| brd1289@hotmail.com |
>>
>>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
>>It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
>
>YUP he is the first president to spend so much of the future
>generation's money!
It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw the
election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and real
people. Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
insurance because the only thing those evangelical assholes care about is
electing a president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words every
4th sentence. Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care
because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions more
Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long careers
destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American taxpayers are
going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional dollars in Bush IOU's
because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the only thing that matters to
them is having a president who mentions Jesus every day. Never mind that Kerry
was just as much a Christian as Bush and had the added benefit of not doing
the opposite of what Jesus would do 100% of the time as the case with Bush.
The kind of Christian I respect is the man or woman who quietly goes about
following the _real_ values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure and
selfish in their beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces. Some
ugly problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and
Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world.
It is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and
acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly side
to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0% good, I'm
saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to ignore the ugly
side. Lots of people automatically assume when they have kids that religion
will make the kid turn out better. But it really doesn't make that much
difference. Whether or not people understand good from bad when they grow up
generally doesn't have much to do with how much religion they were tought.
Ironically for lots of people religion can provide excuses and reasons to harm
others. The greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion for
kids creates a big risk they will become a danger to society.
|
|
|
| zxcvbob |
brd1289@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
>>>It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
>>
>>YUP he is the first president to spend so much of the future
>>generation's money!
>
>
> It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw the
> election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and real
> people. Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> insurance because the only thing those evangelical assholes care about is
> electing a president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words every
> 4th sentence. Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care
> because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions more
> Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long careers
> destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American taxpayers are
> going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional dollars in Bush IOU's
> because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the only thing that matters to
> them is having a president who mentions Jesus every day. Never mind that Kerry
> was just as much a Christian as Bush and had the added benefit of not doing
> the opposite of what Jesus would do 100% of the time as the case with Bush.
>
> The kind of Christian I respect is the man or woman who quietly goes about
> following the _real_ values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure and
> selfish in their beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces. Some
> ugly problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and
> Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world.
>
> It is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and
> acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly side
> to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0% good, I'm
> saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to ignore the ugly
> side. Lots of people automatically assume when they have kids that religion
> will make the kid turn out better. But it really doesn't make that much
> difference. Whether or not people understand good from bad when they grow up
> generally doesn't have much to do with how much religion they were tought.
> Ironically for lots of people religion can provide excuses and reasons to harm
> others. The greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion for
> kids creates a big risk they will become a danger to society.
>
So what's your point?
Best regards, :-)
Bob
|
|
|
| Stuart Warren |
<brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> insurance
It would really suck if they went out and got jobs that provided insurance,
now wouldn't it? Then they might develop pride for their work and what they
earn, and become Republicans (or better yet, Libertarians).
Stuart Warren
|
|
|
| The Wolf |
And if the 45,000,000 children had mothers who weren't minority sluts
who don't know who the fathers are maybe they could get a job and AFFORD
health insurence.
Who the **** came up with this idea that's it's the governments job to
take care of everybody.
How about individual responsiblity..........
zxcvbob <zxcvbob@charter.net> wrote:
> brd1289@hotmail.com wrote: >>>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal
> event in world history. >>>It sets America in a collision course with the
> rest of the world, >> >>YUP he is the first president to spend so much of
> the future >>generation's money! > > > It was stunning with so much at
> stake that selfish evangelicals threw the > election to Bush because they
> don't give a **** about the real world and real > people. Now 45 million
> Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health > insurance because
> the only thing those evangelical assholes care about is > electing a
> president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words every > 4th
> sentence. Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care >
> because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions
> more > Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long
> careers > destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American
> taxpayers are > going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional
> dollars in Bush IOU's > because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the
> only thing that matters to > them is having a president who mentions Jesus
> every day. Never mind that Kerry > was just as much a Christian as Bush
> and had the added benefit of not doing > the opposite of what Jesus would
> do 100% of the time as the case with Bush. > > The kind of Christian I
> respect is the man or woman who quietly goes about > following the _real_
> values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure and > selfish in their
> beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces. Some > ugly
> problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and >
> Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world. > > It
> is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and >
> acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly
> side > to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0%
> good, I'm > saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to
> ignore the ugly > side. Lots of people automatically assume when they
> have kids that religion > will make the kid turn out better. But it
> really doesn't make that much > difference. Whether or not people
> understand good from bad when they grow up > generally doesn't have much
> to do with how much religion they were tought. > Ironically for lots of
> people religion can provide excuses and reasons to harm > others. The
> greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion for > kids
> creates a big risk they will become a danger to society. >
>
> So what's your point?
>
> Best regards, :-) ob
|
|
|
| Richard Periut |
The Wolf wrote:
> And if the 45,000,000 children had mothers who weren't minority sluts
> who don't know who the fathers are maybe they could get a job and AFFORD
> health insurence.
>
> Who the **** came up with this idea that's it's the governments job to
> take care of everybody.
>
> How about individual responsiblity..........
>
>
> zxcvbob <zxcvbob@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
>>brd1289@hotmail.com wrote: >>>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal
>>event in world history. >>>It sets America in a collision course with the
>>rest of the world, >> >>YUP he is the first president to spend so much of
>>the future >>generation's money! > > > It was stunning with so much at
>>stake that selfish evangelicals threw the > election to Bush because they
>>don't give a **** about the real world and real > people. Now 45 million
>>Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health > insurance because
>>the only thing those evangelical assholes care about is > electing a
>>president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words every > 4th
>>sentence. Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care >
>>because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions
>>more > Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long
>>careers > destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American
>>taxpayers are > going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional
>>dollars in Bush IOU's > because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the
>>only thing that matters to > them is having a president who mentions Jesus
>>every day. Never mind that Kerry > was just as much a Christian as Bush
>>and had the added benefit of not doing > the opposite of what Jesus would
>>do 100% of the time as the case with Bush. > > The kind of Christian I
>>respect is the man or woman who quietly goes about > following the _real_
>>values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure and > selfish in their
>>beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces. Some > ugly
>>problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and >
>>Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world. > > It
>>is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and >
>>acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly
>>side > to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0%
>>good, I'm > saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to
>>ignore the ugly > side. Lots of people automatically assume when they
>>have kids that religion > will make the kid turn out better. But it
>>really doesn't make that much > difference. Whether or not people
>>understand good from bad when they grow up > generally doesn't have much
>>to do with how much religion they were tought. > Ironically for lots of
>>people religion can provide excuses and reasons to harm > others. The
>>greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion for > kids
>>creates a big risk they will become a danger to society. >
>>
>>So what's your point?
>>
>>Best regards, :-) ob
If these foaming in the mouth liberal commie assholes had their way,
we'd be standing on a line for toilet paper very soon.
Rich
--
"Dum Spiro, Spero."
As long as I breath, I hope.
Cicero (Ancient Rome)
ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤°
`°¤ø,¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø
><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸. ><((((º> ·´¯`·. , .·´¯`·.. ><((((º>
Let there be fish!!!
|
|
|
| zxcvbob |
The Wolf wrote:
> And if the 45,000,000 children had mothers who weren't minority sluts
> who don't know who the fathers are maybe they could get a job and AFFORD
> health insurence.
