouldn't trust the god
botherer as far as he could be thrown.
Meteorite Debris
Sep 7, 2012, 10:15:01 PM9/7/12
to
Last time that great scribe Mcafee <blu...@porn.net> chipped away at
Actually I was very disappointed that the Easter Bunny was not
mentioned. Or Father Xmas. How very remiss of the Democratic Convention.
Perhaps those who think a god should figure in everyday politics should
join the Taliban in Afghanistan. You can ask them how theocracy works in
their part of the world.
For religious people who insist on wearing God on your sleeve for
everyone to see and praise you and vote for you please note what your
Matthew 6:5 has to say on public displays of religiosity for public
consumption.
"And when you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites are: for they
love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the
streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have
their reward."
An achiest candidate is likely to be more honest because there is no
political motive for being atheistic except for that being an honest
position of the candidate.
his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
mentioned. Or Father Xmas. How very remiss of the Democratic Convention.
Perhaps those who think a god should figure in everyday politics should
join the Taliban in Afghanistan. You can ask them how theocracy works in
their part of the world.
For religious people who insist on wearing God on your sleeve for
everyone to see and praise you and vote for you please note what your
Matthew 6:5 has to say on public displays of religiosity for public
consumption.
"And when you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites are: for they
love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the
streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have
their reward."
An achiest candidate is likely to be more honest because there is no
political motive for being atheistic except for that being an honest
position of the candidate.
Meteorite Debris
Sep 7, 2012, 10:19:59 PM9/7/12
to
Last time that great scribe News <m...@sb.net> chipped away at his/her
>
> "X ` Man" <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote in message
> news:IJydnVl-DqQ0l9fN...@earthlink.com...
> If a candidate said 'God damn', you wouldn't vote for him/her.
> Stop being a hypocrite/liar already, and just admit you don't like God
> or those who believe in Him.
Matt 6:5
And when you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites are: for they love
to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets,
that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their
reward.
stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "X ` Man" <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote in message
> news:IJydnVl-DqQ0l9fN...@earthlink.com...
> Stop being a hypocrite/liar already, and just admit you don't like God
> or those who believe in Him.
Matt 6:5
And when you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites are: for they love
to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets,
that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their
reward.
Roy, Roy, the Asperger Boy
Sep 7, 2012, 10:29:45 PM9/7/12
to
was Allah.
piks11
Sep 8, 2012, 12:22:41 AM9/8/12
to
On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
>
>
> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
>
> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
>
> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
>
> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
>
> abortion, et cetera.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
>
>
> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
>
> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
>
> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
>
> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
>
> abortion, et cetera.
Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like it a lot and it will make you a proud Democrat. Looks like ya’ll got got the non-believer vote in the bag. But I wonder exactly whose idea it was to have Monica Lewinsky’s former Rabbi give an anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage benediction? The Rabbi could have been booked back when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
?
Sep 8, 2012, 1:36:10 AM9/8/12
to
X ` Man
Sep 8, 2012, 8:04:35 AM9/8/12
to
I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
of their religious views.
Have nice day.
BAR
Sep 8, 2012, 9:10:21 AM9/8/12
to
In article <_e2dncgNdLzOqdbN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
your taxes.
> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
> of their religious views.
Funny you speak about shoving opinions and views onto others. You are
guilty of just that when you whine about the rich not paying their fair
share in taxes and the IRS had to sue you to get you to pair your fair
share of taxes.
> Have nice day.
We all have nice days because we aren't looking over our shoulders to
see if the IRS is breathing down our necks with another lawsuit to get
us to pay our taxes.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
>
> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
> >>
> >> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
> >>
> >> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
> >>
> >> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
> >>
> >> abortion, et cetera.
> >
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
> >
> > Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like it a lot and it will make you a proud Democrat. Looks like ya?ll got got the non-believer vote in the bag. But I wonder exactly whose idea it was to have Monica Lewinsky?s former Rabbi give an anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage benediction? The Rabbi could have been booked back when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the
> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
> >>
> >> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
> >>
> >> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
> >>
> >> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
> >>
> >> abortion, et cetera.
> >
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
> >
Rabbi's anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
> >
>
>
> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
Alan West pays his taxes unlike you who had to be sued by the IRS to pay
> >
>
>
> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
your taxes.
> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
> of their religious views.
guilty of just that when you whine about the rich not paying their fair
share in taxes and the IRS had to sue you to get you to pair your fair
share of taxes.
> Have nice day.
We all have nice days because we aren't looking over our shoulders to
see if the IRS is breathing down our necks with another lawsuit to get
us to pay our taxes.
Sarah Ehrett
Sep 8, 2012, 2:37:00 PM9/8/12
to
On Sat, 08 Sep 2012 08:04:35 -0400, X ` Man
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>Have nice day.
Good morning Harry.
It's time you clean up your pigpen and leave the folks here on AO alone.
Did you happen to catch the boys on rec.boats have posted the info on your
run in with not paying your taxes and the IRS documents? It's all there in
black and white from the Duval County clerk's office.
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>Have nice day.
Good morning Harry.
It's time you clean up your pigpen and leave the folks here on AO alone.
Did you happen to catch the boys on rec.boats have posted the info on your
run in with not paying your taxes and the IRS documents? It's all there in
black and white from the Duval County clerk's office.
David Carson
Sep 8, 2012, 2:56:09 PM9/8/12
to
On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 20:40:18 -0400, X ` Man
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>On 9/6/12 8:32 PM, David Carson wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:06:51 -0400, X ` Man
>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/6/12 12:30 PM, David Carson wrote:
>> "health care", "abortion", "poor", "middle class", "wealthiest", "fair
>> share", etc., In fact, the entire platform could be retitled "Words,
>> Phrases and Ideas that Aren't In the Consitution", and that wouldn't be
>> far off. So please don't pretend that your anti-God stance has one thing
>> to do with the Consitution.
>>
>> David Carson
much out of the question.
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>On 9/6/12 8:32 PM, David Carson wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:06:51 -0400, X ` Man
>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/6/12 12:30 PM, David Carson wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 21:58:17 -0400, X ` Man
>>>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
>>>>> Constitution does, eh?
