As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...ry?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

This is just an example of a nut job religious group.

Protesting a Soldier because the US allows homosexuals is just wrong.
This soldier didn't deserve this. And Elizabeth Edwards doesn't deserve
it either.

It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
other out.

On 12/10/2010 11:26 AM, RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...ry?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

tiredofspam nospam.nospam.com wrote in
:

It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
other out.

Good idea.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

You know, as much as I oppose the whole idea upon which they were built,
sometimes the KKK almost made sense. Though I seriously doubt Phelps is
smart enough to understand what would be being said to him.

Deb



wrote:

This is just an example of a nut job religious group.

Protesting a Soldier because the US allows homosexuals is just wrong.
This soldier didn't deserve this. And Elizabeth Edwards doesn't deserve
it either.

It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
other out.

On 12/10/2010 11:26 AM, RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...est-elizabeth-
edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:43:24 -0600, "Dr. Deb"
wrote:


You know, as much as I oppose the whole idea upon which they were built,
sometimes the KKK almost made sense. Though I seriously doubt Phelps is
smart enough to understand what would be being said to him.

Deb

I think something like "You're too rude/stupid/your_term_here to be
allowed to reproduce, so we will ensure that you can't" might be
appropriate.

I'll pay for the knife - don't think any anesthetic should be
provided.

If that's too drastic, maybe tarred and feathered instead?

John




wrote:

This is just an example of a nut job religious group.

Protesting a Soldier because the US allows homosexuals is just wrong.
This soldier didn't deserve this. And Elizabeth Edwards doesn't deserve
it either.

It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
other out.

On 12/10/2010 11:26 AM, RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...est-elizabeth-
edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:43:24 -0600, "Dr. Deb"
wrote:


You know, as much as I oppose the whole idea upon which they were built,
sometimes the KKK almost made sense. Though I seriously doubt Phelps is
smart enough to understand what would be being said to him.

Deb

I think something like "You're too rude/stupid/your_term_here to be
allowed to reproduce, so we will ensure that you can't" might be
appropriate.

I'll pay for the knife - don't think any anesthetic should be
provided.

If that's too drastic, maybe tarred and feathered instead?

Nope. A simple bullet between the eyes is sufficient. Some people simply
shouldn't be allowed to breathe. He's one of them....and any one who follows
him.

On Dec 10, 8:41*am, tiredofspam nospam.nospam.com wrote:
This is just an example of a nut job religious group.

As a Christian myself I totally reject the strange and unsupprted
beliefs and actions of this group. They do not represent in any way
the belief of Christianity as I know it. This type of hate is exactly
the reason for the teaching about loving your neighbor.

On Dec 10, 5:46*pm, "SonomaProducts.com" wrote:
On Dec 10, 8:41*am, tiredofspam nospam.nospam.com wrote:

This is just an example of a nut job religious group.

As a Christian myself I totally reject the strange and unsupprted
beliefs and actions of this group. They do not represent in any way
the belief of Christianity as I know it. This type of hate is exactly
the reason for the teaching about loving your neighbor.

Yabbut.... Elizabeth Edwards was expounding the virtues of a man she
_knew_ was having an affair. The prospect of becoming First Lady of
the USA was irresistible to her.

It is tragic that cancer strikes the way it does, it somehow doesn't
turn her into an angel.... that, in itself, is not a free pass for
complete zealot ****-ups like Phelps and his hangers-on to disrupt a
private affair... clowns like that are giving good-living christians
the same bad name as those crazed muslims are tainting those who do
NOT subscribe to insanity.

People need to learn to tear down the blinds that main stream media
insists on draping before our eyes- Elizabeth Edwards was no better
than that husband of hers.

nomex

On Dec 10, 3:45*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:43:24 -0600, "Dr. Deb"
wrote:



You know, as much as I oppose the whole idea upon which they were built,
sometimes the KKK almost made sense. *Though I seriously doubt Phelps is
smart enough to understand what would be being said to him.