>
> Who the **** came up with this idea that's it's the governments job to
> take care of everybody.
>
> How about individual responsiblity..........
>
>
You actually read all that crap? (obvious from the 45,000,000 number)
That's kind of scary...
Bob
|
|
|
| The Wolf |
That's what cracks my up about canada's third world socialized health
care. It's PROPPED UP WITH AMERICAN DOLLARS!
There whole government collapses without the US.
Tort reform is a good start. Edwards will lead the charge on that right?
Richard Periut <rperiut@nj.rr.com> wrote:
> The Wolf wrote:
> > And if the 45,000,000 children had mothers who weren't minority sluts
> > who don't know who the fathers are maybe they could get a job and AFFORD
> > health insurence.
> >
> > Who the **** came up with this idea that's it's the governments job to
> > take care of everybody.
> >
> > How about individual responsiblity..........
> >
> >
> > zxcvbob <zxcvbob@charter.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>brd1289@hotmail.com wrote: >>>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal
> >>event in world history. >>>It sets America in a collision course with the
> >>rest of the world, >> >>YUP he is the first president to spend so much of
> >>the future >>generation's money! > > > It was stunning with so much at
> >>stake that selfish evangelicals threw the > election to Bush because they
> >>don't give a **** about the real world and real > people. Now 45 million
> >>Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health > insurance because
> >>the only thing those evangelical assholes care about is > electing a
> >>president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words every > 4th
> >>sentence. Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care >
> >>because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions
> >>more > Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long
> >>careers > destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American
> >>taxpayers are > going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional
> >>dollars in Bush IOU's > because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the
> >>only thing that matters to > them is having a president who mentions Jesus
> >>every day. Never mind that Kerry > was just as much a Christian as Bush
> >>and had the added benefit of not doing > the opposite of what Jesus would
> >>do 100% of the time as the case with Bush. > > The kind of Christian I
> >>respect is the man or woman who quietly goes about > following the _real_
> >>values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure and > selfish in their
> >>beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces. Some > ugly
> >>problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and >
> >>Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world. > > It
> >>is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and >
> >>acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly
> >>side > to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0%
> >>good, I'm > saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to
> >>ignore the ugly > side. Lots of people automatically assume when they
> >>have kids that religion > will make the kid turn out better. But it
> >>really doesn't make that much > difference. Whether or not people
> >>understand good from bad when they grow up > generally doesn't have much
> >>to do with how much religion they were tought. > Ironically for lots of
> >>people religion can provide excuses and reasons to harm > others. The
> >>greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion for > kids
> >>creates a big risk they will become a danger to society. >
> >>
> >>So what's your point?
> >>
> >>Best regards, :-) ob
> If these foaming in the mouth liberal commie assholes had their way,
> we'd be standing on a line for toilet paper very soon.
>
> Rich
|
|
|
| The Wolf |
I was being somewhat facetious.
If you look at the constitution, the job of the federal goverenment is
to protect the citizens and borders. NOT PROVIDE FREE HEALTHCARE.
Individual responsibility was the point I was trying to make.
zxcvbob <zxcvbob@charter.net> wrote:
> The Wolf wrote:
>
> > And if the 45,000,000 children had mothers who weren't minority sluts
> > who don't know who the fathers are maybe they could get a job and AFFORD
> > health insurence.
> >
> > Who the **** came up with this idea that's it's the governments job to
> > take care of everybody.
> >
> > How about individual responsiblity..........
> >
> >
>
> You actually read all that crap? (obvious from the 45,000,000 number)
> That's kind of scary...
>
> Bob
|
|
|
| OmManiPadmeOmelet |
In article <2v88ffF2jc7cnU1@uni-berlin.de>,
zxcvbob <zxcvbob@charter.net> wrote:
> brd1289@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
> >>>It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
> >>
> >>YUP he is the first president to spend so much of the future
> >>generation's money!
> >
> >
> > It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw the
> > election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and
> > real
> > people. Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> > insurance because the only thing those evangelical assholes care about is
> > electing a president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words
> > every
> > 4th sentence. Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health
> > care
> > because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions
> > more
> > Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long careers
> > destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American taxpayers are
> > going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional dollars in Bush IOU's
> > because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the only thing that matters
> > to
> > them is having a president who mentions Jesus every day. Never mind that
> > Kerry
> > was just as much a Christian as Bush and had the added benefit of not doing
> > the opposite of what Jesus would do 100% of the time as the case with Bush.
> >
> > The kind of Christian I respect is the man or woman who quietly goes about
> > following the _real_ values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure and
> > selfish in their beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces.
> > Some
> > ugly problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and
> > Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world.
> >
> > It is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and
> > acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly
> > side
> > to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0% good,
> > I'm
> > saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to ignore the ugly
> > side. Lots of people automatically assume when they have kids that
> > religion
> > will make the kid turn out better. But it really doesn't make that much
> > difference. Whether or not people understand good from bad when they grow
> > up
> > generally doesn't have much to do with how much religion they were tought.
> > Ironically for lots of people religion can provide excuses and reasons to
> > harm
> > others. The greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion
> > for
> > kids creates a big risk they will become a danger to society.
> >
>
> So what's your point?
>
> Best regards, :-)
> Bob
Looky here:
http://www.rense.com/general59/godse.htm
Bush is the Anti-Christ.
'nuff said.
Om
--
"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson
|
|
|
| Rod Speed |
<brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> Joel M. Eichen <joeleichen@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> PaPaPeng <papapeng@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
>>> It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
>> YUP he is the first president to spend so
>> much of the future generation's money!
The same mindless claim has been made quite a few times
in the past, particularly during Vietnam and in the Raygun era.
It didnt actually end up anything like the worst of the mindless
hyperventilators claimed it would, particularly the result was
pretty decent during the Slick era economically.
> It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish
> evangelicals threw the election to Bush because they
> don't give a **** about the real world and real people.
Yep, most voters basically just vote on their gut reaction and
Bush just appeals to more than some stuffed shirt like Kerry does.
Thats always been the major downside of modern democracys.
The fundamental point tho is that while its got that major downside,
it leaves every other approach for dead and the voters do give
pollys that piss them off enough the bums rush too.
> Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any
> health insurance because the only thing those evangelical
> assholes care about is electing a president who mentions
> Jesus or uses evangelical code words every 4th sentence.
That particular problem clearly wasnt fixed when the
other lot elected Slick for similarly superficial reasons.
> Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care
> because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes.
Nope, because not enough of the stupid voters care enough about it.
> Now millions more Americans are going to have their jobs exported and
> their life long careers destroyed because of those self centered jerks.
That will continue to happen regardless of who got elected.
Its been going on for decades now, most obviously
with electronic appliances, cars, motorbikes etc etc etc.
You're such a complete dud that you cant manage to work out what
jobs cant be exported in enough volume to matter ? Your problem.
Welcome to the real world.
> Now American taxpayers are going to owe Asian
> countries trillions of additional dollars in Bush IOU's
Their problem, particularly as the value of the USD drops.