>>>>
>>>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
>>>>> Constitution does, eh?
>>>>
>>>> Most of the words in the platform aren't in the Constitution.
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of
>>> a major political party.
>>
>> So why bring the Constitution into it? It doesn't contain the phrases
>>> a major political party.
>>
>> "health care", "abortion", "poor", "middle class", "wealthiest", "fair
>> share", etc., In fact, the entire platform could be retitled "Words,
>> Phrases and Ideas that Aren't In the Consitution", and that wouldn't be
>> far off. So please don't pretend that your anti-God stance has one thing
>> to do with the Consitution.
>>
>> David Carson
>>
>
>I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
>religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
>play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
>determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
>abortion, et cetera.
I guess getting you to stick to the subject - which you raised - is pretty
>
>I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
>religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
>play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
>determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
>abortion, et cetera.
much out of the question.
X ` Man
Sep 8, 2012, 3:23:19 PM9/8/12
to
Dems at the DNC believe in god, that is unknown. What is known is that a
number of them don't believe mention of god belongs in the platform. One
can believe in god and not want it mentioned in a political document.
Oh, wait...you're in Texas, right?
MWB
Sep 8, 2012, 3:25:19 PM9/8/12
to
On 9/8/2012 8:04 AM, X ` Man wrote:
> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
>>>
>>> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
>>>
>>> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
>>>
>>> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
>>>
>>> abortion, et cetera.
>>
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
>>
>> Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times
>> They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like
>> it a lot and it will make you a proud Democrat. Looks like ya�ll got
> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
>>>
>>> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
>>>
>>> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
>>>
>>> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
>>>
>>> abortion, et cetera.
>>
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
>>
>> Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times
>> They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like
>> got the non-believer vote in the bag. But I wonder exactly whose idea
>> it was to have Monica Lewinsky�s former Rabbi give an anti-abortion,
>> anti-gay marriage benediction? The Rabbi could have been booked back
>> when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's
>> anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the
>> democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
>>
>
>
> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
>
> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
> of their religious views.
>
> Have nice day.
I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>> when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's
>> anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the
>> democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
>>
>
>
> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
>
> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
> of their religious views.
>
> Have nice day.
Is abortion murder???
GO PATRIOTS
Mark
X ` Man
Sep 8, 2012, 4:13:18 PM9/8/12
to
On 9/8/12 3:25 PM, MWB wrote:
> On 9/8/2012 8:04 AM, X ` Man wrote:
>> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
>>>>
>>>> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs
>>>> should
>>>>
>>>> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
>>>>
>>>> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
>>>>
>>>> abortion, et cetera.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
>>>
>>> Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times
>>> They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like
>>> it a lot and it will make you a proud Democrat. Looks like ya’ll got
> On 9/8/2012 8:04 AM, X ` Man wrote:
>> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
>>>>
>>>> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs
>>>> should
>>>>
>>>> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
>>>>
>>>> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
>>>>
>>>> abortion, et cetera.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
>>>
>>> Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times
>>> They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like
>>> got the non-believer vote in the bag. But I wonder exactly whose idea
>>> it was to have Monica Lewinsky’s former Rabbi give an anti-abortion,
>>> anti-gay marriage benediction? The Rabbi could have been booked back
>>> when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's
>>> anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the
>>> democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
>> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
>>
>> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
>> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
>> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
>> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
>> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
>> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
>> of their religious views.
>>
>> Have nice day.
>
>
> I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>
> Is abortion murder???
>
"Murder" is a legal term, and it typically involves the "unlawful
>>> when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's
>>> anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the
>>> democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
>> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
>>
>> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
>> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
>> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
>> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
>> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
>> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
>> of their religious views.
>>
>> Have nice day.
>
>
> I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>
> Is abortion murder???
>
killing" of a human being. A country or a state or other entity may
define abortion as "murder" and therefore it becomes murder. The same
societal entity may also define those killed by the dropping of a bomb
as "not murdered."
I don't believe abortion is murder.
There's no particular connection between "abortion is murder" and god.
There's no evidence that anyone on this planet now or in the past has
ever had a face-to-face, a phone conversation, an exchange of emails, or
anything else tangible with god, or can prove that there is, was, or
will be a god.
There's belief, of course, but that's not the same thing. In this
country, for the moment, at least, individuals are free to believe in
god or not believe in god, and, if they believe or don't believe, the
basis of that belief or non-belief can take many forms.
Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest
Sep 8, 2012, 4:29:21 PM9/8/12
to
On Saturday, September 8, 2012 12:25:23 PM UTC-7, MWB wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>
>
>
> Is abortion murder???
>
You would think it is a simple question, but it isn't. Every day the courts are tied up deciding if a homicide is a murder, each unique in its considerations. War is the taking of human life, but is it murder? Is running over a pedestrian murder? Always? No one is going to be happy with a simple answer to a complex question.
>
>
>
>
>
> I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>
>
>
> Is abortion murder???
>
The questions that should be asked should be simpler;
Do we trust a woman to decide if she is to become a mother? If not, then who?
Besides making laws against it (the club approach), are there stratigies that would make giving birth a better option (the carrot approach)?
I have a simple question; has anyone here seen a woman offer her uterus and was willing to carry the "unborn baby" to term? Does that procedure even exist? why not?
I have a different question. People have been clinically dead and the doctors have brought them back to life. Is this stealing from God? I understand the point of view that that act is as bad as "killing an 'unborn baby'", so why is different? The ramifications if Jesus was taken from the cross and resusitated with cpr and a wide open IV of nor-epi and STAT intubation.
When the votes are counted, put me in the camp that says anyone against abortion should not have to have one.
Same with gay marriage.
BAR
Sep 8, 2012, 5:51:16 PM9/8/12
to
In article <FdudnYroiP98O9bN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
IRS sue him?
> I don't believe abortion is murder.
