Remove GOD From the Canadian Constitution!
Peter B. Macdonald
randall g wrote:
>
> Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
> =====================================================
>
> The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
> remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
> recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
> and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
> Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
> all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
Well, you won't get much support for this idea from me.
I helped draft the constitution of the B. C. Conservative Party.
It reads in part as follows;
"A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
freedom of every
individual and family to seek to achieve their God-given potential.
It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
the principle of ethical behaviour;
the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
the principle of caring about the people and the world around us."
Good luck with your cause.
Regards,
Peter B. Macdonald
Have you read 'TAXCAP' lately?
We Separated Church from State didn't we? - Why not State from Taxation?
Home Page for TAXCAP
http://www.netci.com/taxcap
randall g
Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
=====================================================
The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
Here is a link to the complete text of the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms. You'll find the God part right at the top.
http://insight.mcmaster.ca:80/org/efc/pages/law/charter/
I'll bet you didn't even know God was in there. Who is this God person
anyway, and how are Canadian courts supposed to know what he wants?
The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations. Is this what
you want as the fundamental basis behind the justice system in Canada?
The Constitution as currently written makes it legally necessary. Even
though courts have usually completely ignored this God thingy when
rendering judgements, why the heck is It in there anyway, and what
good can come of it?
If you wish to help please print out the petition and get as many
people as you can to sign it. NOTE: In order to be legally valid, the
petition sheets must have slots for 25 signatures, although they don't
all need to be filled in. Please make sure your printer didn't break
the page.
You can find a link to a printable petition here:
http://www.telemark.net/~randallg/petition.htm
Then snail mail it to:
The Canadian Atheist
PO Box 41613 - 923 12th Street
New Westminster, BC V3M 6L1
You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
present the petition to the House of Commons.
The Canadian Atheist Society publishes a humourous and valuable
quarterly newsletter. It is well worth supporting for a $25
subscription. They have the beginnings of a website at
http://home.bc.rogers.wave.ca/rblessin/
For more information contact Ray Blessin, publisher of the Canadian
Atheist, at 604.525.3311 or rble...@home.com
randall g =%^)> #320 - only 346 short
mailto:rand...@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg
When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky
When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea
When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me
- James (a band from England, not my name)
Paul Keenleyside
Peter B. Macdonald wrote:
>
> randall g wrote:
> >
> > Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
> > =====================================================
> >
> > The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
> > remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
> > recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
> > and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
> > Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
> > all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
Actually it was. Canada was formulated under the BNA act in 1867 which was
drafted under British law, which recongises the supremacy of God.
>
> Well, you won't get much support for this idea from me.
> I helped draft the constitution of the B. C. Conservative Party.
> It reads in part as follows;
>
> "A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
> freedom of every
> individual and family to seek to achieve their God-given potential.
>
> It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
>
> the principle of ethical behaviour;
> the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
> the principle of caring about the people and the world around us."
>
> Good luck with your cause.
I'm sure St. Peter (the real St. Peter not Peter Mcdonald) will mark randall g in his
book about that one, don't you think PM? This guy doesn't get to sit next you and me on
my cloud, and I wonder if his halo will shine like yours and mine.
Yessiree I'd sure like to be an assistant to St. Peter when this guy checks in, and
a book check is done on him.
Bill K.
> I'm sure St. Peter (the real St. Peter not Peter Mcdonald) will mark randall g in his
> book about that one, don't you think PM? This guy doesn't get to sit next you and me on
> my cloud, and I wonder if his halo will shine like yours and mine.
>
> Yessiree I'd sure like to be an assistant to St. Peter when this guy checks in, and
> a book check is done on him.
Your music may be my noise
Your food may be my poison
Your treasure may be my trash
Your heaven may be my hell
Your god may be my devil
It's all a matter of individual perception and taste.
--
Bill K. ( b i l l k @ r o g e r s . w a v e . c a )
*** WARNING *** All unsolicited bulk e-mail received at this address
will be promptly reported to the sender's system administrator, and to
law enforcement officials whenever applicable.
Gregory Gyetko
Paul Keenleyside wrote:
>
> Peter B. Macdonald wrote:
> >
> > randall g wrote:
> > >
> > > Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
> > > =====================================================
> > >
> > > The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
> > > remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
> > > recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
> > > and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
> > > Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
> > > all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
>
> Actually it was. Canada was formulated under the BNA act in 1867 which was
> drafted under British law, which recongises the supremacy of God.
> >
> > Well, you won't get much support for this idea from me.
> > I helped draft the constitution of the B. C. Conservative Party.
> > It reads in part as follows;
> >
> > "A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
> > freedom of every
> > individual and family to seek to achieve their God-given potential.
> >
> > It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
> >
> > the principle of ethical behaviour;
> > the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
> > the principle of caring about the people and the world around us."
> >
> I'm sure St. Peter (the real St. Peter not Peter Mcdonald) will mark randall g in his
> book about that one, don't you think PM? This guy doesn't get to sit next you and me on
> my cloud, and I wonder if his halo will shine like yours and mine.
>
> Yessiree I'd sure like to be an assistant to St. Peter when this guy checks in, and
> a book check is done on him
If you would care to provide any kind of evidence for this "St. Peter's"
existence, I'd be pleased to here it.
As of yet, even if I were to believe your bible, I haven't noticed any
lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
set of gates.
Greg.
--
alt.atheism Atheist #911
"I'd worship Satan, but I'm going to hell anyway,
so why waste my time?"
EAC homepage: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/9916/
Cameron Bennett
On Thu, 21 May 1998 05:16:44 GMT, rand...@nospam.com (randall g)
gathered together some electrons and arranged them to say:
>Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
>=====================================================
<much crap deleted>
Surely you must have something better to do.
>You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
>present the petition to the House of Commons.
And so should he.
CB
Cameron Bennett
email: cs...@NOSPAM.torfree.net
remove the NOSPAM. to reply
** Man is incomplete until he is married...then he is TRULY finished **
Paul Keenleyside
Gregory Gyetko wrote:
>
> Paul Keenleyside wrote:
> >
> > Peter B. Macdonald wrote:
> > >
> > > randall g wrote:
> > > >
> > > > =====================================================
> > > >
It's "hear", boy not "here". Peter was one of the Apostles. Do your homework.
Where wre you on Sundays when you were a kid?
> As of yet, even if I were to believe your bible, I haven't noticed any
> lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
> set of gates.
Oh he's up there all right. Once you arrive at the gates, turn right, and he'll be looking
you up in his book of deeds. Before you get your cloud, halo harp and wings.
But, if you're going on the "down" escalator, I'm sure Lucifer will have a few
things cookin' on the grill for you when you step off it. Just ask for medium rare or well
done...
Paul Keenleyside
> >You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
> >present the petition to the House of Commons.
>
> And so should he.
Well good luck on that one. Private member's Bills rarely pass and since
amendments to the Constitution require assent from the provinces, good luck
for this one happening.
But as always, Robinson wants the limelight like a moth is attracted to a lamp.
Just another publicity excercise for Trendy Svendy.
Joseph Lockhart
"You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
present the petition to the House of Commons."
Ah yes... good old Svend... I'm not surprised..
This is a man that believes the following:
1) He believes that a woman should have the right to murder her baby
under the guise of 祖hoice.'
2) He believes that we should have the right to murder grandma and
grandpa under the guise of ç–Žssisted suicide.'
3) He was in favor of a private members bill that would lower the
consent age of anal penetration from 18 to 14. Good for him, because
now he is in a relationship with a man alleged to be half his age.
4) He is in favor of banning parents from spanking their children.
So let's get this right...
Here we have a homosexual (who has never explained how his name was
found in a book of a man who sold young boys to older men) He wants us
to be able to murder our children, kill off old people and sodomize boys
as young as 14, but he doesn't want us to be able to spank our
children.... What's wrong with this picture?
Now Svend wants the word 賎od' removed from a worthless document
misnamed a 舛onstitution.' By the way he also in the past wanted to have
the National Anthem changed because it was gender specific.
Sorry people there is a God, and he has a way to deal with homosexuals
like Svend. But since society has ignored the word of God, He will do it
for us. Don't forget the following: A.I.D.S.
Anally Inflicted Death Sentence
Another Infected Dying Sodomite
You can legislate homosexuality as 創ormal' all you want, but you will
never make it fact!!
Lev, 20 v 13
Gregory Gyetko
Paul Keenleyside wrote:
>
>
>
> > As of yet, even if I were to believe your bible, I haven't noticed any
> > lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
> > set of gates.
>
> Oh he's up there all right. Once you arrive at the gates, turn right, and he'll be looking
> you up in his book of deeds. Before you get your cloud, halo harp and wings.
> But, if you're going on the "down" escalator, I'm sure Lucifer will have a few
> things cookin' on the grill for you when you step off it. Just ask for medium rare or well
> done...
Again, where in the bible does it say anything about this?
randall g
>randall g wrote:
>>
>> Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
>> =====================================================
>>
>> The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
>> remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
>> recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
>> and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
>> Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
>> all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
>
>Well, you won't get much support for this idea from me.
>I helped draft the constitution of the B. C. Conservative Party.
>It reads in part as follows;
>
>"A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
>freedom of every
>individual and family to seek to achieve their God-given potential.
>
>It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
>
> the principle of ethical behaviour;
> the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
> the principle of caring about the people and the world around us."
What has any of that got to do with God?
>Good luck with your cause.
Thanks.
>Regards,
>
>Peter B. Macdonald
>
>Have you read 'TAXCAP' lately?
>We Separated Church from State didn't we? - Why not State from Taxation?
>Home Page for TAXCAP
>http://www.netci.com/taxcap
randall g
On Thu, 21 May 1998 00:29:25 -0700, Paul Keenleyside
<Lotus...@bc.com> wrote:
>Peter B. Macdonald wrote:
>>
>> randall g wrote:
>> >
>> > Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
>> > =====================================================
>> >
>> > The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
>> > remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
>> > recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
>> > and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
>> > Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
>> > all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
>
>Actually it was. Canada was formulated under the BNA act in 1867 which was
>drafted under British law, which recongises the supremacy of God.
Yet it is clear that the "supremacy of God", whatever that means, is
not used as a basis of any kind in the operation of the country.
>> Well, you won't get much support for this idea from me.
>> I helped draft the constitution of the B. C. Conservative Party.
>> It reads in part as follows;
>>
>> "A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
>> freedom of every
>> individual and family to seek to achieve their God-given potential.
>>
>> It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
>>
>> the principle of ethical behaviour;
>> the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
>> the principle of caring about the people and the world around us."
>>
>> Good luck with your cause.
>
>I'm sure St. Peter (the real St. Peter not Peter Mcdonald) will mark randall g in his
>book about that one, don't you think PM? This guy doesn't get to sit next you and me on
>my cloud, and I wonder if his halo will shine like yours and mine.
>
>Yessiree I'd sure like to be an assistant to St. Peter when this guy checks in, and
>a book check is done on him.
"Why the FUCK did you allow so much suffering you ASSHOLE? Not just
human suffering but the animal kingdom as well. You must be one sick
son of a bitch to devise such a scheme. And I suppose the murdering
cannibal, Jeffery Dahmer, who became 'born again' is in heaven, while
Gandhi burns in hell? What a DISGUSTING EXCUSE for a "god" you are.
FUCK off."
- me to God, on Judgement Day
randall g
The depth and breadth of your ignorance, bigotry and hate astounds me.
Surely this is a troll. People like this can't possibly exist.
randall g
On Thu, 21 May 1998 14:56:05 GMT, cs...@torfree.net (Cameron Bennett)
wrote:
>On Thu, 21 May 1998 05:16:44 GMT, rand...@nospam.com (randall g)
>gathered together some electrons and arranged them to say:
>
>>Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
>>=====================================================
>
><much crap deleted>
>
>Surely you must have something better to do.
Of course I do.
>>You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
>>present the petition to the House of Commons.
>
>And so should he.
Whatever.
>CB
>
>Cameron Bennett
>email: cs...@NOSPAM.torfree.net
>remove the NOSPAM. to reply
>
>** Man is incomplete until he is married...then he is TRULY finished **
randall g
>> >You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
>> >present the petition to the House of Commons.
>>
>> And so should he.
>
>Well good luck on that one. Private member's Bills rarely pass and since
>amendments to the Constitution require assent from the provinces, good luck
>for this one happening.
It undoubtedly will not. However it is something that a number of
Canadians believe should happen, and this is the only thing to do
about it. If you want to complain about people wasting their lives
persuing hopeless causes go yell at the prolifers.
>But as always, Robinson wants the limelight like a moth is attracted to a lamp.
>Just another publicity excercise for Trendy Svendy.
I am sure he actually believes it should be done.
And I really don't think the publicity on this issue is going to help
him much at all. Most Canadians get at least a small amount of
emotional comfort from the god concept and probably won't appreciate
anyone messing with it.
Gregory Gyetko
Joseph Lockhart wrote:
> "You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
> present the petition to the House of Commons."