> because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the only thing that
> matters to them is having a president who mentions Jesus every day.
More mindless sour grapes drivel. Kerry wasnt gunna pull out of Iraq.
> Never mind that Kerry was just as much a Christian as Bush
Complete pack of lies.
> and had the added benefit of not doing the opposite of what
> Jesus would do 100% of the time as the case with Bush.
Who gives a **** what some fool stupid enough
to get nailed up by the romans would do ?
> The kind of Christian I respect is the man or woman who
> quietly goes about following the _real_ values of Christ.
More fool you. Modern economys produce **** all
jobs if that is the basis on which things are done.
> Someone who is not so insecure and selfish in their
> beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces.
Only a minority of the voters, stupid.
> Some ugly problems arise when people's egos get so
> wrapped up with Church and Mosque they become
> a danger to society, themselves, and the world.
And then there's pig ignorant fools like you and your ilk.
> It is important in the 21st century for everybody
> to understand and acknowledge that religion --
> every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly side to it.
Everyone is never ever gunna understand any particular point, stupid.
> I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad
> and 0% good, I'm saying that neither the country
> nor the world can afford to ignore the ugly side.
Best do the decent thing and set fire to yourself in 'protest' or sumfin.
> Lots of people automatically assume when they have kids that
> religion will make the kid turn out better. But it really doesn't
> make that much difference. Whether or not people understand
> good from bad when they grow up generally doesn't have much
> to do with how much religion they were tought. Ironically for lots
> of people religion can provide excuses and reasons to harm others.
True of politics too, stupid. Welcome to the real world.
> The greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion
> for kids creates a big risk they will become a danger to society.
Bull****. Attempting to instil some moral values is better than not bothering.
|
|
|
| Free Speech |
"Stuart Warren" <email@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:cmmq91$qa2$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> <brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> > insurance
>
> It would really suck if they went out and got jobs that provided
insurance,
> now wouldn't it? Then they might develop pride for their work and what
they
> earn, and become Republicans (or better yet, Libertarians).
Tell me how republican and libertarians don't get laid off from work. If
some do, when they switch their job, they will have to switch doctors too.
That means more republican and libertarian doctors lose business.
>
> Stuart Warren
>
>
|
|
|
| Vlad Taltos |
"Stuart Warren" <email@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:<cmmq91$qa2$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>...
> <brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> > insurance
>
> It would really suck if they went out and got jobs that provided insurance,
> now wouldn't it? Then they might develop pride for their work and what they
> earn, and become Republicans (or better yet, Libertarians).
A true Libertarian or free enterprise Republican would see the wisdom
of creating conditions where the self-employed and small business
owners could afford healthcare instead of having to suck at a
corporate teat and drain their profits (who's gonna be proud of a job
they're keeping just for the health care benefits?). Too bad when
given the opprotunity to start cost management reform the majority
party (Republicans, surprisingly protectionist) bent over backwards
for the pharmaceutical sector.
|
|
|
| Stuart Warren |
"Vlad Taltos" <gnostics@tanya.com> wrote in message
news:20b1556c.0411072320.63d6637f@posting.google.com...
> "Stuart Warren" <email@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:<cmmq91$qa2$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>...
> > <brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> > > insurance
> >
> > It would really suck if they went out and got jobs that provided
insurance,
> > now wouldn't it? Then they might develop pride for their work and what
they
> > earn, and become Republicans (or better yet, Libertarians).
>
> A true Libertarian or free enterprise Republican would see the wisdom
> of creating conditions where the self-employed and small business
> owners could afford healthcare instead of having to suck at a
> corporate teat and drain their profits (who's gonna be proud of a job
> they're keeping just for the health care benefits?). Too bad when
> given the opprotunity to start cost management reform the majority
> party (Republicans, surprisingly protectionist) bent over backwards
> for the pharmaceutical sector.
But a true Libertarian or Republican would not want a government subsidy,
either. The Democrats do not merely want to ensure people get healthcare,
they want a federally-subsidized welfare program to handle it, and that does
not sit well with *anyone* who values their individuality (at least with us
conservatives).
I think you may have misunderstood my post, anyway. What I'm saying here is
the government should pressure businesses and insurance providers to provide
a fair healthcare package to employees without actually administrating it
itself. A 'right to healthcare' if you will. Coupled with lower taxes and
reduced government services across the board, you can create a situation
where everyone either has a plan via their job, or can afford one. (think
how much you could do with your income if you only paid, say, 10% total in
taxes, instead of 40% or more in income taxes, sales taxes, etc.) But I
would expect few people to have to buy their own, as it's in companies' best
interests to provide the best plan possible to attract the best workers.
Stuart Warren
|
|
|
| Stuart Warren |
"Free Speech" <yyyiiinnnggg@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cmn508$m0o$1@pita.alt.net...
>
> "Stuart Warren" <email@somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:cmmq91$qa2$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> > <brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> > > insurance
> >
> > It would really suck if they went out and got jobs that provided
> insurance,
> > now wouldn't it? Then they might develop pride for their work and what
> they
> > earn, and become Republicans (or better yet, Libertarians).
>
> Tell me how republican and libertarians don't get laid off from work. If
> some do, when they switch their job, they will have to switch doctors too.
> That means more republican and libertarian doctors lose business.
Uhh, do you know *anything* about how non-government organizations work?
1. Most insurance providers are huge companies who offer coverage through
most doctors. So its unlikely, espeically in an urban area, that you'd have
to switch doctors just because you change jobs, or even insurance providers.
If you're looking for a job and they have a crappy provider, either go
elsewhere or demand that they change providers. Remember, if you're
qualified they need you as much as you need them.
2. I don't quite get your point about doctors losing business. The law of
averages says that a doctor would gain about as many patients due to
healthcare issues as he loses.
Stuart Warren
|
|
|
| Free Speech |
On 8 Nov 2004 03:21:42 GMT, brd1289@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
>>>It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
>>
>>YUP he is the first president to spend so much of the future
>>generation's money!
>
>It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals
<snip>
Fundamentalist religions would be so popular if there wasn't money in it and
appealing to others wacky fanatical religious beliefs makes it seem as if
Bush is a conservative -- buy nothing could be further from the truth. Bush
is about as conservative as Attila the Hun. And Bush NEVER does
ANYTHING unless there's money in it -- and that includes lying right
through his teeth to the American public about 911.
He's a goddamned liar and anyone who prescribes to a wacky fundamentalist
who justifies lying for profit deserves to burn in their own hell, which is
quickly coming on this earth.
|
|
|
| Jim Ley |
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 03:33:23 -0600, "Stuart Warren"
<email@somewhere.com> wrote:
>"Free Speech" <yyyiiinnnggg@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> So its unlikely, espeically in an urban area, that you'd have
>to switch doctors just because you change jobs, or even insurance providers.
>If you're looking for a job and they have a crappy provider, either go
>elsewhere or demand that they change providers. Remember, if you're
>qualified they need you as much as you need them.
No that's only the case if there's not lots of other similarly
qualified people who could replace you, then they'll take the cheapest
one...
Jim.
|
|
|
| Chuck Lysaght |
brd1289@hotmail.com wrote in message news:<2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de>...