You have no respect for the law.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
>
> On 9/8/12 3:25 PM, MWB wrote:
> > On 9/8/2012 8:04 AM, X ` Man wrote:
> >> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
> >>>>
> >>>> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs
> >>>> should
> >>>>
> >>>> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
> >>>>
> >>>> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
> >>>>
> >>>> abortion, et cetera.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
> >>>
> >>> Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times
> >>> They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like
> >>> it a lot and it will make you a proud Democrat. Looks like ya?ll got
> On 9/8/12 3:25 PM, MWB wrote:
> > On 9/8/2012 8:04 AM, X ` Man wrote:
> >> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
> >>>>
> >>>> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs
> >>>> should
> >>>>
> >>>> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
> >>>>
> >>>> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
> >>>>
> >>>> abortion, et cetera.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
> >>>
> >>> Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times
> >>> They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like
> >>> got the non-believer vote in the bag. But I wonder exactly whose idea
> >>> it was to have Monica Lewinsky?s former Rabbi give an anti-abortion,
> >>> anti-gay marriage benediction? The Rabbi could have been booked back
> >>> when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's
> >>> anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the
> >>> democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
> >> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
> >>
> >> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
> >> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
> >> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
> >> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
> >> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
> >> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
> >> of their religious views.
> >>
> >> Have nice day.
> >
> >
> > I have a very simple YES or NO question.
> >
> > Is abortion murder???
> >
>
> "Murder" is a legal term, and it typically involves the "unlawful
> killing" of a human being. A country or a state or other entity may
> define abortion as "murder" and therefore it becomes murder. The same
> societal entity may also define those killed by the dropping of a bomb
> as "not murdered."
What is the legal term for one who does not pay his taxes and has the
> >>> when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's
> >>> anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the
> >>> democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
> >> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
> >>
> >> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
> >> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
> >> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
> >> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
> >> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
> >> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
> >> of their religious views.
> >>
> >> Have nice day.
> >
> >
> > I have a very simple YES or NO question.
> >
> > Is abortion murder???
> >
>
> "Murder" is a legal term, and it typically involves the "unlawful
> killing" of a human being. A country or a state or other entity may
> define abortion as "murder" and therefore it becomes murder. The same
> societal entity may also define those killed by the dropping of a bomb
> as "not murdered."
IRS sue him?
> I don't believe abortion is murder.
BAR
Sep 8, 2012, 5:52:16 PM9/8/12
to
In article <OvWdnVmXRNC6BtbN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
You have claimed to be pro taxes but your actions show that you don't
pay them and in order to ensure that you pay your fair share the IRS has
to sue you.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
pay them and in order to ensure that you pay your fair share the IRS has
to sue you.
~M~
Sep 8, 2012, 5:56:11 PM9/8/12
to
"MWB" wrote in message news:k2g633$dof$1...@dont-email.me...
>I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>
>Is abortion murder???
No, but it is the ending of a living human.
It's funny how pro-choice people tend to claim to be pro-science, but
denying that life begins at conception is pretty much an anti-science point
of view.
Abortion is still a necessity, and should stay legal. Just my opinion, of
course.
--
"Yes, they talk about the dirt streets of Cuba and the old cars and whatever
else they see as poverty - while others such as myself see it as paradise"
- Tommy Joe, 4/14/2012
>I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>
>Is abortion murder???
It's funny how pro-choice people tend to claim to be pro-science, but
denying that life begins at conception is pretty much an anti-science point
of view.
Abortion is still a necessity, and should stay legal. Just my opinion, of
course.
--
"Yes, they talk about the dirt streets of Cuba and the old cars and whatever
else they see as poverty - while others such as myself see it as paradise"
- Tommy Joe, 4/14/2012
MWB
Sep 8, 2012, 6:09:28 PM9/8/12
to
I guess you can't read. This was a simple YES or NO question.
Anyway...I will put you down as a NO.
I have another very simple....YES or NO question.
If I murder you and I get the death penalty and the sentence is carried
out...are you in favor of me getting the stool kicked out under my feet???
GO PATRIOTS
Mark
Anyway...I will put you down as a NO.
I have another very simple....YES or NO question.
If I murder you and I get the death penalty and the sentence is carried
out...are you in favor of me getting the stool kicked out under my feet???
GO PATRIOTS
Mark
X ` Man
Sep 8, 2012, 6:22:05 PM9/8/12
to
not. 😣😣
I don't think abortion is murder and I oppose the death penalty.
That should be clear and direct enough for you.
BAR
Sep 8, 2012, 6:31:12 PM9/8/12
to
In article <d9CdndaYX6aQWNbN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
issues? You know Harry the tax issues where the IRS had to come after
you to ensure that you paid your fair share of taxes. You have been
ranting about how the Republicans don't pay their fair share and it has
been you who was screwing over everyone by not paying your fair share of
taxes.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
>
> On 9/8/12 6:09 PM, MWB wrote:
> > I guess you can't read. This was a simple YES or NO question.
> >
> > Anyway...I will put you down as a NO.
> >
> > I have another very simple....YES or NO question.
> >
> > If I murder you and I get the death penalty and the sentence is carried
> > out...are you in favor of me getting the stool kicked out under my feet???
> >
> >
> > GO PATRIOTS
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >
>
> You may think you were asking a simple YES or NO question but you were
> not. ??
> On 9/8/12 6:09 PM, MWB wrote:
> > I guess you can't read. This was a simple YES or NO question.
> >
> > Anyway...I will put you down as a NO.
> >
> > I have another very simple....YES or NO question.
> >
> > If I murder you and I get the death penalty and the sentence is carried
> > out...are you in favor of me getting the stool kicked out under my feet???
> >
> >
> > GO PATRIOTS
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >
>
> You may think you were asking a simple YES or NO question but you were
>
> I don't think abortion is murder and I oppose the death penalty.
>
> That should be clear and direct enough for you.
What do your "friends" here in alt.obituaries know about your tax
> I don't think abortion is murder and I oppose the death penalty.
>
> That should be clear and direct enough for you.
issues? You know Harry the tax issues where the IRS had to come after
you to ensure that you paid your fair share of taxes. You have been
ranting about how the Republicans don't pay their fair share and it has
been you who was screwing over everyone by not paying your fair share of
taxes.
MWB
Sep 8, 2012, 6:41:39 PM9/8/12
to
That should be clear and direct enough for you.