Deb

I think something like "You're too rude/stupid/your_term_here to be
allowed to reproduce, so we will ensure that you can't" might be
appropriate.

I'll pay for the knife - don't think any anesthetic should be
provided.

If that's too drastic, maybe tarred and feathered instead?

John





wrote:

This is just an example of a nut job religious group.

Protesting a Soldier because the US allows homosexuals is just wrong.
This soldier didn't deserve this. And Elizabeth Edwards doesn't deserve
it either.

It is these extremists at any level that we are fighting in Afghanistan,
and maybe we should move the Westboro members over there to wipe each
other out.

On 12/10/2010 11:26 AM, RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. *For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...est-elizabeth-
edawards-funeral/story?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

I don't know who you are, and I really don't give a ****, but
sometimes there is a need for drastic measures. Hauling the KKK into
this discussion is a no-starter. Too much bad history and baggage.
However, sitting on your hands and wishing for change is a no-starter
as well.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...
On 12/10/2010 10:26 AM, RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...ry?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

The irony is that if we truly wish to defend freedom, speech like that
from these people must be protected.

However ... I fail to see how they get away with forcing people to
listen to them by interfering in private events like funerals. A free
society guarantees you the right to speak freely. It does not
guarantee you the right to have listeners.

The simple solution to this is to back these people far enough away so
that they cannot disrupt an entirely private event. They belong on
public property where they can exercise the 1st Amendment rights so
any squirrels or other nut collectors that wish to listen ...


That's where they operate, on public property. They protest on the sidewalks
across from the funeral home, church, streets going to either, etc. This is
all public property. The key, which was accomplished at a few funerals for
soldiers, is to have more people lined up on the same sidewalk as the Phelps
clan, with HUGE signs and flags blocking theirs. I'm willing to bet if this
was accomplished at all of their sites of protest, they would eventually
diminish. We outnumber them by thousands. Surely we can overpower their
existence with a greater display.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message ...


But merely being on public property does not guarantee the right to do
whatever you want.
There are public nuisance ordinances, for example, that prevent you from
disturbing
the neighbors or running naked through the streets. These people should
be subject
to the same restrictions - they are interfering with people involved in a
private
matter.

The Phelps clan has made quite a bit of money suing towns that tried things
like that. Phelps Sr. is a disbarred lawyer, and I think a couple of
members of his genetic-bottleneck family are lawyers, they know how to work
the system.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message ...


The Phelps clan has made quite a bit of money suing towns that tried
things like that.
Phelps Sr. is a disbarred lawyer, and I think a couple of members of his
genetic-bottleneck
family are lawyers, they know how to work the system.


Understood, but somewhere along the way, it would be nice for the
government
to actually defend *everyone's* civil liberties, not just the fringe
lunatics.

I get - and support - their right to speak their piece. This is a
cornerstone of a free society. I do not get why they are able to
morph this into making everyone listen to their lunacy.

I agree. IMO their tactic is to generate publicity by doing something they
know will cause anguish to the families of dead soldiers (and others). I do
not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict
needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over
that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have
been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd
bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the family
can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.

One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one of
their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.

In article , "DGDevin" wrote:
[...]
One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one of
their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.

Nor will I. And I doubt that it would be easy to find 12 men who would vote to
convict him, either.

In article ,
says...


Yabut ... violence isn't the right way to solve this problem. Freedom
of one citizen is always bounded by the freedom of another. We have
a spineless government (particularly of late) that refuses to grasp
this notion. Phelps and his mob must be free to peddle their ideas -
however malignant. But I cannot grasp why the various governmental
bodies don't get that the funeral attendees also have co-equal rights.
Then again, I sort of do get it ... for some 70 years, the government
has anointed itself as being in charge of who is- and who is not worth
of particular rights and privileges... and "equal" isn't part of the
formula...