>
> Ah yes... good old Svend... I'm not surprised..
>
> This is a man that believes the following:
>
> 1) He believes that a woman should have the right to murder her baby
> under the guise of ?choice.'
It's called 'abortion' not murder, because the 'baby' isn't alive (i.e. it
has no brain, no central nervous system, ergo no self-awareness)
> 2) He believes that we should have the right to murder grandma and
> grandpa under the guise of ?assisted suicide.'
Whereas people in pain should have to prolong their agony for as long as
possible? This is totally inconsistent with your view that heaven exists.
> 3) He was in favor of a private members bill that would lower the
> consent age of anal penetration from 18 to 14. Good for him, because
> now he is in a relationship with a man alleged to be half his age.
The current legal age for sexual activity is already 14 years old. Why
would he need to make a law specifically about anal sex. I think you're
gargling.
> 4) He is in favor of banning parents from spanking their children.
That's interesting. And do you have the context from which you took this
quote?
> So let's get this right...
> Here we have a homosexual
Nothing wrong with being gay. It's usually decided at birth.
> (who has never explained how his name was found in a book of a man who
> sold young boys to older men)
Uh, gee, a pimp puts a famous man's name in his customer list and we should
take him at his word. How about I make a list of strip joint frequenters
and stick your name on the list with a hefty bar tab? Hardly good
evidence.
> He wants us to be able to murder our children, kill off old people and
> sodomize boys
> as young as 14, but he doesn't want us to be able to spank our
> children.... What's wrong with this picture?
The part where you lie and misrepresent his views, that's what.
> Now Svend wants the word ?God' removed from a worthless document
> misnamed a ?Constitution.'
This 'god' character of yours is responsible for a lot of crap. You want a
religious nation? Look at Pakistan. Blasphemy is punishable by death.
You want to go that way?
> By the way he also in the past wanted to have the National Anthem changed
> because it was gender specific.
Yikes, how dare he teach that the women who have died for their country
deserve mentioning!!!
> Sorry people there is a God,
Evidence please.
> and he has a way to deal with homosexuals like Svend.
Yeah, the EXACT SAME WAY he deals with people who wear clothes made of two
different fabrics. Read your stupid bible before you spew it out here.
> But since society has ignored the word of God, He will do it for us.
> Don't forget the following: A.I.D.S.
>
> Anally Inflicted Death Sentence
> Another Infected Dying Sodomite
If Aids is a disease made for killing gays, then god has poor aim. He ends
up killing a lot hemophiliacs, accident victims and entirely misses
lesbians.
> You can legislate homosexuality as ?normal' all you want, but you will
> never make it fact!!
>
> Lev, 20 v 13
Read three or four verses back. Wearing certain clothes is an equal
abomination.
chr...@interlog.com.nospam
randall g <rand...@nospam.com> wrote:
: Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
: =====================================================
<tons of garbage deleted>
Sure, thats on the top of all our lists on Constitutional change for
Canada.. get a life, we got more important things to worry about.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chrys Pelegris | Toronto, Canada | chr...@interlog.com
"The Fixer" | ===__-+- | http://www.scar.utoronto.ca/~93pelegr
If responding by email. remove ".NOSPAM" from my email address.
randall g
On 21 May 1998 14:21:47 -0400, chr...@interlog.com.NOSPAM wrote:
>randall g <rand...@nospam.com> wrote:
>: Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
>: =====================================================
><tons of garbage deleted>
>
>Sure, thats on the top of all our lists on Constitutional change for
>Canada.. get a life, we got more important things to worry about.
Yeah, like spending our days picketing abortion clinics.
Bill K.
Gregory Gyetko wrote:
>
> Joseph Lockhart wrote:
> > Sorry people there is a God,
>
> Evidence please.
The only evidence Joseph needs is that it is the god that HE believes
in. The god that was taught to him by his parents and Sunday school
teachers from an early age. Whatever he believes is the universal
absolute for everyone. ;)
> > and he has a way to deal with homosexuals like Svend.
>
> Yeah, the EXACT SAME WAY he deals with people who wear clothes made of two
> different fabrics. Read your stupid bible before you spew it out here.
Ha ha! Good one.
> > But since society has ignored the word of God, He will do it for us.
> > Don't forget the following: A.I.D.S.
> >
> > Anally Inflicted Death Sentence
> > Another Infected Dying Sodomite
>
> If Aids is a disease made for killing gays, then god has poor aim. He ends
> up killing a lot hemophiliacs, accident victims and entirely misses
> lesbians.
HAHAHAHAHAAAA! Excellent comeback.
But you see, God and the Christians need the lesbians. They need them
for the lesbian porno videos that they can jerk off to while watching in
their privacy. :) :) :) :) :)
John Savard
rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>On Thu, 21 May 1998 11:30:47 -0700, Joseph Lockhart
><ec...@mb.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>>"You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
>>present the petition to the House of Commons."
>>Ah yes... good old Svend... I'm not surprised..
>>This is a man that believes the following:
>>1) He believes that a woman should have the right to murder her baby
>>under the guise of ‘choice.'
>>2) He believes that we should have the right to murder grandma and
>>grandpa under the guise of ‘assisted suicide.'
>>3) He was in favor of a private members bill that would lower the
>>consent age of anal penetration from 18 to 14. Good for him, because
>>now he is in a relationship with a man alleged to be half his age.
>>4) He is in favor of banning parents from spanking their children.
(other stuff snipped which admittedly was outrageous from more
perspectives)
>The depth and breadth of your ignorance, bigotry and hate astounds me.
>Surely this is a troll. People like this can't possibly exist.
Plenty of people who don't believe that homosexual acts between
consenting adults are evil, or that AIDS is Divine retribution for
same, would agree in finding the above four points good reason of
disapproving of the politics of the honorable member for Burnaby B.C..
John Savard
John Savard
rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
>country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
>Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
>and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
>record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations.
Surely you mean to work on a _Saturday_, or, more precisely, between
sunset Friday evening and sunset Saturday evening.
John Savard
randall g
Hey, I'm not here to plug Svend (in a manner of speaking). I greatly
respect his stance on intellectual freedom and human rights, though
not even that would persuade me to vote for his party, unless perhaps
I was actually in his riding.
However if you aren't going to publicly display ignorance, bigotry and
hate, then you shouldn't take my response to the previous post
personally.
>John Savard
Rev Chuck
And so even the third world bends under the yoke of theism as it yearns
to be free...
David wrote:
>
> This guy has FAR TOO MUCH TIME ON HIS HANDS! Do we also have to take "God
> keep our Land" out of the national anthem? Ya, great idea. This guy should
> get a job and quit loitering on the net. He's using up valuable bandwidth
> with gibberish that he doesn't even understand.
>
> randall g wrote in message <3568b5b6....@news.bctel.net>...
> >Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
> >=====================================================
> >
> >The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
> >remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
> >recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
> >and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
> >Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
> >all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
> >
> >Here is a link to the complete text of the Canadian Charter of Rights
> >and Freedoms. You'll find the God part right at the top.
> >
> >http://insight.mcmaster.ca:80/org/efc/pages/law/charter/
> >
> >I'll bet you didn't even know God was in there. Who is this God person
> >anyway, and how are Canadian courts supposed to know what he wants?
> >The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
> >country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
> >Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
> >and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
> >record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations. Is this what
> >you want as the fundamental basis behind the justice system in Canada?
> >The Constitution as currently written makes it legally necessary. Even
> >though courts have usually completely ignored this God thingy when
> >rendering judgements, why the heck is It in there anyway, and what
> >good can come of it?
> >
> >If you wish to help please print out the petition and get as many
> >people as you can to sign it. NOTE: In order to be legally valid, the
> >petition sheets must have slots for 25 signatures, although they don't
> >all need to be filled in. Please make sure your printer didn't break
> >the page.
> >
> >You can find a link to a printable petition here:
> >
> >http://www.telemark.net/~randallg/petition.htm
> >
> >Then snail mail it to:
> >
> >The Canadian Atheist
> >PO Box 41613 - 923 12th Street
> >New Westminster, BC V3M 6L1
> >
> >You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
> >present the petition to the House of Commons.
> >
> >The Canadian Atheist Society publishes a humourous and valuable
> >quarterly newsletter. It is well worth supporting for a $25
> >subscription. They have the beginnings of a website at
> >http://home.bc.rogers.wave.ca/rblessin/
> >
> >For more information contact Ray Blessin, publisher of the Canadian
> >Atheist, at 604.525.3311 or rble...@home.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
Eric Mills
randall g,rand...@nospam.com,UUCP writes:
The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
It's a euphemism. It means, variously, the supremacy of --
* Europeans over aboriginal people
* whites over non-whites
* men over women
* rich over poor
* etc.
Whereas the British have what used to be called an unwritten constitution,
Canada -- in this respect -- has its euphemistic constitution.
Eric Mills
This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
> >present the petition to the House of Commons.
Too bad Broadbent went along with this theocratic nonsense.
(It got unanimous consent in the Commons.)
Glad there's still a free-thinker in the New Theocratic Party.
Eric Mills
ecd...@mb.sympatico.ca,UUCP writes:
He was in favor of a private members bill that would lower the
consent age of anal penetration
Too bad spam filters don't delete files like this example
of banal penetration of newsgroups.
randall g
On Thu, 21 May 1998 22:04:17 GMT, jsa...@tenMAPSONeerf.edmonton.ab.ca
(John Savard) wrote:
>rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>
>>The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
>>country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
>>Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
>>and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
>>record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations.
>
>Surely you mean to work on a _Saturday_, or, more precisely, between
>sunset Friday evening and sunset Saturday evening.
>
>John Savard
It's the CHRISTIAN god that Canada is founded on, and HIS sacred day
is Sunday.
Who cares what the Jews think? They are blasphemers.
(hopefully this helps illustrate the uselessness of the god phrase)
erikc
On Thu, 21 May 1998 11:30:47 -0700
Joseph Lockhart <ec...@mb.sympatico.ca>
-- origin: alt.atheism:
[===]
>|Sorry people there is a God, and he has a way to deal with homosexuals
>|like Svend. But since society has ignored the word of God, He will do it
>|for us. Don't forget the following: A.I.D.S.
>|
>|Anally Inflicted Death Sentence
>|Another Infected Dying Sodomite
<sarcasm>
Such love. Such tolerance. Such a message of peace.
</sarcasm>
I hope you die real soon. Preferably in a slow and agonising manner.
Fucks like you deserve it.
Erikc (WA #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
| "The Truth against the World."
| -- Bardic Motto
erikc
On Thu, 21 May 1998 17:16:29 GMT
rand...@nospam.com (randall g)
-- origin: alt.atheism:
>|On Wed, 20 May 1998 23:20:33 -0700, "Peter B. Macdonald"
>|<pbmac...@netci.com> wrote:
>|
>|>randall g wrote:
>|>>
>|>> =====================================================
>|>>
>|>> remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
>|>> recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
>|>> and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
>|>> Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
>|>> all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
>|>
>|>I helped draft the constitution of the B. C. Conservative Party.
>|>It reads in part as follows;
>|>
>|>"A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
>|>freedom of every
>|>individual and family to seek to achieve their God-given potential.
>|>
>|>It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
>|>
>|> the principle of ethical behaviour;
>|> the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
>|> the principle of caring about the people and the world around us."
>|
Absolutely nothing. Ethics, logic and compassion are all anti-xian.
Bruce Becker
In article <3564f991....@news.insync.net>,
erikc <firewevr...@insync.net> wrote:
|On Thu, 21 May 1998 11:30:47 -0700
|Joseph Lockhart <ec...@mb.sympatico.ca>
|-- origin: alt.atheism:
|
|[===]
|
|>|Sorry people there is a God, and he has a way to deal with homosexuals
|>|like Svend. But since society has ignored the word of God, He will do it
|>|for us. Don't forget the following: A.I.D.S.
|>|
|>|Anally Inflicted Death Sentence
|>|Another Infected Dying Sodomite
|
|<sarcasm>
|Such love. Such tolerance. Such a message of peace.
|</sarcasm>
|
|I hope you die real soon. Preferably in a slow and agonising manner.
|Fucks like you deserve it.
<sarcasm>
Such love. Such tolerance. Such a message of peace.
</sarcasm>
I hope you die real soon. Preferably in a slow and agonising manner.
Fucks like you deserve it.
8^) ...I think...
--
,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario 1 416 699 1868
a /i/ Internet: b...@gts.org Uucp: ...!gts!bdb
`\o\-e "When did the Me Generation become the meme generation?"
_< /_ - Mimi Pond, historian
Gregory Gyetko
randall g wrote:
> On Thu, 21 May 1998 22:04:17 GMT, jsa...@tenMAPSONeerf.edmonton.ab.ca
> (John Savard) wrote:
>
> >rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
> >
> >>The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
> >>country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
> >>Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
> >>and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
> >>record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations.
> >
> >Surely you mean to work on a _Saturday_, or, more precisely, between
> >sunset Friday evening and sunset Saturday evening.