Mark
Louis Epstein
Sep 8, 2012, 10:20:45 PM9/8/12
to
News <m...@sb.net> wrote:
:
: "X ` Man" <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote in message
: news:z_WdnQBvDJbp39TN...@earthlink.com...
: You can remove 'et cetera'.
: The only freedom the Dem's are passionate and care about at all is
: whether a pregnant woman should have an abortion if she casually wants one,
: always at taxpayers' expense.
:
Why always?
Only if she can't afford it herself.
(And of course her doctors should be unmolested by those who would
interfere with her decision,and not be forced to tell her anti-abortionist
propaganda before the procedure).
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
:
: "X ` Man" <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote in message
: news:z_WdnQBvDJbp39TN...@earthlink.com...
:> On 9/6/12 8:32 PM, David Carson wrote:
:>> On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:06:51 -0400, X ` Man
:>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
:>>
:>>> On 9/6/12 12:30 PM, David Carson wrote:
:>>>> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 21:58:17 -0400, X ` Man
:>>>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
:>>>>
:>>>>> It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
:>>>>> Constitution does, eh?
:>>>>
:>>>> Most of the words in the platform aren't in the Constitution.
:>>>>
:>>>
:>>> Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of
:>>> a major political party.
:>>
:>> So why bring the Constitution into it? It doesn't contain the phrases
:>> "health care", "abortion", "poor", "middle class", "wealthiest", "fair
:>> share", etc., In fact, the entire platform could be retitled "Words,
:>> Phrases and Ideas that Aren't In the Consitution", and that wouldn't be
:>> far off. So please don't pretend that your anti-God stance has one thing
:>> to do with the Consitution.
:>>
:>> David Carson
:>>
:>
:> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
:> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
:> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
:> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
:> abortion, et cetera.
:
:>> On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:06:51 -0400, X ` Man
:>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
:>>
:>>> On 9/6/12 12:30 PM, David Carson wrote:
:>>>> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 21:58:17 -0400, X ` Man
:>>>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
:>>>>
:>>>>> It's important for the platform to mention god as many times as the
:>>>>> Constitution does, eh?
:>>>>
:>>>> Most of the words in the platform aren't in the Constitution.
:>>>>
:>>>
:>>> Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of
:>>> a major political party.
:>>
:>> So why bring the Constitution into it? It doesn't contain the phrases
:>> "health care", "abortion", "poor", "middle class", "wealthiest", "fair
:>> share", etc., In fact, the entire platform could be retitled "Words,
:>> Phrases and Ideas that Aren't In the Consitution", and that wouldn't be
:>> far off. So please don't pretend that your anti-God stance has one thing
:>> to do with the Consitution.
:>>
:>> David Carson
:>>
:>
:> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
:> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
:> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
:> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
:> abortion, et cetera.
: You can remove 'et cetera'.
: The only freedom the Dem's are passionate and care about at all is
: whether a pregnant woman should have an abortion if she casually wants one,
: always at taxpayers' expense.
:
Why always?
Only if she can't afford it herself.
(And of course her doctors should be unmolested by those who would
interfere with her decision,and not be forced to tell her anti-abortionist
propaganda before the procedure).
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
Louis Epstein
Sep 8, 2012, 10:22:06 PM9/8/12
to
MWB <bic...@gmail.com> wrote:
: On 9/8/2012 8:04 AM, X ` Man wrote:
:> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
:>> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
:>>>
:>>>
:>>> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
:>>>
:>>> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
:>>>
:>>> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
:>>>
:>>> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
:>>>
:>>> abortion, et cetera.
:>>
:>>
:>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
:>>
:>> Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times
:>> They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like
:>> it a lot and it will make you a proud Democrat. Looks like ya?ll got
:> On 9/8/12 12:22 AM, piks11 wrote:
:>> On Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:40:21 PM UTC-5, X ` Man wrote:
:>>>
:>>>
:>>> I'm not "anti-god." I'm agnostic. I have little use for "organized"
:>>>
:>>> religion and I just don't believe superstitious religious beliefs should
:>>>
:>>> play a part in civil government, in electing government officials, in
:>>>
:>>> determining civil laws, in determining whether women have access to
:>>>
:>>> abortion, et cetera.
:>>
:>>
:>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQuT2worqc
:>>
:>> Hey X Man. Have you seen this video Three Times (as in Three Times
:>> They Denied God)? Col. Alan West approved it. I think you will like
:>> got the non-believer vote in the bag. But I wonder exactly whose idea
:>> it was to have Monica Lewinsky?s former Rabbi give an anti-abortion,
:>> anti-gay marriage benediction? The Rabbi could have been booked back
:>> when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's
:>> anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the
:>> democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
:>>
:>
:>
:> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
:> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
:>
:> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
:> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
:> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
:> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
:> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
:> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
:> of their religious views.
:>
:> Have nice day.
:
:
: I have a very simple YES or NO question.
:
: Is abortion murder???
No.
:>> when Obama was still against gay marriage, but the Rabbi's
:>> anti-abortion bit must have terribly confused and frightened the
:>> democrat women in the crowd who are already war weary.
:>>
:>
:>
:> Allen West? The male counterpart to Batshit Crazy Bachmann? :) Thanks,
:> I'll pass. I have no interest in watching videos endorsed by the insane.
:>
:> Religious leaders, like any other citizens, are entitled to have and
:> express their opinions. The problem arises when citizens try to shove
:> their religious views and superstitions onto our secular society via
:> regulations, restrictions, laws, courts. It's fine with me if a rabbi,
:> priest, or minister wants to speak out against abortion. It's not fine
:> when they try to outlaw it or pressure legislators to outlaw it because
:> of their religious views.
:>
:> Have nice day.
:
:
: I have a very simple YES or NO question.
:
: Is abortion murder???
Louis Epstein
Sep 8, 2012, 10:25:23 PM9/8/12
to
~M~ <~M~@gmail.com> wrote:
: "MWB" wrote in message news:k2g633$dof$1...@dont-email.me...
: It's funny how pro-choice people tend to claim to be pro-science, but
individual human life biologically begins is the anti-science
: "MWB" wrote in message news:k2g633$dof$1...@dont-email.me...
:
:>I have a very simple YES or NO question.