The nutjobs' behaviour sounds a lot like the behaviour of brownshirt
fascists to me.

They also sound a bit like terrorists.

I would ask the question, "Who benefits politically from their bad
behaviour and what is that political beneficiarie's politics when you
strip the facade back to frame and foundation?"

They are on a continuum. If government/law will not stop them, you have
to ask *why* it will not stop them.

Follow the power.

phorbin wrote:


The nutjobs' behaviour sounds a lot like the behaviour of brownshirt
fascists to me.

They also sound a bit like terrorists.

Throwing extreme words like facists and terrorists makes you sound more like
them than not. Nutjobs - sure, I can buy into that, but if wackos like this
cause you to feel terror, then you shouldn't step outside of your front
door.


I would ask the question, "Who benefits politically from their bad
behaviour and what is that political beneficiarie's politics when you
strip the facade back to frame and foundation?"

They are on a continuum. If government/law will not stop them, you
have to ask *why* it will not stop them.

Follow the power.

And you suggest the government have to power to decide who to stop? You're
really scaring me now.

--

-Mike-

Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Freedom of one citizen is always bounded by the freedom of another.

I like this phrasing. It captures something I've known forever, but never been
able to express so well. The closest is Oliver Wendell Holmes' "The right to
swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."

Sidebar: I'd always attributed that to Will Rogers, but it seems the Internet
has another opinion.

-- Doug

On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 08:26:18 -0800 (PST), RonB
wrote:

As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...ry?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

One way to counter them would be to picket, protest, and otherwise
totally obstruct THEIR lives. i.e.: send a well-behaved mob to their
church, homes, and place of business. Protest loudly all night long.
Publish photographs of individuals at their business. Sic a PI on
them and publish the dirt. Send a mob to THEIR gatherings (weddings,
funerals, company picnics, graduations, church functions, &tc.).

And jam potatoes up the tailpipes of their cars (I learned that one
when I was ~ 7 yrs old).

-Zz

-Zz

"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...

One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one
of their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.


I will. The trucker will have to take the time to clean Phelps splatter from
his truck and that could take awhile.

"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...

I do not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict
needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over
that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have
been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd
bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the
family can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.


Freedom of the correct speech. Incorrect speech should be banned. OK......

"CW" wrote in message
...

"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...

I do not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict
needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over
that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have
been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd
bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the
family can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.


Freedom of the correct speech. Incorrect speech should be banned. OK......

....and who defines what's correct and what's not? The government? Then we'll
have more complaints about gov intervention and slowly stripping our freedom
away.

On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 12:57:49 -0800, CW wrote:

Freedom of the correct speech. Incorrect speech should be banned.
OK......

I really, really, really hope you're trolling :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message ...


One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
pocket
is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one of
their roadside
protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.

Yabut ... violence isn't the right way to solve this problem.

IMO it would solve this particular problem quite nicely. It's not like the
Phelps clan is a franchise operation with branches in every city.

Freedom
of one citizen is always bounded by the freedom of another. We have
a spineless government (particularly of late) that refuses to grasp
this notion.

Legislators climb over each other to pass laws stopping the Phelps clan from
getting near military funerals, the problem isn't the legislative or
executive branches, it is the judicial branch. The courts (usually
correctly) lean towards protecting freedom of speech, but there are still
limitations when a public need is more pressing than an individual one--IMO
this should be one of them. But as the lawyers say, hard cases make bad
law.

Phelps and his mob must be free to peddle their ideas -
however malignant. But I cannot grasp why the various governmental
bodies don't get that the funeral attendees also have co-equal rights.

Because they don't see them as equal, they assume that hurt feelings are not
as important as freedom of speech. In general I agree with that, but I do
feel that this particular speech should not be protected outside the gates
of a cemetery even if I would protect it a quarter of a mile away. We
impose limitations on speech in order to serve compelling public needs, e.g.
discouraging defamation or incitement to violence. I think a case could be
made that the Phelps mutants have ample opportunity to express their views
in places other than in front of grieving relations at a funeral, that their
rights do not depend on protesting outside the cemetery gates. Some laws
that have been passed require them to stay 1,000 feet away, but others
impose a useless 150 foot requirement--I'd make it at least 1,500 feet. If
they want to protest a few blocks away in front of some car wash, fine.
Then the car wash owner can sue them for interfering with his business.

"SBH" wrote in message ...


One day some pilled-out trucker with a stack of alimony demands in his
pocket is going to turn the wheel and flatten the Phelps clan during one
of their roadside protests, and I for one won't shed any tears.


I will. The trucker will have to take the time to clean Phelps splatter
from his truck and that could take awhile.

The bank is going to repo his rig anyway, that's one of the reasons he's so
****ed-off.

"CW" wrote in message
...

I do not think the law should protect speech which is designed to inflict
needless suffering on innocent parties and then exploit the outrage over
that loathsome practice. If it was up to me (and so far the courts have
been curiously reluctant to seek my opinion on this or other matters) I'd
bar such protests far enough from the gates of a cemetery so that the
family can come and go without seeing these gibbering vermin.


Freedom of the correct speech. Incorrect speech should be banned. OK......

Nonsense. The law limits speech when a compelling public interest overrides
a private interest. I cannot libel or slander you without risking a
lawsuit, the law recognizes that preventing *damaging* defamation is more
important than my right to speak defamatory words--your right not to be
injured overrides my right to speak. The Phelps clan cannot demonstrate that
being kept away from the gates of a cemetery prevents them from speaking, it
only keeps them from inflicting emotional distress on the family of a dead
soldier (or whoever's family they are trying to hurt). So the right of a
family at a funeral not to injured by hateful speech should override the
Phelps clan's right to speak *at that particular location*. This isn't a
blanket ban on their speech, only a limitation on it being conducted in a
location designed purely to inflict needless pain.

As one of the Supreme Court Justices hearing the related case asked, what if
the Phelps wanted to protest outside the homes of wounded soldiers, follow
them to their rehab sessions, picket family picnics, follow them down public
streets and so on. Would that speech be protected? Are there no limits,
anywhere, ever?

"SBH" wrote in message ...


...and who defines what's correct and what's not? The government? Then
we'll have more complaints about gov intervention and slowly stripping our
freedom away.

The courts have the final say on *everything*. So if the courts can
determine whether or not someone goes to prison for the rest of his life (or
gets a lethal injection), is it reasonable to insist they can't be trusted
to rule on where the Phelps clan can stage their nightmarish protests?

RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...ry?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the words
from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring very true
when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of religeous intolerance
and bigotry.

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
*And* *no* *religion* too
Imagine all the people
*Living* *life* *in* *peace*

I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction in this
world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce at the interment
of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker in peace.

On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:28:55 -0000, "Disbelief"
wrote:



With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the words
from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring very true
when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of religeous intolerance
and bigotry.

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
*And* *no* *religion* too
Imagine all the people
*Living* *life* *in* *peace*

I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction in this
world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce at the interment
of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker in peace.

Well said!
--
Mr.E

On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:28:55 -0000, "Disbelief"
wrote:

RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...ry?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the words
from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring very true
when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of religeous intolerance
and bigotry.

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
*And* *no* *religion* too
Imagine all the people
*Living* *life* *in* *peace*

I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction in this
world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce at the interment
of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker in peace.

Nice thought, but the idiots on both (or all, as there are more than
two) sides want to snuff the others.

I'll see you and call you one:

That's me in the corner
That's me in the spotlight
Losing my religion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ2yXWi0ppw
(REM, 1991)

--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch

Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:28:55 -0000, "Disbelief"
wrote:

RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...ry?id=12364430

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the
words from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring
very true when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of
religeous intolerance and bigotry.