> >
> >John Savard
>
> It's the CHRISTIAN god that Canada is founded on, and HIS sacred day
> is Sunday.
>
> Who cares what the Jews think? They are blasphemers.
Yeah, that and they killed Jesus.
(That's called dark sarcasm)
David
This guy has FAR TOO MUCH TIME ON HIS HANDS! Do we also have to take "God
keep our Land" out of the national anthem? Ya, great idea. This guy should
get a job and quit loitering on the net. He's using up valuable bandwidth
with gibberish that he doesn't even understand.
randall g wrote in message <3568b5b6....@news.bctel.net>...
>Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
>=====================================================
>
>The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
>remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
>recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
>and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
>Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
>all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
>
>Here is a link to the complete text of the Canadian Charter of Rights
>and Freedoms. You'll find the God part right at the top.
>
>http://insight.mcmaster.ca:80/org/efc/pages/law/charter/
>
>I'll bet you didn't even know God was in there. Who is this God person
>anyway, and how are Canadian courts supposed to know what he wants?
>The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
>country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
>Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
>and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
>record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations. Is this what
>you want as the fundamental basis behind the justice system in Canada?
>The Constitution as currently written makes it legally necessary. Even
>though courts have usually completely ignored this God thingy when
>rendering judgements, why the heck is It in there anyway, and what
>good can come of it?
>
>If you wish to help please print out the petition and get as many
>people as you can to sign it. NOTE: In order to be legally valid, the
>petition sheets must have slots for 25 signatures, although they don't
>all need to be filled in. Please make sure your printer didn't break
>the page.
>
>You can find a link to a printable petition here:
>
>http://www.telemark.net/~randallg/petition.htm
>
>Then snail mail it to:
>
>The Canadian Atheist
>PO Box 41613 - 923 12th Street
>New Westminster, BC V3M 6L1
>
>You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
>present the petition to the House of Commons.
>
>The Canadian Atheist Society publishes a humourous and valuable
>quarterly newsletter. It is well worth supporting for a $25
>subscription. They have the beginnings of a website at
>http://home.bc.rogers.wave.ca/rblessin/
>
>For more information contact Ray Blessin, publisher of the Canadian
>Atheist, at 604.525.3311 or rble...@home.com
>
>
>
>
>
Gregory Gyetko
David wrote:
> This guy has FAR TOO MUCH TIME ON HIS HANDS! Do we also have to take "God
> keep our Land" out of the national anthem? Ya, great idea. This guy should
> get a job and quit loitering on the net. He's using up valuable bandwidth
> with gibberish that he doesn't even understand.
2 questions m'boy:
1) What is this 'god' thing?
2) How can it help keep our land?
As far as I can tell, the keeping of our land (presumably our freedom and way
of life) is done by *people*. Some of them vote, some of them in politics and
a bunch of them went and died and killed in different places for our land.
Didn't notice any god person helping out while they charged those gun mounts.
Peter B. Macdonald
* *Peter B. Macdonald wrote:
* *
* *"A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
* *freedom of every individual and family to seek to achieve their
* * God-given potential.
* *
* *It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
* *
* * the principle of ethical behaviour;
* * the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
* * the principle of caring about the people and the world around
us."
*
* randall g wrote:
* What has any of that got to do with God?
If I were blind, I imagine that it would be next to impossible to fully
explain a rose to me. If I were deaf -- music.
If you have to ask what is the connection between the first statement
and the next three, then everything that I could say or write about the
subject would be meaningless.
But since you are so sure that there is no God - then maybe you could
describe to me, how to make a machine turn itself on..... and we can
both become millionaires.
Regards,
Peter B. Macdonald
Have you read "TAXCAP" lately?
randall g
>* *Peter B. Macdonald wrote:
>* *
>* *"A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
>* *freedom of every individual and family to seek to achieve their
>* * God-given potential.
>* *
>* *It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
>* *
>* * the principle of ethical behaviour;
>* * the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
>* * the principle of caring about the people and the world around
>us."
>*
>* randall g wrote:
>
>* What has any of that got to do with God?
>
>If I were blind, I imagine that it would be next to impossible to fully
>explain a rose to me. If I were deaf -- music.
Oh, and without belief in YOUR GOD, I cannot achieve or understand
principles of ethical behaviour. You have no idea how sanctimonious,
condescending and insulting that is. Do not assume I need to be
threatened with eternal torture to act ethically.
>If you have to ask what is the connection between the first statement
>and the next three, then everything that I could say or write about the
>subject would be meaningless.
Plenty has been written about ethics with a natural basis not a
Christian one, and it sure doesn't lead to slavery, oppression of
women, witch burning, and the persecution of other religions and
minorities of all kinds.
It is only due to NON-religious pressures that these things have been
largely alleviated in our society today. No thanks to GOD.
But I guess they didn't mention that in Sunday school.
>But since you are so sure that there is no God - then maybe you could
>describe to me, how to make a machine turn itself on..... and we can
>both become millionaires.
It's mostly been figured out. Educate yourself.
randall g
>* *Peter B. Macdonald wrote:
>* *
>* *"A British Columbia Conservative philosophy means believing in the
>* *freedom of every individual and family to seek to achieve their
>* * God-given potential.
>* *
>* *It means requiring each of us to attempt to follow:
>* *
>* * the principle of ethical behaviour;
>* * the principle of acting in a logical manner; and
>* * the principle of caring about the people and the world around
>us."
>*
>* randall g wrote:
>
>* What has any of that got to do with God?
>
>If I were blind, I imagine that it would be next to impossible to fully
>explain a rose to me. If I were deaf -- music.
Oh, and without belief in YOUR GOD, I cannot achieve or understand
principles of ethical behaviour. You have no idea how sanctimonious,
condescending and insulting that is.
>If you have to ask what is the connection between the first statement
>and the next three, then everything that I could say or write about the
>subject would be meaningless.
Plenty has been written about ethics without a Christian basis, and it
sure doesn't lead to slavery, oppression, witch burning, and the
persecution of other religions and minorities of all kinds.
>But since you are so sure that there is no God - then maybe you could
>describe to me, how to make a machine turn itself on..... and we can
>both become millionaires.
randall g
On Fri, 22 May 1998 10:17:37 -0400, "David" <dart...@interlog.com>
wrote:
>This guy has FAR TOO MUCH TIME ON HIS HANDS!
Never enough...
>Do we also have to take "God
>keep our Land" out of the national anthem?
What, is that still in there ???
>Ya, great idea. This guy should
>get a job and quit loitering on the net. He's using up valuable bandwidth
>with gibberish that he doesn't even understand.
Ya! Hyuck hyuck. Ya got me. I've got no job, pay no taxes, and prattle
gibberish I don't understand.
Looks like I'm your worst nightmare, moron.
>randall g wrote in message <3568b5b6....@news.bctel.net>...
>>Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
>>=====================================================
>>
Kalle Helenius
Paul Keenleyside wrote in message <356445...@bc.com>...
>Gregory Gyetko wrote:
<snipo>
>> If you would care to provide any kind of evidence for this "St. Peter's"
>> existence, I'd be pleased to here it.
>
>It's "hear", boy not "here". Peter was one of the Apostles. Do your
homework.
>Where wre you on Sundays when you were a kid?
Oooh, a spell lame! Actually it's "It's "hear", boy, not "here"". Ta. You
were obviously in church being brainwashed. And another. It's were, not wre.
Boy. Heh.
>> As of yet, even if I were to believe your bible, I haven't noticed any
>> lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
>> set of gates.
>
>Oh he's up there all right. Once you arrive at the gates, turn right, and
he'll be looking
>you up in his book of deeds. Before you get your cloud, halo harp and
wings.
>But, if you're going on the "down" escalator, I'm sure Lucifer will have a
few
>things cookin' on the grill for you when you step off it. Just ask for
medium rare or well
>done...
Another stupid ignorant hickey shithead who hasn't got a fact to put into
the debate, but has to make noise anyway. Fuck that noise. Why don't you go
really read that precious bible of yours, before making statements about
it's contents, and making judgements about who is going your imaginary hell.
Holier-than-thou fuckups like you make me sick. Is your slate so clean that
you feel confident?
No. 907, Shop Attendant, Clue-shop for Theists,
Logic section, laid off because lack of business, suing
EAC for severance pay. Remove number to reply.
Peter B. Macdonald
> >* What has any of that got to do with God?
> >
> >If I were blind, I imagine that it would be next to impossible to fully
> >explain a rose to me. If I were deaf -- music.
>
> Oh, and without belief in YOUR GOD,
And who said anything about "YOUR GOD" - I did not. I used the word
"God"
in a sense of any "God" - your choice!
There are many different Gods to as many different people.
I cannot achieve or understand
> principles of ethical behaviour. You have no idea how sanctimonious,
> condescending and insulting that is. Do not assume I need to be
> threatened with eternal torture to act ethically.
And who said anything about a threatening God - I did not.
>
> >If you have to ask what is the connection between the first statement
> >and the next three, then everything that I could say or write about the
> >subject would be meaningless.
>
> Plenty has been written about ethics with a natural basis not a
> Christian one, and it sure doesn't lead to slavery, oppression of
> women, witch burning, and the persecution of other religions and
> minorities of all kinds.
>
> It is only due to NON-religious pressures that these things have been
> largely alleviated in our society today. No thanks to GOD.
>
> But I guess they didn't mention that in Sunday school.
I think that you are trying to put words into this thread and
then acting as if they are my thoughts and words.
Your ranting is uncalled for.
>
> >But since you are so sure that there is no God - then maybe you could
> >describe to me, how to make a machine turn itself on..... and we can
> >both become millionaires.
>
> It's mostly been figured out. Educate yourself.
Then you do not understand the problem - and I suggest that you give
my question some more thought rather than present glib answers - or
rather non-answers.
randall g
>> >* What has any of that got to do with God?
>> >
>> >If I were blind, I imagine that it would be next to impossible to fully
>> >explain a rose to me. If I were deaf -- music.
>>
>> Oh, and without belief in YOUR GOD,
>
>And who said anything about "YOUR GOD" - I did not. I used the word
>"God"
>in a sense of any "God" - your choice!
>
>There are many different Gods to as many different people.
I choose no god at all. Does that make me unable to act ethically?
Does that make me unwelcome in this country?
Your analogy implies that without "god" or whatever you mean by that,
this would be the case.
Answer the question.
Or what if I choose Quetzlcoatl? He demands 20,000 virgins to be
sacrificed every year or the crops won't grow. Perhaps we should base
our justice system on that one, what do you think?
>I cannot achieve or understand
>> principles of ethical behaviour. You have no idea how sanctimonious,
>> condescending and insulting that is. Do not assume I need to be
>> threatened with eternal torture to act ethically.
>
>And who said anything about a threatening God - I did not.
Hmm. Can you think of a god that does not threaten? And don't try
Jehovah; there's plenty of smoking gun evidence of *that* god's
threats.
>> >If you have to ask what is the connection between the first statement
>> >and the next three, then everything that I could say or write about the
>> >subject would be meaningless.
>>
>> Plenty has been written about ethics with a natural basis not a
>> Christian one, and it sure doesn't lead to slavery, oppression of
>> women, witch burning, and the persecution of other religions and
>> minorities of all kinds.
>>
>> It is only due to NON-religious pressures that these things have been
>> largely alleviated in our society today. No thanks to GOD.
>>
>> But I guess they didn't mention that in Sunday school.
>
>I think that you are trying to put words into this thread and
>then acting as if they are my thoughts and words.
>
>Your ranting is uncalled for.
Sorry, I mistook you for a Christian.
>> >But since you are so sure that there is no God - then maybe you could
>> >describe to me, how to make a machine turn itself on..... and we can
>> >both become millionaires.
>>
>> It's mostly been figured out. Educate yourself.
>>
>> [ snipped reference to talk.origins website replaced]
>> www.talkorigins.com
>
>Then you do not understand the problem - and I suggest that you give
>my question some more thought rather than present glib answers - or
>rather non-answers.
Perhaps I misunderstood your riddle.
Try stating your point clearly.
gap...@vcn.bc.ca
rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
RG> Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
RG> =====================================================
RG>
RG> The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
RG> remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
RG> recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
RG> and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
RG> Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
RG> all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
How so an insult? It's an historical statement, as worded. If it said,
"Whereas Canada is founded upon principles[...] and thus SHOULD BE..." I could
see athiests and other non-Christians being upset, but the way the Constitution
is worded is an acknowledgement of history. It's your type that are happy to
practice revisionism in all its nastiness upon all sorts of basic facts. The
founding members of Canada were, for the most part Christians, with a strong
faith in the God of the Christian Bible.
Deny God all you wish, but don't deny historical fact.
RG> I'll bet you didn't even know God was in there. Who is this God person
RG> anyway, and how are Canadian courts supposed to know what he wants?
RG> The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
RG> country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
RG> Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
RG> and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
RG> record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations. Is this what
RG> you want as the fundamental basis behind the justice system in Canada?