:>
:>Is abortion murder???
:
: No, but it is the ending of a living human.
Only for illogical definitions of "a living human".
:>I have a very simple YES or NO question.
:>
:>Is abortion murder???
:
: No, but it is the ending of a living human.
: It's funny how pro-choice people tend to claim to be pro-science, but
: denying that life begins at conception is pretty much an anti-science
: point of view.
Nonsense.Insisting that there is a specific point at which an
: point of view.
individual human life biologically begins is the anti-science
point of view.
: Abortion is still a necessity, and should stay legal. Just my opinion, of
: course.
:
: Abortion is still a necessity, and should stay legal. Just my opinion, of
: course.
Louis Epstein
Sep 8, 2012, 10:28:21 PM9/8/12
to
~M~ <~M~@gmail.com> wrote:
: "X ` Man" wrote in message
: news:ddednf7cV4PBn9TN...@earthlink.com...
:
: say amendments to your platform must be approved in a democratic way, you
: shouldn't have your decision made before a democratic vote is held, and you
: shouldn't ignore the democratic vote you hold to take the politically
: expedient path of reinserting God into your platform.
:
: I was embarrassed for them when they did this. I can only imagine how I
: would feel if I didn't already think they were idiots.
I wish the presidential nominating process for both major parties
was reformed to prevent the platform and nominee from being
determined before the delegates convene.
Like the Electoral College,gatherings meant to have decision-making
power have been perverted into rubber stamps...this shouldn't be
seen as progress.
: "X ` Man" wrote in message
: news:ddednf7cV4PBn9TN...@earthlink.com...
:
:>Indeed, and there's no reason for the word god to be in the platform of a
:>major political party.
:
: I agree with you on this, but if your party is named for democracy, and you
:>major political party.
:
: say amendments to your platform must be approved in a democratic way, you
: shouldn't have your decision made before a democratic vote is held, and you
: shouldn't ignore the democratic vote you hold to take the politically
: expedient path of reinserting God into your platform.
:
: I was embarrassed for them when they did this. I can only imagine how I
: would feel if I didn't already think they were idiots.
I wish the presidential nominating process for both major parties
was reformed to prevent the platform and nominee from being
determined before the delegates convene.
Like the Electoral College,gatherings meant to have decision-making
power have been perverted into rubber stamps...this shouldn't be
seen as progress.
Louis Epstein
Sep 8, 2012, 10:29:56 PM9/8/12
to
Mcafee <blu...@porn.net> wrote:
: On 9/5/2012 9:31 PM, Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest wrote:
:> Here's where the Dems made their mistake, it's "Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
:> Wool of bat, and tongue of dog...", not "Eye of frog, and toe of newt...". Easy mistake to make, something anyone could have done.
:>
: Dems don't care as long as it kills babies.
Embryos aren't babies.Do you bake trees into pecan pies?
: On 9/5/2012 9:31 PM, Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest wrote:
:> Here's where the Dems made their mistake, it's "Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
:> Wool of bat, and tongue of dog...", not "Eye of frog, and toe of newt...". Easy mistake to make, something anyone could have done.
:>
: Dems don't care as long as it kills babies.
Embryos aren't babies.Do you bake trees into pecan pies?
~M~
Sep 9, 2012, 5:04:38 AM9/9/12
to
"Louis Epstein" wrote in message news:k2gumj$omr$3...@reader1.panix.com...
>Nonsense.Insisting that there is a specific point at which an
>individual human life biologically begins is the anti-science
>point of view.
Absolutely not. At conception, when the cells start to multiply and
organize, is when life begins. Additionally, when it is two humans that were
involved in the conception, that newly created life is human as well.
Denying these facts is just an ignorant attempt to make terminating that
life more palatable.
>Nonsense.Insisting that there is a specific point at which an
>individual human life biologically begins is the anti-science
>point of view.
organize, is when life begins. Additionally, when it is two humans that were
involved in the conception, that newly created life is human as well.
Denying these facts is just an ignorant attempt to make terminating that
life more palatable.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
X ` Man
Sep 9, 2012, 4:36:24 PM9/9/12
to
On 9/9/12 3:50 PM, News wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
> news:FdudnYroiP98O9bN...@earthlink.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>>>
>>> Is abortion murder???
>>>
>>
>> There's no evidence that anyone on this planet now or in the past has
>> ever had a face-to-face, a phone conversation, an exchange of emails,
>> or anything else tangible with god, or can prove that there is, was,
>> or will be a god.
>
> Neither can you prove there is NOT a God.
> BTW, there is in civil society law (ex, insurance), an idea called
> "Acts of God."
> According to you, God doesn't exist, therefore, there is no such
> thing.
> Maybe you would like to re-write the idea all-by-your-lonesome as
> "Acts of Nature"?
>
>
>> There's belief, of course, but that's not the same thing.
>
> The same belief you hold on the other side that makes Government
> your own special God that can do miracles such as making peace, no
> unemployment, killing inflation, no more wars, etc., etc., etc.
>
>> In this country, for the moment, at least, individuals are free to
>> believe in god or not believe in god, and, if they believe or don't
>> believe, the basis of that belief or non-belief can take many forms.
>
> Your punctuation is consistently wrong.
> You have to capitalize God, harry.
No, I don't.
The claim that there is a god or gods cannot be tested; assertions
immune to disproof are veridically worthless. Faith is not proof of
existence.
Attributing "acts of nature" to "acts of god" is nothing more than a
semantical canard that has been accepted by society as a way to explain
away storms, floods, hurricanes, forest fires, tsunamis, et cetera.
If there was a god, why would it want to wreak devastation on those who
worship it? Do you really accept the Jerry Falwell-Pat Robertson
explanation that the killing acts of nature are really acts of god
punishing humans for being, oh, gay, liberal, feminist, Muslim? What
about the "good christians" who also suffer because of those acts of
nature? Why is their god punishing them?
As stated previously, I don't know whether god exists. Neither does
anyone else who has lived or is living. Further, proving the existence
of god is not like finding a cure or effective treatment for cancer. The
latter is a road upon which progress can be made, demonstrated, proven,
and verified.