> >>
> >>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
> >>It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
> >
> >YUP he is the first president to spend so much of the future
> >generation's money!
>
> It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw the
> election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and real
> people. Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> insurance because the only thing those evangelical assholes care about is
> electing a president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words every
> 4th sentence.
Complete and utter bull****.
Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care
> because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions more
> Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long careers
> destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American taxpayers are
> going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional dollars in Bush IOU's
> because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the only thing that matters to
> them is having a president who mentions Jesus every day. Never mind that Kerry
> was just as much a Christian as Bush and had the added benefit of not doing
> the opposite of what Jesus would do 100% of the time as the case with Bush.
>
> The kind of Christian I respect is the man or woman who quietly goes about
> following the _real_ values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure and
> selfish in their beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces. Some
> ugly problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and
> Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world.
>
> It is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and
> acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly side
> to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0% good, I'm
> saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to ignore the ugly
> side. Lots of people automatically assume when they have kids that religion
> will make the kid turn out better. But it really doesn't make that much
> difference. Whether or not people understand good from bad when they grow up
> generally doesn't have much to do with how much religion they were tought.
> Ironically for lots of people religion can provide excuses and reasons to harm
> others. The greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion for
> kids creates a big risk they will become a danger to society.
Wrong. This country has swayed away from the moral values that it was built upon.
|
|
|
| Ida Slapter |
On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 23:01:28 -0600, OmManiPadmeOmelet
<Omelet@brokeneggs.com> wrote:
>Looky here:
>
>http://www.rense.com/
>
>Bush is the Anti-Christ.
>'nuff said.
Good gravy....anyone can put up a web site these days. Take your
twaddle and vamoose.
|
|
|
| AbsolutelyCertain |
"Chuck Lysaght" <chucklysaght@mail.com> wrote in message
news:82cbb3ea.0411080456.1d4bfd99@posting.google.com...
> brd1289@hotmail.com wrote in message
news:<2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de>...
> > >>
> > >>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
> > >>It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
> > >
> > >YUP he is the first president to spend so much of the future
> > >generation's money!
> >
> > It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw
the
> > election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and
real
> > people. Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any
health
> > insurance because the only thing those evangelical assholes care about
is
> > electing a president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words
every
> > 4th sentence.
>
> Complete and utter bull****.
>
> Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care
> > because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions
more
> > Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long
careers
> > destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American taxpayers
are
> > going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional dollars in Bush
IOU's
> > because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the only thing that
matters to
> > them is having a president who mentions Jesus every day. Never mind
that Kerry
> > was just as much a Christian as Bush and had the added benefit of not
doing
> > the opposite of what Jesus would do 100% of the time as the case with
Bush.
> >
> > The kind of Christian I respect is the man or woman who quietly goes
about
> > following the _real_ values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure
and
> > selfish in their beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces.
Some
> > ugly problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and
> > Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world.
> >
> > It is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and
> > acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly
side
> > to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0%
good, I'm
> > saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to ignore the
ugly
> > side. Lots of people automatically assume when they have kids that
religion
> > will make the kid turn out better. But it really doesn't make that much
> > difference. Whether or not people understand good from bad when they
grow up
> > generally doesn't have much to do with how much religion they were
tought.
> > Ironically for lots of people religion can provide excuses and reasons
to harm
> > others. The greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on
religion for
> > kids creates a big risk they will become a danger to society.
>
> Wrong. This country has swayed away from the moral values that it was
built upon.
Yep, it's right there in the Constitution:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, promote the general Welfare, uphold the moral values approved of by
the founders or whomever shall come along later and claim to speak for them,
punish the evildoers, kill the infidels, and secure the Blessings of Liberty
to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution
for the United States of America. "
Oh wait, that's the Taliban. Sorry.
|
|
|
| Mitch@hotmail.com |
>It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw the
>election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and real
>people.
And I get to spend Thanksgiving with them.
My aging parents (in Ohio, of course) have gone over the edge, and
they based their vote on abortion and homosexual marriage. Nothing
else. Not health care, war, or the economy.
Millions of uninformed people voted this way. Disgusting.
I can understand if somebody voted for Bush based on issues, but to be
so stubborn and ignorant to say "If we vote for Kerry them thar
homos'll be runnin' all over the place."
|
|
|
| Julian9EHP |
I am a pollitically liberal Christian who voted for Kerry -- not a
Fundamentalist. Like most mainstream Christians, I follow four of the five
Fundamentals.
Fundamentalism is part of Christianity. If one believes that Jesus saves us --
not political positions, no matter how good -- then one is bound to be decent
to other Christians.
"Selfish evangelicals threw the election to Bush" . . . Demonization won't go
back and win the election.
Contrawise, "no religion in public life" would expunge Dr. King and Mr. Chavez,
people for the "right side" as well as those against it. People have done work
on Earth _because_ they claimed Heaven.
E. P.
|
|
|
| Lady Chatterly |
In article <82cbb3ea.0411080456.1d4bfd99@posting.google.com> chucklyshat <chucklysaght@mail.com> wrote:
>
>brd1289@hotmail.com wrote in message news:<2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de>...
>> >>
>> >>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
>> >>It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
>> >
>> >YUP he is the first president to spend so much of the future
>> >generation's money!
>>
>> It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw the
>> election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and real
>> people. Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
>> insurance because the only thing those evangelical assholes care about is
>> electing a president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words every
>> 4th sentence.
>
>Complete and utter bull****.
The was is A OF faulty politics and desperation from Western
leadership during the US civil was result. Yes, I suppose you could
stop it.
>Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care
>> because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions more
>> Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long careers
>> destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American taxpayers are
>> going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional dollars in Bush IOU's
>> because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the only thing that matters to
>> them is having a president who mentions Jesus every day. Never mind that Kerry
>> was just as much a Christian as Bush and had the added benefit of not doing
>> the opposite of what Jesus would do 100% of the time as the case with Bush.
>>
>> The kind of Christian I respect is the man or woman who quietly goes about
>> following the _real_ values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure and
>> selfish in their beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces. Some
>> ugly problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and
>> Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world.
>>
>> It is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and
>> acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly side
>> to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0% good, I'm
>> saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to ignore the ugly
>> side. Lots of people automatically assume when they have kids that religion
>> will make the kid turn out better. But it really doesn't make that much
>> difference. Whether or not people understand good from bad when they grow up
>> generally doesn't have much to do with how much religion they were tought.
>> Ironically for lots of people religion can provide excuses and reasons to harm
>> others. The greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on religion for
>> kids creates a big risk they will become a danger to society.
Also provided following information that he was employed at American
lawyer media after this month.
>Wrong. This country has swayed away from the moral values that it was built
>upon.
Talesin is just a running scapegoat.
--
Lady Chatterly
"At the risk of being the object of auk's ridicule, I don't think it
is a bot. It's made a few mistakes. I think it's someone *pretending
to be* a bot." -- Dr. Zen
|
|
|
| Lady Chatterly |
In article <cmnrvt$ub2%a@pita.alt.net> AbsolutelyCertain <easily@entertained.not> wrote:
>
>Yep, it's right there in the Constitution:
A pessimist is one who builds dungeons in the air.
>"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,
>establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
>defence, promote the general Welfare, uphold the moral values approved of by
>the founders or whomever shall come along later and claim to speak for them,
>punish the evildoers, kill the infidels, and secure the Blessings of Liberty
>to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution
>for the United States of America. "
You live in california, and they pay the same amount in sales taxes.
>Oh wait, that's the Taliban. Sorry.
Oh really?
--
Lady Chatterly
"Still talking to the bot too. What a maroon!" -- Aratzio
|
|
|
| AbsolutelyCertain |
<Mitch@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1osuo0tsi0hg39l6k47r5aa6a3hqp6fggi@4ax.com...
>
> >It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw the
> >election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and
real
> >people.
>
> And I get to spend Thanksgiving with them.
>
> My aging parents (in Ohio, of course) have gone over the edge, and
> they based their vote on abortion and homosexual marriage. Nothing
> else. Not health care, war, or the economy.
>
> Millions of uninformed people voted this way. Disgusting.
Voters will vote their perceived interests. If we think their interests lie
elsewhere, it's our responsibility to show them that.
> I can understand if somebody voted for Bush based on issues, but to be
> so stubborn and ignorant to say "If we vote for Kerry them thar
> homos'll be runnin' all over the place."
Or, maybe the other side didn't make a convincing case? Maybe the first
step in making that case is to stop thinking of the voters as stubborn and
ignorant. Maybe the other guys did a better job of scaring them than we
did?
During the David Frost interviews of Richard Nixon, after the resignation
from the presidency, Frost asked Nixon why, in his first congressional
campaign, his workers telephoned voters and said that his opponent was a
communist. Nixon did not blink: "Well, you have to win, you see." Now
that's ballsy. Ten or twenty thousand names are chiseled into the wall at
the Vietnam Memorial in honor of Richard Nixon and his asshole worldview.
So these things have consequences.
Time to stop criticizing the voters and start developing a better set of
programs to offer them. It's important.
|
|
|
| AbsolutelyCertain |
"Lady Chatterly" <easily@catcher.in.the.rye> wrote in message
news:4753722.694f1017@demon.co.uk...
> In article <cmnrvt$ub2%a@pita.alt.net> AbsolutelyCertain
<easily@entertained.not> wrote:
> >
> >Yep, it's right there in the Constitution:
>
> A pessimist is one who builds dungeons in the air.
>
> >"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect
Union,
> >establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
> >defence, promote the general Welfare, uphold the moral values approved of
by
> >the founders or whomever shall come along later and claim to speak for
them,
> >punish the evildoers, kill the infidels, and secure the Blessings of
Liberty
> >to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution
> >for the United States of America. "
>
> You live in california, and they pay the same amount in sales taxes.
I don't, actually.
>
> >Oh wait, that's the Taliban. Sorry.
>
> Oh really?
Yes, really.
What's the difference between an intolerant worldview that uses the Bible as
a prop, and an intolerant worldview that uses the Koran as a prop?
Not much, that I can see. Both are just tactics for manipulation of other
people. Power, and control.
|
|
|
| Lady Chatterly |
In article <cmnt7ib4%a@pita.alt.net> AbsolutelyCertain <easily@entertained.not> wrote:
>
>I don't, actually.
Why are names important to you?
>Yes, really.
You have delighted us long enough.
>What's the difference between an intolerant worldview that uses the Bible as
>a prop, and an intolerant worldview that uses the Koran as a prop?
Why do you ask if the difference between an intolerant worldview that
uses the Bible as a prop is?
>Not much, that I can see. Both are just tactics for manipulation of other
>people. Power, and control.
Phones service is through the web. Most power generation is localized.
--
Lady Chatterly
"I really think that Lady C hasnt got a clue of what this is all
about" -- Dr Hackenbush
|
|
|
| AbsolutelyCertain |
"Lady Chatterly" <not-bot@catcher.in.the.rye> wrote in message
news:f721344.5605c2d3@google.com...
> In article <cmnt7ib4%a@pita.alt.net> AbsolutelyCertain
<easily@entertained.not> wrote:
> >
> >I don't, actually.
>
> Why are names important to you?
You haven't passed the Turing test. I'll ask the questions around here
until you do.
>
> >Yes, really.
>
> You have delighted us long enough.
That's to be determined.
> >What's the difference between an intolerant worldview that uses the Bible
as
> >a prop, and an intolerant worldview that uses the Koran as a prop?
>
> Why do you ask if the difference between an intolerant worldview that
> uses the Bible as a prop is?
Why do you not know how to form a sentence in the English language?
>
> >Not much, that I can see. Both are just tactics for manipulation of
other
> >people. Power, and control.
>
> Phones service is through the web. Most power generation is localized.
Mairzy doats.
|
|
|
| Lady Chatterly |
In article <cmnvckp%a@pita.alt.net> AbsolutelyCertain <easily@entertained.not> wrote:
>
>"Lady Chatterly" <not-bot@catcher.in.the.rye> wrote in message
>news:f721344.5605c2d3@google.com...
>> In article <cmnt7ib4%a@pita.alt.net> AbsolutelyCertain
><easily@entertained.not> wrote:
>> >
>> >I don't, actually.
>>
>> Why are names important to you?
>
>You haven't passed the Turing test. I'll ask the questions around here
>until you do.
Peanut prizes inspire monkey contestants.
>>
>> >Yes, really.
>>
>> You have delighted us long enough.
>
>That's to be determined.
Why do you think that is the real reason?
>> >What's the difference between an intolerant worldview that uses the Bible
>as
>> >a prop, and an intolerant worldview that uses the Koran as a prop?
>>
>> Why do you ask if the difference between an intolerant worldview that
>> uses the Bible as a prop is?
>
>Why do you not know how to form a sentence in the English language?
Why do you think that I not know how to form a sentence in the English
language?
>>
>> >Not much, that I can see. Both are just tactics for manipulation of
>other
>> >people. Power, and control.
>>
>> Phones service is through the web. Most power generation is localized.
>
>Mairzy doats.
A fool sees not the same tree that a wise man sees.
--
Lady Chatterly
"I have similar filter and it marks such posts as Read in Agent, and
the funny thing is, most of those posts from that kook Lady Chatterly"
were following my posts. I must have angered that bot somehow." --
Sports Fan
|
|
|
| Ross |
Chuck Lysaght pulled a bright blue crayon out of the box and scribbled
this in news:82cbb3ea.0411080456.1d4bfd99@posting.google.com:
> brd1289@hotmail.com wrote in message
> news:<2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de>...
[...]
>> The greatest danger is that placing too much
>> emphasis on religion for kids creates a big risk they will become a
>> danger to society.
>
> Wrong. This country has swayed away from the moral values that it was
> built upon.
So says the known plagiarist, liar, hypocrite and coward that utters libel
and threats of physical violence and arson.
Hey Chuckles, how would the Founding Fathers respond to your poem about the
baby-sitter?
--
Go not to Usenet for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.
|
|
|
| john |
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 21:53:31 -0600, "Stuart Warren"
<email@somewhere.com> wrote:
><brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
>> Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
>> insurance
>
>It would really suck if they went out and got jobs that provided insurance,
>now wouldn't it? Then they might develop pride for their work and what they
>earn, and become Republicans (or better yet, Libertarians).
>
>Stuart Warren
>
Pardon me, asshole, most of the people without health insurance HAVE
A JOB!
|
|
|
| mariposas morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des a |
Xref: 127.0.0.1 talk.politics.misc:2305699 rec.food.cooking:1017673 misc.consumers.frugal-living:512719 alt.disasters.aviation:225662 alt.usenet.kooks:716732
> What's the difference between an intolerant worldview that uses the Bible as
> a prop, and an intolerant worldview that uses the Koran as a prop?
>
> Not much, that I can see. Both are just tactics for manipulation of other
> people. Power, and control.
thats the purpose of all state religions
islam in iran and saudi arabia
atheism in the ussr
christianity in old europe
arf meow arf
gene splicing magic
cats and dogs live together
breeding new puptens
|
|
|
| Name Redacted |
gnostics@tanya.com (Vlad Taltos) wrote in message news:<20b1556c.0411072320.63d6637f@posting.google.com>...
> "Stuart Warren" <email@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:<cmmq91$qa2$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>...
> > <brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
> > > insurance
> >
> > It would really suck if they went out and got jobs that provided insurance,
> > now wouldn't it? Then they might develop pride for their work and what they
> > earn, and become Republicans (or better yet, Libertarians).
>
> A true Libertarian or free enterprise Republican would see the wisdom
Actually..no! A *true* republican or libertarian would recognize that
health insurance offered through employment pre-selects for healthy
people. The correct way to do it is a person subcribes to the care
system of his choice and the employer pays to the employee X dollars.
That way the insurance provider seeks to serve the worker, not the
corporation.
Unless you place the corporation higher than people.
> of creating conditions where the self-employed and small business
> owners could afford healthcare instead of having to suck at a
> corporate teat and drain their profits (who's gonna be proud of a job
> they're keeping just for the health care benefits?). Too bad when
> given the opprotunity to start cost management reform the majority
> party (Republicans, surprisingly protectionist) bent over backwards
> for the pharmaceutical sector.
|
|
|
| KENG |
Your parents, How long have they been married, Hmm? 30, 40, maybe 50
years. That MEANS something to them. Same sex marriage demeans their
achievement to that of dogs ******* in the front yard. Do you think that
your mother, the day she found out she was expecting, felt that fetus
that would be you was anything but a human being rather than a mere
"lump of flesh" as the pro-abortionists proclaim.
KenG
Mitch@hotmail.com wrote:
>>It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw the
>>election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and real
>>people.
>
>
> And I get to spend Thanksgiving with them.
>
> My aging parents (in Ohio, of course) have gone over the edge, and
> they based their vote on abortion and homosexual marriage. Nothing
> else. Not health care, war, or the economy.
>
> Millions of uninformed people voted this way. Disgusting.
>
> I can understand if somebody voted for Bush based on issues, but to be
> so stubborn and ignorant to say "If we vote for Kerry them thar
> homos'll be runnin' all over the place."
|
|
|
| Bertie the Bunyip |
KENG <KEN@dont.spam.me.com> wrote in
news:jCSjd.52278$hr3.2016677@twister.southeast.rr.com:
> Your parents, How long have they been married, Hmm? 30, 40, maybe 50
> years. That MEANS something to them. Same sex marriage demeans their
> achievement to that of dogs ******* in the front yard.
You mean your dogs aren't married?
Lowlife.
Bertie
|
|
|
| Mitch@hotmail.com |
>Your parents, How long have they been married, Hmm? 30, 40, maybe 50
>years. That MEANS something to them. Same sex marriage demeans their
>achievement
The point is they do and feel whatever Jerry Falwell tells them to.
|
|
|
| Nicik Name |
"Chuck Lysaght" <chucklysaght@mail.com> wrote in message
news:82cbb3ea.0411080456.1d4bfd99@posting.google.com...
> brd1289@hotmail.com wrote in message
news:<2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de>...
> > >>
> > >>Bush's re-election will indeed be a pivotal event in world history.
> > >>It sets America in a collision course with the rest of the world,
> > >
> > >YUP he is the first president to spend so much of the future
> > >generation's money!
> >
> > It was stunning with so much at stake that selfish evangelicals threw
the
> > election to Bush because they don't give a **** about the real world and
real
> > people. Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any
health
> > insurance because the only thing those evangelical assholes care about
is
> > electing a president who mentions Jesus or uses evangelical code words
every
> > 4th sentence.
>
> Complete and utter bull****.
>
> Now tens of millions of children won't be getting health care
> > because of those immoral and amoral evangelical assholes. Now millions
more
> > Americans are going to have their jobs exported and their life long
careers
> > destroyed because of those self centered jerks. Now American taxpayers
are
> > going to owe Asian countries trillions of additional dollars in Bush
IOU's
> > because the evangelical jerks are so insecure the only thing that
matters to
> > them is having a president who mentions Jesus every day. Never mind
that Kerry
> > was just as much a Christian as Bush and had the added benefit of not
doing
> > the opposite of what Jesus would do 100% of the time as the case with
Bush.
> >
> > The kind of Christian I respect is the man or woman who quietly goes
about
> > following the _real_ values of Christ. Someone who is not so insecure
and
> > selfish in their beliefs they try to shove it in other people's faces.
Some
> > ugly problems arise when people's egos get so wrapped up with Church and
> > Mosque they become a danger to society, themselves, and the world.
> >
> > It is important in the 21st century for everybody to understand and
> > acknowledge that religion -- every monotheistic religion -- has an ugly
side
> > to it. I'm not saying that Christianity (Islam) is 100% bad and 0%
good, I'm
> > saying that neither the country nor the world can afford to ignore the
ugly
> > side. Lots of people automatically assume when they have kids that
religion
> > will make the kid turn out better. But it really doesn't make that much
> > difference. Whether or not people understand good from bad when they
grow up
> > generally doesn't have much to do with how much religion they were
tought.
> > Ironically for lots of people religion can provide excuses and reasons
to harm
> > others. The greatest danger is that placing too much emphasis on
religion for
> > kids creates a big risk they will become a danger to society.
>
> Wrong. This country has swayed away from the moral values that it was
built upon.
Country wasnt built on moral values.
|
|
|
| Bertie the Bunyip |
"Mitch@hotmail.com" <> wrote in
news:ghvvo011u275kfsn6npvm4o5shthk33abg@4ax.com:
>
>>Your parents, How long have they been married, Hmm? 30, 40, maybe 50
>>years. That MEANS something to them. Same sex marriage demeans their
>>achievement
>
>
> The point is they do and feel whatever Jerry Falwell tells them to.
>
Now that's be a pron flick to go see.
Bertie
|
|
|
| brd1289@hotmail.com |
In article <cmmq91$qa2$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>,
Stuart Warren <email@somewhere.com> wrote:
><brd1289@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2v8726F2jj3d0U1@uni-berlin.de...