RG> The Constitution as currently written makes it legally necessary. Even
RG> though courts have usually completely ignored this God thingy when
RG> rendering judgements, why the heck is It in there anyway, and what
RG> good can come of it?
Try looking at those points in their proper context. For a particular people
at a particular time there were some very strict rules laid down(that they
willingly asked for and accepted.)
It's like a parent who is a school teacher, and has one of his/her own children
in the class, generally the parent/teacher will be harder on his/her own
children than the class at large. . .
Your servant,
<+]::-)
"Cyberpope", servant to Y'shua the King!
*NEW* e-mail: "gap...@vcn.bc.ca"
--
Your servant,
<+]::-)
(Cyberpope, servant to Y'shua the King!)
Peter B. Macdonald
> >I think that you are trying to put words into this thread and
> >then acting as if they are my thoughts and words.
> >
> >Your ranting is uncalled for.
>
> Sorry, I mistook you for a Christian.
There you go again - assuming! I made no reference to Christian or any
other.
>
> >> >But since you are so sure that there is no God - then maybe you could
> >> >describe to me, how to make a machine turn itself on..... and we can
> >> >both become millionaires.
> >>
> >> It's mostly been figured out. Educate yourself.
> >>
> >> [ snipped reference to talk.origins website replaced]
> >> www.talkorigins.com
> >
> >Then you do not understand the problem - and I suggest that you give
> >my question some more thought rather than present glib answers - or
> >rather non-answers.
>
> Perhaps I misunderstood your riddle.
> Try stating your point clearly.
I'd be glad to if I you wish to enter into serious conversation about
God as he/she applies to the above stated problem (riddle), but I think
that this thread is not the place to do it. We have strayed from
politics to philosophy.
Drop me an e-mail with your address - or suggest another newsgroup and
I'd be glad to go at it.
Regards,
Peter.
John Savard
rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>On Thu, 21 May 1998 22:04:17 GMT, jsa...@tenMAPSONeerf.edmonton.ab.ca
>(John Savard) wrote:
>>rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>>>The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
>>>country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
>>>Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
>>>and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
>>>record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations.
>>Surely you mean to work on a _Saturday_, or, more precisely, between
>>sunset Friday evening and sunset Saturday evening.
>It's the CHRISTIAN god that Canada is founded on, and HIS sacred day
>is Sunday.
Well, if you're going to claim that it is "documented" that Jehovah
decrees it a capital crime to "wear garments of mixed fabrics", you
must be using the Old Testament (specifically, the book of Leviticus)
as your reference source.
Of course, Christians believe that He changed His sacred day to Sunday
to honor Jesus or something, but where's the Bible verse that says
working then is a capital offence? Seems the New Testament said that
"the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath".
If you want to make a case that the God which Christians worship is
documented to have demanded silly things, you really do have to get
your facts right.
John Savard
randall g
On 22 May 1998 11:14:09 -0700, gap...@vcn.bc.ca wrote:
>rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>RG> Petition to Remove God from the Canadian Constitution
>RG> =====================================================
>RG>
>RG> The Canadian Atheist Society is sponsoring a national petition to
>RG> remove the phrase "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
>RG> recognize the supremacy of God" from the Canadian Charter of Rights
>RG> and Freedoms, which is Part 1 of the Canadian Constitution. Clearly
>RG> Canada is founded on no such basis, and this statement is an insult to
>RG> all non-Christian Canadians (and probably some Christians too).
>
>How so an insult? It's an historical statement, as worded. If it said,
>"Whereas Canada is founded upon principles[...] and thus SHOULD BE..." I could
>see athiests and other non-Christians being upset, but the way the Constitution
>is worded is an acknowledgement of history. It's your type that are happy to
>practice revisionism in all its nastiness upon all sorts of basic facts. The
>founding members of Canada were, for the most part Christians, with a strong
>faith in the God of the Christian Bible.
>
>Deny God all you wish, but don't deny historical fact.
I make no mention of historical facts. The Constitution says nothing
about the religious beliefs of the founders.
"Founded" in this sense means "based upon" or "guided by" God, and
this is clearly not the case, as the legal system and governmental
structures make no mention of such a beastie anywhere else, nor is
this God-object invoked officially for any purpose that I am aware of.
Problem is, it leaves the door open for those Christians who are not
so liberal as yourself to claim that their particular oppressive moral
ideas need to be made into national law.
>RG> I'll bet you didn't even know God was in there. Who is this God person
>RG> anyway, and how are Canadian courts supposed to know what he wants?
>RG> The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
>RG> country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
>RG> Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
>RG> and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
>RG> record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations. Is this what
>RG> you want as the fundamental basis behind the justice system in Canada?
>RG> The Constitution as currently written makes it legally necessary. Even
>RG> though courts have usually completely ignored this God thingy when
>RG> rendering judgements, why the heck is It in there anyway, and what
>RG> good can come of it?
>
>Try looking at those points in their proper context. For a particular people
>at a particular time there were some very strict rules laid down(that they
>willingly asked for and accepted.)
I am not at all surprised that an ancient tribe of ignorant
goatherders came up with a vicious war god and a pile of nutty rules
like this. Happened all the time back then.
But, there are a number of Christians, on this thread even, who
believe it all still applies to us today, as amazing as that sounds.
Or more commonly they pick some bits of it and ignore the rest in
order to make it conform to their particular prejudices.
This is the sort of principle I believe we should get away from.
>It's like a parent who is a school teacher, and has one of his/her own children
>in the class, generally the parent/teacher will be harder on his/her own
>children than the class at large. . .
Whatever. Nonsense like this has no place in a civilized society, and
even the appearance of it should not be present in a document designed
to define a country composed of a wide and diverse range of peoples,
religions, races, sexes, etc.
>Your servant,
>
><+]::-)
>"Cyberpope", servant to Y'shua the King!
>*NEW* e-mail: "gap...@vcn.bc.ca"
randall g =%^)> #320 - only 346 short
Al Klein
On Thu, 21 May 1998 17:21:23 GMT, rand...@nospam.com (randall g)
wrote:
>"Why the FUCK did you allow so much suffering you ASSHOLE? Not just
>human suffering but the animal kingdom as well. You must be one sick
>son of a bitch to devise such a scheme. And I suppose the murdering
>cannibal, Jeffery Dahmer, who became 'born again' is in heaven, while
>Gandhi burns in hell? What a DISGUSTING EXCUSE for a "god" you are.
>FUCK off."
>- me to God, on Judgement Day
You'll be mumbling to yourself on judgement day?
--
Al - aklein at villagenet dot com
randall g
>rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>>On Thu, 21 May 1998 22:04:17 GMT, jsa...@tenMAPSONeerf.edmonton.ab.ca
>>(John Savard) wrote:
>>>rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>
>>>>The Christian god Jehovah, by far the most popular god in this
>>>>country, is documented as saying it is a capital crime to work on a
>>>>Sunday, be a homosexual, or wear garments of mixed fabrics. Slavery
>>>>and genocide are acceptable and desirable to Him, and He is on the
>>>>record as having ordered the slaughter of entire nations.
>
>>>Surely you mean to work on a _Saturday_, or, more precisely, between
>>>sunset Friday evening and sunset Saturday evening.
>
>>It's the CHRISTIAN god that Canada is founded on, and HIS sacred day
>>is Sunday.
>
>Well, if you're going to claim that it is "documented" that Jehovah
>decrees it a capital crime to "wear garments of mixed fabrics", you
>must be using the Old Testament (specifically, the book of Leviticus)
>as your reference source.
Correct. There's a lot of other bizarre stuff in there too.
The homophobes, and they are numerous and vocal, rely on it.
>Of course, Christians believe that He changed His sacred day to Sunday
>to honor Jesus or something, but where's the Bible verse that says
>working then is a capital offence? Seems the New Testament said that
>"the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath".
(Num 15:32-36 NRSV)
When the Israelites were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering
sticks on the sabbath day. Those who found him gathering sticks
brought him to Moses, Aaron, and to the whole congregation. They put
him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him.
Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man shall be put to death; all the
congregation shall stone him outside the camp." The whole congregation
brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death, just as the LORD
had commanded Moses.
>If you want to make a case that the God which Christians worship is
>documented to have demanded silly things, you really do have to get
>your facts right.
It's all there in black and white.
When I was a Christian the Old Testament was still included in the
Bible. I don't know if that policy has changed since, but I doubt it.
After all, that's where the 10 commandments are, isn't it?
Of course, if you choose to selectively disregard parts of it, how am
I supposed to know? Why can't Christians even agree on *which* bits
they are going to ignore?
More to the point, if the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is
supposed to be based on such capricious and arbitrary rough justice,
why should I or anyone else put up with such nonsense?
Sherif Hanna
randall g wrote in message <3583e6ae....@news.bctel.net>...
>Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
>God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
>sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
>a single god named God.
Muslims also worship the same God.
Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
guidelines...
Sherif :)
Lars P Ormberg
Joseph Lockhart wrote:
> Here we have a homosexual (who has never explained how his name was
> found in a book of a man who sold young boys to older men) He wants us
> to be able to murder our children, kill off old people and sodomize boys
> as young as 14, but he doesn't want us to be able to spank our
> children.... What's wrong with this picture?
Don't forget chain himself to trees and spike mighty pines to kill
loggers.
> Now Svend wants the word ‘God' removed from a worthless document
> misnamed a ‘Constitution.' By the way he also in the past wanted to have
> the National Anthem changed because it was gender specific.
Why they didn't keep sawing in the first place remains beyond me.
--
Lars Ormberg
(I don't know where Mr. T lives...stop phoning my home) (___)
(o o)
- I'm a genuine, certified, dixie fried, full of /-------\ /
pride, 'til I die pure bred redneck! / | ||O
* ||,---||
mailto:la...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca ^^ ^^
mailto:commodo...@geocities.com
The University of Lars http://www.freeyellow.com/members2/larso/
"The Grateway" http://www.ualberta.ca/~larso/polysci/grateway.htm
Lars Across the Globe Campain
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Club/5847/
Drew:So who all goes to these conventions anyway?
Lewis:Well, most of them are Trekkies like us, but then there are
a few Star Wars and Babylon 5 fans there too.
Oswald:Yeah, like that's real.
"The Drew Carey Show"
Lars P Ormberg
Gregory Gyetko wrote:
> Joseph Lockhart wrote:
> > 1) He believes that a woman should have the right to murder her baby
> > under the guise of ?choice.'
>
> It's called 'abortion' not murder, because the 'baby' isn't alive (i.e. it
> has no brain, no central nervous system, ergo no self-awareness)
Self-awareness doesn't figure into any other murder case. After 20
weeks there's a CNS. 24 and a brain. Humanity from day one. Ergo
murder.
> > 2) He believes that we should have the right to murder grandma and
> > grandpa under the guise of ?assisted suicide.'
>
> Whereas people in pain should have to prolong their agony for as long as
> possible?
The euthenasia situation is very dangerous. If I had a clean room I
could find a Byfield article that notices some very dangerous
combinations.
> The current legal age for sexual activity is already 14 years old.
So let's expand it. Maybe if we heep on more coal it will smother the
fire.
> Nothing wrong with being gay. It's usually decided at birth.
Not really.
> > (who has never explained how his name was found in a book of a man who
> > sold young boys to older men)
>
> Uh, gee, a pimp puts a famous man's name in his customer list and we should
> take him at his word.
We certainly shouldn't dismiss it.
> How about I make a list of strip joint frequenters
> and stick your name on the list with a hefty bar tab? Hardly good
> evidence.
But worth a look into...
> > He wants us to be able to murder our children, kill off old people and
> > sodomize boys
> > as young as 14, but he doesn't want us to be able to spank our
> > children.... What's wrong with this picture?
>
> The part where you lie and misrepresent his views, that's what.
He must have left it out, I suppose.
> > By the way he also in the past wanted to have the National Anthem changed
> > because it was gender specific.
>
> Yikes, how dare he teach that the women who have died for their country
> deserve mentioning!!!
Men created history, they deserve the credit for it.
cam and or nenette remove trailing 666
On Fri, 22 May 1998 11:47:38 -0700, "Peter B. Macdonald"
<pbmac...@netci.com> added to the entropy with:
>> >I think that you are trying to put words into this thread and
>> >then acting as if they are my thoughts and words.
>> >
>> >Your ranting is uncalled for.
>>
>> Sorry, I mistook you for a Christian.
>
>There you go again - assuming! I made no reference to Christian or any
>other.
>
>> Try stating your point clearly.
>
>I'd be glad to if I you wish to enter into serious conversation about
Is there another religion besides christianity and judaism that makes
specific reference to "God" with a capital G? Assuming there aren't,
I think he made a good assumption that you were arguing the christian
point of view, since the old testament god wasn't the motivator for
the value systems on which this country was originally based, which is
exactly relevant to this thread.
randall g
>> >I think that you are trying to put words into this thread and
>> >then acting as if they are my thoughts and words.
>> >
>> >Your ranting is uncalled for.
>>
>> Sorry, I mistook you for a Christian.
>
>There you go again - assuming! I made no reference to Christian or any
>other.
Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
a single god named God.
>> >> >But since you are so sure that there is no God - then maybe you could
>> >> >describe to me, how to make a machine turn itself on..... and we can
>> >> >both become millionaires.
>> >>
>> >> It's mostly been figured out. Educate yourself.
>> >>
>> >> [ snipped reference to talk.origins website replaced]
>> >> www.talkorigins.com
>> >
>> >Then you do not understand the problem - and I suggest that you give
>> >my question some more thought rather than present glib answers - or
>> >rather non-answers.
>>
>> Perhaps I misunderstood your riddle.
>> Try stating your point clearly.
>
>I'd be glad to if I you wish to enter into serious conversation about
>God as he/she applies to the above stated problem (riddle), but I think
>that this thread is not the place to do it. We have strayed from
>politics to philosophy.
True, and I would prefer to keep this thread on the topic of God's
place in the Canadian Constitution.
If you wish to have a general argument about gods and religion, I am
only interested if it is in public. My home newsgroup is alt.atheism.
Michael H.
Didn't read a single post in this thread. Just thought I'd jump in and
say that the title of it proves that it is stupid and probably populated
by morons.
Michael
randall g
On Sat, 23 May 1998 00:07:53 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
wrote:
Hyuck hyuck. I gotta agree. Me an the boys all think just like you do.
Hyuck hyuck hyuck.
randall g
>randall g wrote in message <3583e6ae....@news.bctel.net>...
>>Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
>>God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
>>sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
>>a single god named God.
>
>
>Muslims also worship the same God.
>
>Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
>differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
>are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
>you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
>guidelines...
>
>Sherif :)
Well you are fucking wrong, because *all* stable societies that have
*ever* existed, including many *before* the Hebrews wrote down their
particular myths, have incorporated all the same basic principles.
What do you have to say about the traditional morality of the ancient
Indian or Chinese cultures. They are only two obvious examples, which
existed and had *higher* morals than the cruel desert god of the
Hebrews laid down later, for that particular tribe.
These ethics have evolved with us, as they provide clear survival
advantages to us and allow us to live harmoniously in groups and reap
the incredible survival advantages that result from a division of
labour.
Forgive me for saying so but your point is incredibly ignorant and
naive. You know nothing of history.
randall g
>randall g wrote in message <3583e6ae....@news.bctel.net>...
>>Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
>>God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
>>sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
>>a single god named God.
>
>
>Muslims also worship the same God.
Muslims worship Jesus Christ as God? Forgive me but I thought that was
the ultimate blasphemy in Islam.
I should also point out that the vast majority of Canadians are
Christians, and it amazes me to think that you believe they had Allah,
Mohammed, and the Qu'ran in mind when the god phrase was put into the
Constitution. You were certainly not being considered. This is a
CHRISTIAN issue. Hell, they don't even care about the Jewish religion,
where most of their Bible came from.
Centuries of persecution by the Christians hasn't taught you anything,
has it? The God phrase in the Constitution isn't doing YOU any
favours.
Michael H.
randall g wrote:
> On Sat, 23 May 1998 00:07:53 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
> wrote:
> >Didn't read a single post in this thread. Just thought I'd jump in and
> >say that the title of it proves that it is stupid and probably populated
> >by morons.
> > Michael>
> Hyuck hyuck. I gotta agree. Me an the boys all think just like you do.
> Hyuck hyuck hyuck.
Get that throat checked, pal.
Michael
Michael H.
Sherif Hanna wrote:
> randall g wrote in message <3583e6ae....@news.bctel.net>...
> >Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
> >God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
> >sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
> >a single god named God.
> Muslims also worship the same God.
> Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
> differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
> are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
> you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
> guidelines...
Good point, although, sadly, Randall is apparently not likely to be
affected by abstract notions such as "ideas."
Michael H.
Michael H.
randall g wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 1998 23:40:08 -0400, "Sherif Hanna"
> <eng...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >randall g wrote in message <3583e6ae....@news.bctel.net>...
> >>Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
> >>God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
> >>sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
> >>a single god named God.
> >Muslims also worship the same God.
> >Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
> >differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
> >are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
> >you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
> >guidelines...
> >Sherif :)
> Well you are fucking wrong, because *all* stable societies that have
> *ever* existed, including many *before* the Hebrews wrote down their
> particular myths, have incorporated all the same basic principles.
> What do you have to say about the traditional morality of the ancient
> Indian or Chinese cultures. They are only two obvious examples, which
> existed and had *higher* morals than the cruel desert god of the
> Hebrews laid down later, for that particular tribe.
The early Hindu caste system was a disgrace, and early Chinese culture
involved a lot of severing of heads from bodies.
> These ethics have evolved with us, as they provide clear survival
> advantages to us and allow us to live harmoniously in groups and reap
> the incredible survival advantages that result from a division of
> labour.
Sure, division of labour as in "shine my shoes or I'll kill your ass."
> Forgive me for saying so but your point is incredibly ignorant and
> naive. You know nothing of history.
Maybe he doesn't, but I see no rocket science in your posts either,
pal.
Michael
Bill K.
Michael H. wrote:
>
> Didn't read a single post in this thread. Just thought I'd jump in and
> say that the title of it proves that it is stupid and probably populated
> by morons.
I suppose you're also prepared to review a book after glancing over its
cover.
Well, better you not read any of the posts. They may be a direct link
to the devil looking to contaminate and infiltrate your mind and take
over your soul through Usenet articles. }:)
--
Bill K.
b i l l k @ r o g e r s . w a v e . c a
Don't question, don't think, but CONFORM. God likes you better that
way.
randall g
On Sat, 23 May 1998 01:13:17 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
wrote:
>Sherif Hanna wrote:
>
>> randall g wrote in message <3583e6ae....@news.bctel.net>...
>> >Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
>> >God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
>> >sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
>> >a single god named God.
>
>> Muslims also worship the same God.
>
>> Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
>> differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
>> are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
>> you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
>> guidelines...
>
> Good point, although, sadly, Randall is apparently not likely to be
>affected by abstract notions such as "ideas."
>
>
> Michael H.
I have to wonder if you even have one. At least I have expressed mine.
All you are capable of is lame ass, childish insults.
Hey little boy. Go beat up the smaller kids at your local playground.
Stick to things you are *good* at.
randall g
On Sat, 23 May 1998 01:22:29 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
wrote:
>randall g wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 22 May 1998 23:40:08 -0400, "Sherif Hanna"
>> <eng...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >randall g wrote in message <3583e6ae....@news.bctel.net>...
>> >>Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
>> >>God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
>> >>sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
>> >>a single god named God.
>
>> >Muslims also worship the same God.
>
>> >Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
>> >differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
>> >are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
>> >you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
>> >guidelines...
>
>> >Sherif :)
>
>> Well you are fucking wrong, because *all* stable societies that have
>> *ever* existed, including many *before* the Hebrews wrote down their
>> particular myths, have incorporated all the same basic principles.
>
>> What do you have to say about the traditional morality of the ancient
>> Indian or Chinese cultures. They are only two obvious examples, which
>> existed and had *higher* morals than the cruel desert god of the
>> Hebrews laid down later, for that particular tribe.
>
> The early Hindu caste system was a disgrace, and early Chinese culture
>involved a lot of severing of heads from bodies.
Oh, OK. Let's play deuling religions. The Christian religion, derived
from the ancient Hebrew religion which you think was so great,
promoted SLAVERY for nineteen centuries without a whisper of dissent.
Your own Christian masters ordered or condoned the torture and death
of many millions.
NO ancient culture can stand up to modern civil rights, and the reason
has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Christian principles.
But EVERY ancient culture had sanctions agains murder, theft, and the
obvious crimes. This is because such things are OBVIOUSLY against the
best interests of society and all its members.
Unless of course they were committed by the kings or priests in the
name of their GODS, in which case there was always a magical divine
EXEMPTION of course.
It didn't take the ancient savage Hebrew war god to spring this
amazing revelation on humanity. It was already there for millenia
before.
>> These ethics have evolved with us, as they provide clear survival
>> advantages to us and allow us to live harmoniously in groups and reap
>> the incredible survival advantages that result from a division of
>> labour.
>
> Sure, division of labour as in "shine my shoes or I'll kill your ass."
Fuck are you ignorant. More like "I can trust my tribal members not to
steal my woman and possessions when I go off to hunt, so neither will
I steal from them."
I suppose without a threat of eternal torture, YOU would be a
psychopath. Please don't become an atheist, because then you would be
a danger to us all. Keep the faith, brother!
>> Forgive me for saying so but your point is incredibly ignorant and
>> naive. You know nothing of history.
>
> Maybe he doesn't, but I see no rocket science in your posts either,
>pal.
I was wondering when the morons would show up.
You may be one tough mother in your local downhome bar, but here in
the world of words, that counts for sweet fuck all.
Welcome to Usenet. Blustering is useless here, and you just look like
an idiot.
> Michael
John Lauzon
Paul Keenleyside (Lotus...@bc.com) wrote:
: Gregory Gyetko wrote:
: >
: > Paul Keenleyside wrote:
: > >
: > > I'm sure St. Peter (the real St. Peter not Peter Mcdonald) will mark randall g in his
: > > book about that one, don't you think PM? This guy doesn't get to sit next you and me on
: > > my cloud, and I wonder if his halo will shine like yours and mine.
: > >
: > > Yessiree I'd sure like to be an assistant to St. Peter when this guy checks in, and
: > > a book check is done on him
: >
: > If you would care to provide any kind of evidence for this "St. Peter's"
: > existence, I'd be pleased to here it.
: It's "hear", boy not "here". Peter was one of the Apostles. Do your homework.
: Where wre you on Sundays when you were a kid?
: > As of yet, even if I were to believe your bible, I haven't noticed any
: > lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
: > set of gates.
: Oh he's up there all right. Once you arrive at the gates, turn right, and he'll be looking
: you up in his book of deeds. Before you get your cloud, halo harp and wings.
: But, if you're going on the "down" escalator, I'm sure Lucifer will have a few
: things cookin' on the grill for you when you step off it. Just ask for medium rare or well
: done...
Actually...Hell is no joke, it exists. Your soul is eternal and so is
Hell. When you die your spirit leaves the body and you still think exactly
the way as when you where alive, it's like nothing has changed, you still
feel like you have a physical body, but you haven't, from that point on
you have no control over anything, and where you end up depends on the
state of your soul. Make sure it isn't Hell because it will be an insanely
terrifying experience that never ends, and you will never see the light of
day again, and the worst of all is, you will know you will never see God,
that...will be the most painful and frightening of all, because you where
created in His image and likeness so that you could enjoy Paradise with
Him forever.
Hell is no joke.
--
\ [P] / o<<<<<>>>>> "PRAY THE HOLY ROSARY" <<<<<>>>>>o \ [F] /
-- [[[R]]] -- I extend to you who is reading this .sig the -- [[[A]]] --
/ [A] \ "SPECIAL BLESSING" of the "QUEEN OF PEACE" / [S] \
/ [Y] \ o<<<<<>>>>>"Our Lady of Medjugorje"<<<<<>>>>>o / [T] \
randall g
On Sat, 23 May 1998 06:02:40 GMT, bk...@torfree.net (John Lauzon)
wrote:
>Paul Keenleyside (Lotus...@bc.com) wrote:
>: Gregory Gyetko wrote:
>: >
>: > Paul Keenleyside wrote:
>: > >
>: > > I'm sure St. Peter (the real St. Peter not Peter Mcdonald) will mark randall g in his
>: > > book about that one, don't you think PM? This guy doesn't get to sit next you and me on
>: > > my cloud, and I wonder if his halo will shine like yours and mine.
>: > >
>: > > Yessiree I'd sure like to be an assistant to St. Peter when this guy checks in, and
>: > > a book check is done on him
>: >
>: > If you would care to provide any kind of evidence for this "St. Peter's"
>: > existence, I'd be pleased to here it.
>
>: It's "hear", boy not "here". Peter was one of the Apostles. Do your homework.
>: Where wre you on Sundays when you were a kid?
>
>: > As of yet, even if I were to believe your bible, I haven't noticed any
>: > lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
>: > set of gates.
>
>: Oh he's up there all right. Once you arrive at the gates, turn right, and he'll be looking
>: you up in his book of deeds. Before you get your cloud, halo harp and wings.
>: But, if you're going on the "down" escalator, I'm sure Lucifer will have a few
>: things cookin' on the grill for you when you step off it. Just ask for medium rare or well
>: done...
>
>Actually...Hell is no joke, it exists.
And I should believe this because... ?
>Your soul is eternal and so is Hell.
And I should believe this because... ?
>When you die your spirit leaves the body and you still think exactly
>the way as when you where alive, it's like nothing has changed, you still
>feel like you have a physical body, but you haven't, from that point on
>you have no control over anything, and where you end up depends on the
>state of your soul.
Oh wwwwoooowwww mmmaaaannnn.... What a trip...
Who told you this anyway? Sounds like you've already been there.
>Make sure it isn't Hell because it will be an insanely
>terrifying experience that never ends, and you will never see the light of
>day again, and the worst of all is, you will know you will never see God,
>that...will be the most painful and frightening of all, because you where
>created in His image and likeness so that you could enjoy Paradise with
>Him forever.
Well, I'll be in good company. Gandhi, Einstein, Sagan. I could go on
for a long time naming good, interesting people your pathetic GOD
condemned to eternal torture along with me.
Meanwhile you get to hang out with such Christians as Hitler and
Torquemada.
I'd rather be in Hell than spend eternity with a sanctimonious fuckwit
like you, and the monster god that dreamed up such an evil scheme.
> Hell is no joke.
Your puny, meaningless, impossible threats are incredibly ridiculous,
and can never be anything *but* a joke.
Hell, most *Christians* don't believe this shit any more.
Grow up. There is no monster under your bed.
Bill K.
randall g wrote:
>
> On Sat, 23 May 1998 01:13:17 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
> wrote:
> > Good point, although, sadly, Randall is apparently not likely to be
> >affected by abstract notions such as "ideas."
>
>
> All you are capable of is lame ass, childish insults.
>
> Hey little boy. Go beat up the smaller kids at your local playground.
>
> Stick to things you are *good* at.
Which, I doubt he is good at either. That's why there's spouting off on
the Usenet. Here there's absolutely no risk to one's self, physically,
not even by small children. ;)
--
Bill K. ( b i l l k @ r o g e r s . w a v e . c a )
*** WARNING *** All unsolicited bulk e-mail received at this address
will be promptly reported to the sender's system administrator, and to
law enforcement officials whenever applicable.
randall g
On Sat, 23 May 1998 07:35:21 GMT, "Bill K." <bi...@see.sig> wrote:
>randall g wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 23 May 1998 01:13:17 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
>> wrote:
>> > Good point, although, sadly, Randall is apparently not likely to be
>> >affected by abstract notions such as "ideas."
>>
>> I have to wonder if you even have one. At least I have expressed mine.
>>
>> All you are capable of is lame ass, childish insults.
>>
>> Hey little boy. Go beat up the smaller kids at your local playground.
>>
>> Stick to things you are *good* at.
>
>Which, I doubt he is good at either. That's why there's spouting off on
>the Usenet. Here there's absolutely no risk to one's self, physically,
>not even by small children. ;)
Heh heh. I was cutting him some slack.
Actually he's a pathetic dweeb who repels people with his body odour
and gross personality. Dogs and little children laugh at him.
Best thing he could aspire to is to be the next Unabomber, but he's
way too stupid.
Unfortunately he's NOT too stupid to get hold of an automatic weapon
and let loose at the local high school, so I hope someone's got an eye
on him.
Bill K.
Michael H. wrote:
> Maybe he doesn't, but I see no rocket science in your posts either,
> pal.
I suppose, if your idea of rocket science is regurgitating everything
that was embedded into your mind through decades of brainwashing by
clergymen and religious fundamentalist parents. By your logic,
intelligence is about comformity and uncritical acceptance of all the
dogma taught to you by the aforementioned figures without ever stopping
to question or doubt.
--
Bill K.
b i l l k @ r o g e r s . w a v e . c a
Don't question, don't think, but CONFORM. God likes you better that
way.
Bill K.
randall g wrote:
> Actually he's a pathetic dweeb who repels people with his body odour
> and gross personality. Dogs and little children laugh at him.
>
> Best thing he could aspire to is to be the next Unabomber, but he's
> way too stupid.
>
> Unfortunately he's NOT too stupid to get hold of an automatic weapon
> and let loose at the local high school, so I hope someone's got an eye
> on him.
In that case, let's just hope that he's not intelligent enough to figure
out how to undo the safety lock on it. ;)
Bill K.
Sherif Hanna wrote:
> Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
> differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
> are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
> you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
> guidelines...
There's something called a conscience, which, in case you haven't
figured it out, has nothing to do with pursuing rewards or avoiding
punishment from god. There's also the principle of mutual security and
respect that one doesn't need a bible stuffed in his face to realize.
It's called common sense. Don't give your religion more credit than is
due.
cam and or nenette remove trailing 666
>
>Hell. When you die your spirit leaves the body and you still think exactly
>the way as when you where alive, it's like nothing has changed, you still
>feel like you have a physical body, but you haven't, from that point on
>you have no control over anything, and where you end up depends on the
>state of your soul.
No way, John! You might feel that way for a few minutes, but then
you're drawn towards the Eagle and it consumes you, unless you can
give it a good copy of your life to eat instead!
gap...@vcn.bc.ca
RG> Or what if I choose Quetzlcoatl? He demands 20,000 virgins to be
RG> sacrificed every year or the crops won't grow. Perhaps we should base
RG> our justice system on that one, what do you think?
I guess that would mean, if there was real objective & absolute authenticity to
your choice, that the crops would never again grow (try to find *1* virgin, let
alone *20,000*!!)
Your servant,
<+]::-)
"Cyberpope", servant to Y'shua the King!
*NEW* e-mail: "gap...@vcn.bc.ca"
--
Your servant,
<+]::-)
(Cyberpope, servant to Y'shua the King!)
gap...@vcn.bc.ca
Paul Keenleyside <Lotus...@bc.com> wrote:
PK> > As of yet, even if I were to believe your bible, I haven't noticed any
PK> > lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
PK> > set of gates.
PK>
PK> Oh he's up there all right. Once you arrive at the gates, turn right, and
PK> be looking
PK> you up in his book of deeds. Before you get your cloud, halo harp and wing
Isn't that the angel Gabriel who does the looking up? & isn't it the Father
Himself, on His Judgement Throne, who makes the final up/down decision? I
don't know where this folklore story of Peter as gateskeeper ever came from...
and who says you get a cloud, halo, harp, OR wings?
You don't do much to effectively present the the True King of the Universe when
you mix in questionable folksie stories with the facts. . . :(
Ron Webb
--
Ron Webb
Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada
Ron Webb
>>How so an insult? It's an historical statement, as worded. If it said,
>>"Whereas Canada is founded upon principles[...] and thus SHOULD BE..." I
could
There is no reason at all for the inclusion of this phrase. All that is
required is a statement telling who we are and what principles we follow. It
is not a requirement to refer to some mythical being to validate ourselves.
Ron Webb
Sherif Hanna wrote in message <35664...@oasis.idirect.com>...
>Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
>differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
>are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these,
whether
>you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
>guidelines...
What a pile of crap! Just because a lot of our laws can be paralleled with
the Ten Commandments, doesn't mean that they were derived from them. Many
societies much older than ours and vastly different from ours in religious
belief have laws very similar to ours that also parallel the Ten
Commandments in many areas. Some of these religious beliefs don't even have
a notion of a "God" as we know it.
The reference to any God in our Constitution is not valid.
Ron Webb
Michael H. wrote in message <3565D0...@netcom.ca>...
> The early Hindu caste system was a disgrace, and early Chinese culture
>involved a lot of severing of heads from bodies.
Look at Christian history and you will see that it is a "real piece of work"
also. Christianity can't claim to be "holier" than most other religions that
I am aware of.
Ron Webb
>NO ancient culture can stand up to modern civil rights, and the reason
>has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Christian principles.
>
>But EVERY ancient culture had sanctions agains murder, theft, and the
>obvious crimes. This is because such things are OBVIOUSLY against the
>best interests of society and all its members.
>
>Unless of course they were committed by the kings or priests in the
>name of their GODS, in which case there was always a magical divine
>EXEMPTION of course.
>
>It didn't take the ancient savage Hebrew war god to spring this
>amazing revelation on humanity. It was already there for millenia
>before.
This sounds about right to me....well said.
nev...@*anti-klik*freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
>
> Hell is no joke.
>--
He's right, I spend 40 hours a week there.
Bill K.
Sherif Hanna wrote:
> Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
> differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
> are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
> you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
> guidelines...
There's something called a conscience, which, in case you haven't
figured it out, has nothing to do with pursuing rewards or avoiding
punishment from god. There's also the principle of mutual security and
respect that one doesn't need a bible stuffed in his face to realize.
It's called common sense. Don't give your religion more credit than is
due.
--
Bill K.
b i l l k @ r o g e r s . w a v e . c a
Don't question, don't think, but CONFORM. God likes you better that
way.
Bruce Becker
In article <EtEBGH.Dx...@torfree.net>,
John Lauzon <bk...@torfree.net> wrote:
|Paul Keenleyside (Lotus...@bc.com) wrote:
|: Gregory Gyetko wrote:
|: >
|: > Paul Keenleyside wrote:
|: > >
|: > > I'm sure St. Peter (the real St. Peter not Peter Mcdonald) will
|mark randall g in his
|: > > book about that one, don't you think PM? This guy doesn't get to
|sit next you and me on
|: > > my cloud, and I wonder if his halo will shine like yours and mine.
|: > >
|: > > Yessiree I'd sure like to be an assistant to St. Peter when this
|guy checks in, and
|: > > a book check is done on him
|: >
|: > If you would care to provide any kind of evidence for this "St. Peter's"
|: > existence, I'd be pleased to here it.
|
|: It's "hear", boy not "here". Peter was one of the Apostles. Do your homework.
|: Where wre you on Sundays when you were a kid?
|
|: > lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
|: > set of gates.
|
|: Oh he's up there all right. Once you arrive at the gates, turn right,
|and he'll be looking
|: you up in his book of deeds. Before you get your cloud, halo harp and wings.
|: But, if you're going on the "down" escalator, I'm sure Lucifer will have a few
|: things cookin' on the grill for you when you step off it. Just ask for
|medium rare or well
|: done...
|
|Hell. When you die your spirit leaves the body and you still think exactly
|the way as when you where alive, it's like nothing has changed, you still
|feel like you have a physical body, but you haven't, from that point on
|you have no control over anything, and where you end up depends on the
|terrifying experience that never ends, and you will never see the light of
|day again, and the worst of all is, you will know you will never see God,
|that...will be the most painful and frightening of all, because you where
|created in His image and likeness so that you could enjoy Paradise with
|Him forever.
|
Altho normally relentlessly hetero in inclination,
something about your posts nearly always give me a
chubby. Go figger...
--
,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario 1 416 699 1868
a /i/ Internet: b...@gts.org Uucp: ...!gts!bdb
`\o\-e "When did the Me Generation become the meme generation?"
_< /_ - Mimi Pond, historian
Al Klein
>randall g wrote in message <3583e6ae....@news.bctel.net>...
>>Well, you were certainly talking about a single specific god named
>>God, which is easy to take pretty specifically in a Judeo-Christian
>>sort of light. Offhand, I can't think of any other religions that have
>>a single god named God.
>Muslims also worship the same God.
Muslims DO NOT have a god named God. They have one, and only one, and
its name is Allah.
>Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
>differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
>are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
>you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
>guidelines...
Actually, most of the current western laws are based on the Code of
Hammurabi, of which the Ten Commandments are a copy.
--
Al - aklein at villagenet dot com
Al Klein
>Actually...Hell is no joke, it exists. Your soul is eternal and so is
>Hell. When you die your spirit leaves the body and you still think exactly
>the way as when you where alive, it's like nothing has changed, you still
>feel like you have a physical body, but you haven't, from that point on
>you have no control over anything, and where you end up depends on the
>state of your soul. Make sure it isn't Hell because it will be an insanely
>terrifying experience that never ends, and you will never see the light of
>day again, and the worst of all is, you will know you will never see God,
>that...will be the most painful and frightening of all, because you where
>created in His image and likeness so that you could enjoy Paradise with
>Him forever.
He says this as someone who has been through the process at least
once? Or one whose oral and anal sphincters are the same hole?
Al Klein
On Sat, 23 May 1998 01:22:29 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
wrote:
>early Chinese culture involved a lot of severing of heads from bodies.
As did the early Hebrew culture. Your point, viv-a-vis morality?
Hartmann Schaffer
randall g wrote:
> ...
> Hey little boy. Go beat up the smaller kids at your local playground.
This definitely is not good advice
--
Hartmann Schaffer
Guelph, Ontario, Canada
scha...@netcom.ca (hs)
Omegatimes
In article <3567617e....@news.bctel.net>,
rand...@nospam.com (randall g) wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 May 1998 11:30:47 -0700, Joseph Lockhart
> <ec...@mb.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >"You have until August 1998. This fall Burnaby MP Svend Robinson will
> >present the petition to the House of Commons."
> >
> >
> >Ah yes... good old Svend... I'm not surprised..
> >
> >This is a man that believes the following:
> >
> >1) He believes that a woman should have the right to murder her baby
> >under the guise of ‘choice.'
> >
> >2) He believes that we should have the right to murder grandma and
> >grandpa under the guise of ‘assisted suicide.'
> >
> >3) He was in favor of a private members bill that would lower the
> >consent age of anal penetration from 18 to 14. Good for him, because
> >now he is in a relationship with a man alleged to be half his age.
> >
> >4) He is in favor of banning parents from spanking their children.
> >
> >So let's get this right...
> >Here we have a homosexual (who has never explained how his name was
> >found in a book of a man who sold young boys to older men) He wants us
> >to be able to murder our children, kill off old people and sodomize boys
> >as young as 14, but he doesn't want us to be able to spank our
> >children.... What's wrong with this picture?
> >
> >Now Svend wants the word ‘God' removed from a worthless document
> >misnamed a ‘Constitution.' By the way he also in the past wanted to have
> >the National Anthem changed because it was gender specific.
> >
> >Sorry people there is a God, and he has a way to deal with homosexuals
> >like Svend. But since society has ignored the word of God, He will do it
> >for us. Don't forget the following: A.I.D.S.
> >
> >Anally Inflicted Death Sentence
> >Another Infected Dying Sodomite
> >
> >You can legislate homosexuality as ‘normal' all you want, but you will
> >never make it fact!!
> >
> >Lev, 20 v 13
>
> The depth and breadth of your ignorance, bigotry and hate astounds me.
> Surely this is a troll. People like this can't possibly exist.
Certainly they can...Svend exists very well.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Eric Mills
gap...@vcn.bc.ca,UUCP writes:
The founding members of Canada were, for the most part Christians,
with a strong faith in the God of the Christian Bible.
Deny God all you wish, but don't deny historical fact.
Historical fact: Canada was founded on the seizure of native land,
and the extermination and/or assimilation of native peoples.
The conquerors may have carried bibles, but it's hard to think
of them as real Christians -- unless that term is more of
an insult than I think is usually meant.
Eric Mills
pbmac...@netci.com,UUCP writes:
But since you are so sure that there is no God -
then maybe you could describe to me,
how to make a machine turn itself on.....
and we can both become millionaires.
Just turn your spam filters off and wait.
Believe me (not god), the answer won't be long in coming
-- and it won't be divine.
Eric Mills
David,dart...@interlog.com,UUCP writes:
Do we also have to take "God keep our Land"
out of the national anthem?
Only if we want to demystify where the power lies.
Michael H.
randall g wrote:
<snip>
> >> Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
> >> differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
> >> are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
> >> you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
> >> guidelines...
> > Good point, although, sadly, Randall is apparently not likely to be
> >affected by abstract notions such as "ideas."
> > Michael H.
> I have to wonder if you even have one. At least I have expressed mine.
That is why I posted. Your ideas make no sense.
> All you are capable of is lame ass, childish insults.
I was trying to stay on the topic.
> Hey little boy. Go beat up the smaller kids at your local playground.
You accuse me of being heavy-handed? Not at all.
> Stick to things you are *good* at.
> randall g =%^)> #320 - only 346 short
Michael H.
Bill K. wrote:
> randall g wrote:
> > On Sat, 23 May 1998 01:13:17 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
> > wrote:
> > > Good point, although, sadly, Randall is apparently not likely to be
> > >affected by abstract notions such as "ideas."
> > I have to wonder if you even have one. At least I have expressed mine.
> > All you are capable of is lame ass, childish insults.
> > Hey little boy. Go beat up the smaller kids at your local playground.
> > Stick to things you are *good* at.
> Which, I doubt he is good at either. That's why there's spouting off on
> the Usenet. Here there's absolutely no risk to one's self, physically,
> not even by small children. ;)
It is nice to see a spirit of conspiratorial comradory on the net. It
reminds me of how small animals huddle together when they hear thunder.
Quite frankly, I don't even know or care what petty little jot or tittle
you pin-heads are so wound up about. No doubt you have been duped in
some way by some well-marketed politico package. Hey, get your money's
worth dudes. I actually couldn't care less about your stupid
distinctions. It annoys me when people parrot the common garbage, no
matter what it is, and that is why I was unpleasant to you. You were
both pathetic suckers of the mass media, and I pointed that out, and
therefore you have that in common. You can both pick on me for blowing
your silly parrotings to smithereens without even thinking about it. If
I had thought about it, I would have done a much better job, but you
wouldn't have understood it, so why waste my time? This is just typing
practice for me, pals. Just skip it. I hate BS as much as you do, but
you will find that you aren't as good as I am at detecting it.
Michael
Michael H.
randall g wrote:
<...>
> Heh heh. I was cutting him some slack.
> Actually he's a pathetic dweeb who repels people with his body odour
> and gross personality. Dogs and little children laugh at him.
> Best thing he could aspire to is to be the next Unabomber, but he's
> way too stupid.
> Unfortunately he's NOT too stupid to get hold of an automatic weapon
> and let loose at the local high school, so I hope someone's got an eye
> on him.
You are a very silly little boy. I am I complete pacifist and do not
even harm insects. If I did harm insects, you'd be the first to know.
But I am strictly non-violent. You have a vendetta against me because of
what? I criticized Pierre Berton? You are so monolithic that you could
be replaced by a program that would cost $19.95 tops. You'd be like the
Russian chess player that got beaten, except that in your case it would
be something that a kid found at the bottom of the corn flakes box.
"Heh, look at this? Is it a corn flake? No! Well, then, let's hook it up
to the net and watch it outwit Randall!" Hey, pal, we'll all be
replaced. Probably 50% of the posters here are AI's that are set up to
annoy people and generate activity. It's great typing practice, but
let's not get personal about it. This is supposed to be a place to
exchange ideas in cyberspace. If you don't like my sense of humour, skip
my posts. Change the channel. Don't get so personal about it.
Michael
Michael H.
Ron Webb wrote:
Based only on what you quoted, I have to agree.
Michael
Michael H.
randall wrote a very silly post commenting on my comments, and I
commented on his comments as a typing exercise. As a public service
announcement, if you have a pathetically slow modem, you will not lose
anything by giving this a miss.
randall g wrote:
<in response to my statement, that follows...>
> > The early Hindu caste system was a disgrace, and early Chinese culture
> >involved a lot of severing of heads from bodies.
> Oh, OK. Let's play deuling religions.
That is funny. You really see religion as a backwoods thing, don't you?
Some gimps on a bridge playing banjos, like in "Deliverance." An odd way
to deal with the existence (as versus non-existence) of quadrillions of
galaxies. So you figure that the universe was created by neither Homer
nor Jethro. Not surprising.
> The Christian religion, derived
> from the ancient Hebrew religion which you think was so great,
> promoted SLAVERY for nineteen centuries without a whisper of dissent.
> Your own Christian masters ordered or condoned the torture and death
> of many millions.
Unfortunately, you are correct insofar that atrocities have been
committed for 19 or 20 centuries in Jesus's name. I don't dispute that.
I do dispute two things, though. Slavery thrived in non-Christian
nations before European contact was ever made, from at least 4000BC, and
likely earlier, and it would still exist today if not for the
intervention of a Judao-Christian culture that holds that slavery is
wrong. In fact, many African countries, especially Nigeria, strongly
protested the imperialist imposition of anti-slavery laws, given that
the slave trade was the mainstay of their economies. No doubt you wish
that those horrible honkey anglos had stayed out of Africa so that
Africa could had maintained its vibrant and successful slave-trade
economy, and be one of the world's wealthy nations.
The second thing is that the phrase "Christian masters" is an oxymoron.
Jesus washed his disciples' feet, in case you forgot. Christianity is
about compassion and caring, unlike the atheist left which is about
exploiting guilt and using the faces of the poor as springboards into
the kind of power that famous leftists such as Stalin, Casto, and Pot
wielded. Forgive me for raining on your lefty parade, but my typing
fingers never read the Miss Manners article about being nice to the
intellectually naive.
> NO ancient culture can stand up to modern civil rights, and the reason
> has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Christian principles.
> But EVERY ancient culture had sanctions agains murder, theft, and the
> obvious crimes. This is because such things are OBVIOUSLY against the
> best interests of society and all its members.
You are right. The Ten Commandments are pretty obvious. There are not
many cultures that have ideals such as "Thou shalt kill" or "Thou shalt
steal." The Ten Cs are no act of genius. They are just common sense, but
there are so many people without common sense that they have to be
spelled out. Why do you have a problem with that?
> Unless of course they were committed by the kings or priests in the
> name of their GODS, in which case there was always a magical divine
> EXEMPTION of course.
Ah yes, the end justifies the means. The founding pillar of the left.
Drop a bomb into a baby carriage if it will serve your leftist cause.
The "divine exemption" of the left is "furthering a higher cause."
> It didn't take the ancient savage Hebrew war god to spring this
> amazing revelation on humanity. It was already there for millenia
> before.
True.
> >> These ethics have evolved with us, as they provide clear survival
> >> advantages to us and allow us to live harmoniously in groups and reap
> >> the incredible survival advantages that result from a division of
> >> labour.
> > Sure, division of labour as in "shine my shoes or I'll kill your ass."
> Fuck are you ignorant. More like "I can trust my tribal members not to
> steal my woman and possessions when I go off to hunt, so neither will
> I steal from them."
What a witless response to my comment.
> I suppose without a threat of eternal torture, YOU would be a
> psychopath. Please don't become an atheist, because then you would be
> a danger to us all. Keep the faith, brother!
Atheism is so juvenile, but that fact is becoming less and less
surprising as I read along.
> >> Forgive me for saying so but your point is incredibly ignorant and
> >> naive. You know nothing of history.
> > Maybe he doesn't, but I see no rocket science in your posts either,
> >pal.
> I was wondering when the morons would show up.
Getting lonely, were you?
> You may be one tough mother in your local downhome bar, but here in
> the world of words, that counts for sweet fuck all.
> Welcome to Usenet. Blustering is useless here, and you just look like
> an idiot.
As long as it is nothing serious.
> > Michael
Michael H.
Bill K. wrote:
> Michael H. wrote:
> > Maybe he doesn't, but I see no rocket science in your posts either,
> > pal.
> I suppose, if your idea of rocket science is regurgitating everything
> that was embedded into your mind through decades of brainwashing by
> clergymen and religious fundamentalist parents. By your logic,
> intelligence is about comformity and uncritical acceptance of all the
> dogma taught to you by the aforementioned figures without ever stopping
> to question or doubt.
This ng is hilarious. I have no dogma. You hate the fundies? Welcome to
the club. What does that have to do with the theism/atheism question?
Nothing whatsoever, other than to a moron.
Michael
Michael H.
Ron Webb wrote:
> Michael H. wrote in message <3565D0...@netcom.ca>...
> > The early Hindu caste system was a disgrace, and early Chinese culture
> >involved a lot of severing of heads from bodies.
> Look at Christian history and you will see that it is a "real piece of work"
> also. Christianity can't claim to be "holier" than most other religions that
> I am aware of.
The Salem witch hunts were a disgrace. Apparently they burned an
epileptic teen at the stake because they thought her fits to be the work
of the devil.
What has happened to this ng? I get the impression that it has
degenerated into spamming lobby-groups. Honest ordinary Canadian posts
are getting lost in the shuffle of professional propaganda-spammers, but
I think that it could backfire. Spam-infested ngs become so boring that
ordinary Canadians log off for the summer and let the politico-spammers
fight it out for a dollar. Another day another dollar. Being hired to
spam the net with lefty posts certainly beats flipping carrion-patties
at the local heart-attack drive-in. Many of us probably won't even
bother coming back, given that it is perfectly clear that the net is not
a representative sample of public input.
Michael
randall g
On Sun, 24 May 1998 01:06:39 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
wrote:
>randall g wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> >> Randall, you say that it is possible to be ethical without God. I beg to
>> >> differ. You grew up in a society which, like many others, upholds laws that
>> >> are based on the Ten Commandments. Thus, you were affected by these, whether
>> >> you fucking like it or not. Otherwise, there would have been no
>> >> guidelines...
>
>> > Good point, although, sadly, Randall is apparently not likely to be
>> >affected by abstract notions such as "ideas."
>
>> > Michael H.
>
>> I have to wonder if you even have one. At least I have expressed mine.
>
> That is why I posted. Your ideas make no sense.
Why not ask for clarification then? I did put some effort into
expressing myself clearly, but I am more than willing to expand on a
point.
Or, point out exactly what you think is wrong.
That's normal adult maturity.
>> All you are capable of is lame ass, childish insults.
>
> I was trying to stay on the topic.
You did little else but fire off childish, one line insults.
Lame ones.
I quote two of your posts in their entirety:
"Didn't read a single post in this thread. Just thought I'd jump in
and say that the title of it proves that it is stupid and probably
populated by morons."
"Good point, although, sadly, Randall is apparently not likely to be
affected by abstract notions such as "ideas."
End quote.
Don't whine so much about the response. It's unbecoming, and you
deserved it. You poisoned the well first, and I have no requirement to
turn the other cheek.
>> Hey little boy. Go beat up the smaller kids at your local playground.
>
> You accuse me of being heavy-handed? Not at all.
No, just childish.
You seem to have suddenly become more lucid.
Why don't you try making a real point, or responding intelligently to
mine, if it is so important to you? Otherwise, feel free to continue
the lame-ass insults, and I will feel free to respond as I deem
appropriate.
Michael H.
Ron Webb wrote:
> Michael H. wrote in message <3565D0...@netcom.ca>...
> > The early Hindu caste system was a disgrace, and early Chinese culture
> >involved a lot of severing of heads from bodies.
> Look at Christian history and you will see that it is a "real piece of work"
> also. Christianity can't claim to be "holier" than most other religions that
> I am aware of.
Check the original post. I was pointing out that in ancient times there
was a lot of cruel things happening all over the world, and that the
Judao-Christian tradition should not be singled out. Only a bigot would
suggest that the ancient Jews were crueller than their counterparts in
other cultures.
Michael
Michael H.
Al Klein wrote:
> On Sat, 23 May 1998 01:22:29 +0600, "Michael H." <zol...@netcom.ca>
> wrote:
> >early Chinese culture involved a lot of severing of heads from bodies.
> As did the early Hebrew culture. Your point, viv-a-vis morality?
My point is that in those days there wasn't any.
Michael
John Lauzon
randall g (rand...@nospam.com) wrote:
: On Sat, 23 May 1998 06:02:40 GMT, bk...@torfree.net (John Lauzon)
: wrote:
: >Paul Keenleyside (Lotus...@bc.com) wrote:
: >: Gregory Gyetko wrote:
: >: >
: >: > Paul Keenleyside wrote:
: >: > >
: >: > > I'm sure St. Peter (the real St. Peter not Peter Mcdonald) will mark randall g in his
: >: > > book about that one, don't you think PM? This guy doesn't get to sit next you and me on
: >: > > my cloud, and I wonder if his halo will shine like yours and mine.
: >: > >
: >: > > Yessiree I'd sure like to be an assistant to St. Peter when this guy checks in, and
: >: > > a book check is done on him
: >: >
: >: > If you would care to provide any kind of evidence for this "St. Peter's"
: >: > existence, I'd be pleased to here it.
: >
: >: It's "hear", boy not "here". Peter was one of the Apostles. Do your homework.
: >: Where wre you on Sundays when you were a kid?
: >
: >: > As of yet, even if I were to believe your bible, I haven't noticed any
: >: > lines in it which indicate that anyone named "Peter" is waiting at any
: >: > set of gates.
: >
: >: Oh he's up there all right. Once you arrive at the gates, turn right, and he'll be looking
: >: you up in his book of deeds. Before you get your cloud, halo harp and wings.
: >: But, if you're going on the "down" escalator, I'm sure Lucifer will have a few
: >: things cookin' on the grill for you when you step off it. Just ask for medium rare or well
: >: done...
: >
: >Actually...Hell is no joke, it exists.
: And I should believe this because... ?
: >Your soul is eternal and so is Hell.
: And I should believe this because... ?
: >When you die your spirit leaves the body and you still think exactly
: >the way as when you where alive, it's like nothing has changed, you still
: >feel like you have a physical body, but you haven't, from that point on
: >you have no control over anything, and where you end up depends on the
: >state of your soul.
: Oh wwwwoooowwww mmmaaaannnn.... What a trip...
: Who told you this anyway? Sounds like you've already been there.
Read the Medjugorje Messages and you may learn something.
: >Make sure it isn't Hell because it will be an insanely
: >terrifying experience that never ends, and you will never see the light of
: >day again, and the worst of all is, you will know you will never see God,
: >that...will be the most painful and frightening of all, because you where
: >created in His image and likeness so that you could enjoy Paradise with
: >Him forever.
: Well, I'll be in good company. Gandhi, Einstein, Sagan. I could go on
: for a long time naming good, interesting people your pathetic GOD
: condemned to eternal torture along with me.
Why do you assume God has condemned these people? He's a Just God, He
will be as fair with you as you are with Him and your neighbour.
: Meanwhile you get to hang out with such Christians as Hitler and
: Torquemada.
Obviously your playing the Devils advocate.
: I'd rather be in Hell than spend eternity with a sanctimonious fuckwit
: like you, and the monster god that dreamed up such an evil scheme.
You may get your wish, Our Blessed Mother said:
October 8, 1985
"Those who say , 'I do not believe in God', how difficult it will be
for them when they approach the Throne of God and hear the voice:
'Enter into Hell'."
July 25, 1982
Concerning Hell: "Today many persons go to Hell. God allows His
children to suffer in Hell due to the fact that they have committed
grave, unpardonable sins. Those who are in Hell no longer have a
chance to know a lot better." Other answers from Our Lady state that
people who commit grave sins live in Hell while here on earth and
continue this Hell in eternity. They actually go to Hell because they
chose it in life and at the moment of death."
November 6, 1981
During this apparition, Our Lady disappears and the visionaries see a
terrifying vision of Hell. Then Our Lady reappears and says: "Do not
be afraid! I have shown you Hell so that you may know the state of
those who are there."
January 10, 1983 Mirjana shared with Father Tomislav Vlasic that
during the year and a half that she had been receiving
apparitions, she had experienced the maternal love and intimacy
of Our Lady and questioned Her why God could so "Mercilessly"
send sinners to Hell forever. "Men who go to Hell no longer want
to receive any benefit from God. They do not repent nor do they
cease to revolt and to blaspheme. they make up their mind to live
in Hell and do not contemplate leaving it."
Regarding Purgatory:
"In Purgatory there are different levels; the lowest is close to
Hell and the highest gradually draws near to Heaven. It is not on
All Souls Day, but at Christmas, that the greatest number of
souls leave Purgatory. There are in Purgatory, souls who pray
ardently to God, but for whom no relative or friend prays on
earth. God makes them benefit from the prayers of other people.
It happens that God permits them to manifest themselves in
different ways, close to their relatives on earth, in order to
remind men of the existence of Purgatory and to solicit their
prayers to come close to God who is just, but good. The majority
of people go to Purgatory. Many go to Hell. A small number go
directly to Heaven."
Hell is no joke.
: Your puny, meaningless, impossible threats are incredibly ridiculous,
: and can never be anything *but* a joke.
It appears the 'joke' could be on you.
: Hell, most *Christians* don't believe this shit any more.
That's why Our Lady is appearing all over the world in her last
apparitions on earth before the chastisements, to ask you to believe and
return to God while there is still time. You have noticed the weather
conditions throughout the world are getting continually worse. The
numerous apparitions in themselves tell us she is here because something
'really big' is coming and it's coming soon.
: Grow up. There is no monster under your bed.
Growing up is your concern.
God bless
John
--
\ [P] / o<<<<<>>>>> "PRAY THE HOLY ROSARY" <<<<<>>>>>o \ [F] /
-- [[[R]]] -- I extend to you who is reading this .sig the -- [[[A]]] --
/ [A] \ "SPECIAL BLESSING" of the "QUEEN OF PEACE" / [S] \
/ [Y] \ o<<<<<>>>>>"Our Lady of Medjugorje"<<<<<>>>>>o / [T] \
Bill K.
Michael H. wrote:
>
> Bill K. wrote:
> It is nice to see a spirit of conspiratorial comradory on the net. It
> reminds me of how small animals huddle together when they hear thunder.
Waaahh!! The other children are picking on me! Boo hoo hoo! I guess
you can huddle with your Islamic buddy just like you describe above and
dish out insults and character attacks against those you disagree with,
but when some go flying back your way, it is all of a sudden a
"conspiracy". Anyways, sorry for *almost* falling to your level by
feeding you your own medicine. ;)
> Quite frankly, I don't even know or care what petty little jot or tittle
> you pin-heads are so wound up about. No doubt you have been duped in
> some way by some well-marketed politico package. Hey, get your money's
> worth dudes. I actually couldn't care less about your stupid
> distinctions. It annoys me when people parrot the common garbage, no
> matter what it is, and that is why I was unpleasant to you. You were
> both pathetic suckers of the mass media, and I pointed that out, and
> therefore you have that in common.
The media is to blame, you say? Well, I suppose you think it would be a
better influence if it were to fall in line with conservative thought
through strict censorship and authoritarian control like it was 40 years
ago. You claim that we're suckers of popular media, and likewise, we
claim that you're a sucker of the church and parental influence, but
hey, what a good little boy you are not challenging or arguing against
whatever your parents and the church taught you.
My main influence is most likely from having grown up immersed in a
multiracial, multicultural, and multireligious environment. As such, I
don't see it appropriate to place "God" or any other religious biases in
a constitution that governs everyone.
> You can both pick on me for blowing
> your silly parrotings to smithereens without even thinking about it. If
> I had thought about it, I would have done a much better job, but you
> wouldn't have understood it, so why waste my time? This is just typing
> practice for me, pals. Just skip it. I hate BS as much as you do, but
> you will find that you aren't as good as I am at detecting it.
Didn't you say you weren't going to bother to read any articles in this
thread earlier, since you'd already passed judgement upon it as full of
morons by reading the title? So much for your credibility. If you've
got so much as an iota of wit, you'll have to demonstrate it before
anyone believes it.
As for what constitutes "BS", that's really a matter of perspective,
isn't it? Closed-minded people label anything they disagree with as
BS. But hey, anything you say is the absolute truth, echoing the
thoughts of God himself. ;)
--
Bill K. ( b i l l k @ r o g e r s . w a v e . c a )
*** WARNING *** All unsolicited bulk e-mail received at this address
will be promptly reported to the sender's system administrator, and to
law enforcement officials whenever applicable.
Bill K.
John Lauzon wrote:
>
> randall g (rand...@nospam.com) wrote:
> : >When you die your spirit leaves the body and you still think exactly
> : >the way as when you where alive, it's like nothing has changed, you still
> : >feel like you have a physical body, but you haven't, from that point on
> : >you have no control over anything, and where you end up depends on the
> : >state of your soul.
>
> : Oh wwwwoooowwww mmmaaaannnn.... What a trip...
>
> : Who told you this anyway? Sounds like you've already been there.
>
> Read the Medjugorje Messages and you may learn something.
Perhaps you can save us some time by summarizing the relevant portions.
> : Well, I'll be in good company. Gandhi, Einstein, Sagan. I could go on
> : for a long time naming good, interesting people your pathetic GOD
> : condemned to eternal torture along with me.
>
> Why do you assume God has condemned these people? He's a Just God, He
> will be as fair with you as you are with Him and your neighbour.
And how do you know this? Have you met the big fellow, or seen his
selection of condemnees?
> : Meanwhile you get to hang out with such Christians as Hitler and
> : Torquemada.
>
> Obviously your playing the Devils advocate.
So do they get a spot in heaven or not? Can I murder 100 people and get
a spot saved in heaven if I pick up the bible before I die? If I do, is
that your idea of a "just" God.
> : I'd rather be in Hell than spend eternity with a sanctimonious fuckwit
> : like you, and the monster god that dreamed up such an evil scheme.
>
> You may get your wish, Our Blessed Mother said:
Who is this "Blessed Mother" of yours anyways?
> October 8, 1985
>
> "Those who say , 'I do not believe in God', how difficult it will be
> for them when they approach the Throne of God and hear the voice:
> 'Enter into Hell'."
I prefer to trust my own five basic senses before anything else. Maybe
this god can make it easier for us to believe in him by showing his
face.
> July 25, 1982
>
> Concerning Hell: "Today many persons go to Hell. God allows His
> children to suffer in Hell due to the fact that they have committed
> grave, unpardonable sins. Those who are in Hell no longer have a
> chance to know a lot better." Other answers from Our Lady state that
> people who commit grave sins live in Hell while here on earth and
> continue this Hell in eternity. They actually go to Hell because they
> chose it in life and at the moment of death."
Ahhh...revenge is sweet. Especially when it lasts forever. ;)
<rest of weird delusionary BS snipped>
> : Hell, most *Christians* don't believe this shit any more.
>
> That's why Our Lady is appearing all over the world in her last
> apparitions on earth before the chastisements, to ask you to believe and
> return to God while there is still time. You have noticed the weather
> conditions throughout the world are getting continually worse.
Do you mean global warming? There's something called CO2 gas and the
"greenhouse effect". You might want to do some research into it.
> The
> numerous apparitions in themselves tell us she is here because something
> 'really big' is coming and it's coming soon.
Like India blasting a few nukes? ;)
Let's face it. None of the arguments you give are absolutely
compelling. Nothing you say make what you claim an irrefutable logical
certainty. You believe in all this because you CHOOSE to. That's
okay. Maybe it enlightens your spirit gives you psychological comfort
to believe that there is something out there, and gives you a reason to
live and something to look forward to. I don't know. In any case, it
is a choice, and I can accept that, provided that you, in return,
respect other people's right and choice to believe in another religion,
or no religion at all.
So let's keep government and laws theologically neutral and keep all
reference to "God" out of a constitution that covers us all.