I won't dispute that the *concept* of god has evolved, if that's the
word, over the ages. Most believers no longer worship rocks, stone
statues, the sun, et cetera. Belief has evolved to an entity that
created man in his own image, whatever that means. At some point,
mankind may find sentient beings in another part of the universe, and
those beings may not resemble us in any way. Maybe it is those beings
who were created in the image of god.
Where does that leave us?
Belief in god is an act of faith, not an assertion based upon proof.
If you bother to respond, try to do it intellectually, in your own
words. If you can.
Have nice day.
> x-no-archive: yes
> news:FdudnYroiP98O9bN...@earthlink.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> I have a very simple YES or NO question.
>>>
>>> Is abortion murder???
>>>
>>
>> "Murder" is a legal term, and it typically involves the "unlawful
>> killing" of a human being. A country or a state or other entity may
>> define abortion as "murder" and therefore it becomes murder. The same
>> societal entity may also define those killed by the dropping of a bomb
>> as "not murdered."
>>
>> killing" of a human being. A country or a state or other entity may
>> define abortion as "murder" and therefore it becomes murder. The same
>> societal entity may also define those killed by the dropping of a bomb
>> as "not murdered."
>>
>> I don't believe abortion is murder.
>>
>> There's no particular connection between "abortion is murder" and god.
>>
>> There's no evidence that anyone on this planet now or in the past has
>> ever had a face-to-face, a phone conversation, an exchange of emails,
>> or anything else tangible with god, or can prove that there is, was,
>> or will be a god.
>
> Neither can you prove there is NOT a God.
> BTW, there is in civil society law (ex, insurance), an idea called
> "Acts of God."
> According to you, God doesn't exist, therefore, there is no such
> thing.
> Maybe you would like to re-write the idea all-by-your-lonesome as
> "Acts of Nature"?
>
>
>> There's belief, of course, but that's not the same thing.
>
> The same belief you hold on the other side that makes Government
> your own special God that can do miracles such as making peace, no
> unemployment, killing inflation, no more wars, etc., etc., etc.
>
>> In this country, for the moment, at least, individuals are free to
>> believe in god or not believe in god, and, if they believe or don't
>> believe, the basis of that belief or non-belief can take many forms.
>
> Your punctuation is consistently wrong.
> You have to capitalize God, harry.
No, I don't.
The claim that there is a god or gods cannot be tested; assertions
immune to disproof are veridically worthless. Faith is not proof of
existence.
Attributing "acts of nature" to "acts of god" is nothing more than a
semantical canard that has been accepted by society as a way to explain
away storms, floods, hurricanes, forest fires, tsunamis, et cetera.
If there was a god, why would it want to wreak devastation on those who
worship it? Do you really accept the Jerry Falwell-Pat Robertson
explanation that the killing acts of nature are really acts of god
punishing humans for being, oh, gay, liberal, feminist, Muslim? What
about the "good christians" who also suffer because of those acts of
nature? Why is their god punishing them?
As stated previously, I don't know whether god exists. Neither does
anyone else who has lived or is living. Further, proving the existence
of god is not like finding a cure or effective treatment for cancer. The
latter is a road upon which progress can be made, demonstrated, proven,
and verified.
I won't dispute that the *concept* of god has evolved, if that's the
word, over the ages. Most believers no longer worship rocks, stone
statues, the sun, et cetera. Belief has evolved to an entity that
created man in his own image, whatever that means. At some point,
mankind may find sentient beings in another part of the universe, and
those beings may not resemble us in any way. Maybe it is those beings
who were created in the image of god.
Where does that leave us?
Belief in god is an act of faith, not an assertion based upon proof.
If you bother to respond, try to do it intellectually, in your own
words. If you can.
Have nice day.
X ` Man
Sep 9, 2012, 4:45:06 PM9/9/12
to
On 9/9/12 4:18 PM, News wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
>
> But you've already said you don't believe (or have huge doubts as
> x-no-archive: yes
>
>
> an "agnostic"), which is just a way to avoid saying 'atheist'.
No. Agnostic and atheist are not synonyms, though there are some
agnostics who are also atheists. Agnosticism can take at least a
half-dozen different forms, maybe more.
Have nice day.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Sarah Ehrett
Sep 9, 2012, 5:25:04 PM9/9/12
to
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 14:41:56 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:0p3n489th09lifre9...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 08 Sep 2012 08:04:35 -0400, X ` Man
>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Have nice day.
>>
>> Good morning Harry.
>>
>> It's time you clean up your pigpen and leave the folks here on AO alone.
>>
>> Did you happen to catch the boys on rec.boats have posted the info on your
>> run in with not paying your taxes and the IRS documents? It's all there
>> in
>> black and white from the Duval County clerk's office.
>
> There doesn't appear to be a Duval County in Maryland of the 24 in that
>State.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland
Duval County is in Florida.
> Maybe you can figure out which one Harry actually lives in with the map
>of MD.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland#Map
Krause lives in Calvert County, Maryland, about 30 miles across the
Benedict Bridge from Ken's home in Golden Beach.
http://www.mapquest.com/maps?city=Prince%20Frederick&state=MD
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:0p3n489th09lifre9...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 08 Sep 2012 08:04:35 -0400, X ` Man
>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Have nice day.
>>
>> Good morning Harry.
>>
>> It's time you clean up your pigpen and leave the folks here on AO alone.
>>
>> Did you happen to catch the boys on rec.boats have posted the info on your
>> run in with not paying your taxes and the IRS documents? It's all there
>> in
>> black and white from the Duval County clerk's office.
>
> There doesn't appear to be a Duval County in Maryland of the 24 in that
>State.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland
Duval County is in Florida.
> Maybe you can figure out which one Harry actually lives in with the map
>of MD.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland#Map
Krause lives in Calvert County, Maryland, about 30 miles across the
Benedict Bridge from Ken's home in Golden Beach.
http://www.mapquest.com/maps?city=Prince%20Frederick&state=MD
Message has been deleted
Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest
Sep 9, 2012, 5:36:44 PM9/9/12
to
On Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:25:05 PM UTC-7, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>
> Krause lives ....
Wow! You are a little shit stain, aren't you? Nothing to add, so then you go into attack mode. Once again, no wonder why you have no friends.