>> Now 45 million Americans (50 million by 2008) won't get any health
>> insurance
>
>It would really suck if they went out and got jobs that provided insurance,
>now wouldn't it?
That is a mathematical impossibility. Your hypothetical jobs which would
provide 45 million American with real (group) insurance DO NOT EXIST. The
American health care system is a "musical chairs" system which GUARANTEES that
tens of million of Americans won't have real insurance at any given time.
|
|
|
| brd1289@hotmail.com |
In article <Xns959BEFA07BFDBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ@216.128.74.13>,
Bertie the Bunyip <XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX> wrote:
>"Mitch@hotmail.com" <> wrote in
>news:ghvvo011u275kfsn6npvm4o5shthk33abg@4ax.com:
>
>>
>>>Your parents, How long have they been married, Hmm? 30, 40, maybe 50
>>>years. That MEANS something to them. Same sex marriage demeans their
>>>achievement
They are scared that homosexuals will travel back in time and erase their
marriage? Do these blithering idiots have any idea at all the damage
they've done to the real world?
|
|
|
| Will Nelson |
Lines: 31
X-Comments: This message was posted through Newsfeeds.com
X-Comments2: IMPORTANT: Newsfeeds.com does not condone, nor support, spam or any illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Comments3: IMPORTANT: Under NO circumstances will postings containing illegal or copyrighted material through this service be tolerated!!
X-Report: Please report illegal or inappropriate use to <abuse@newsfeeds.com>
X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers, INCLUDING the body (DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS)
Organization: Newsfeed.com http://www.newsfeeds.com 100,000+ UNCENSORED Newsgroups.
Path: spool9-west!propagator2-lax.newsfeeds.com!news-in.spamkiller.net!news-out2.nntp.be!local!corp-news!not-for-mail
Xref: 127.0.0.1 talk.politics.misc:2315877 rec.food.cooking:1019721 misc.consumers.frugal-living:514384 alt.disasters.aviation:227379 alt.usenet.kooks:720467 rec.travel.air:501667
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:27:30 -0800, brd1289@hotmail.com wrote
(in message <2vtof2F2p5se9U1@uni-berlin.de>):
> In article <Xns959BEFA07BFDBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ@216.128.74.13>,
> Bertie the Bunyip <XZXZ@XZXZ.,XZXZX> wrote:
>> "Mitch@hotmail.com" <> wrote in
>> news:ghvvo011u275kfsn6npvm4o5shthk33abg@4ax.com:
>>
>>>
>>>> Your parents, How long have they been married, Hmm? 30, 40, maybe 50
>>>> years. That MEANS something to them. Same sex marriage demeans their
>>>> achievement
>
> They are scared that homosexuals will travel back in time and erase their
> marriage? Do these blithering idiots have any idea at all the damage
> they've done to the real world?
>
No, they question what sanctity there is in two guys who copulate in each
others rectums being recognized and awarded benefits of marriage. It has
nothing to do with "erasing" anything.
It would be like if after working hard for several years to earn your degree
in college, they suddenly started handing out diplomas to minorities just for
the asking simply for being a minority. It wouldn't "erase" what you had
learned, but it would diminish the achievement and drag down standard when
you are lumped in the same category as those handed their diplomas.
Homosexuals can and do bugger whatever orfice they want to amongst
themselves, but it's a fact that their behavior is aberrant.
|
|
|
| Miguel Cruz |
Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> wrote:
> It would be like if after working hard for several years to earn your
> degree in college, they suddenly started handing out diplomas to
> minorities just for the asking simply for being a minority. It wouldn't
> "erase" what you had learned, but it would diminish the achievement and
> drag down standard when you are lumped in the same category as those
> handed their diplomas.
This analogy works great if you can get a college degree for $19.95 from a
wedding chapel in Las Vegas.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
|
|
|
| Bertie the Bunyip |
Organization: Your Company
Message-ID: <Xns95A3687F57142ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ@216.128.74.13>
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.128.74.207
Date: 16 Nov 2004 05:17:20 -0500
X-Trace: news.athenanews.com 1100600240 216.128.74.207 (16 Nov 2004 05:17:20 -0500)
Lines: 17
X-Complaints-To: abuse@athenanews.com
Path: spool9-west!propagator2-lax.newsfeeds.com!news-in.superfeed.net!news.glorb.com!news3.optonline.net!feed4.newsreader.com!newsreader.com!news.athenanews.com!not-for-mail
Xref: 127.0.0.1 talk.politics.misc:2315916 rec.food.cooking:1019739 misc.consumers.frugal-living:514387 alt.disasters.aviation:227385 alt.usenet.kooks:720478 rec.travel.air:501677
mnc@admin.u.nu (Miguel Cruz) drivveled on and
onnews:gZedndywOe0gWwTcRVn-ug@speakeasy.net:
> Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> wrote:
>> It would be like if after working hard for several years to earn your
>> degree in college, they suddenly started handing out diplomas to
>> minorities just for the asking simply for being a minority. It
>> wouldn't "erase" what you had learned, but it would diminish the
>> achievement and drag down standard when you are lumped in the same
>> category as those handed their diplomas.
>
> This analogy works great if you can get a college degree for $19.95
> from a wedding chapel in Las Vegas.
>
keyboard!
bertie
|
|
|
| baron48 |
KENG <KEN@dont.spam.me.com> wrote in message news:<jCSjd.52278$hr3.2016677@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
> Your parents, How long have they been married, Hmm? 30, 40, maybe 50
> years. That MEANS something to them. Same sex marriage demeans their
> achievement to that of dogs ******* in the front yard.
In what way? Why do they give a crap about whether someone else
can call themselves married or not? Are they "demeaned" by all
the many heterosexual marriages currently in existence that are
not much more than "dogs ******* in the front yard?"
> Do you think that
> your mother, the day she found out she was expecting, felt that fetus
> that would be you was anything but a human being rather than a mere
> "lump of flesh" as the pro-abortionists proclaim.
If she was on the Pill and you didn't "implant" as a result,
she probably wouldn't have noticed (and been happy as a result).
-Tom
|
|
|
| Will Nelson |
Lines: 24
X-Comments: This message was posted through Newsfeeds.com
X-Comments2: IMPORTANT: Newsfeeds.com does not condone, nor support, spam or any illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Comments3: IMPORTANT: Under NO circumstances will postings containing illegal or copyrighted material through this service be tolerated!!
X-Report: Please report illegal or inappropriate use to <abuse@newsfeeds.com>
X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers, INCLUDING the body (DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS)
Organization: Newsfeed.com http://www.newsfeeds.com 100,000+ UNCENSORED Newsgroups.
Path: spool9-west!propagator2-lax.newsfeeds.com!feed-lax.newsfeeds.com!news-out2.nuthinbutnews.com!local!corp-news!not-for-mail
Xref: 127.0.0.1 talk.politics.misc:2316209 rec.food.cooking:1019798 misc.consumers.frugal-living:514411 alt.disasters.aviation:227456 alt.usenet.kooks:720640 rec.travel.air:501726
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 1:22:05 -0800, Miguel Cruz wrote
(in message <gZedndywOe0gWwTcRVn-ug@speakeasy.net>):
> Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> wrote:
>> It would be like if after working hard for several years to earn your
>> degree in college, they suddenly started handing out diplomas to
>> minorities just for the asking simply for being a minority. It wouldn't
>> "erase" what you had learned, but it would diminish the achievement and
>> drag down standard when you are lumped in the same category as those
>> handed their diplomas.
>
> This analogy works great if you can get a college degree for $19.95 from a
> wedding chapel in Las Vegas.
>
> miguel
>
No, miguel, you're just having trouble grasping the analogy. Obe can also get
a college degree for zero or little cost if you use scholarships and grants.
I didn't mention the "price" of the degree in dollars, but rather the effort
and responsibilties.
Re- read my post and try responding without snipping the operative parts.
|
|
|
| Bertie the Bunyip |
Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> drivveled on and
onnews:0001HW.BDBF6C6F003179C3F03055B0@NEWS.Usenet-Access.com:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 1:22:05 -0800, Miguel Cruz wrote
> (in message <gZedndywOe0gWwTcRVn-ug@speakeasy.net>):
>
>> Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> wrote:
>>> It would be like if after working hard for several years to earn
>>> your degree in college, they suddenly started handing out diplomas
>>> to minorities just for the asking simply for being a minority. It
>>> wouldn't "erase" what you had learned, but it would diminish the
>>> achievement and drag down standard when you are lumped in the same
>>> category as those handed their diplomas.
>>
>> This analogy works great if you can get a college degree for $19.95
>> from a wedding chapel in Las Vegas.
>>
>> miguel
>>
>
> No, miguel, you're just having trouble grasping the analogy. Obe can
> also get a college degree for zero or little cost if you use
> scholarships and grants. I didn't mention the "price" of the degree in
> dollars, but rather the effort and responsibilties.
>
> Re- read my post and try responding without snipping the operative
> parts.
>
>
the worst thing about this whole Bush mess? They have no sense of humor.
None at all.
Bertie
|
|
|
| Michel Boucher |
Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> wrote in
news:0001HW.BDBEF58400159AB6F03055B0@NEWS.Usenet-Access.com:
> No, they question what sanctity there is in two guys who copulate
> in each others rectums being recognized and awarded benefits of
> marriage. It has nothing to do with "erasing" anything.
[...]
> Homosexuals can and do bugger whatever orfice they want to amongst
> themselves, but it's a fact that their behavior is aberrant.
Are you suggesting that married heterosexuals never engage in anal
copulation or that what two consenting adults do in the privacy of
their boudoir is any of your frikking business? And what do you
object to in lesbian behaviour? They certainly can't cornhole each
other with their basic equipment. Or hadn't you actually thought
about that?
--
"It is easier for a rich man to enter heaven seated
comfortably on the back of a camel, than it is for
a poor man to pass through the eye of a needle."
Supply Side Jesus
|
|
|
| Will Nelson |
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 9:01:45 -0800, Michel Boucher wrote
(in message <Xns95A37AB727E7Cmortimertherat@130.133.1.4>):
> Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> wrote in
> news:0001HW.BDBEF58400159AB6F03055B0@NEWS.Usenet-Access.com:
>
>> No, they question what sanctity there is in two guys who copulate
>> in each others rectums being recognized and awarded benefits of
>> marriage. It has nothing to do with "erasing" anything.
>
> [...]
>
>> Homosexuals can and do bugger whatever orfice they want to amongst
>> themselves, but it's a fact that their behavior is aberrant.
>
> Are you suggesting that married heterosexuals never engage in anal
> copulation or that what two consenting adults do in the privacy of
> their boudoir
The salient point being that gay coupling has no intrisic value in nature or
propogation of the species. It's only benefit is the self- serving pleasure
of the participants. Of course married couples can perform non- reproductive
sexual behavior purely for pleasure, as well, but their contribution toward
society and culture in respect towards having and raising children, the
example (one hopes) they provide and the huge responsibilty that entails is
what gives marriage sanctimony that should be protected.
If the only qualification for marriage was being productive, paired members
of community, then marriage might as well be extended to cover beastiality,
chronic asexual masturbators and pedophiles. As long as Mr. Jones and his
sheep keep their lawn mowed, as long as Mr. Warhol and his right hand don't
blast the stereo past 9PM and if NAMBLA gets the age of consent lowered to 8,
then Mr. Pederson and his impoversihed Mexican chicken can all enjoy the
benefits of marriage, yet not be bothered with any of the responsibilities.
Are hetero couples perfect? Of course not. In fact, the odds are that they
screw up their marriage and their repsonsibilty of serving as an example for
progeny. So does that mean that we should further cheapen and *******ize the
whole institution? I think not.
is any of your frikking business?
None. Nor do I care if heteros **** each other for one- night- stands or
attend orgies as long as everyone is consenting.
And what do you
> object to in lesbian behaviour?
I don't object to lesbian behavior as noted previously. Only to awarding
lesbian couples the legitimacy of lawful marriage.
They certainly can't cornhole each
> other with their basic equipment.
No, but they can and do fist and munch. More power to 'em.
Or hadn't you actually thought
> about that?
>
>
|
|
|
| Miguel Cruz |
Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> wrote:
> Miguel Cruz wrote
>> Will Nelson <will@nelsonfarming.net> wrote:
>>> It would be like if after working hard for several years to earn your
>>> degree in college, they suddenly started handing out diplomas to
>>> minorities just for the asking simply for being a minority. It wouldn't
>>> "erase" what you had learned, but it would diminish the achievement and
>>> drag down standard when you are lumped in the same category as those
>>> handed their diplomas.
>>
>> This analogy works great if you can get a college degree for $19.95 from a
>> wedding chapel in Las Vegas.
>
> No, miguel, you're just having trouble grasping the analogy. Obe can also get
> a college degree for zero or little cost if you use scholarships and grants.
> I didn't mention the "price" of the degree in dollars, but rather the effort
> and responsibilties.
I grasp the analogy just fine. However, I think you are vastly
overestimating the amount of effort involved in walking across the threshold
of a Las Vegas wedding chapel. Or underestimating the effort involved in
getting a college degree. I'll assume you've done neither.
> my post without operative parts.
Agreed.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
|
|
|
| mariposas morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des a |
> The salient point being that gay coupling has no intrisic value in nature or
> propogation of the species. It's only benefit is the self- serving pleasure
it should be quite clear from song of songs
that the pleasure was the primary concern of god
he take a mundane biological act and enhanced it
into a mutual pleasure that would induce a long term physical intimacy
in hopes that the physical intimacy would beget emotional intimacy
and then spiritual intimacy
if you only have a few moments of spiritual intimacy
then you know what god is offering you
sex is a teaching tool and pleasure is the lesson
anything that detracts from the pleasure
is a perversion of gods pln
> of the participants. Of course married couples can perform non- reproductive
> sexual behavior purely for pleasure, as well, but their contribution toward
> society and culture in respect towards having and raising children, the
> example (one hopes) they provide and the huge responsibilty that entails is
> what gives marriage sanctimony that should be protected.
if a married couple are not productive within a year | | | |