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
*And* *no* *religion* too
Imagine all the people
*Living* *life* *in* *peace*

I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction
in this world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce
at the interment of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker
in peace.

Nice thought, but the idiots on both (or all, as there are more than
two) sides want to snuff the others.

I'll see you and call you one:

That's me in the corner
That's me in the spotlight
Losing my religion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ2yXWi0ppw
(REM, 1991)

Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world
would be a damn site better place. Too many have died, been maimed,
deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and
usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.

When was the last time you saw a hungry clergyman? I could go on, but this
is not the place to do so.

And just to finish Lennon's song:

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one

And that's the world without religion..

On Dec 13, 2:24*pm, "Disbelief" disbelief@diilly-
daally....invalid.com wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:28:55 -0000, "Disbelief"
wrote:

RonB wrote:
As a life-long Kansan, I love my state, but there are times when I
want to hide under a damned rock. *For those who haven't heard the
nutcase a**holes from the Topeka-based Westboro "church" plan to
protest her funeral.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/contr...test-elizabeth....

No word regarding Patriot Guard intervention.

%$@#&*

With all due respects to the lady, its at times like this when the
words from the song - Imagine - by the great, late John Lennon, ring
very true when someone cannot be put to rest in peace because of
religeous intolerance and bigotry.

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
*And* *no* *religion* too
Imagine all the people
*Living* *life* *in* *peace*

I am a committed atheist, but if there is to be religious friction
in this world, then at least let all opposing factions call a truce
at the interment of a "believer" so that they may meet their maker
in peace.

Nice thought, but the idiots on both (or all, as there are more than
two) sides want to snuff the others.

I'll see you and call you one:

That's me in the corner
That's me in the spotlight
Losing my religion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ2yXWi0ppw
(REM, 1991)

Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world
would be a damn site better place. *Too many have died, been maimed,
deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and
usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.

When was the last time you saw a hungry clergyman? *I could go on, but this
is not the place to do so.

And just to finish Lennon's song:

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one

And that's the world without religion..

Some people quote the Bible and try to live by what it teaches.
You quote John Lennon, a drugged-out megalomaniac. You may, sir, live
by what he had to say, I'll stick to _my_ beliefs.

Robatoy wrote in news:a1877b77-6b34-4d19-a19b-
:

Some people quote the Bible and try to live by what it teaches.
You quote John Lennon, a drugged-out megalomaniac. You may, sir, live
by what he had to say, I'll stick to _my_ beliefs.


That's right: To each his own, or as the poet said:
Jeder soll nach seiner Façon selig werden

(one line):
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_gefl%C3%
BCgelter_Worte/J#Jeder_soll_nach_seiner_Fa.C3.A7on_selig_werden.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Han wrote:
Robatoy wrote in
news:a1877b77-6b34-4d19-a19b-
:

Some people quote the Bible and try to live by what it teaches.
You quote John Lennon, a drugged-out megalomaniac. You may, sir, live
by what he had to say, I'll stick to _my_ beliefs.


That's right: To each his own,

I fully agree, and then perhaps the various religious factions could get on
with living their own beliefs whilst respecting others and perhaps praying
to whatever god they believe in peacefully side by side.

All the best and may your Christmas be a good and peaceful one - and if your
religion doesn't recognise the birth of a Christ, then peace to you all.

"Disbelief" wrote in message ...


Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world
would be a damn site better place. Too many have died, been maimed,
deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and
usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.

A fellow my wife and I know lost everything to Hurricane Katrina, his house
had six feet of water in it. He didn't even see anyone from FEMA for
months, but he and his neighbors were fed and housed for the most part by
church groups, many of them had come hundreds or even thousands of miles to
help. So while I agree that religion has been the source of a lot of strife
over the centuries, that doesn't mean that no good has ever come of it.
Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can be a
force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:15:16 -0800, DGDevin wrote:

Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can
be a force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.

Absolutely correct. And whether or not the religion is "true" or not
seems to have no bearing.

Have a wonderful winter solstice festival, whatever myths you attach to
it :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Dec 13, 7:51*pm, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:15:16 -0800, DGDevin wrote:
Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can
be a force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.

Absolutely correct. *And whether or not the religion is "true" or not
seems to have no bearing.

Have a wonderful winter solstice festival, whatever myths you attach to
it :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

I celebrate Festivus.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 12:00:47 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
wrote:

On Dec 13, 2:24*pm, "Disbelief" disbelief@diilly-
daally....invalid.com wrote:
--snip--
Some people quote the Bible and try to live by what it teaches.
You quote John Lennon, a drugged-out megalomaniac. You may, sir, live
by what he had to say, I'll stick to _my_ beliefs.

Yeah, tell us all about your Old Testament punishments and such, Toy.

Poor John was horribly liberal, too.

--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:15:16 -0800, "DGDevin"
wrote:

"Disbelief" wrote in message ...


Not a patch on Lennon's song - and if there were no religion, the world
would be a damn site better place. Too many have died, been maimed,
deprived of food or cast out of society in the name of religion - and
usually by preachers of it who are either hypocrites or bigots or both.

A fellow my wife and I know lost everything to Hurricane Katrina, his house
had six feet of water in it. He didn't even see anyone from FEMA for
months, but he and his neighbors were fed and housed for the most part by
church groups, many of them had come hundreds or even thousands of miles to
help. So while I agree that religion has been the source of a lot of strife
over the centuries, that doesn't mean that no good has ever come of it.
Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can be a
force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.

Please remember that one does not have to go to church, nor preach to
natives to have a good heart, to share their bounty, or to be nice to
people. Religion gets in the way of that more than you think, driving
away generous people who don't want to put up with the horrible
bigotry and animosity of churchgoers of all races and religions.

I'm totally against organized religion yet I gave $6 to a lady and her
daughter who approached me as I left the market yesterday. They needed
gas to get to Portland.

Religious folks can keep their witch burnings, Crusades, Westboros,
etc.

--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 17:26:27 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
wrote:

On Dec 13, 7:51*pm, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:15:16 -0800, DGDevin wrote:
Religion is no different from any other aspect of human society, it can
be a force for good or ill, it all depends on how people use it.

Absolutely correct. *And whether or not the religion is "true" or not
seems to have no bearing.

Have a wonderful winter solstice festival, whatever myths you attach to
it :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

I celebrate Festivus.

Warn't he that guy on Rawhide?

Happy Yule! Joyous Saturnalia!


P.S: No, Genitalia is not an Italian airline.

--
Know how to listen, and you will
profit even from those who talk badly.
-- Plutarch

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news

Religious folks can keep their witch burnings, Crusades, Westboros,
etc.

How about their soup kitchens and homeless shelters and rehab programs and
hospices and so on, can they keep those two? You're choosing to see only
one side, and while bigotry and stupidity can certainly be found among
religious people, so can compassion and generosity. I've known some real
jerks who made a big deal of their religious faith, but some of the nicest
folks I've ever met were also very religious--they're not all looking for
opportunities to burn witches.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
news

More people have died at the hands of atheists than at the hands of the
religious wingnuts. Stalin alone probably eclipses the entire death
toll of the Crusades and medieval Christian church. Tribalists come in
second - think Tutsi/Hutu for one example - but religion is a far distant
third.

What leads you to believe Stalin was an atheist? There is significant
evidence that he never really shook off the seminary training he had as a
young man, and that his support of religious persecution especially prior to
WWII was largely from fear that the church represented competition for the
loyalty of the people.

You're also forgetting some religiously inspired slaughters, e.g. the
Taiping Rebellion in China (led by the self-announced brother of Christ)
killed twenty million. But it also isn't a competition in which the
body-count determines who is worst. An atheist who kills to achieve power,
or a supposed Christian who kills to achieve power--which one is defying the
moral code he claims to believe in?