>
> Krause lives ....
Wow! You are a little shit stain, aren't you? Nothing to add, so then you go into attack mode. Once again, no wonder why you have no friends.
BAR
Sep 9, 2012, 5:42:15 PM9/9/12
to
In article <-pSdnROBJsRVYNHN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
It is come to light that you are a deadbeat of the first kind. The IRS
has to sue you to get tax money you owe them, us really, and that you
have a difficult time handling money due to your actions to absolve
yourself of all of your debts multiple times.
I would think that most people would want to stay away from you on
USENET and in real life due to your stink rubbing off of you and on to
them.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
has to sue you to get tax money you owe them, us really, and that you
have a difficult time handling money due to your actions to absolve
yourself of all of your debts multiple times.
I would think that most people would want to stay away from you on
USENET and in real life due to your stink rubbing off of you and on to
them.
BAR
Sep 9, 2012, 5:43:06 PM9/9/12
to
In article <3eydnVG658NPYtHN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
Have you paid your taxes yet?
Are you going to try and discharge your debts again.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
Are you going to try and discharge your debts again.
BAR
Sep 9, 2012, 5:49:37 PM9/9/12
to
In article <bOOdnRO4TNeJbNHN...@earthlink.com>, m...@sb.net
says...
Virginia and then he moved to Maryland.
says...
>
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:0p3n489th09lifre9...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 08 Sep 2012 08:04:35 -0400, X ` Man
> > <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Have nice day.
> >
> > Good morning Harry.
> >
> > It's time you clean up your pigpen and leave the folks here on AO alone.
> >
> > Did you happen to catch the boys on rec.boats have posted the info on your
> > run in with not paying your taxes and the IRS documents? It's all there
> > in
> > black and white from the Duval County clerk's office.
>
> There doesn't appear to be a Duval County in Maryland of the 24 in that
> State.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland
>
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:0p3n489th09lifre9...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 08 Sep 2012 08:04:35 -0400, X ` Man
> > <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Have nice day.
> >
> > Good morning Harry.
> >
> > It's time you clean up your pigpen and leave the folks here on AO alone.
> >
> > Did you happen to catch the boys on rec.boats have posted the info on your
> > run in with not paying your taxes and the IRS documents? It's all there
> > in
> > black and white from the Duval County clerk's office.
>
> There doesn't appear to be a Duval County in Maryland of the 24 in that
> State.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland
>
> Maybe you can figure out which one Harry actually lives in with the map
> of MD.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland#Map
Maybe you can check Florida where Harry lived before he moved to
> of MD.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland#Map
Virginia and then he moved to Maryland.
Message has been deleted
X ` Man
Sep 9, 2012, 6:18:42 PM9/9/12
to
On 9/9/12 5:26 PM, News wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "X ` Man" <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote in message
> news:3eydnVG658NPYtHN...@earthlink.com...
>> On 9/9/12 4:18 PM, News wrote:
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>>
>>>
>>> But you've already said you don't believe (or have huge doubts as
>>> an "agnostic"), which is just a way to avoid saying 'atheist'.
>>
>>
>> No. Agnostic and atheist are not synonyms, though there are some
>> agnostics who are also atheists.
>
> Just a fancy-schmancy way of avoiding the dreaded term, 'atheist'.
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>>
>>>
>>> But you've already said you don't believe (or have huge doubts as
>>> an "agnostic"), which is just a way to avoid saying 'atheist'.
>>
>>
>> No. Agnostic and atheist are not synonyms, though there are some
>> agnostics who are also atheists.
>
And once again you prove you have the intellectual capability of a
rotifer. If I were an atheist, I wouldn't have any hesitation in saying
so, and neither would any of the handful of other agnostics I know. That
you can't differentiate only speaks to your mental inabilities.
> If you say you don't know, that automatically places you in the
> anti-God area.
> You can't have it both ways, and there is no middle ground.
Another intellectual absurdity. To state you don't know if there is a
god doesn't mean you are saying there is no god. Whoever first described
you as an eight year old child was spot on.
>
>> Agnosticism can take at least a half-dozen different forms, maybe more.
>
> Don't make me laugh at you--again.
> Marx was an atheist, and fervently believed in Government (as his
> 'God').
> Same as your Marxist views on the bigger the Government, the better.
>
That's just moronic.
BAR
Sep 9, 2012, 6:30:42 PM9/9/12
to
In article <WtOdnRRupK9ZiNDN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
What's mornic is you who is a tax cheat and a deadbeat who doesn't pay
his bills.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
his bills.
Sarah Ehrett
Sep 9, 2012, 6:34:07 PM9/9/12
to
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 17:06:10 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> Duval County is in Florida.
>
> I knew that, and was going to make a joke about him living in
>
>[Jacksonville] Florida when he hates all Southern States.
> Why did you mention him living in Duval Co., Florida if he doesn't
>live there?
Harry used to live in Florida, also used to live in Virginia. The fine
folks on rec.boats have uncovered all sorts of scummy things Krausie has
done over the years and are posting links to court cases, IRS documents,
etc..
> Unless you meant something else entirely in your Duval Co. reference.
>
>>> Maybe you can figure out which one Harry actually lives in with the map
>>>of MD.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland#Map
>>
>> Krause lives in Calvert County, Maryland, about 30 miles across the
>> Benedict Bridge from Ken's home in Golden Beach.
>
> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>> Maybe you can figure out which one Harry actually lives in with the map
>>>of MD.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Maryland#Map
>>
>> Krause lives in Calvert County, Maryland, about 30 miles across the
>> Benedict Bridge from Ken's home in Golden Beach.
>
We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
> He has a second home there near harry?
Yep, let me get the mileage...........<GoogleMaps>....... 27.1 miles door
to door.
> [note: small 'h', to tweak him about his small 'g' whenever he
>mentions God]
I knew another New Zealand doofus, besides Booby Feigel, who insisted on
writing " USA " as " USa". He had a bug up his butt about the fact the
United States shares the [ North] American continent with other nations and
we didn't have the right to claim it exclusively in the name. I think you
should also know that same googlie-eyed nitwit also claimed there was a
Shah of Iraq. LOL
X ` Man
Sep 9, 2012, 6:49:37 PM9/9/12
to
On 9/9/12 6:34 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>
> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
Surely not this guy:
>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>
> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
Thought you lived in North Kingston and Kenny lived in Mechanicsville.
Ms. Czepiel.
BAR
Sep 9, 2012, 7:19:32 PM9/9/12
to
In article <GO-dndNiMsOegNDN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
They live in Wepayourtaxesville and you live in
Theirshastosuemetopaymytaxesville.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
Theirshastosuemetopaymytaxesville.
Sarah Ehrett
Sep 9, 2012, 7:24:33 PM9/9/12
to
On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 18:49:37 -0400, X ` Man
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>On 9/9/12 6:34 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>
>>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>
>> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
>
>Surely not this guy:
>
>http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
>
That photo was taken in RI.
<dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>On 9/9/12 6:34 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>
>>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>
>> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
>
>Surely not this guy:
>
>http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
>
>Thought you lived in North Kingston and Kenny lived in Mechanicsville.
>Ms. Czepiel.
Brian
Sep 9, 2012, 9:54:57 PM9/9/12
to
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 02:20:45 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein
<l...@main.put.com> wrote:
>Only if she can't afford it herself.
You think so? If contraception is supposedly unavailable, it isn't
free to everyone, why should abortion be different?
>(And of course her doctors should be unmolested by those who would
>interfere with her decision,and not be forced to tell her anti-abortionist
>propaganda before the procedure).
Like actually knowing what is happening? In all other medical
procedures it is called informed consent.
<l...@main.put.com> wrote:
>Only if she can't afford it herself.
You think so? If contraception is supposedly unavailable, it isn't
free to everyone, why should abortion be different?
>(And of course her doctors should be unmolested by those who would
>interfere with her decision,and not be forced to tell her anti-abortionist
>propaganda before the procedure).
Like actually knowing what is happening? In all other medical
procedures it is called informed consent.
Brian
Sep 9, 2012, 9:56:47 PM9/9/12
to
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 02:22:06 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein
<l...@main.put.com> wrote:
>: Is abortion murder???
>
>No.
How about when there is a live birth and medical care is denied?
<l...@main.put.com> wrote:
>: Is abortion murder???
>
>No.
How about when there is a live birth and medical care is denied?
Brian
Sep 9, 2012, 9:58:30 PM9/9/12
to
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 02:29:56 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein
<l...@main.put.com> wrote:
>Embryos aren't babies.Do you bake trees into pecan pies?
Do some become humans and some become grapefruit?
<l...@main.put.com> wrote:
>Embryos aren't babies.Do you bake trees into pecan pies?
Do some become humans and some become grapefruit?
Brian
Sep 9, 2012, 11:00:00 PM9/9/12
to
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 02:28:21 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein
<l...@main.put.com> wrote:
>I wish the presidential nominating process for both major parties
>was reformed to prevent the platform and nominee from being
>determined before the delegates convene.
Like when the political bosses determined the candidates? Primaries
were established to reduce their influence.
<l...@main.put.com> wrote:
>I wish the presidential nominating process for both major parties
>was reformed to prevent the platform and nominee from being
>determined before the delegates convene.
Like when the political bosses determined the candidates? Primaries
were established to reduce their influence.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
X ` Man
Sep 10, 2012, 8:05:19 AM9/10/12
to
On 9/10/12 3:34 AM, News wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "X ` Man" <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote in message
> news:GO-dndNiMsOegNDN...@earthlink.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "X ` Man" <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote in message
>> On 9/9/12 6:34 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>
>>>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>>
>>> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
>>
>> Surely not this guy:
>>
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
>
> What do you care?
>>
>>>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>>
>>> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
>>
>> Surely not this guy:
>>
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
>
> Handsome looking gun. The guy isn't bad, either.
Give him a call...maybe he dates eight year old girls with Asperger's
syndrome.
BAR
Sep 10, 2012, 8:06:46 AM9/10/12
to
In article <J5WdneiYF8fiStDN...@earthlink.com>, dump-on-
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
I would bet money that he pays his taxes, unlike you.
conser...@anywhere-you-can.com says...
Sarah Ehrett
Sep 10, 2012, 2:29:46 PM9/10/12
to
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 02:38:13 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:q79q48tjmatmvjiru...@4ax.com...
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 18:49:37 -0400, X ` Man
>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 9/9/12 6:34 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>>>
>>>> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
>>>
>>>Surely not this guy:
>>>
>>>http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
>>>
>>
>> That photo was taken in RI.
>
> It really is Ken?
>> <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 9/9/12 6:34 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>>>
>>>> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
>>>
>>>Surely not this guy:
>>>
>>>http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
>>>
>>
>> That photo was taken in RI.
>
Yes. That picture was taken last year.
> Haha, I made a (cute) joke about it a few minutes ago.
>
>
>>>Thought you lived in North Kingston and Kenny lived in Mechanicsville.
>>>Ms. Czepiel.
>>
>> You're wrong on both counts.
>
> Hairy-ape is perfect!
>
>>>Thought you lived in North Kingston and Kenny lived in Mechanicsville.
>>>Ms. Czepiel.
>>
>> You're wrong on both counts.
>
> He's been wrong every time.
Yep. There is no such city or town in RI named North Kingston.
Ken and I live in North KingsTOWN.
Sarah Ehrett
Sep 10, 2012, 2:29:56 PM9/10/12
to
>"X ` Man" <dump-on-co...@anywhere-you-can.com> wrote in message
>news:GO-dndNiMsOegNDN...@earthlink.com...
>news:GO-dndNiMsOegNDN...@earthlink.com...
>> On 9/9/12 6:34 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>
>>>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>>
>>> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
>>
>> Surely not this guy:
>>
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
>
>>
>>>> I thought you and Ken live in RI?
>>>
>>> We do. Ken still owns a home in Maryland.
>>
>> Surely not this guy:
>>
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/KensMSAR.jpg
>
> What do you care?
> Handsome looking gun. The guy isn't bad, either.
:) <chuckle>
> Handsome looking gun. The guy isn't bad, either.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages