Discussion:
"Blackout In A Can"
(too old to reply)
Green Skeptic
2010-11-07 01:53:08 UTC
Permalink
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php

Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.

I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid, and to
manufacture products that endanger non-imbibers seems criminal.

---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
"Show me on the doll where Cook Source Magazine touched you."
Pink Freud
2010-11-07 01:03:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
We know. But keep trying.
Green Skeptic
2010-11-09 02:37:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pink Freud
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
We know. But keep trying.
The irony is that religion manages to achieve the same results.

http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php

Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.

I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid, and to
manufacture products that endanger non-imbibers seems criminal.

---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
I mean, OK, he was a drug-crazed transvestite, but at least we could have gone dancing!
Uncle Vic
2010-11-07 04:20:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid, and to
manufacture products that endanger non-imbibers seems criminal.
---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity?
http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm "Show me on the doll where Cook
Source Magazine touched you."
You're not married, I take it.
--
Uncle Vic
AA # 2011

"I'm not gay. I'M NOT GAY! I'm not gay, okay? Now that we've cleared up
the fact that I'm not gay, you're a fox Christian."

[Zacharias Mulletstein]
Michael Gray
2010-11-07 04:36:41 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 23:20:44 -0500, Uncle Vic
Post by Uncle Vic
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid, and to
manufacture products that endanger non-imbibers seems criminal.
---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity?
http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm "Show me on the doll where Cook
Source Magazine touched you."
You're not married, I take it.
Nor human.
--
The scientific method is accepted because it works, not because it is believed.
- Christopher A. Lee
Don Kresch
2010-11-07 14:27:22 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 15:06:41 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 23:20:44 -0500, Uncle Vic
Post by Uncle Vic
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid, and to
manufacture products that endanger non-imbibers seems criminal.
You're not married, I take it.
Nor human.
I don't understand it, either. And I'm human.


Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in slacklessness trying not to.
Green Skeptic
2010-11-09 02:44:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Gray
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 23:20:44 -0500, Uncle Vic
Post by Uncle Vic
You're not married, I take it.
Nor human.
Seriously? Not *everybody* drinks alcohol or uses narcotics or
anything like that. I never did, I never smoked pot, nor tobacco,
and I've never been drunk -- I dislike most alcohols and I hate
beer.

A lot of the people I hike with or bicycle with, camp, swim, or
climb with also don't imbibe in anything like that though I don't
know their reasons.


---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
I mean, OK, he was a drug-crazed transvestite, but at least we could have gone dancing!
Green Skeptic
2010-11-09 02:41:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Uncle Vic
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid, and to
manufacture products that endanger non-imbibers seems criminal.
You're not married, I take it.
ROFL! But I am, for some 27 years now and hapilly so. But yeah,
that *does* explain Rush Limbaugh and just about every other right
wing Christian. }:-}

---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
I mean, OK, he was a drug-crazed transvestite, but at least we could have gone dancing!
Andrew
2010-11-07 14:06:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
Don Kresch
2010-11-07 14:31:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?

Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in slacklessness trying not to.
Free Lunch
2010-11-07 14:46:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And the storytellers who wrote the gospels claim that Jesus made some
really good wine at a wedding.

Religious zealots have no idea how profoundly ignorant they are.
Wombat
2010-11-07 16:17:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
   So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And the storytellers who wrote the gospels claim that Jesus made some
really good wine at a wedding.
Religious zealots have no idea how profoundly ignorant they are.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The marriage feast of Cana always makes me wonder where the Temperance
idiots were coming from. It certainly wasn't biblical Christianity.

Wombat
Free Lunch
2010-11-07 20:20:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wombat
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
   So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And the storytellers who wrote the gospels claim that Jesus made some
really good wine at a wedding.
Religious zealots have no idea how profoundly ignorant they are.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The marriage feast of Cana always makes me wonder where the Temperance
idiots were coming from. It certainly wasn't biblical Christianity.
None of the theistic idiots derive their religious doctrines from the
Bible. They impose their doctrines on the Bible. They can always find
something that fits their preconceptions and the ignore everything that
does not.
Wombat
2010-11-07 16:18:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
        So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in slacklessness trying not to.
Aren't you forgetting the long beers brewed by many farmers. It was
safer than drinking the water.

Wombat
Don Kresch
2010-11-07 16:26:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wombat
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
        So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
Aren't you forgetting the long beers brewed by many farmers. It was
safer than drinking the water.
I'm not forgetting that; I just didn't see the need to bring
it up.

Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in slacklessness trying not to.
Wombat
2010-11-07 17:57:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
        So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
Aren't you forgetting the long beers brewed by many farmers.  It was
safer than drinking the water.
        I'm not forgetting that; I just didn't see the need to bring
it up.
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in slacklessness trying not to.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Oh, you've tied it and it made you sick?

Wombat
Don Kresch
2010-11-08 00:33:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wombat
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
        So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
Aren't you forgetting the long beers brewed by many farmers.  It was
safer than drinking the water.
        I'm not forgetting that; I just didn't see the need to bring
it up.
Oh, you've tied it and it made you sick?
To what are you referring?


Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in slacklessness trying not to.
Wombat
2010-11-08 06:35:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wombat
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
        So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
Aren't you forgetting the long beers brewed by many farmers.  It was
safer than drinking the water.
        I'm not forgetting that; I just didn't see the need to bring
it up.
Oh, you've tied it and it made you sick?
        To what are you referring?
Don
It was an (admittedly poor) joke, not helped by misspelling 'tried' as
'tied'. However, though the beer produced by monks is still
obtainable at my local supermarkets, unlike long beer (or ale), the
ale was produced in amounts which I suggest probably dwarfed the
monk's output. I was referring firstly to your use of "mostly". The
temperance movement finally managed to wean the Victorian farmers off
their ale in favour of tea. Their health suffered (from The Victorian
Farm BBC2).

Wombat
fasgnadh
2010-11-07 20:59:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
Water quality was so poor it was safer to drink (brewed) beer.

Judeao/Christian/Islamic Civilisation has produced enormous advances
in the quality of life enjoyed by humans, despite the massive regression
into barbarity during the atheist regimes of the 20th century.
Post by Don Kresch
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA,
Bloodthirsty Atheist Arseholes Wanking Away;


# From: Steve Knight <***@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA



---------


alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source



"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)



http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

Loading Image...


Loading Image...
Don Kresch
2010-11-08 00:34:25 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 07:59:36 +1100, fasgnadh <***@yahoo.com>
scrawled in blood:

I snipped everything, since you had nothing important to say.
After all: you're naught but a troll.


Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in slacklessness trying not to.
fasgnadh
2010-11-08 05:44:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Kresch
I snipped everything,
Of course you did, you are an atheist and never allow the facts
to cloud your prejudices.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
since you had nothing important to say.
I provided basic information for the popularity of brewed drinks
in the middle ages, the fact that water could kill you;
Post by Don Kresch
Post by fasgnadh
Water quality was so poor it was safer to drink (brewed) beer.
Von Krapsch had no rational response to the facts, so he did what
every militant atheist doe when his hate filled anti-theist propaganda
is challenged by historical facts, SNIP, RUN and spew poitless ABUSE.

Atheists do that because of the enormous frustrations they feel because
atheism is in global decline, after the catastrophic slaughters carried
out by ever atheist regime of the 20th century.
EVERY atheist state in human history has been a TOTALITARIAN TYRANNY,
MURDEROUS SHITHOLES.. EVERY one!!!!! 8^o

No wonder atheists can't discuss the history of their ideology.

# http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism#Wolak2004
#
# "State atheism is the official promotion of atheism
# by a government, typically by active suppression of
# religious freedom and practice."
# - "Protest for Religious Rights in the USSR:
# Characteristics and Consequences,
# David Kowalewski,
# Russian Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Oct., 1980), pp. 426-441,
#
#
# "An atheist, Pol Pot suppressed Cambodia’s Buddhist religion:
# monks were defrocked; temples and artifacts, including statues of
# Buddha, were destroyed; and people praying or expressing
# other religious sentiments were often killed.
# ...the government emptied the cities through mass evacuations
# and sent people to the countryside. Cambodians were overworked
# and underfed on collective farms, often succumbing to disease or
# starvation as a result. Spouses were separated and family meals
# prohibited in order to steer loyalties toward the state
# instead of the family.
#
# About 1.7 million Cambodians, or about 20 percent of the population,
# were worked, starved, or beaten to death under Pol Pot’s regime."
# - http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761579038/pol_pot.html
#
# The Cambodian Genocide:
Loading Image...

#
# "The country's 40,000 to 60,000 Buddhist monks,
# regarded by the regime as social parasites,
# were defrocked and forced into labor brigades.
# Many monks were executed; temples and pagodas were
# destroyed or turned into storehouses or jails.
# Images of the Buddha were defaced and dumped into
# rivers and lakes. People who were discovered praying
# or expressing religious sentiments in other ways
# were often killed.
#
# The Christian and Muslim communities were among the most
# persecuted, as well. The Roman Catholic cathedral of
# Phnom Penh was completely razed.
#
# The Khmer Rouge forced Muslims to eat pork, which they
# regard as an abomination. Many of those who refused were killed.
# Christian clergy and Muslim imams were executed."
# - http://countrystudies.us/cambodia/29.htm
#
# "Forty-eight percent of Cambodia's Christians were killed
# because of their religion."
#
Loading Image...
#
#
# "the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
# - Daniel Peris,
# "Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
# Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
#
#
# "State atheism has been mostly implemented in communist
# countries, such as the former Soviet Union,[1] China,
# Communist Albania, Communist Afghanistan, North Korea,
# Communist Mongolia and Poland under communist rule also
# promoted state atheism and suppressed religion.
# - Forced out: the fate of Polish Jewry in Communist Poland.
# Wolak, Arthur J. p 104
#
# In these nations, the governments viewed atheism as an
# intrinsic part of communist ideology.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by fasgnadh
Judeao/Christian/Islamic Civilisation has produced enormous advances
in the quality of life enjoyed by humans, despite the massive regression
into barbarity during the atheist regimes of the 20th century.
70,000,000 dead in the Atheist regimes; the Union of Savage Slaughter
and Repression(USSR), Mao's Great Leap Backward and Cultural Devolution,
and Pol Pot's implementation of the Genocidal anti-theist violence still
advocated today by BAAWA thugs.
Post by Don Kresch
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Don Kresch
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA,
Bloodthirsty Atheist Arseholes Wanking Away;
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
naught but a troll.
Your warlord is indeed a knuckle dragging, sloping forehead,
lowlife slimebag from the Band of Anus Attired Weakminded Atheists (BAAWA);

Loading Image...

---------
Post by Don Kresch
Post by fasgnadh
http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source
Post by Don Kresch
Post by fasgnadh
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest
http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Mitchell Holman
2010-11-08 02:39:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Judeao/Christian/Islamic Civilisation has produced enormous advances
in the quality of life enjoyed by humans, despite the massive
regression into barbarity during the atheist regimes of the 20th
century.
Christians complain about "barbarity".

Oh, the irony..................




GE 6:11-17, 7:11-24 God is unhappy with the wickedness of man and
decides to do something about it. He kills every living thing on the
face of the earth other than Noah's family and thereby makes himself
the greatest mass murderer in history.

EX 9:22-25 A plague of hail from the Lord strikes down everything in
the fields of Egypt both man and beast except in Goshen where the
Israelites reside.

EX 12:29 The Lord kills all the first-born in the land of Egypt.

EX 21:20-21 With the Lord's approval, a slave may be beaten to death
with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't
die too quickly.

EX 32:27 "Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from
gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and
every man his companion, and every man his neighbor.

EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.

LE 26:7-8 The Lord promises the Israelites that, if they are obedient,
their enemies will "fall before your sword."

LE 26:22 "I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you
of your children."

LE 26:29, DT 28:53, JE 19:9, EZ 5:8-10 As a punishment, the Lord will
cause people to eat the flesh of their own sons and daughters and
fathers and friends.

NU 16:27-33 The Lord causes the earth to open and swallow up the men
and their households (including wives and children) because the men
had been rebellious.

NU 16:35 A fire from the Lord consumes 250 men.

NU 16:49 A plague from the Lord kills 14,700 people.

NU 21:6 Fiery serpents, sent by the Lord, kill many Israelites.

NU 21:35 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay Og "... and his
sons and all his people, until there was not one survivor left ...."

NU 25:4 (KJV) "And the Lord said unto Moses, take all the heads of the
people, and hang them up before the Lord against the sun ...."

NU 31:17-18 Moses, following the Lord's command, orders the Israelites
to kill all the Midianite male children and "... every woman who has
known man ...." (Note: How would it be determined which women had
known men? One can only speculate.)
fasgnadh
2010-11-08 06:54:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
Water quality was so poor it was safer to drink (brewed) beer.
Judeao/Christian/Islamic Civilisation has produced enormous advances
in the quality of life enjoyed by humans, despite the massive regression
into barbarity during the atheist regimes of the 20th century.
Post by Don Kresch
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA,
Bloodthirsty Atheist Arseholes Wanking Away;
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Christians complain about "barbarity".
a. I'm not a Christian
b. Why would it matter if I was..
c. Why wouldn't any normal person complain about
such barbarity?
d. Why do you defend such barbarity and not condemn it?
Post by Mitchell Holman
Oh, the irony..................
You wouldn't know irony if it bit you on the arse.

You snipped the issue in an attempt to change the topic
from atheist barbarity to some diversion based NOT on the actions
of Christians but the Stories Told by some pre-Christian tribes! 8^o

Oh the IDIOTIC MENDACITY! B^D

Is their any reason, other than your desire to cover up for
the atrocities of fellow atheists, for you to ignore a topic
which rightfully BELONGS in alt.atheism, and try to divert to
a discussion of matters more appropriate to alt.RELIGION, especially
when you are so ignorant you don't seem to know which religions are
which and you actually BLAME CHRISTIANS for events that purportedly
occurred in PRE- CHRISTIAN TIMES!!!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAAA

Oh the HYPOCRISY! B^p
Post by Mitchell Holman
GE 6:11-17, 7:11-24
God is unhappy with the wickedness of man and
decides to do something about it.
"God" is a pre-Christian concept.

Why do you claim Christians are responsible for these alleged deaths?
Post by Mitchell Holman
He kills every living thing on the
face of the earth other than Noah's family
incorrect. Even if we take these 'stories' you quote
as evidence, to be LITERAL AND True, other lifeforms were
spared (some kind of DNA Ark).

And most of the life on earth is in the oceans, the
airborne mocrobes survived and, finally, how many humans
were on the earth at the time? 100,000? 1,000,000?

Hell, each of the atheist regimes of the 20th century
killed more than that!!! The Union of Savage Slaughter
and Repression killed over 40,000,000. the Maoist Great Leap Backward
and Cultural Devolution another >40,000,000!!

And how is an "Act of God", an apocalyptic flood, the fault of the
Christians? They weren't even around then!!! B^D

According to you every atheist must therefore be held responsible
for all those acts of murder by atheist regimes!

And yet you want to hold people living today responsible for
the purported acts of an ancient Deity??? 8^o

What a crazy nutter!!!
Post by Mitchell Holman
and thereby makes himself
the greatest mass murderer in history.
I added up all the figures you included in this taxt
which YOU present as an accurate historical document;

Apparently you hold an entity referred to as 'God',
not modern Christians, to be responsible for the death
of LESS THAN 50,000 people (the rest of your cites
are unquantified, and refer to small TRIBES of goat herders.

The atheist regimes killed OVER 70,000,000 people, men women
and children, in just 7 decades... The peer reviewed data
based on historical evidence is listed below to show how atheist
regimes are clearly responsible for the greatest slaughters in
human history.. far more than the killing by ANY religion!!! B^[
Post by Mitchell Holman
EX 9:22-25
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
EX 12:29
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
EX 21:20-21
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
EX 32:27
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.
Proof?
Jews are not Christians.
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
LE 26:7-8
Proof?
Jews are not Christians.
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
LE 26:22
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
LE 26:29, DT 28:53, JE 19:9, EZ 5:8-10
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
NU 16:27-33
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
NU 16:35
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
NU 16:49
Proof?
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
NU 21:6 Fiery serpents, sent by the Lord, kill many Israelites.
Proof?
Fiery Serpents are not Christians.
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
NU 21:35 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay Og "... and his
sons and all his people, until there was not one survivor left ...."
Proof?
Jews are not Christians.
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
NU 25:4 (KJV) "And the Lord said unto Moses, take all the heads of the
people, and hang them up before the Lord against the sun ...."
Proof?
Moses was nor a Christian.
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.
Post by Mitchell Holman
NU 31:17-18 Moses, following the Lord's command, orders the Israelites
to kill all the Midianite male children and "... every woman who has
known man ...." (Note: How would it be determined which women had
known men? One can only speculate.)
Proof?
Moses was not a Christian.
Pre-Christian Era. No Christians involved.


So you use a document setting down tribal stories as if it is FIRM,
FACTUAL EVIDENCE, it doesn't implicate ANY CHRISTIANS at all,
inconsistently blames "God", "serpents", Moses and "Israelites"

..and it still only has numbers adding up to less than
a months killings by the atheist Pol Pot in his Cambodian genocide!!:

# http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism#Wolak2004
#
# "State atheism is the official promotion of atheism
# by a government, typically by active suppression of
# religious freedom and practice."
# - "Protest for Religious Rights in the USSR:
# Characteristics and Consequences,
# David Kowalewski,
# Russian Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Oct., 1980), pp. 426-441,
#
#
# "An atheist, Pol Pot suppressed Cambodia’s Buddhist religion:
# monks were defrocked; temples and artifacts, including statues of
# Buddha, were destroyed; and people praying or expressing
# other religious sentiments were often killed.
# ...the government emptied the cities through mass evacuations
# and sent people to the countryside. Cambodians were overworked
# and underfed on collective farms, often succumbing to disease or
# starvation as a result. Spouses were separated and family meals
# prohibited in order to steer loyalties toward the state
# instead of the family.
#
# About 1.7 million Cambodians, or about 20 percent of the population,
# were worked, starved, or beaten to death under Pol Pot’s regime."
# - http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761579038/pol_pot.html
#
# The Cambodian Genocide:
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/392millones.jpg

#
# "The country's 40,000 to 60,000 Buddhist monks,
# regarded by the regime as social parasites,
# were defrocked and forced into labor brigades.
# Many monks were executed; temples and pagodas were
# destroyed or turned into storehouses or jails.
# Images of the Buddha were defaced and dumped into
# rivers and lakes. People who were discovered praying
# or expressing religious sentiments in other ways
# were often killed.
#
# The Christian and Muslim communities were among the most
# persecuted, as well. The Roman Catholic cathedral of
# Phnom Penh was completely razed.
#
# The Khmer Rouge forced Muslims to eat pork, which they
# regard as an abomination. Many of those who refused were killed.
# Christian clergy and Muslim imams were executed."
# - http://countrystudies.us/cambodia/29.htm
#
# "Forty-eight percent of Cambodia's Christians were killed
# because of their religion."
#
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/44camboyano.jpg
#
#
# "the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
# - Daniel Peris,
# "Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
# Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
#
#
# "State atheism has been mostly implemented in communist
# countries, such as the former Soviet Union,[1] China,
# Communist Albania, Communist Afghanistan, North Korea,
# Communist Mongolia and Poland under communist rule also
# promoted state atheism and suppressed religion.
# - Forced out: the fate of Polish Jewry in Communist Poland.
# Wolak, Arthur J. p 104
#
# In these nations, the governments viewed atheism as an
# intrinsic part of communist ideology.


---------


This is just a SUMMARY of the peer reviewed date
collated by the world's most eminent historians
on the GREATER THAN 70,000,000 deaths caused by the
atheist regimes of the 20th century:

This is what REAL EVIDENCE looks like, not the storybooks
of people, like you, who BELIEVE them without PROOF! pffffft!

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#RCW

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Stalin

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#ww2ussr

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Mao


First, Lenin's Red Terror, Atheism in praxis;

# Russian Civil War (1917-22): 9 000 000 [make link]

* Eckhardt: 500,000 civ. + 300,000 mil. = 800,000
* Readers Companion to Military History, Cowley and Parker, eds.
(1996)
[http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/mil/html/mh_045400_russiancivil.htm]:
o Combat deaths: 825,000
o Ancillary deaths: 2,000,000
o TOTAL: 2,825,000
* Davies, Norman (Europe A History, 1998)
o Civil War and Volga Famine (1918-22): 3,000,000 to 5,000,000
* Brzezinski, Z:
o 6 to 8 million people died under Lenin from war, famine etc.
* Mastering Twentieth Century Russian History by Norman Lowe (2002)
o TOTAL: 7,000,000 to 10,000,000
o Red Army
+ Battle: 632,000
+ Disease: 581,000
o Whites: 1,290,000 battle + disease
o White Terror: "tens of thousands"
o Red Terror
+ Executed: 50-200,000
+ Died in prison or killed in revolts: 400,000
o Typhoid + typhus
+ 1919: 890,000
+ 1920: >1M
* Urlanis:
o Military deaths: 800,000
+ Battle deaths, all sides: 300,000
+ Dead of wounds: 50,000
+ Disease: 450,000
o Civilians: 8,000,000
o TOTAL: 8,800,000
* Dyadkin, I.G. (cited in Adler, N., Victims of Soviet Terror, 1993)
o 9 million unnatural deaths from terror, famine and disease,
1918-23
* Richard Pipes, A concise history of the Russian Revolution
(1995): 9 million deaths, 1917-1922
o Famine: 5M
o Combat: 2M
+ Reds: 1M
+ Whites: 127,000
o Epidemics: 2M
o not incl.
+ Emigration: 2M
+ Birth deficit: 14M
* Rummel:
o Civil War (1917-22)
+ War: 1,410,000 (includes 500,000 civilian)
+ Famine: 5,000,000 (50% democidal)
+ Other democide: 784,000
+ Epidemics: 2,300,000
+ Total: 9,494,000
o Lenin's Regime (1917-24)
+ Rummel blames Lenin for a lifetime total of 4,017,000
democides.
* Figes, Orlando (A People's Tragedy: A History of the Russian
Revolution, 1997)
o 10 million deaths from war, terror, famine and disease.
+ Including...
# Famine (1921-22): 5 million
# Killed in fighting, both military and civilian: 1M
# Jews killed in pogroms: 150,000
+ Not including...
# Demographic effects of a hugely reduced
birth-rate: 10M
# Emmigration: 2M
* McEvedy, Colin (Atlas of World Population History, 1978)
o War deaths: 2M
o Other excess deaths: 14M
o Reduced births: 10M
o Emmigration: 2M
* MEDIAN: Of these ten estimates that claim to be complete, the
median is 8.8M-9.0M.
* PARTIALS:
o Small & Singer (battle deaths, 1917-21)
+ Russian Civil War (Dec.1917-Oct.1920)
# Russians: 500,000
# Allied Intervention:
* Japan: 1,500
* UK: 350
* USA: 275
* France: 50
* Finland: 50
+ Russian Nationalities War (Dec.1917-Mar.1921)
# USSR: 50,000
o Bruce Lincoln, Red Victory: a History of the Russian Civil
War 1918-1921
+ Death sentences by the Cheka: ca. 100,000
+ Pogroms: as many as one in 13 Jews k. out of 1.5M in
Ukraine [i.e. ca. 115,000] (citing Heifetz)
o Nevins, citing Heifetz and the Red Cross: 120,000 Jews
killed in 1919 pogroms [http://www.west.net/~jazz/felshtin/redcross.html]
o Richard Overy, Russia's War (1997): Cheka responsible for
maybe 250,000+ violent deaths.
o Paul Johnson
+ 50,000 death sentences imposed by the Cheka by 12/20
+ 100,000 Jews killed in 1919
o Green, Barbara (in Rosenbaum, Is the Holocaust Unique?)
+ 4 to 5 million deaths in the famine of 1921-23
o Max Boot, The Savage Wars of Peace
+ North Russia: 244 USAns d. incl. 144 k.battle
+ Siberia: 160 USAns KIA + 168 other d.
+ [US Total: 304 KIA + 268 other = 572 d.]
+ Czech Legion: 13,000 dead.

# Soviet Union, Stalin's regime (1924-53): 20 000 000 [make link]

* There are basically two schools of thought when it comes to the
number who died at Stalin's hands. There's the "Why doesn't anyone
realize that communism is the absolutely worst thing ever to hit the
human race, without exception, even worse than both world wars, the
slave trade and bubonic plague all put together?" school, and there's
the "Come on, stop exaggerating. The truth is horrifying enough without
you pulling numbers out of thin air" school. The two schools are
generally associated with the right and left wings of the political
spectrum, and they often accuse each other of being blinded by
prejudice, stubbornly refusing to admit the truth, and maybe even having
a hidden agenda. Also, both sides claim that recent access to former
Soviet archives has proven that their side is right.
* Here are a few illustrative estimates from the Big Numbers school:
o Adler, N., Victims of Soviet Terror, 1993 cites these:
+ Chistyakovoy, V. (Neva, no.10): 20 million killed
during the 1930s.
+ Dyadkin, I.G. (Demograficheskaya statistika
neyestestvennoy smertnosti v SSSR 1918-1956 ): 56 to 62 million
"unnatural deaths" for the USSR overall, with 34 to 49 million under Stalin.
+ Gold, John.: 50-60 million.
o Davies, Norman (Europe A History, 1998): c. 50 million
killed 1924-53, excluding WW2 war losses. This would divide (more or
less) into 33M pre-war and 17M after 1939.
o Rummel, 1990: 61,911,000 democides in the USSR 1917-87, of
which 51,755,000 occurred during the Stalin years. This divides up into:
+ 1923-29: 2,200,000 (plus 1M non-democidal famine deaths)
+ 1929-39: 15,785,000 (plus 2M non-democidal famine)
+ 1939-45: 18,157,000
+ 1946-54: 15,613,000 (plus 333,000 non-democidal famine)
+ TOTAL: 51,755,000 democides and 3,333,000 non-demo.
famine
o William Cockerham, Health and Social Change in Russia and
Eastern Europe: 50M+
o Wallechinsky: 13M (1930-32) + 7M (1934-38)
+ Cited by Wallechinsky:
# Medvedev, Roy (Let History Judge): 40 million.
# Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr: 60 million.
o MEDIAN: 51 million for the entire Stalin Era; 20M during
the 1930s.
* And from the Lower Numbers school:
o Nove, Alec ("Victims of Stalinism: How Many?" in J. Arch
Getty (ed.) Stalinist Terror: New Perspectives, 1993): 9,500,000
"surplus deaths" during the 1930s.
o Cited in Nove:
+ Maksudov, S. (Poteri naseleniya SSSR, 1989): 9.8
million abnormal deaths between 1926 and 1937.
+ Tsaplin, V.V. ("Statistika zherty naseleniya v 30e
gody" 1989): 6,600,000 deaths (hunger, camps and prisons) between the
1926 and 1937 censuses.
+ Dugin, A. ("Stalinizm: legendy i fakty" 1989):
642,980 counterrevolutionaries shot 1921-53.
+ Muskovsky Novosti (4 March 1990): 786,098 state
prisoners shot, 1931-53.
o Gordon, A. (What Happened in That Time?, 1989, cited in
Adler, N., Victims of Soviet Terror, 1993): 8-9 million during the 1930s.
o Ponton, G. (The Soviet Era, 1994): cites an 1990 article by
Milne, et al., that excess deaths 1926-39 were likely 3.5 million and at
most 8 million.
o MEDIAN: 8.5 Million during the 1930s.
* As you can see, there's no easy compromise between the two
schools. The Big Numbers are so high that picking the midpoint between
the two schools would still give us a Big Number. It may appear to be a
rather pointless argument -- whether it's fifteen or fifty million, it's
still a huge number of killings -- but keep in mind that the population
of the Soviet Union was 164 million in 1937, so the upper estimates
accuse Stalin of killing nearly 1 out of every 3 of his people, an
extremely Polpotian level of savagery. The lower numbers, on the other
hand, leave Stalin with plenty of people still alive to fight off the
German invasion.
* [Letter]
* Although it's too early to be taking sides with absolute
certainty, a consensus seems to be forming around a death toll of 20
million. This would adequately account for all documented nastiness
without straining credulity:
o In The Great Terror (1969), Robert Conquest suggested that
the overall death toll was 20 million at minimum -- and very likely 50%
higher, or 30 million. This would divide roughly as follows: 7M in
1930-36; 3M in 1937-38; 10M in 1939-53. By the time he wrote The Great
Terror: A Re-assessment (1992), Conquest was much more confident that 20
million was the likeliest death toll.
o Britannica, "Stalinism": 20M died in camps, of famine,
executions, etc., citing Medvedev
o Brzezinski: 20-25 million, dividing roughly as follows: 7M
destroying the peasantry; 12M in labor camps; 1M excuted during and
after WW2.
o Daniel Chirot:
+ "Lowest credible" estimate: 20M
+ "Highest": 40M
+ Citing:
# Conquest: 20M
# Antonov-Ovseyenko: 30M
# Medvedev: 40M
o Courtois, Stephane, Black Book of Communism (Le Livre Noir
du Communism): 20M for the whole history of Soviet Union, 1917-91.
+ Essay by Nicolas Werth: 15M
+ [Ironic observation: The Black Book of Communism
seems to vote for Hitler as the answer to the question of who's worse,
Hitler (25M) or Stalin (20M).]
o John Heidenrich, How to Prevent Genocide: A Guide for
Policymakers, Scholars, and the Concerned Citizen (2001): 20M, incl.
+ Kulaks: 7M
+ Gulag: 12M
+ Purge: 1.2M (minus 50,000 survivors)
o Adam Hochschild, The Unquiet Ghost: Russians Remember
Stalin: directly responsible for 20 million deaths.
o Tina Rosenberg, The Haunted Land: Facing Europes Ghosts
After Communism (1995): upwards of 25M
o Time Magazine (13 April 1998): 15-20 million.
* AVERAGE: Of the 17 estimates of the total number of victims of
Stalin, the median is 30 million.
* Individual Gulags etc.
o Kolyma
o Kuropaty
o Vorkuta
o Bykivnia
* Famine, 1926-38
o Richard Overy, Russia's War (1997): 4.2M in Ukraine + 1.7M
in Kazakhstan
o Green, Barbara ("Stalinist Terror and the Question of
Genocide: the Great Famine" in Rosenbaum, Is the Holocaust Unique?)
cites these sources for the number who died in the famine:
+ Nove: 3.1-3.2M in Ukraine, 1933
+ Maksudov: 4.4M in Ukraine, 1927-38
+ Mace: 5-7M in Ukraine
+ Osokin: 3.35M in USSR, 1933
+ Wheatcraft: 4-5M in USSR, 1932-33
+ Conquest:
# Total, USSR, 1926-37: 11M
# 1932-33: 7M
# Ukraine: 5M

######################################################################
# Next, just to show it's a CONSISTENT PATTERN in EVERY ATHEIST REGIME,
#
# Mao's Cultural Devolution and Great Leap Backward!
#
######################################################################


# People's Republic of China, Mao Zedong's regime (1949-1975):

40 000 000

* Agence France Press (25 Sept. 1999) citing at length from
Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism:
o Rural purges, 1946-49: 2-5M deaths
o Urban purges, 1950-57: 1M
o Great Leap Forward: 20-43M
o Cultural Revolution: 2-7M
o Labor Camps: 20M
o Tibet: 0.6-1.2M
o TOTAL: 44.5 to 72M
* Jasper Becker, Hungry Ghosts : Mao's Secret Famine (1996)
o Estimates of the death toll from the Great Leap Forward,

1959-61:

+ Judith Banister, China's Changing Population (1984):
30M excess deaths (acc2 Becker: "the most reliable estimate we have")

+ Wang Weizhi, Contemporary Chinese Population (1988):
19.5M deaths

+ Jin Hui (1993): 40M population loss due to "abnormal
deaths and reduced births"

+ Chen Yizi of the System Reform Inst.: 43-46M deaths

* Brzezinski:
o Forcible collectivization: 27 million peasants
o Cultural Revolution: 1-2 million
o TOTAL: 29 million deaths under Mao
* Daniel Chirot:
o Land reform, 1949-56
+ According to Zhou Enlai: 830,000
+ According to Mao Zedong: 2-3M
o Great Leap Forward: 20-40 million deaths.
o Cultural Revolution: 1-20 million
* Jung Chang, Mao: the Unknown Story (2005)
o Suppression of Counterrevolutionaries, 1950-51:
3M by execution, mob or suicide
o Three-Anti Campaign, 1952-53: 200,000-300,000 suicides
o Great Leap Forward, 1958-61: 38M of starvation and overwork
o Cultural Revolution, 1966-76: > 3M died violent deaths
o Laogai camp deaths, 1949-76: 27M
o TOTAL under Mao: 70M
* Dictionary of 20C World History: around a half million
died in Cultural Rev.
* Eckhardt:
o Govt executes landlords (1950-51): 1,000,000
o Cultural Revolution (1967-68): 50,000
* Gilbert:
o 1958-61 Famine: 30 million deaths.
* Kurt Glaser and Stephan Possony, Victims of Politics (1979):
o They estimate the body count under Mao to be 38,000,000
to 67,000,000.
o Cited by G & P:
+ Walker Report (see below): 44.3M to 63.8M deaths.
+ The Government Information Office of Taiwan (18 Sept.
1970): 37M deaths in the PRC.
+ A Radio Moscow report (7 Apr. 1969): 26.4M people had
been exterminated in China.
+ (NOTE: Obviously the Soviets and Taiwanese would, as
enemies, be strongly motivated to exaggerate.)
* Guinness Book of World Records:
o Although nowadays they don't come right out and declare Mao
to be the Top Dog in the Mass Killings category, earlier
editions (such as 1978) did, and they cited sources which
are similar, but not identical, to the Glaser & Possony sources:
+ On 7 Apr. 1969 the Soviet government radio reported
that 26,300,000 people were killed in China, 1949-65.
+ In April 1971 the cabinet of the government of Taiwan
reported 39,940,000 deaths for the years 1949-69.
+ The Walker Report (see below): between 32,2500,000
and 61,700,000.
* Harff and Gurr:
o KMT cadre, rich peasants, landlords (1950-51):
800,000-3,000,000
o Cultural Revolution (1966-75): 400,000-850,000
* John Heidenrich, How to Prevent Genocide: A Guide for
Policymakers, Scholars, and the Concerned Citizen:
27M death toll, incl. 2M in Cultural Revolution
* Paul Johnson doesn't give an overall total, but he gives
estimates for the principle individual mass dyings of the Mao years:
o Land reform, first years of PRC: at least 2 million people
perished.
o Great Leap Forward: "how many millions died ...
is a matter of conjecture."
o Cultural Revolution: 400,000, calling the 3 Feb. 1979
estimate by Agence France Presse, "The most widely respected figure".
* Meisner, Maurice, Mao's China and After (1977, 1999), doesn't
give an overall total either, but he does give estimates for the three
principle mass dyings of the Mao years:
o Terror against the counterrevolutionaries: 2 million people
executed during the first three years of the PRC.
o Great Leap Forward: 15-30 million famine-related deaths.
o Cultural Revolution: 400,000, citing a 1979 estimate by
Agence France Presse.
* R. J. Rummel:
o Estimate:
+ Democide: 34,361,000 (1949-75)
# The principle episodes being...
* All movements (1949-58): 11,813,000
o incl. Land Reform (1949-53): 4,500,000
* Cult. Rev. (1964-75): 1,613,000
* Forced Labor (1949-75): 15,000,000
* Great Leap Forward (1959-63): 5,680,000
democides
+ War: 3,399,000
+ Famine: 34,500,000
# Great Leap Forward: 27M famine deaths
+ TOTAL: 72,260,000
o Cited in Rummel:
+ Li, Cheng-Chung (Republic of China, 1979): 78.86M
direct/indirect deaths.
+ World Anti-Communist League, True Facts of Maoist
Tyranny (1971): 64.5M
+ Glaser & Possony: 38 to 67M (see above)
+ Walker Report, 1971 (see below): 31.75M to 58.5M
casualties of Communism (excluding Korean War).
+ Current Death Toll of International Communism (1979):
39.9M
+ Stephen R. Shalom (1984), Center for Asian Studies,
Deaths in China Due To Communism: 3M to 4M death toll,
excluding famine.
* Walker, Robert L., The Human Cost of Communism in China (1971,
report to the US Senate Committee of the Judiciary)
"Casualties to Communism" (deaths):
o 1st Civil War (1927-36): .25-.5M
o Fighting during Sino-Japanese War (1937-45): 50,000
o 2nd Civil War (1945-49): 1.25M
o Land Reform prior to Liberation: 0.5-1.0M
o Political liquidation campaigns: 15-30M
o Korean War: 0.5-1.234M
o Great Leap Forward: 1-2M
o Struggle with minorities: 0.5-1.0M
o Cultural Revolution: .25-.5M
o Deaths in labor camps: 15-25M
o TOTAL: 34.3M to 63.784M
o TOTAL FOR PRC: 32M to 59.5M
* July 17, 1994, Washington Post (Great Leap Forward 1959-61)
o Shanghai University journal, Society: > 40 million
o Cong Jin: 40 million
o Chen Yizi: 43 million in the famine. 80 million total as a
result of Mao's policies.
* Weekly Standard, 29 Sept. 1997, "The Laogai Archipelago" by D.
Aikman:
o Between 1949 and 1997, 50M prisoners passed through the
labor camps, and 15,000,000 died (citing Harry Wu)
* WHPSI: 1,633,319 political executions and 25,961 deaths from
political violence, 1948-77. TOTAL: 1,659,280
* Analysis: If we line up the 14 sources which claim to be
complete, the median falls in the 45.75 to 52.5 million
range, so you probably can't go wrong picking a final
number from this neighborhood.
Depending on how you want to count some of the incomplete
estimates (such as Becker and Meisner) and whether to count a
source twice (or thrice, as with Walker) if it's referenced by
two different authorities, you can slide the median up and
down the scale by many millions. Keep in mind, however, that
official Chinese records are hidden from scrutiny,
so most of these numbers are pure guesses. It's pointless
to get attached to any one of them, because the real number
could easily be half or twice any number here.
* Perhaps a better way of estimating would be to add up the
individual components. The medians here are:
o Purges, etc. during the first few years: 2M (10 estimates)
o Great Leap Forward: 31-33M (14 estimates)
o Cultural Revolution: 1M (13 estimates)
o Ethnic Minorities, primarily Tibetans: 750-900T
(8 estimates, see below)
o Labor Camps: 20M (5 estimates)
o This produces a total of some 54,750,000 to 56,900,000
deaths. The weak link in this calculation is in the
Labor Camp numbers for which we only have 5 estimates.
* Notice that many early body counts (such as Walker) completely
miss the famine during the Great Leap Forward, which was
largely unknown in the west until around 1980. There are two
contradictory ways to assess those early estimates which
ignore the famine:
1. "If these are the numbers that they came up with without
the famine, imagine how high the true number will be
once you add the famine deaths."
2. "Can we trust any of these numbers? After all, if they
missed such a huge famine, they can't have known very much
about what was going on inside China."
* ... so this line of reasoning will get us nowhere. In fact, the
median of the 7 estimate that predate 1980 is 45.7M, which is
almost the same as the median of the 7 estimates that post-date
1980 -- 58M. (At this scale, a 12M difference counts as "almost
the same".)


Now, remember, these are the CITIZENS of those atheist shitholes being
killed by the Atheist regimes who made their lives such misery and
despair that when the atheist regimes crumbled from their own evil and
incompetence, the people could not wait to shuck off the filthy atheist
shitpigs and their nightmare.. and embrace a path more tolerant of
religion.. since then their nations have prospered.. still suffering
the deep scars of atheist abuse, but once more part of Civilisation and
making progress!!


Now, all you have to do is show similar EVIDENCE.. not your IDIOTIC
OPINIONS, or those of some other atheist cretin.. that countries like
the USA, which Prints "In God We Trust" on it's money, is in any way
such a murderous tyranny, torturing terrorising and murdering over
20,000,000 of it's citizens!

Off you go you snivelling atheist fraud!
Smiler
2010-11-09 05:03:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network to
experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And Benedictine and other liquers.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Michael Gray
2010-11-09 06:42:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network to
experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And Benedictine and other liquers.
That should have been spelled "lickers".
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
Smiler
2010-11-10 02:17:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And Benedictine and other liquers.
That should have been spelled "lickers".
For the 'merkins?
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Michael Gray
2010-11-10 11:58:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Smiler
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And Benedictine and other liquers.
That should have been spelled "lickers".
For the 'merkins?
And the limeys.
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
Alex W.
2010-11-10 12:54:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Smiler
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And Benedictine and other liquers.
That should have been spelled "lickers".
For the 'merkins?
And the limeys.
Shirley you don't mean us Poms!
Michael Gray
2010-11-11 09:12:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alex W.
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Smiler
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And Benedictine and other liquers.
That should have been spelled "lickers".
For the 'merkins?
And the limeys.
Shirley you don't mean us Poms!
Yes, and stop calling me Mike.
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
Free Lunch
2010-11-10 01:12:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network to
experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And Benedictine and other liquers.
And bubbly, don't forget the Champagne.
Alex W.
2010-11-10 12:55:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Kresch
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network to
experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So why was beer brewed mostly by monks in middle ages Europe?
And Benedictine and other liquers.
And bubbly, don't forget the Champagne.
And spirits, once they had stolen the secret of distillation from
the Arabs!
Free Lunch
2010-11-07 14:44:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
No, Andrew, this is not because people ignore your imaginary god.

Please learn something, anything about human physiology. You have to
stop worshipping your own ignorance.
Buddythunder
2010-11-08 01:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
Someone should lay off the Kool-Aid.
Mitchell Holman
2010-11-08 02:36:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Buddythunder
messagenews:Mo6dnawn
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the
emptiness of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy.
They simply lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless
one comes to the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is
freely offered thru a living connection with, and surrender to, our
loving Creator - God.
Someone should lay off the Kool-Aid.
"our loving Creator", in action.




GE 6:11-17, 7:11-24 God is unhappy with the wickedness of man and
decides to do something about it. He kills every living thing on the
face of the earth other than Noah's family and thereby makes himself
the greatest mass murderer in history.

EX 9:22-25 A plague of hail from the Lord strikes down everything in
the fields of Egypt both man and beast except in Goshen where the
Israelites reside.

EX 12:29 The Lord kills all the first-born in the land of Egypt.

EX 21:20-21 With the Lord's approval, a slave may be beaten to death
with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't
die too quickly.

EX 32:27 "Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from
gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and
every man his companion, and every man his neighbor.

EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.

LE 26:7-8 The Lord promises the Israelites that, if they are obedient,
their enemies will "fall before your sword."

LE 26:22 "I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you
of your children."

LE 26:29, DT 28:53, JE 19:9, EZ 5:8-10 As a punishment, the Lord will
cause people to eat the flesh of their own sons and daughters and
fathers and friends.

NU 16:27-33 The Lord causes the earth to open and swallow up the men
and their households (including wives and children) because the men
had been rebellious.

NU 16:35 A fire from the Lord consumes 250 men.

NU 16:49 A plague from the Lord kills 14,700 people.

NU 21:6 Fiery serpents, sent by the Lord, kill many Israelites.

NU 21:35 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay Og "... and his
sons and all his people, until there was not one survivor left ...."

NU 25:4 (KJV) "And the Lord said unto Moses, take all the heads of the
people, and hang them up before the Lord against the sun ...."

NU 31:17-18 Moses, following the Lord's command, orders the Israelites
to kill all the Midianite male children and "... every woman who has
known man ...." (Note: How would it be determined which women had
known men? One can only speculate.)
Michael Gray
2010-11-08 07:45:06 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 17:14:01 -0800 (PST), Buddythunder
Post by Buddythunder
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
Someone should lay off the Kool-Aid.
An increased dose, I suggest, may cure his insanity.
--
The scientific method is accepted because it works, not because it is believed.
- Christopher A. Lee
Christopher A. Lee
2010-11-08 02:57:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
A liar as well as an idiot.

"As society turns further away from The Great Arkleseizure, they try
to fill the emptiness of their souls with such things. But these do
not satisfy. They simply lead to further emptiness and eventual
despair..unless one comes to the Great White Handkerchief of peace and
eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru a living connection
with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - The Great Arkleseizure."

You might just as well have said that.

And if you had an IQ bigger than a banana slug's, you would have
realised there was no difference where you are rudely and stupidly
preaching your bullshit.

What's wrong with you?

Why haven't you had help for your mental illness?
Michael Gray
2010-11-08 07:48:43 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 18:57:05 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
A liar as well as an idiot.
"As society turns further away from The Great Arkleseizure, they try
to fill the emptiness of their souls with such things. But these do
not satisfy. They simply lead to further emptiness and eventual
despair..unless one comes to the Great White Handkerchief of peace and
eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru a living connection
with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - The Great Arkleseizure."
You might just as well have said that.
And if you had an IQ bigger than a banana slug's, you would have
realised there was no difference where you are rudely and stupidly
preaching your bullshit.
What's wrong with you?
Why haven't you had help for your mental illness?
Sadly, acquired theism is not a recognised mental illness in this
decade.
In 200 years, they will be as puzzled as we are today about how on
earth schizophrenia used to be seen as demon possession, about how
acquired theism was not seen to be plainly as a mental illness.
Mark my words.
--
The scientific method is accepted because it works, not because it is believed.
- Christopher A. Lee
Christopher A. Lee
2010-11-08 11:30:00 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 18:18:43 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 18:57:05 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
A liar as well as an idiot.
"As society turns further away from The Great Arkleseizure, they try
to fill the emptiness of their souls with such things. But these do
not satisfy. They simply lead to further emptiness and eventual
despair..unless one comes to the Great White Handkerchief of peace and
eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru a living connection
with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - The Great Arkleseizure."
You might just as well have said that.
And if you had an IQ bigger than a banana slug's, you would have
realised there was no difference where you are rudely and stupidly
preaching your bullshit.
What's wrong with you?
Why haven't you had help for your mental illness?
Sadly, acquired theism is not a recognised mental illness in this
decade.
In 200 years, they will be as puzzled as we are today about how on
earth schizophrenia used to be seen as demon possession, about how
acquired theism was not seen to be plainly as a mental illness.
Mark my words.
It's not his theism per se, but his refusal to grasp that there is a
world beyond it where people don't believe as he does.
Michael Gray
2010-11-09 06:46:00 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 03:30:00 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 18:18:43 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 18:57:05 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
A liar as well as an idiot.
"As society turns further away from The Great Arkleseizure, they try
to fill the emptiness of their souls with such things. But these do
not satisfy. They simply lead to further emptiness and eventual
despair..unless one comes to the Great White Handkerchief of peace and
eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru a living connection
with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - The Great Arkleseizure."
You might just as well have said that.
And if you had an IQ bigger than a banana slug's, you would have
realised there was no difference where you are rudely and stupidly
preaching your bullshit.
What's wrong with you?
Why haven't you had help for your mental illness?
Sadly, acquired theism is not a recognised mental illness in this
decade.
In 200 years, they will be as puzzled as we are today about how on
earth schizophrenia used to be seen as demon possession, about how
acquired theism was not seen to be plainly as a mental illness.
Mark my words.
It's not his theism per se, but his refusal to grasp that there is a
world beyond it where people don't believe as he does.
But that affliction has a profound correlation with theism.
The direction of correlation is open to question for each individual
case.
Closed minds are attracted to theism.
Thesim causes closed minds.
In fact, the correlation may be bi-modal in the majority of cases: a
self-reinforcing downward spiral of brain to backside and back again,
ala the not so mythical Ouroboros.
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
Yap
2010-11-10 09:25:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 18:18:43 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 18:57:05 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
A liar as well as an idiot.
"As society turns further away from The Great Arkleseizure, they try
to fill the emptiness of their souls with such things. But these do
not satisfy. They simply lead to further emptiness and eventual
despair..unless one comes to the Great White Handkerchief of peace and
eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru a living connection
with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - The Great Arkleseizure."
You might just as well have said that.
And if you had an IQ bigger than a banana slug's, you would have
realised there was no difference where you are rudely and stupidly
preaching your bullshit.
What's wrong with you?
Why haven't you had help for your mental illness?
Sadly, acquired theism is not a recognised mental illness in this
decade.
In 200 years, they will be as puzzled as we are today about how on
earth schizophrenia used to be seen as demon possession, about how
acquired theism was not seen to be plainly as a mental illness.
Mark my words.
It's not his theism per se, but his refusal to grasp that there is a
world beyond it where people don't believe as he does.
The trouble is, all the bigots are thinking this world is theirs and
we are part of the system.
This is why past misdeeds were carried out in the name of the sky
pixie.
Only the Muslims can make enforcement of their religious laws now but
not others, since they have not grown out of their barbarism.
Michael Gray
2010-11-10 12:00:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yap
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 18:18:43 +1030, Michael Gray
Post by Michael Gray
On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 18:57:05 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things. But these do not satisfy. They simply
lead to further emptiness and eventual despair..unless one comes to
the Source of peace and eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru
a living connection with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - God.
A liar as well as an idiot.
"As society turns further away from The Great Arkleseizure, they try
to fill the emptiness of their souls with such things. But these do
not satisfy. They simply lead to further emptiness and eventual
despair..unless one comes to the Great White Handkerchief of peace and
eternal satisfaction as is freely offered thru a living connection
with, and surrender to, our loving Creator - The Great Arkleseizure."
You might just as well have said that.
And if you had an IQ bigger than a banana slug's, you would have
realised there was no difference where you are rudely and stupidly
preaching your bullshit.
What's wrong with you?
Why haven't you had help for your mental illness?
Sadly, acquired theism is not a recognised mental illness in this
decade.
In 200 years, they will be as puzzled as we are today about how on
earth schizophrenia used to be seen as demon possession, about how
acquired theism was not seen to be plainly as a mental illness.
Mark my words.
It's not his theism per se, but his refusal to grasp that there is a
world beyond it where people don't believe as he does.
The trouble is, all the bigots are thinking this world is theirs and
we are part of the system.
This is why past misdeeds were carried out in the name of the sky
pixie.
Only the Muslims can make enforcement of their religious laws now but
not others, since they have not grown out of their barbarism.
I'm not sure that I totally grasp your assertion.
Are you suggesting that there are religious laws that the Muslims are
NOT able to enforce given the Muslims' barbarism?
If so, are you able to proffer an example, please?
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
Michael Gray
2010-11-08 07:43:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God,
God is a crude fiction.
Grow up, you sad mental infant.
--
The scientific method is accepted because it works, not because it is believed.
- Christopher A. Lee
Brian E. Clark
2010-11-09 00:45:49 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics
for recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural
network to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So back when religion suffused society, people didn't drink
as much as they do now, right?

Hmm.

Or perhaps we could look at this way: the people in our
society who make the most noise about being holy, Christian
and pure in body 'n spirit will exhibit the lowest rates of
alcoholism and substance abuse, correct?

Oops.

Or could it be that people like you have never had anything
sensible to say to anyone?
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Michael Gray
2010-11-09 06:47:10 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 19:45:49 -0500, Brian E. Clark
Post by Brian E. Clark
In article
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics
for recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural
network to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
So back when religion suffused society, people didn't drink
as much as they do now, right?
Hmm.
Or perhaps we could look at this way: the people in our
society who make the most noise about being holy, Christian
and pure in body 'n spirit will exhibit the lowest rates of
alcoholism and substance abuse, correct?
Oops.
Or could it be that people like you have never had anything
sensible to say to anyone?
He might have once. When he was three or thereabouts.
Before his vile and contemptible religious indoctrination sessions.
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
Green Skeptic
2010-11-09 02:49:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network
to experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid..
As society turns further away from God, they try to fill the emptiness
of their souls with such things.
That's not true, atheists use less illegal narcotics, drink less
alcohol, and commit less jailable crimes than theists do. The more
cult-driven a society, the more deadly, dangerous, crime riddled,
and evil.

Also the more atheist a country is, the higher the quality of life
is and the higher average longivity, less infant mortality and a
whole whose of things.

The Christanics in the United States consume 23rds of the world's
psychotropic medications -- which says a lot about Christianity.

---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
I mean, OK, he was a drug-crazed transvestite, but at least we could have gone dancing!
MarkA
2010-11-07 17:01:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network to
experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid, and to
manufacture products that endanger non-imbibers seems criminal.
People have been ingesting alcohol and hallucinogenic plants since before
the beginning of recorded history. The brain craves novelty. There's
nothing illogical or stupid about it.

That being said, a lot of what people do is illogical and stupid. We
didn't evolve to be logical or smart. We evolved to be able to outwit
whatever animals we were trying to catch, and avoid being eaten by
whatever animals were trying to eat us. Maybe in the next million years
we'll get smarter and more logical. But we'll probably still be getting
drunk.
--
MarkA

If you are reading this, you can stop now.
Green Skeptic
2010-11-09 03:47:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by MarkA
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes. Deliberately disrupting one's neural network to
experience the effects seems illogical and, well, stupid, and to
manufacture products that endanger non-imbibers seems criminal.
People have been ingesting alcohol and hallucinogenic plants since before
the beginning of recorded history. The brain craves novelty. There's
nothing illogical or stupid about it.
I suppose it's *possible* that deliberatly poisoning oneself to
experience the toxic effects is a survival mechanism since it
may tend to alleviate boredom. More likely is it kept the dopers
sitting on their couches watching MAD TV eating cheetos and
snickering than running outside hunting dangerous carnivores.
Post by MarkA
That being said, a lot of what people do is illogical and stupid. We
didn't evolve to be logical or smart. We evolved to be able to outwit
whatever animals we were trying to catch, and avoid being eaten by
whatever animals were trying to eat us. Maybe in the next million years
we'll get smarter and more logical. But we'll probably still be getting
drunk.
---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
I mean, OK, he was a drug-crazed transvestite, but at least we could have gone dancing!
James Dale Guckert
2010-11-08 01:05:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Green Skeptic
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
*Shrug*

To make others feel superior to them?
--
JDG
"We are not dealing with a conventional war. We cannot respond
in a conventional manner. I do not want to see this spiral out
of control.... If we rush to launch a counterattack, we run too
great a risk that women, children and other noncombatants will
be caught in the cross-fire.... Finally, we must be careful not
to embark on an open-ended war with neither an exit strategy
nor a focused target. We cannot repeat past mistakes."
-- Rep. Barbara Lee, September 14, 2001
Green Skeptic
2010-11-10 15:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Dale Guckert
Post by Green Skeptic
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
*Shrug*
To make others feel superior to them?
Seems unlikely, more like it's peer pressure when they're young.
And stupid.

---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
James Dale Guckert
2010-11-12 07:46:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by James Dale Guckert
Post by Green Skeptic
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
*Shrug*
To make others feel superior to them?
Seems unlikely, more like it's peer pressure when they're young.
And stupid.
I'll go with my explanation. It makes as much sense.
--
JDG
"We are not dealing with a conventional war. We cannot respond
in a conventional manner. I do not want to see this spiral out
of control.... If we rush to launch a counterattack, we run too
great a risk that women, children and other noncombatants will
be caught in the cross-fire.... Finally, we must be careful not
to embark on an open-ended war with neither an exit strategy
nor a focused target. We cannot repeat past mistakes."
-- Rep. Barbara Lee, September 14, 2001
Richo
2010-11-08 01:29:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.

Alcohol is a social lubricant - it reduces inhibitions - so if you
are shy (I am) it makes you less shy.
This reduction in inhibition also means that people will more easily
be agressive or overtly sexual in their behaviour.
If you are a shy
The other recreational drugs have other desirable and negative
effects.
People take the drugs for the positive effects - and hope the negative
effects dont catch up with them.

Mark.
fasgnadh
2010-11-08 06:15:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Post by Richo
Alcohol is a social lubricant
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...


It depresses brain function...
Post by Richo
- it reduces inhibitions - so if you
are shy (I am) it makes you less shy.
There are good reasons you have evolved shyness:

- when you have little talent and Low IQ it is best to maintain
a low profile.

- you have learned from experience that when people get to know you,
they don't like you.

Alcohol reduces your social and perceptual skills, motor co-ordination
and embarrassment threshold.. hence, you remain unlikeable, even
become more so, but are unaware of the disdain which would normally
restrain you from making a complete arse of yourself, in public! B^p
Post by Richo
This reduction in inhibition also means that people will more easily
be agressive
Sure, as you get more pissed and obnoxious, feeling up the
Football team Quarterback's girlfriend while she was ordering drinks
and ignoring your fashionable Lampshade Headwear, he get's more prepared
to "rip off your head and shit down your throat".

Thus alcohol makes people more stupid AND aggressive while
simultaneously blocking their perception and intelligence receptors,
so they think they are being witty and charming. In short, they turn
into brainless cretins just like this:

# From: Steve Knight <***@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA

Surely there are only two ways to get THAT stupid.. pissed as a Newt,
or atheism!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAA
Post by Richo
or overtly sexual in their behaviour.
So you claim your Warlord is PERPETUALLY DRUNK?;

Agnostics were having a polite rational discourse with
some theists, talking about love, and diseased atheists
respond with their bestial psychosis;

# Subject: Re: Where's the Love in the Quran? EVERYWHERE,
# and in atheism- NOWHERE ..They DON'T GET IT!!!
# Read and see for yourself!
# From: Steve Knight <***@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam,
# alt.religion.christianity,alt.religion
# Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
# Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:11:14 -0700
#
# >>> @ "And argue not with the People of the Scripture
# >>> @ unless it be in ( a way) that is better,
# >>> @ save with such of them as do wrong;
# >>> @ and say: We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us
# >>> @ and revealed unto you;
# >>> @ our God and your God is One,
# >>> @ and unto Him we surrender."
# >>> @
# >>> @ - The Qur'an Sura 29 verse 46
# >>>
# >>> That was revolutionary, it took the parable of the Good Samaritan,
# >>> where the religious Other who acts with Love is held up as more
# >>> righteous in the eyes of God as those orthodox of one's own faith
who fail to show love or do good.
# >>>
# >>> Outstanding! That is the Message of the Age.
# >>
# >> Maybe - but it is about surrender, not love.
# >
# > Exactly as my beloved does.. bending herself toward me..
# > and offering herself totally... as I also do to her beauty and
# > charms....
#
# Then you grab her tail and make her say 'Baaaaaaa'.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA

In a discussion of MUTUAL LOVE and willing surrender,
the atheist thug reveals his misogyny and bestial force.

It's a common occurrence among the atheist perverts;

People talking about Cosmology were shocked to find Steve
touting his pornographic bent:

#From: Steve Knight <***@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: The Big Bang Theory
# Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:46:34 -0700
#
# "Firnando" wrote:
#
# >The Big Bang Theory
#
# You wanna see the big bang?
#
# NSFW!
#
# http://www.ovguide.com/adult.html
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA


If you Google the word "Mother" for Steve Knight, this is what you find,
Steve has to say about her;


# took his rubber cock out of his mouth, shoved it
# up his mother's ass and ...
#
# - From: Steve Knight <***@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.agnosticism
# Subject: Re: Better place to debate theists?
# Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
# Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:06:52 -0700


His sick fantasies include violent murder and desecration
of the bodies of his enemies, men, women and children:

# From: Steve Knight <***@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA

This Atheist LEADER, who they all pay homage to, even sick females
like Trance Stupor who share his perversions, uses imagery full
of the violent misogyny he expresses in the posts above:

# From: Steve Knight <***@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: a.a.(atheist.angst.)
# OT(Ordinary and Tiresome) - not-a-Joke
# Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:37:21 -0700
#
# Your Dad wanted to watch me fuck your Mom in the
# ass and offered me a kilo of crack to do it.
# I told him she was so fucking fat and oily and smelled
# like two day old urine that I'd need at least five kilos
# and a gallon of Jack.
#
# The only thing keeping me interested is putting a bag
# over your sister's head and fucking her mouth.
# I love that cooing sound when she swallows my sperm.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA


As he admits, (rather unecessarily ;-) atheists have serious mental
issues and they come to Usenet to share their personal problems:


# From: Steve Knight <***@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We're here to talk about our own personal issues as atheists


Jung was right:


"Among all my patients in the second half of life, that is, over
thirty-five, there has not been one whose problem in the last
resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life.
It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because
he had lost that which the living religions of every age
have given their followers, and none of them has really
been healed who did not regain his religious outlook."

-Carl G. Jung Modern Man in Search of a Soul

They cannot RECOGNISE Love, because they think it means
perverted SEX!!!!!!

Talking to an atheist about Love is like speaking to the BLIND
about the colours of a sunset.

The snip it all and make ANIMAL noises.. they are captives
of their Lower Self.

Alcoholism, like syphillis and atheism, causes brain damage
and the symptoms include memory loss, as Ritalin Richo demonstrates,
by forgetting where you are, what you are doing, even WHO
you are.. IN MID SENTENCE:-
Post by Richo
If you are a shy
...

..
.
....


Comeback and finish your 'thought' when you SOBER UP, you pisshead! B^]
Post by Richo
People take the drugs for the positive effects -
The fact that when you zoned out we were spared the rest of your
mindslime? B^D




---------


Once again we find atheists defending mind altering drugs which
kill tens of thousands every year, and attacking the religious
communities who provide the rehab and support services to look after
their burnouts.

Alcohol is involved in most road trauma, domestic violence,
child abuse.. etc etc..
Devils Advocaat
2010-11-08 08:26:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Are you suggesting that every drunk has a victim, other than
themselves?
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Alcohol is a social lubricant
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
Then explain why the evidence suggests otherwise, being as in the USA
over 56% of the present prison population on admission self-identify
as Christians.
Post by fasgnadh
It depresses brain function...
Post by Richo
- it reduces inhibitions  - so if you
are shy  (I am) it makes you less shy.
- when you have little talent and Low IQ it is best to maintain
   a low profile.
- you have learned from experience that when people get to know you,
   they don't like you.
Alcohol reduces your social and perceptual skills, motor co-ordination
and embarrassment threshold..    hence, you remain unlikeable, even
become more so, but are unaware of the disdain which would normally
restrain you from making a complete arse of yourself, in public!  B^p
Post by Richo
This reduction in inhibition also means that people will more easily
be agressive
Sure, as you get more pissed and obnoxious, feeling up the
Football team Quarterback's girlfriend while she was ordering drinks
and ignoring your fashionable Lampshade Headwear, he get's more prepared
to "rip off your head and shit down your throat".
Thus alcohol makes people more stupid AND aggressive while
simultaneously blocking their perception and intelligence receptors,
so they think they are being witty and charming. In short, they turn
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA  - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
#  We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
  Surely there are only two ways to get THAT stupid.. pissed as a Newt,
or atheism!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAA
 > or overtly sexual in their behaviour.
So you claim your Warlord is PERPETUALLY DRUNK?;
Agnostics were having a polite rational discourse with
some theists, talking about love, and diseased atheists
respond with their bestial psychosis;
# Subject: Re: Where's the Love in the Quran? EVERYWHERE,
#              and in atheism- NOWHERE ..They DON'T GET IT!!!
#              Read and see for yourself!
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam,
#             alt.religion.christianity,alt.religion
# Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:11:14 -0700
#
# >>>
# >>> That was revolutionary, it took the parable of the Good Samaritan,
# >>> where the religious Other who acts with Love is held up as more
# >>> righteous in the eyes of God as those orthodox of one's own faith
who fail to show love or do good.
# >>>
# >>>  Outstanding!  That is the Message of the Age.
# >>
# >> Maybe - but it is about surrender, not love.
# >
# > Exactly as my beloved does.. bending herself toward me..
# > and offering herself totally... as I also do to her beauty and
# > charms....
#
#   Then you grab her tail and make her say 'Baaaaaaa'.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
In a discussion of MUTUAL LOVE and willing surrender,
the atheist thug reveals his misogyny and bestial force.
It's a common occurrence among the atheist perverts;
People talking about Cosmology were shocked to find Steve
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: The Big Bang Theory
# Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:46:34 -0700
#
# >The Big Bang Theory
#
#    You wanna see the big bang?
#
#    NSFW!
#
#    http://www.ovguide.com/adult.html
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
If you Google the word "Mother" for Steve Knight, this is what you find,
Steve has to say about her;
#  took his rubber cock out of his mouth, shoved it
# up his mother's ass and ...
#
#   Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,
#   alt.agnosticism
#   Subject: Re: Better place to debate theists?
#   Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:06:52 -0700
His sick fantasies include violent murder and desecration
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA  - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
#  We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
This Atheist LEADER, who they all pay homage to, even sick females
like Trance Stupor who share his perversions, uses imagery full
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: a.a.(atheist.angst.)
#          OT(Ordinary and Tiresome) - not-a-Joke
# Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:37:21 -0700
#
# Your Dad wanted to watch me fuck your Mom in the
# ass and offered me a kilo of crack to do it.
# I told him she was so fucking fat and oily and smelled
# like two day old urine that I'd need at least five kilos
# and a gallon of Jack.
#
# The only thing keeping me interested is putting a bag
# over your sister's head and fucking her mouth.
# I love that cooing sound when she swallows my sperm.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
As he admits, (rather unecessarily ;-) atheists have serious mental
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA  - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We're here to talk about our own personal issues as atheists
"Among all my patients in the second half of life, that is, over
thirty-five, there has not been one whose problem in the last
resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life.
It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because
he had lost that which the living religions of every age
have given their followers, and none of them has really
been healed who did not regain his religious outlook."
           -Carl G. Jung  Modern Man in Search of a Soul
They cannot RECOGNISE Love, because they think it means
perverted SEX!!!!!!
Talking to an atheist about Love is like speaking to the BLIND
about the colours of a sunset.
The snip it all and make ANIMAL noises..  they are captives
of their Lower Self.
Alcoholism, like syphillis and atheism, causes brain damage
and the symptoms include memory loss, as Ritalin Richo demonstrates,
by  forgetting where you are, what you are doing, even WHO
you are.. IN MID SENTENCE:-
Post by Richo
If you are a shy
...
..
.
....
Comeback and finish your 'thought' when you SOBER UP, you pisshead!  B^]
Post by Richo
People take the drugs for the positive effects -
The fact that when you zoned out we were spared the rest of your
mindslime?   B^D
---------
Once again we find atheists defending mind altering drugs which
kill tens of thousands every year, and attacking the religious
communities who provide the rehab and support services to look after
their burnouts.
Yet the statistics show its the religious types that cause most of
what you blame on the atheists.
Post by fasgnadh
Alcohol is involved in most road trauma, domestic violence,
child abuse.. etc etc..
fasgnadh
2010-11-08 12:59:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Are you suggesting that every drunk has a victim, other than
themselves?
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Alcohol is a social lubricant
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
Then explain why the evidence suggests otherwise, being as in the USA
over 56% of the present prison population on admission self-identify
as Christians.
As the religious in the USA are over 80% (ARIS) they are clearly
UNDER-REPRESENTED in the criminal population! Which means that atheists
are over represented! You ARE the criminal class! B^D

Besides a lot of people pretend to be righteous when in a pinch.. some
of that 56% are acting out of Remorse, (the more sincere ones), and some
are hypocritical pretenders, (the more devious, unprincipled, arse
lickers!) B^D
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
It depresses brain function...
Post by Richo
- it reduces inhibitions - so if you
are shy (I am) it makes you less shy.
- when you have little talent and Low IQ it is best to maintain
a low profile.
- you have learned from experience that when people get to know you,
they don't like you.
I note that none of the atheists could challenge, let alone refute
the truth! B^D
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Alcohol reduces your social and perceptual skills, motor co-ordination
and embarrassment threshold.. hence, you remain unlikeable, even
become more so, but are unaware of the disdain which would normally
restrain you from making a complete arse of yourself, in public! B^p
Post by Richo
This reduction in inhibition also means that people will more easily
be agressive
Sure, as you get more pissed and obnoxious, feeling up the
Football team Quarterback's girlfriend while she was ordering drinks
and ignoring your fashionable Lampshade Headwear, he get's more prepared
to "rip off your head and shit down your throat".
Thus alcohol makes people more stupid AND aggressive while
simultaneously blocking their perception and intelligence receptors,
so they think they are being witty and charming. In short, they turn
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Surely there are only two ways to get THAT stupid.. pissed as a Newt,
or atheism!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAA
Post by Richo
or overtly sexual in their behaviour.
So you claim your Warlord is PERPETUALLY DRUNK?;
Agnostics were having a polite rational discourse with
some theists, talking about love, and diseased atheists
respond with their bestial psychosis;
# Subject: Re: Where's the Love in the Quran? EVERYWHERE,
# and in atheism- NOWHERE ..They DON'T GET IT!!!
# Read and see for yourself!
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam,
# alt.religion.christianity,alt.religion
# Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:11:14 -0700
#
#>>>
#>>> That was revolutionary, it took the parable of the Good Samaritan,
#>>> where the religious Other who acts with Love is held up as more
#>>> righteous in the eyes of God as those orthodox of one's own faith
who fail to show love or do good.
#>>>
#>>> Outstanding! That is the Message of the Age.
#>>
#>> Maybe - but it is about surrender, not love.
#>
#> Exactly as my beloved does.. bending herself toward me..
#> and offering herself totally... as I also do to her beauty and
#> charms....
#
# Then you grab her tail and make her say 'Baaaaaaa'.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
In a discussion of MUTUAL LOVE and willing surrender,
the atheist thug reveals his misogyny and bestial force.
It's a common occurrence among the atheist perverts;
People talking about Cosmology were shocked to find Steve
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: The Big Bang Theory
# Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:46:34 -0700
#
#>The Big Bang Theory
#
# You wanna see the big bang?
#
# NSFW!
#
# http://www.ovguide.com/adult.html
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
If you Google the word "Mother" for Steve Knight, this is what you find,
Steve has to say about her;
# took his rubber cock out of his mouth, shoved it
# up his mother's ass and ...
#
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.agnosticism
# Subject: Re: Better place to debate theists?
# Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:06:52 -0700
His sick fantasies include violent murder and desecration
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
This Atheist LEADER, who they all pay homage to, even sick females
like Trance Stupor who share his perversions, uses imagery full
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: a.a.(atheist.angst.)
# OT(Ordinary and Tiresome) - not-a-Joke
# Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:37:21 -0700
#
# Your Dad wanted to watch me fuck your Mom in the
# ass and offered me a kilo of crack to do it.
# I told him she was so fucking fat and oily and smelled
# like two day old urine that I'd need at least five kilos
# and a gallon of Jack.
#
# The only thing keeping me interested is putting a bag
# over your sister's head and fucking her mouth.
# I love that cooing sound when she swallows my sperm.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
As he admits, (rather unecessarily ;-) atheists have serious mental
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We're here to talk about our own personal issues as atheists
"Among all my patients in the second half of life, that is, over
thirty-five, there has not been one whose problem in the last
resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life.
It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because
he had lost that which the living religions of every age
have given their followers, and none of them has really
been healed who did not regain his religious outlook."
-Carl G. Jung Modern Man in Search of a Soul
They cannot RECOGNISE Love, because they think it means
perverted SEX!!!!!!
Talking to an atheist about Love is like speaking to the BLIND
about the colours of a sunset.
The snip it all and make ANIMAL noises.. they are captives
of their Lower Self.
Alcoholism, like syphillis and atheism, causes brain damage
and the symptoms include memory loss, as Ritalin Richo demonstrates,
by forgetting where you are, what you are doing, even WHO
you are.. IN MID SENTENCE:-
Post by Richo
If you are a shy
...
..
.
....
Comeback and finish your 'thought' when you SOBER UP, you pisshead! B^]
Post by Richo
People take the drugs for the positive effects -
The fact that when you zoned out we were spared the rest of your
mindslime? B^D
---------
Once again we find atheists defending mind altering drugs which
kill tens of thousands every year, and attacking the religious
communities who provide the rehab and support services to look after
their burnouts.
Yet the statistics show its the religious types that cause most of
what you blame on the atheists.
Liar. As a proportion of the population of the USA, where 80% are
believers, 56% means they are LESS CRIMINAL proportionally, than the non
religious!! B^]

Can't you thick atheists perform the most basic statistical analysis?

No wonder atheism is in terminal decline, internationally:


"At the dawn of the 20th Century approximately one half of the world's
population identified itself as either Muslim, Catholic, Protestant,
Hindu or Buddhist, and 100 years of secularism, and technological
advancement, and scientific progress later and that number is now
two thirds.

So, for those of you who enjoy beginning coffee shop
conversations with "The Death of God" .. it's time to change
the subject! It's time to talk about something else , because
it's not happening at all.

People are becoming more religious, not less religious,
and religion itself is also evolving"



- Dr Reza Aslan

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2010/2929354.htm
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Alcohol is involved in most road trauma, domestic violence,
child abuse.. etc etc..
Naturally the atheists defend the violent drug abusers and their
anti-social behaviour.

---------

alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source



"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)



http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Devils Advocaat
2010-11-10 09:11:49 UTC
Permalink
On Nov 8, 12:59 pm, fasgnadh <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

[snipped for brevity and focus]
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
Then explain why the evidence suggests otherwise, being as in the USA
over 56% of the present prison population on admission self-identify
as Christians.
As the religious in the USA are over 80% (ARIS) they are clearly
UNDER-REPRESENTED in the criminal population!   Which means that atheists
are over represented!  You ARE the criminal class!    B^D
Besides a lot of people pretend to be righteous when in a pinch.. some
of that 56% are acting out of Remorse, (the more sincere ones), and some
are hypocritical pretenders, (the more devious, unprincipled, arse
lickers!)   B^D
[snipped for brevity and focus]
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Devils Advocaat
Yet the statistics show its the religious types that cause most of
what you blame on the atheists.
Liar.  As a proportion of the population of the USA, where 80% are
believers, 56% means they are LESS CRIMINAL proportionally, than the non
religious!!   B^]
Can't you thick atheists perform the most basic statistical analysis?
[snipped for brevity and focus]

Okay simple analysis.

The most recent ARIS report (2008 survey) shows 76% of the adults in
the USA self-identify as Christians, and just 0.7% self identify as
Atheists.

So that is 760 in every 1,000 and 7 in every 1,000 respectively.

The most recent data I obtained from the Federal Bureau of Prisons
(2010 actual data) shows 56% of inmates self-identify as Christians
and just 0.08% self-identify as Atheists.

So that is 560 in every 1,000 and less than 1 in every 1,000
respectively.

Seems to me if Christians were actually more law abiding and morally
superior to the Atheists the figures ought to be the other way round.

But tell me, why do you accept what the ARIS report shows when it is
only a survey, and claim that the data gathered from the prison
inmates is false?

After all claiming to be a Christian once you are already an inmate
isn't going to change your sentence is it?
Michael Gray
2010-11-10 12:02:30 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:11:49 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
Post by Devils Advocaat
The most recent ARIS report (2008 survey) shows 76% of the adults in
the USA self-identify as Christians, and just 0.7% self identify as
Atheists.
Do you have a 'cite' for this stat, please?
I should like to add it to my database of similar studies.

:
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
Devils Advocaat
2010-11-10 19:00:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Gray
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:11:49 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
Post by Devils Advocaat
The most recent ARIS report (2008 survey) shows 76% of the adults in
the USA self-identify as Christians, and just 0.7% self identify as
Atheists.
Do you have a 'cite' for this stat, please?
I should like to add it to my database of similar studies.
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
I would be happy to send you the whole report in PDF format if you
wish :)
Michael Gray
2010-11-11 09:13:00 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 11:00:26 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by Michael Gray
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:11:49 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
Post by Devils Advocaat
The most recent ARIS report (2008 survey) shows 76% of the adults in
the USA self-identify as Christians, and just 0.7% self identify as
Atheists.
Do you have a 'cite' for this stat, please?
I should like to add it to my database of similar studies.
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
I would be happy to send you the whole report in PDF format if you
wish :)
Duly received, thankyou.
--
Maleficat quae malum celat
fasgnadh
2010-11-13 14:06:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by Michael Gray
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:11:49 -0800 (PST), Devils Advocaat
...
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
Then explain why the evidence suggests otherwise, being as in the USA
over 56% of the present prison population on admission self-identify
as Christians.
56% of the prison population and 76% of the wider population!
FASCINATING!!

They are clearly MORE law abiding than the 15% of non-religious:

# American Religious Identification Survey, Summary Report March 2009:
#
# "Self-identification of U.S. Adult Population by Religious Tradition
#
# 2001 2008
#
# Non- religious 29,481,000 (14.1%) 34,169,000 (15%)
#
# Religious 167,254,000 (80%) 182,198,000 (80%)
#

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/documents/aris030609.pdf
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
As the religious in the USA are over 80% (ARIS) they are clearly
UNDER-REPRESENTED in the criminal population! Which means that atheists
are over represented! You ARE the criminal class! B^D
The most recent ARIS report (2008 survey) shows 76% of the adults in
the USA self-identify as Christians,
And as Devil's Associate told us, they are only 56% of the prison
population!!!! 8^o so they are UNDER-REPRESENTED in the criminal
ranks!!!!
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Devils Advocaat
The most recent data I obtained from the Federal Bureau of Prisons
(2010 actual data)
Where's your cite? Is this the one where atheists ignore 18,381
inmates recorded as "Unknown/No Answer" in the data? B^D

Quoting figures without p, it means we can't CHECK your 'opinions'.
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by Michael Gray
Post by Devils Advocaat
shows 56% of inmates self-identify as Christians
and just 0.08% self-identify as Atheists.
Do you have a 'cite' for this stat, please?
The ARIS Data is well known, it's the lack of citation for
the prison's data that destroys his credibility.


Is it an anonymous survey? Atheists are widely despised (see "Atheists
distrusted" below) and many lie about their position, if it suits them,
as this demonstrates:


# It's Official, Dishonest Atheist LIARSs claim to be
# a persecuted RELIGION: B^p
#
#
# "THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints
# of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart
#
# "atheism counts as a religion, Dr Perkins said."
# The Age 29/1/2009
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by Michael Gray
I should like to add it to my database of similar studies.
"Similar studies"? Such as?
Post by Devils Advocaat
I would be happy to send you the whole report in PDF format if you
wish :)
Why don't you both simply post a proper citation, like all
honest people do.

If your "prison data" is from "Denise Golumbaski Research
Analyst, Federal Bureau of Prisons" then we can all have
a good laugh...
because I demolished that previously.. as part of a long
series of exposures of dishonest atheist misrepresentations
of data.


holysmoke! B^]



---------


# Atheists Identified as America’s Most Distrusted Minority"
# - American Sociological Association, ASA NEWS
#
# "A survey by sociologists at the University of Minnesota
# found that atheists are “America’s most distrusted minority.”
#

No wonder so many atheists are too embarrassed to
admit their atheism.

# "From a telephone sampling of more than 2,000 households,
# university researchers found that Americans rate atheists
# below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and
# other minority groups in “sharing their vision of
# American society.”
#

So the atheists, unless it's a completely ANONYMOUS
survey, like the ARIS data, would be reluctant to
reveal their atheism. Especially in jail! 8^o

# Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are
# least willing to allow their children to marry.
#
# Even though atheists are few in number, not formally
# organized and relatively hard to publicly identify,
# they are seen as a threat to the American way of life
# by a large portion of the American public.
#

Seen as a threat! 8^o so they would have to be careful
in the showers! 8^o

# Many of the study’s respondents associated atheism with
# an array of moral indiscretions ranging from criminal
# behavior to rampant materialism and cultural elitism.

Jeez, who would own up to being an atheist in prison, eh? B^D

Like admitting you're a paedophile!


# Edgell believes a fear of moral decline and resulting
# social disorder is behind the findings.
# “Americans believe they share more than rules and
# procedures with their fellow citizens—they share an
# understanding of right and wrong,” she said. “Our
# findings seem to rest on a view of atheists as
# self-interested individuals who are not concerned
# with the common good.”
#
# The study is co-authored by assistant professor
# Joseph Gerteis and associate professor Doug Hartmann.
# It’s the first in a series of national studies conducted
# the American Mosaic Project, a three-year project funded
# by the Minneapolis-based David Edelstein Family Foundation
# that looks at race, religion and cultural diversity in
# the contemporary United States."
Burkhard
2010-11-13 15:03:27 UTC
Permalink
<snp>
# Atheists Identified as America�s Most Distrusted Minority"
#  - American Sociological Association, ASA NEWS
#
# "A survey by sociologists at the University of Minnesota
# found that atheists are �America�s most distrusted minority.�
#
No wonder so many atheists are too embarrassed to
admit their atheism.
# "From a telephone sampling of more than 2,000 households,
# university researchers found that Americans rate atheists
# below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and
# other minority groups in �sharing their vision of
# American society.�
#
So the atheists, unless it's a completely ANONYMOUS
survey, like the ARIS data, would be reluctant to
reveal their atheism.  Especially in jail!  8^o
Not sure why "especially in jail", unless you think they have to be
in fear of hate crime from the religious inmates. Possible, but is it
likely that religious motivated hate crime in prisons is high?

Methodologically speaking, you are right, non-anonymous self-
identification surveys are problematic.

However, your argument works of course in both direction. Assuming for
the sake of the argument that non-religious people were
overrepresented in prison, your data could explain a systematic
sampling bias. They don;t commit more crimes, but are simply more
likely to be suspected, arrested, charged and later imprisoned by
police officers, prosecutors and judges who, as religious people,
"distrust and fear" them, as you said. That would simply extend the
analysis e.g. by Box ( Power, Crime and Mystification. Routledge:
London. 1983) or Becker (Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of
Deviance. (New York: The Free Press, 1963) on race and prison
population to religious groups.
# Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are
# least willing to allow their children to marry.
#
# Even though atheists are few in number, not formally
# organized and relatively hard to publicly identify,
# they are seen as a threat to the American way of life
# by a large portion of the American public.
#
Seen as a threat!  8^o   so they would have to be careful
in the showers!    8^o
You mean out of fear to be raped by the Christians they are
incarcerated with? That seems to be the only interpretation of your
comment that makes sense, and sounds a bit odd coming from you. I
would want to get some data on this to believe it, I slightly doubt
that religious on non-religious sexual crimes are proportionally that
much higher than what we would expect in the population, but I could
of course be wrong on this.


<snip more of the same>
fasgnadh
2010-11-13 13:21:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Devils Advocaat
[snipped for brevity and focus]
Actually you snipped it because it showed YOU claiming
that the rate of Christian's in prison is 56%, and then
when I showed that's LESS than their percentage in the wider population,
you pulled some NEW figures out of your arse!!!!

BWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA

<unsnip for ACCURACY and honesty>
...
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
Then explain why the evidence suggests otherwise, being as in the USA
over 56% of the present prison population on admission self-identify
as Christians.
So Devil's Arselicker puts the Christian's at 56% of the
prison population! FASCINATING!! .. as the ARIS figures show they
and the other religious are GREATLY under-represented in the criminal
ranks! B^D

That means that the irreligious are OVER REPRESENTED among criminals! 8^o
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
As the religious in the USA are over 80% (ARIS) they are clearly
UNDER-REPRESENTED in the criminal population! Which means that atheists
are over represented! You ARE the criminal class! B^D
No refutation from the atheists...

The figures clearly speak for themselves! B^]
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
Besides a lot of people pretend to be righteous when in a pinch.. some
of that 56% are acting out of Remorse, (the more sincere ones), and some
are hypocritical pretenders, (the more devious, unprincipled, arse
lickers!) B^D
So you would need an ANONYMOUS survey, so that people are not
giving answers they think will help them in prison!!!
Post by Devils Advocaat
[snipped for brevity and focus]
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Devils Advocaat
Yet the statistics show its the religious types that cause most of
what you blame on the atheists.
Liar.
Clearly the statistics show the non-religious are over-represented
in the prison population! How embarrassing for you! B^D
Post by Devils Advocaat
Post by fasgnadh
As a proportion of the population of the USA, where 80% are
believers, 56% means they are LESS CRIMINAL, proportionally,
than the non religious!! B^]
Can't you thick atheists perform the most basic statistical analysis?
It seems you can't even provide proper CITATIONS for you UN-EVIDENCED
OPINIONS!

Don't any of you have any tertiary education data analysis skills??
Post by Devils Advocaat
[snipped for brevity and focus]
Okay simple analysis.
What, you are going to analyse more figures you just PULL
FROM YOUR ARSE with no proper attribution!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAAA


You did that last time and just MADE A FOOL OF YOURSELF!

Once could have been a mistake, twice is deliberate dishonesty!
Post by Devils Advocaat
The most recent ARIS report (2008 survey) shows 76% of the adults in
the USA self-identify as Christians,
So according to you christians are LESS likely to be convicted
criminals... MORE PROOF that theism is a SOCIAL GOOD!

Well Done, Devil's Adversary!!!! B^D

And the TOTAL RELIGIOUS is 80%!!!

So the Christians and indeed ALL religious are a Smaller proportion of
the PRISON population than they are of the national population !!!!

# American Religious Identification Survey, Summary Report March 2009:
#
# "Self-identification of U.S. Adult Population by Religious Tradition
#
# 2001 2008
#
# Non- religious 29,481,000 (14.1%) 34,169,000 (15%)
#
# Religious 167,254,000 (80%) 182,198,000 (80%)
#

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/documents/aris030609.pdf

That means the NON RELIGIOUS must be a LARGER proportion of the
Criminals than the religious are! 8^o

You criminals better stay away from our daughters! B^D
Post by Devils Advocaat
The most recent data I obtained from the Federal Bureau of Prisons
(2010 actual data) shows
Post it, with proper citation. I have shown you how it's done.

Otherwise you are just covering up your first unsubstantiated claim
with another one. pffffft!

[ If it's the old atheist misrepresentation of Denise Golumbaski's
statistics which dishonest atheists have previously been exposed
for distorting, then don't bother.. I demolished that in alt.atheism
earlier! B^]


[snipped for brevity and focus]


---------


# Atheists Identified as America’s Most Distrusted Minority"
# - American Sociological Association, ASA NEWS
#

No wonder.. they give us their OPINIONS without ANY VERIFIABLE PROOF,
and expect us to simply BELIEVE them.. only the gullible OTHER
ATHEISTS Do!!! B^D


# "A survey by sociologists at the University of Minnesota
# found that atheists are “America’s most distrusted minority.”
#
# "From a telephone sampling of more than 2,000 households,
# university researchers found that Americans rate atheists
# below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and
# other minority groups in “sharing their vision of
# American society.”
#
# Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are
# least willing to allow their children to marry.
#
# Even though atheists are few in number, not formally
# organized and relatively hard to publicly identify,
# they are seen as a threat to the American way of life
# by a large portion of the American public.
#
# Many of the study’s respondents associated atheism with
# an array of moral indiscretions ranging from criminal
# behavior to rampant materialism and cultural elitism.
#
# Edgell believes a fear of moral decline and resulting
# social disorder is behind the findings.
# “Americans believe they share more than rules and
# procedures with their fellow citizens—they share an
# understanding of right and wrong,” she said. “Our
# findings seem to rest on a view of atheists as
# self-interested individuals who are not concerned
# with the common good.”
#
# The study is co-authored by assistant professor
# Joseph Gerteis and associate professor Doug Hartmann.
# It’s the first in a series of national studies conducted
# the American Mosaic Project, a three-year project funded
# by the Minneapolis-based David Edelstein Family Foundation
# that looks at race, religion and cultural diversity in
# the contemporary United States."
Richo
2010-11-08 10:33:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Some people use alcohol and are not "drunks" and don't have victims.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Alcohol is a social lubricant
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
You meant "alcohol" - you shouldn't post pissed.

Mark.
fasgnadh
2010-11-08 13:28:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Some people use alcohol and are not "drunks" and don't have victims.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Alcohol is a social lubricant
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
You meant "alcohol"
See, you understand it's social costs, yet you advocate that
destructive toxin!

You hedonists are weak, irrational and immoral hypocrites.
Post by Richo
shouldn't post pissed.
That's what I told you! B^D

Unlike you, I don't need any drugs, self harming 'Spirits' or
mood enhancers in order to have the 'Dutch Courage to talk to girls! B^D

You defend drugs because they are your crutch,
and atheists are once again found rationalising their despair;


http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17456?context=latest
Post by Richo
Mark.
Post by fasgnadh
It depresses brain function...
just like atheism! B^D
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
- it reduces inhibitions - so if you
are shy (I am) it makes you less shy.
- when you have little talent and Low IQ it is best to maintain
a low profile.
- you have learned from experience that when people get to know you,
they don't like you.
Alcohol reduces your social and perceptual skills, motor co-ordination
and embarrassment threshold.. hence, you remain unlikeable, even
become more so, but are unaware of the disdain which would normally
restrain you from making a complete arse of yourself, in public! B^p
First you take drugs to reduce inhibition because you cannot
act authentically without chemical crutches, then you take more
drugs to cover up your humiliation and embarassment from acting
like a silly tosser('uninhibited')!!! B^D priceless!
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
This reduction in inhibition also means that people will more easily
be agressive
Sure, as you get more pissed and obnoxious, feeling up the
Football team Quarterback's girlfriend while she was ordering drinks
and ignoring your fashionable Lampshade Headwear, he get's more prepared
to "rip off your head and shit down your throat".
Thus alcohol makes people more stupid AND aggressive while
simultaneously blocking their perception and intelligence receptors,
so they think they are being witty and charming. In short, they turn
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Surely there are only two ways to get THAT stupid.. pissed as a Newt,
or atheism!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAA
Post by Richo
or overtly sexual in their behaviour.
So you claim your Warlord is PERPETUALLY DRUNK?;
Agnostics were having a polite rational discourse with
some theists, talking about love, and diseased atheists
respond with their bestial psychosis;
# Subject: Re: Where's the Love in the Quran? EVERYWHERE,
# and in atheism- NOWHERE ..They DON'T GET IT!!!
# Read and see for yourself!
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam,
# alt.religion.christianity,alt.religion
# Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:11:14 -0700
#
# >>>
# >>> That was revolutionary, it took the parable of the Good Samaritan,
# >>> where the religious Other who acts with Love is held up as more
# >>> righteous in the eyes of God as those orthodox of one's own faith
who fail to show love or do good.
# >>>
# >>> Outstanding! That is the Message of the Age.
# >>
# >> Maybe - but it is about surrender, not love.
# >
# > Exactly as my beloved does.. bending herself toward me..
# > and offering herself totally... as I also do to her beauty and
# > charms....
#
# Then you grab her tail and make her say 'Baaaaaaa'.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
In a discussion of MUTUAL LOVE and willing surrender,
the atheist thug reveals his misogyny and bestial force.
It's a common occurrence among the atheist perverts;
People talking about Cosmology were shocked to find Steve
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: The Big Bang Theory
# Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:46:34 -0700
#
#
# >The Big Bang Theory
#
# You wanna see the big bang?
#
# NSFW!
#
# http://www.ovguide.com/adult.html
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
If you Google the word "Mother" for Steve Knight, this is what you find,
Steve has to say about her;
# took his rubber cock out of his mouth, shoved it
# up his mother's ass and ...
#
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.agnosticism
# Subject: Re: Better place to debate theists?
# Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:06:52 -0700
His sick fantasies include violent murder and desecration
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
This Atheist LEADER, who they all pay homage to, even sick females
like Trance Stupor who share his perversions, uses imagery full
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: a.a.(atheist.angst.)
# OT(Ordinary and Tiresome) - not-a-Joke
# Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:37:21 -0700
#
# Your Dad wanted to watch me fuck your Mom in the
# ass and offered me a kilo of crack to do it.
# I told him she was so fucking fat and oily and smelled
# like two day old urine that I'd need at least five kilos
# and a gallon of Jack.
#
# The only thing keeping me interested is putting a bag
# over your sister's head and fucking her mouth.
# I love that cooing sound when she swallows my sperm.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
As he admits, (rather unecessarily ;-) atheists have serious mental
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We're here to talk about our own personal issues as atheists
"Among all my patients in the second half of life, that is, over
thirty-five, there has not been one whose problem in the last
resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life.
It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because
he had lost that which the living religions of every age
have given their followers, and none of them has really
been healed who did not regain his religious outlook."
-Carl G. Jung Modern Man in Search of a Soul
They cannot RECOGNISE Love, because they think it means
perverted SEX!!!!!!
Talking to an atheist about Love is like speaking to the BLIND
about the colours of a sunset.
The snip it all and make ANIMAL noises.. they are captives
of their Lower Self.
Alcoholism, like syphillis and atheism, causes brain damage
and the symptoms include memory loss, as Ritalin Richo demonstrates,
by forgetting where you are, what you are doing, even WHO
you are.. IN MID SENTENCE:-
Post by Richo
If you are a shy
...
..
.
....
Comeback and finish your 'thought' when you SOBER UP, you pisshead! B^]
Post by Richo
People take the drugs for the positive effects -
The fact that when you zoned out we were spared the rest of your
mindslime? B^D
---------
Once again we find atheists defending mind altering drugs which
kill tens of thousands every year, and attacking the religious
communities who provide the rehab and support services to look after
their burnouts.
Alcohol is involved in most road trauma, domestic violence,
child abuse.. etc etc..
And above we see richo agreeing with that summation! B^]

Game Set, Match .....again! B^]






---------


alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source



"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)



http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
Richo
2010-11-09 04:48:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
 >
 > Some people use alcohol and are not "drunks" and don't have victims.
 >>>> Alcohol is a social lubricant
Post by fasgnadh
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
 >
 > You meant "alcohol"
See, you understand it's social costs, yet you advocate that
destructive toxin!
Do I?
Have you got any evidence to back that up? - like a quote or
something?
You hedonists are weak, irrational and immoral hypocrites.
Unlike you, I don't need any drugs,
You claim that I need drugs - on what evidence?
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
I explained why they have appeal - are you saying that they have no
appeal?
If they have no appeal, then why have humans been endulging for (at
least) thousands of years?
because they are your crutch,
No actually, they are not.

You are pretending to know things ( this time about me) that you do
not. Again.

Silly Troll! Bad Troll!

Mark.
Green Skeptic
2010-11-11 15:35:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt. I explained why they have appeal - are you
saying that they have no appeal? If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.

---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
fasgnadh
2010-11-15 19:41:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't.. you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.

Now you are backsliding,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
are you saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'

Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.

pffffft!
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination? No girlfriend? Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?

I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.

When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?

It's as socially useless as atheism! B^D



---------

"At the dawn of the 20th Century approximately one half of the world's
population identified itself as either Muslim, Catholic, Protestant,
Hindu or Buddhist, and 100 years of secularism, and technological
advancement, and scientific progress later and that number is now
two thirds.

So, for those of you who enjoy beginning coffee shop
conversations with "The Death of God" .. it's time to change
the subject! It's time to talk about something else , because
it's not happening at all.

People are becoming more religious, not less religious,
and religion itself is also evolving"



- Dr Reza Aslan

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2010/2929354.htm
Burkhard
2010-11-15 20:00:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
 >> I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't..   you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.
Now you are backsliding,
 >> are you  saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'
Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.
pffffft!
 >> If they have no appeal,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination?  No girlfriend?  Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?
I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.
When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?
It's as socially useless as atheism!  B^D
Slightly odd statement, given how closely drug taking and religious
experience have been historically related, from the use of peyote in
ancient Schamanism to it s use in Maya and Aztec culture, from the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Exodus 30:23) to the new age religions.
(better SLD than LDS) The technical term you are looking for is
entheogen, and their use across cultures has been intensively studies
by anthropologists and comparative religious studies scholars.

Robert Thomas is one of the leading experts in the field, you could
try his 2006 book "Chemical Input, Religious Output—Entheogens"
Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3: The Psychology of
Religious Experience Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood. " or his edited
colleciton, "Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and
Religion San Francisco: Council on Spiritual Practices".

Or try for an overview of the field
Richard Evans Schultes: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing and
Hallucinogenic Powers. Innes 1992









(
thomas p.
2010-11-16 17:24:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't.. you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.
Now you are backsliding,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
are you saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'
Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.
pffffft!
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination? No girlfriend? Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?
I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.
When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?
It's as socially useless as atheism! B^D
Slightly odd statement, given how closely drug taking and religious
experience have been historically related, from the use of peyote in
ancient Schamanism to it s use in Maya and Aztec culture, from the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Exodus 30:23) to the new age religions.
(better SLD than LDS) The technical term you are looking for is
entheogen, and their use across cultures has been intensively studies
by anthropologists and comparative religious studies scholars.

Robert Thomas is one of the leading experts in the field, you could
try his 2006 book "Chemical Input, Religious Output-Entheogens"
Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3: The Psychology of
Religious Experience Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood. " or his edited
colleciton, "Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and
Religion San Francisco: Council on Spiritual Practices".

Or try for an overview of the field
Richard Evans Schultes: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing and
Hallucinogenic Powers. Innes 1992


thomas p wrote:

It should also not be forgotten that the ascetic practices encouraged by
Christianity perhaps especially by Catholicism often have the same results
as the drugs of other religions i.e. visions or hallucinations.






(
Devils Advocaat
2010-11-16 17:44:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't.. you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.
Now you are backsliding,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
are you saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'
Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.
pffffft!
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination? No girlfriend? Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?
I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.
When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?
It's as socially useless as atheism! B^D
Slightly odd statement, given how closely drug taking and religious
experience have been historically related, from the use of peyote in
ancient Schamanism to it s use  in Maya and Aztec culture, from the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Exodus 30:23) to the new age religions.
(better SLD than LDS)  The technical term you are looking for is
entheogen, and their use across cultures has been intensively studies
by anthropologists and comparative religious studies scholars.
Robert Thomas is one of the leading experts in the field, you could
try his 2006 book "Chemical Input, Religious Output-Entheogens"
Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3: The Psychology of
Religious Experience Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood. " or his edited
colleciton, "Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and
Religion San Francisco: Council on Spiritual Practices".
Or try for an overview of the field
Richard Evans Schultes: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing and
Hallucinogenic Powers. Innes 1992
It should also not be forgotten that the ascetic practices encouraged by
Christianity perhaps especially by Catholicism often have the same results
as the drugs of other religions i.e. visions or hallucinations.
(
I presume you mean ascetic as in those practices of extreme self-
denial or self-mortification for religious reasons?

If so, such was the domain primarily of the more unusual monastic
orders as opposed to the rank and file of the laity.

At least that is what I have been lead to believe on such matters. :)
thomas p.
2010-11-17 06:21:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't.. you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.
Now you are backsliding,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
are you saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'
Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.
pffffft!
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination? No girlfriend? Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?
I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.
When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?
It's as socially useless as atheism! B^D
Slightly odd statement, given how closely drug taking and religious
experience have been historically related, from the use of peyote in
ancient Schamanism to it s use in Maya and Aztec culture, from the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Exodus 30:23) to the new age religions.
(better SLD than LDS) The technical term you are looking for is
entheogen, and their use across cultures has been intensively studies
by anthropologists and comparative religious studies scholars.
Robert Thomas is one of the leading experts in the field, you could
try his 2006 book "Chemical Input, Religious Output-Entheogens"
Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3: The Psychology of
Religious Experience Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood. " or his edited
colleciton, "Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and
Religion San Francisco: Council on Spiritual Practices".
Or try for an overview of the field
Richard Evans Schultes: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing and
Hallucinogenic Powers. Innes 1992
It should also not be forgotten that the ascetic practices encouraged by
Christianity perhaps especially by Catholicism often have the same results
as the drugs of other religions i.e. visions or hallucinations.
(
I presume you mean ascetic as in those practices of extreme self-
denial or self-mortification for religious reasons?

If so, such was the domain primarily of the more unusual monastic
orders as opposed to the rank and file of the laity.

At least that is what I have been lead to believe on such matters. :)


thomas p wrote:

It all depends on what one means by "extreme". There were a few orders and
individual monks whose practices could barely be distinguished from
Sado-Masochism, but frequent fasting, sleep denial and exposure to cold were
quite common and encouraged sometimes by "The Rule" of the particular order
itself. Naturally enough the resulting hallucinations were seen as either
of divine or satanic origin. There were also members of the laity who
gained high praise from the Church for such practices including a number of
saints. When I was a Catholic school student, this was all presented to us
as evidence of holiness. Christianity has always been attracted by the joys
of "suffering for the Lord".
Burkhard
2010-11-16 18:27:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't.. you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.
Now you are backsliding,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
are you saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'
Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.
pffffft!
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination? No girlfriend? Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?
I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.
When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?
It's as socially useless as atheism! B^D
Slightly odd statement, given how closely drug taking and religious
experience have been historically related, from the use of peyote in
ancient Schamanism to it s use  in Maya and Aztec culture, from the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Exodus 30:23) to the new age religions.
(better SLD than LDS)  The technical term you are looking for is
entheogen, and their use across cultures has been intensively studies
by anthropologists and comparative religious studies scholars.
Robert Thomas is one of the leading experts in the field, you could
try his 2006 book "Chemical Input, Religious Output-Entheogens"
Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3: The Psychology of
Religious Experience Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood. " or his edited
colleciton, "Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and
Religion San Francisco: Council on Spiritual Practices".
Or try for an overview of the field
Richard Evans Schultes: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing and
Hallucinogenic Powers. Innes 1992
It should also not be forgotten that the ascetic practices encouraged by
Christianity perhaps especially by Catholicism often have the same results
as the drugs of other religions i.e. visions or hallucinations.
(
Sure, from extreme fasting to self flagellation - and certain types
of music and dance also have the effect. But just for the record, I do
not consider any of these an argument against the validity of the
spiritual experience that they trigger, not any more than I would
consider microscopes or other equipment that enhances our more
"public" senses an argument against science. I just noted the fact
that drug use and religious experience are closely related - apart
from the historical data you get of course also things like the Marsh
Chapel Experiment.
thomas p.
2010-11-17 06:29:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't.. you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.
Now you are backsliding,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
are you saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'
Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.
pffffft!
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination? No girlfriend? Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?
I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.
When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?
It's as socially useless as atheism! B^D
Slightly odd statement, given how closely drug taking and religious
experience have been historically related, from the use of peyote in
ancient Schamanism to it s use in Maya and Aztec culture, from the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Exodus 30:23) to the new age religions.
(better SLD than LDS) The technical term you are looking for is
entheogen, and their use across cultures has been intensively studies
by anthropologists and comparative religious studies scholars.
Robert Thomas is one of the leading experts in the field, you could
try his 2006 book "Chemical Input, Religious Output-Entheogens"
Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3: The Psychology of
Religious Experience Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood. " or his edited
colleciton, "Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and
Religion San Francisco: Council on Spiritual Practices".
Or try for an overview of the field
Richard Evans Schultes: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing and
Hallucinogenic Powers. Innes 1992
It should also not be forgotten that the ascetic practices encouraged by
Christianity perhaps especially by Catholicism often have the same results
as the drugs of other religions i.e. visions or hallucinations.
(
Sure, from extreme fasting to self flagellation - and certain types
of music and dance also have the effect. But just for the record, I do
not consider any of these an argument against the validity of the
spiritual experience that they trigger, not any more than I would
consider microscopes or other equipment that enhances our more
"public" senses an argument against science. I just noted the fact
that drug use and religious experience are closely related - apart
from the historical data you get of course also things like the Marsh
Chapel Experiment.


thomas p wrote:

I agree that they are not an argument against the validity of the spiritual
experience, but you have jumped a step; there; there is no evidence for a
spiritual experience to be argued for or against. There is also no parallel
between drug-induced experiences, which vary widely from person to person
and from culture to culture, and the objective and repeatable results
achieved with scientific equipment.
Burkhard
2010-11-17 09:25:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't.. you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.
Now you are backsliding,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
are you saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'
Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.
pffffft!
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination? No girlfriend? Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?
I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.
When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?
It's as socially useless as atheism! B^D
Slightly odd statement, given how closely drug taking and religious
experience have been historically related, from the use of peyote in
ancient Schamanism to it s use in Maya and Aztec culture, from the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Exodus 30:23) to the new age religions.
(better SLD than LDS) The technical term you are looking for is
entheogen, and their use across cultures has been intensively studies
by anthropologists and comparative religious studies scholars.
Robert Thomas is one of the leading experts in the field, you could
try his 2006 book "Chemical Input, Religious Output-Entheogens"
Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3: The Psychology of
Religious Experience Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood. " or his edited
colleciton, "Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and
Religion San Francisco: Council on Spiritual Practices".
Or try for an overview of the field
Richard Evans Schultes: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing and
Hallucinogenic Powers. Innes 1992
It should also not be forgotten that the ascetic practices encouraged by
Christianity perhaps especially by Catholicism often have the same results
as the drugs of other religions i.e. visions or hallucinations.
(
Sure, from  extreme fasting to self flagellation - and certain types
of music and dance also have the effect. But just for the record, I do
not consider any of these an argument against the validity of the
spiritual experience that they trigger, not any more than I would
consider microscopes or other equipment that enhances our more
"public" senses an argument against science. I just noted the fact
that drug use and religious experience are closely related - apart
from the historical data you get of course also things like the Marsh
Chapel Experiment.
I agree that they are not an argument against the validity of the spiritual
experience, but you have jumped a step; there; there is no evidence for a
spiritual experience to be argued for or against.
That seems to be an odd and counterfactual statement to make.
Phenomenologically,you just have a bunch of people reporting an
internal experience, and the reports share sufficient similarity and
distinctness to other experiences to give it a label, spirituality.
Which is something that obviously happens, and with sufficient
regularity to allow scientific exploration. That is the experimental
set up necessary for the Mash Chapel experiment, and also how the
term is used in psychological or indeed biological studies of
religion.

Sam Harris(who I think practices Buddhist mediation techniques) uses
it (from the cover of one of his books: it will “celebrates the
spiritual aspect of human existence and explains how we can live moral
and spiritual lives without religion, and i think there is a Dawkins
quote to the some effect when he talks about his own spiritual
experiences.
 There is also no parallel
between drug-induced experiences, which vary widely from person to person
and from culture to culture, and the objective and repeatable results
achieved with scientific equipment.
As always, it rather depends what aspects are important for your
research question. Obvious if somewhat trivial parallels are that both
are human activities, or that both are typically carried out in
groups, which means they can be seen as sufficiently similar for
certain sociological studies. Both report using language, which makes
them sufficiently similar that they can be seen as "sufficiently
similar" for linguistic studies etc etc, That of course does not deny
that there are also substantial differences. Think in analogy of
something like the tree of life in biology, they are not the same
species, but possibly the same Kingdom.
thomas p.
2010-11-17 17:15:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Burkhard
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects " - richo
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal -
No you didn't.. you ASSERTED positive benefits,
you never 'explained' what they were, let alone
demonstrated what evidence there was for believing they
might be real.
Now you are backsliding,
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
are you saying that they have no appeal?
You couldn't finish the previous argument, we don't have
ANY evidence of the positive benefits that lead you, or
other drug takers to advocate drug taking.... so why would
I want to take up your new diversion on something as flakey and
indeterminate as having 'appeal'
Some people find watching others shit on a glass table has 'appeal',
I don't share your view that means it has 'positive benefits'.
pffffft!
Post by Green Skeptic
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal,
then why have humans been endulging for (at least)
thousands of years?
Lack of imagination? No girlfriend? Natural shit eaters?
Dumb as Atheists?
I can't be expected to explain the behaviours you assert have
'positive benefits' when you can't explain what they are, and
even deny that you ever defended drug taking by claiming it had
'positive benefits'
Post by Green Skeptic
It seems possible that the brain behavior that makes narcotics appealing
to some is the same brain behavior that makes religion appealing to some.
What nonsense.
When has drug taking produced a great and enduring civilisation?
It's as socially useless as atheism! B^D
Slightly odd statement, given how closely drug taking and religious
experience have been historically related, from the use of peyote in
ancient Schamanism to it s use in Maya and Aztec culture, from the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Exodus 30:23) to the new age religions.
(better SLD than LDS) The technical term you are looking for is
entheogen, and their use across cultures has been intensively studies
by anthropologists and comparative religious studies scholars.
Robert Thomas is one of the leading experts in the field, you could
try his 2006 book "Chemical Input, Religious Output-Entheogens"
Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3: The Psychology of
Religious Experience Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood. " or his edited
colleciton, "Psychoactive Sacramentals: Essays on Entheogens and
Religion San Francisco: Council on Spiritual Practices".
Or try for an overview of the field
Richard Evans Schultes: Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing and
Hallucinogenic Powers. Innes 1992
It should also not be forgotten that the ascetic practices encouraged by
Christianity perhaps especially by Catholicism often have the same results
as the drugs of other religions i.e. visions or hallucinations.
(
Sure, from extreme fasting to self flagellation - and certain types
of music and dance also have the effect. But just for the record, I do
not consider any of these an argument against the validity of the
spiritual experience that they trigger, not any more than I would
consider microscopes or other equipment that enhances our more
"public" senses an argument against science. I just noted the fact
that drug use and religious experience are closely related - apart
from the historical data you get of course also things like the Marsh
Chapel Experiment.
I agree that they are not an argument against the validity of the spiritual
experience, but you have jumped a step; there; there is no evidence for a
spiritual experience to be argued for or against.
That seems to be an odd and counterfactual statement to make.
Phenomenologically,you just have a bunch of people reporting an
internal experience, and the reports share sufficient similarity and
distinctness to other experiences to give it a label, spirituality.
Which is something that obviously happens, and with sufficient
regularity to allow scientific exploration. That is the experimental
set up necessary for the Mash Chapel experiment, and also how the
term is used in psychological or indeed biological studies of
religion.

Sam Harris(who I think practices Buddhist mediation techniques) uses
it (from the cover of one of his books: it will "celebrates the
spiritual aspect of human existence and explains how we can live moral
and spiritual lives without religion, and i think there is a Dawkins
quote to the some effect when he talks about his own spiritual
experiences.
There is also no parallel
between drug-induced experiences, which vary widely from person to person
and from culture to culture, and the objective and repeatable results
achieved with scientific equipment.
As always, it rather depends what aspects are important for your
research question. Obvious if somewhat trivial parallels are that both
are human activities, or that both are typically carried out in
groups, which means they can be seen as sufficiently similar for
certain sociological studies. Both report using language, which makes
them sufficiently similar that they can be seen as "sufficiently
similar" for linguistic studies etc etc, That of course does not deny
that there are also substantial differences. Think in analogy of
something like the tree of life in biology, they are not the same
species, but possibly the same Kingdom.


thomas p wrote:

If you are saying that the reactions of the individuals involved is worthy
of study, I agree. If you are trying to claim that a spiritual reality is
being studied, there is absolutely no evidence that there is any such thing
or that it could be studied if there was.

fasgnadh
2010-11-13 14:54:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Some people use alcohol and are not "drunks" and don't have victims.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Alcohol is a social lubricant
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
You meant "alcohol"
See, you understand it's social costs, yet you advocate that
destructive toxin!
Do I?
Sure, YOU just identified alcohol with road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence... are you now denying they are
social costs???

Are you so drug addled you can't remember what you posted and is right
in front of your nose? B^D
Post by Richo
Have you got any evidence to back that up? - like a quote or
something?
Sure thing, you poor mentally defective loser.. from your
words "Alcohol is a social lubricant" (because "it reduces inhibitions"
..pffffft! ) to your words "You meant alcohol"

Clearly you accept that it causes harm, yet until I pointed that out,
and challenged your notion that 'reducing inhibitions' with alcohol
is a social lubricant you were telling us "so if you are shy (I am) it
makes you less shy."

Now you want to pretend that you weren't describing alcohol in positive
terms! B^p

It seems as soon as I challenge your nonsense you BACK DOWN! B^D
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You hedonists are weak, irrational and immoral hypocrites.
Unlike you, I don't need any drugs,
You claim that I need drugs - on what evidence?
Your own claim that ...."it makes you less shy."

Shit, you poor sad little bastard, if you can't accept
your own admission that you need alcohol to make you feel
like you are functioning adequately in social situations
I suggest you STOP MAKING DISCLOSURES in public and seek
help from a confidential therapist.
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
I explained why they have appeal
And I challenged the veracity of your claims on behalf of drugs;

1. your belief that losing inhibitions is a 'social lubricant'
when it is in fact a loss of conscious control which produces
delusional behaviour, aggression, road trauma, domestic violence..

Communication, genuine, clear and with the full range of human
senses and emotions, UN-IMPEDED by distortions from drugs, is the
basis of healthy social relations.. alcohol is an IMPEDIMENT,
not a lubricant.
Post by Richo
- are you saying that they have no appeal?
No, because you have explained your view that they help shy people
like you.

I dispute the TRUTH of the appeal you describe. I maintain,
on the basis of studies, that it promotes ILLUSIONS.

People THINK they are functioning better, and hence CRASH THEIR CAR,
or fall over, or believe they are being more witty and amusing.
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal, then why have humans been endulging for (at
I never denied they have an appeal.. I just pointed out it's
appealing to inadequate individuals, like you and your shyness,
who want to believe that some chemical can make you socially
adequate.

"Appeal" is how ad agencies and salespeople get you to do what they
want.. that doesn't make it good for you, you poor dimwit! B^D
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
because they are your crutch,
No actually, they are not.
SO you recant your claim that drugs enable shy people like you
to function adequately, and you admit MY position that they
just think they are witty and entertaining when they are merely PISSED!

Drunks are boring arseholes who BELIEVE they are fascinating.

Where's your evidence that they actually are?
Post by Richo
You are pretending to know things (this time about me)
So when you said drugs help shy people like you, you were
talking through your arse. You haven't been helped,
you now agree drugs can't help, you were just bullshitting
about them 'helping' others.. something that you PRETENDED
to know but do not. B^p
Post by Richo
that you do not.
YOU told us drugs are a 'social lubricant' for shy people like you.

If you now deny it, that's fine. YOur credibility was never
very high yo begin with. pfffffttt!

Just another richo backflip! B^D
Post by Richo
Again.
But why do you do it?
Post by Richo
Silly Troll! Bad Troll!
but people can see that you abandon the substantive debate,
once I have demolished your position, and simply try to
argue what you "meant" when you told us drugs help shy
people like you.

You didn't say 'they think it helps them' you claimed it did.

Explain in detail how suppression of the higher order thinking
skills helps shy people like you feel like you are 'socially
lubricated', and tell us why you would simply believe sense
perception, when research shows it is so chronically inaccurate.
Post by Richo
Mark.
Post by fasgnadh
You hedonists are weak, irrational and immoral hypocrites.
Post by Richo
shouldn't post pissed.
That's what I told you! B^D
Unlike you, I don't need any drugs, self harming 'Spirits' or
mood enhancers in order to have the 'Dutch Courage to talk to girls! B^D
You defend drugs because they are your crutch,
and atheists are once again found rationalising their despair;
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17456?context=latest
Post by Richo
Mark.
Post by fasgnadh
It depresses brain function...
just like atheism! B^D
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
- it reduces inhibitions - so if you
are shy (I am) it makes you less shy.
- when you have little talent and Low IQ it is best to maintain
a low profile.
- you have learned from experience that when people get to know you,
they don't like you.
Alcohol reduces your social and perceptual skills, motor co-ordination
and embarrassment threshold.. hence, you remain unlikeable, even
become more so, but are unaware of the disdain which would normally
restrain you from making a complete arse of yourself, in public! B^p
First you take drugs to reduce inhibition because you cannot
act authentically without chemical crutches, then you take more
drugs to cover up your humiliation and embarassment from acting
like a silly tosser('uninhibited')!!! B^D priceless!
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
This reduction in inhibition also means that people will more easily
be agressive
Sure, as you get more pissed and obnoxious, feeling up the
Football team Quarterback's girlfriend while she was ordering drinks
and ignoring your fashionable Lampshade Headwear, he get's more prepared
to "rip off your head and shit down your throat".
Thus alcohol makes people more stupid AND aggressive while
simultaneously blocking their perception and intelligence receptors,
so they think they are being witty and charming. In short, they turn
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Surely there are only two ways to get THAT stupid.. pissed as a Newt,
or atheism!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAA
Post by Richo
or overtly sexual in their behaviour.
So you claim your Warlord is PERPETUALLY DRUNK?;
Agnostics were having a polite rational discourse with
some theists, talking about love, and diseased atheists
respond with their bestial psychosis;
# Subject: Re: Where's the Love in the Quran? EVERYWHERE,
# and in atheism- NOWHERE ..They DON'T GET IT!!!
# Read and see for yourself!
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam,
# alt.religion.christianity,alt.religion
# Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:11:14 -0700
#
# >>>
# >>> That was revolutionary, it took the parable of the Good Samaritan,
# >>> where the religious Other who acts with Love is held up as more
# >>> righteous in the eyes of God as those orthodox of one's own faith
who fail to show love or do good.
# >>>
# >>> Outstanding! That is the Message of the Age.
# >>
# >> Maybe - but it is about surrender, not love.
# >
# > Exactly as my beloved does.. bending herself toward me..
# > and offering herself totally... as I also do to her beauty and
# > charms....
#
# Then you grab her tail and make her say 'Baaaaaaa'.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
In a discussion of MUTUAL LOVE and willing surrender,
the atheist thug reveals his misogyny and bestial force.
It's a common occurrence among the atheist perverts;
People talking about Cosmology were shocked to find Steve
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: The Big Bang Theory
# Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:46:34 -0700
#
#
# >The Big Bang Theory
#
# You wanna see the big bang?
#
# NSFW!
#
# http://www.ovguide.com/adult.html
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
If you Google the word "Mother" for Steve Knight, this is what you find,
Steve has to say about her;
# took his rubber cock out of his mouth, shoved it
# up his mother's ass and ...
#
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.agnosticism
# Subject: Re: Better place to debate theists?
# Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:06:52 -0700
His sick fantasies include violent murder and desecration
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
This Atheist LEADER, who they all pay homage to, even sick females
like Trance Stupor who share his perversions, uses imagery full
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: a.a.(atheist.angst.)
# OT(Ordinary and Tiresome) - not-a-Joke
# Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:37:21 -0700
#
# Your Dad wanted to watch me fuck your Mom in the
# ass and offered me a kilo of crack to do it.
# I told him she was so fucking fat and oily and smelled
# like two day old urine that I'd need at least five kilos
# and a gallon of Jack.
#
# The only thing keeping me interested is putting a bag
# over your sister's head and fucking her mouth.
# I love that cooing sound when she swallows my sperm.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
As he admits, (rather unecessarily ;-) atheists have serious mental
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We're here to talk about our own personal issues as atheists
"Among all my patients in the second half of life, that is, over
thirty-five, there has not been one whose problem in the last
resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life.
It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because
he had lost that which the living religions of every age
have given their followers, and none of them has really
been healed who did not regain his religious outlook."
-Carl G. Jung Modern Man in Search of a Soul
They cannot RECOGNISE Love, because they think it means
perverted SEX!!!!!!
Talking to an atheist about Love is like speaking to the BLIND
about the colours of a sunset.
The snip it all and make ANIMAL noises.. they are captives
of their Lower Self.
Alcoholism, like syphillis and atheism, causes brain damage
and the symptoms include memory loss, as Ritalin Richo demonstrates,
by forgetting where you are, what you are doing, even WHO
you are.. IN MID SENTENCE:-
Post by Richo
If you are a shy
...
..
.
....
Comeback and finish your 'thought' when you SOBER UP, you pisshead! B^]
Post by Richo
People take the drugs for the positive effects -
The fact that when you zoned out we were spared the rest of your
mindslime? B^D
---------
Once again we find atheists defending mind altering drugs which
kill tens of thousands every year, and attacking the religious
communities who provide the rehab and support services to look after
their burnouts.
Alcohol is involved in most road trauma, domestic violence,
child abuse.. etc etc..
And above we see richo agreeing with that summation! B^]
Game Set, Match .....again! B^]
---------
http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest
http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
fasgnadh
2010-11-13 15:37:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Some people use alcohol and are not "drunks" and don't have victims.
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Alcohol is a social lubricant
Atheism is factor in road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence...
You meant "alcohol"
See, you understand it's social costs, yet you advocate that
destructive toxin!
Do I?
Sure, YOU just identified alcohol with road trauma, child and
wife abuse, street violence... are you now denying they are
social costs???

Are you so drug addled you can't remember what you posted and is right
in front of your nose? B^D
Post by Richo
Have you got any evidence to back that up? - like a quote or
something?
Sure thing, you poor mentally defective loser.. from your
words "Alcohol is a social lubricant" (because "it reduces inhibitions"
..pffffft! ) to your words "You meant alcohol"

Clearly you accept that it causes harm, yet until I pointed that out,
and challenged your notion that 'reducing inhibitions' with alcohol
is a social lubricant you were telling us "so if you are shy (I am) it
makes you less shy." and you told us people take drugs because of
the "positive effects"

"People take the drugs for the positive effects" - richo

Now you want to pretend that you weren't describing alcohol in positive
terms! B^p

It seems as soon as I challenge your nonsense you BACK DOWN! B^D


WHAT "POSITIVE EFFECTS" do you claim drugs have?
On what evidence do you claim there are any real positive effects?

On what basis do you claim these alleged 'positive effects' are
THE reason, aren't you aware that they are ADDICTIVE?

You continue to claim that drugs HAVE POSITIVE EFFECTS but now
you deny you are speaking from personal experience, so list the studies
that support your view;

why do you now claim to speak ONLY on behalf of "Others"?
when previously you included yourself in the beneficiaries:

"Shy people, like me"

If you walk like a pro-drug advocate, and quack like a pro-drug
advocate then don't be surprised when people think you are a
pro-drug advocate, you delicate widdle Flower! B^D
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You hedonists are weak, irrational and immoral hypocrites.
Unlike you, I don't need any drugs, self harming 'Spirits' or
mood enhancers in order to have the 'Dutch Courage to talk
to girls! B^D
You claim that I need drugs - on what evidence?
Your own claim that ...."it makes you less shy." B^D

Your claim that drugs have 'positive benefits'.. are you
now saying you don't need 'positive benefits'? B^D

Shit, you poor sad little bastard, if you can't accept
your own admission that you need alcohol to make you feel
like you are functioning adequately in social situations
I suggest you STOP MAKING DISCLOSURES in public and seek
help from a confidential therapist.
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
You defend drugs
No i didnt.
"People take the drugs for the positive effects -"
Post by Richo
I explained why they have appeal
And I challenged the veracity of your claims on behalf of drugs
which you have now BACKEDD OFF, from an ABSOLUTE claim that drugs
HAVE positive effects, to one where you just want to pretend you said
they 'appeal' to people, and the appeal may not be real, NOT be
POSITIVE. I also challenged your unproven claims;

1. your belief that losing inhibitions is a 'social lubricant'
when it is in fact a loss of conscious control which produces
delusional behaviour, aggression, road trauma, domestic violence..

Communication, genuine, clear and with the full range of human
senses and emotions, UN-IMPEDED by distortions from drugs, is the
basis of healthy social relations.. alcohol is an IMPEDIMENT,
not a lubricant.
Post by Richo
- are you saying that they have no appeal?
Clearly not because you explained your view that they help shy people
like you and I accept that is your idea of their Appeal. I just don't
share your OPINION.. I openly dispute your claim in defence of drug
taking that "People take the drugs for the positive effects -"
If you sincerely believe drugs TRULY HAVE positive effects, then
state what they are, make your case with EVIDENCE, and then explain why
you wouldn't "defend drugs". If you no longer believe drugs should be
defended based on the 'positive benefits' you allege, then just admit
it, you pathetic squirming weasel!

I dispute the TRUTH of the appeal you describe. I demand evidence
for the positive benefits you claim in your defence of drug taking..
I maintain, on the basis of studies, that drugs distort natural
processes, alter our perceptions of reality and thus promote ILLUSIONS.

People THINK they are functioning better, and hence CRASH THEIR CAR,
or fall over, or believe they are being more witty and amusing.
Post by Richo
If they have no appeal, then why have humans been endulging for (at
I never denied they have 'an appeal'.. I just pointed out it's
'appealing' to inadequate individuals, like you and your shyness,
who want to believe that some chemical can make you socially
adequate.

"Appeal" is how ad agencies and salespeople get you to do what they
want.. that doesn't make it good for you, you poor dimwit! B^D
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
because they are your crutch,
No actually, they are not.
SO you recant your claim that drugs enable shy people like you
to function adequately, and you admit MY position that they
just THINK they are witty and entertaining, when they are merely PISSED!

Drunks are boring arseholes who BELIEVE they are fascinating.

Where's your evidence that they actually are?
Post by Richo
You are pretending to know things (this time about me)
No, you claimed to know things about drug users, viz they "take the
drugs for the positive effects -" I'm just challenging you
to tell us why defend drug taking based on these alleged, but not
demonstrated, 'positive benefits', until I challenged your
advocacy of drugs as having 'positive benefits', uunamed except
for your reference to your personal experience with Shyness.

Mow it appears you were simply talking through your arse.
You haven't been helped, you now agree drugs can't help, that
you no longer advocate them having 'positive benefits',
you were just bullshitting about them possibly 'helping' others..
something that you PRETENDED to know. B^p
Post by Richo
that you do not.
YOU told us drugs are a 'social lubricant' with 'positive benefits' for
shy people like you. (like what, getting fucked while drunk and
becoming pregnant at age 13? )

If you now deny it, that's fine. Your credibility was never
very high to begin with. pfffffttt!

Just another richo backflip! B^p
Post by Richo
Again.
But why do you do it?
Post by Richo
Silly Troll! Bad Troll!
but people can see that you abandon the substantive debate,
once I have demolished your position, and simply try to
argue what you "meant" when you told us drugs help shy
people like you.

You didn't say 'they think it helps them' you claimed it did.

Explain in detail how suppression of the higher order thinking
skills helps shy people like you feel like you are 'socially
lubricated', and tell us why you would simply believe sense
perception, when research shows it is so chronically inaccurate.
Post by Richo
Mark.
Post by fasgnadh
and atheists are once again found rationalising their despair;
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17456?context=latest
Post by Richo
Mark.
Post by fasgnadh
It depresses brain function...
just like atheism! B^D
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
- it reduces inhibitions - so if you
are shy (I am) it makes you less shy.
- when you have little talent and Low IQ it is best to maintain
a low profile.
- you have learned from experience that when people get to
know you, they don't like you.
Alcohol reduces your social and perceptual skills,
motor co-ordination
and embarrassment threshold.. hence, you remain unlikeable, even
become more so, but are unaware of the disdain which would normally
restrain you from making a complete arse of yourself, in public! B^p
First you take drugs to reduce inhibition because you cannot
act authentically without chemical crutches, then you take more
drugs to cover up your humiliation and embarrassment from acting
like a silly tosser('uninhibited')!!! B^D priceless!
And then you stop arguing the facts of the issue and want to debate
my assessment of your attitude to the 'positive benefits' of drugs
.. well.. it seems clear I have identified many of the NEGATIVE
effects.. and you haven't even got started on the justification
of your advoicacy of drug taking for it's alleged, but not even
SPECIFIED, let alone evidenced, 'benefits'...

so OFF YOU GO.. make your case:


Otherwise my PARODY of your position remains, and you are,
once again, shredded;
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
This reduction in inhibition also means that people will
Post by Green Skeptic
more easily be agressive
Sure, as you get more pissed and obnoxious, feeling up the
Football team Quarterback's girlfriend while she was
ordering drinks and ignoring your fashionable
Lampshade Headwear, he get's more prepared
to "rip off your head and shit down your throat".
Thus alcohol makes people more stupid AND aggressive while
simultaneously blocking their perception and intelligence
receptors, so they think they are being witty and charming.
In short, they turn
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Surely there are only two ways to get THAT stupid.. pissed as a
Newt, or atheism!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAAAAA
Post by Richo
or overtly sexual in their behaviour.
So you claim your Warlord is PERPETUALLY DRUNK?;
Agnostics were having a polite rational discourse with
some theists, talking about love, and diseased atheists
respond with their bestial psychosis;
# Subject: Re: Where's the Love in the Quran? EVERYWHERE,
# and in atheism- NOWHERE ..They DON'T GET IT!!!
# Read and see for yourself!
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam,
# alt.religion.christianity,alt.religion
# Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:11:14 -0700
#
# >>>
# >>> That was revolutionary, it took the parable of the Good Samaritan,
# >>> where the religious Other who acts with Love is held up as more
# >>> righteous in the eyes of God as those orthodox of one's own faith
who fail to show love or do good.
# >>>
# >>> Outstanding! That is the Message of the Age.
# >>
# >> Maybe - but it is about surrender, not love.
# >
# > Exactly as my beloved does.. bending herself toward me..
# > and offering herself totally... as I also do to her beauty and
# > charms....
#
# Then you grab her tail and make her say 'Baaaaaaa'.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
In a discussion of MUTUAL LOVE and willing surrender,
the atheist thug reveals his misogyny and bestial force.
It's a common occurrence among the atheist perverts;
People talking about Cosmology were shocked to find Steve
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: The Big Bang Theory
# Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:46:34 -0700
#
#
# >The Big Bang Theory
#
# You wanna see the big bang?
#
# NSFW!
#
# http://www.ovguide.com/adult.html
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
If you Google the word "Mother" for Steve Knight, this is what you find,
Steve has to say about her;
# took his rubber cock out of his mouth, shoved it
# up his mother's ass and ...
#
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,
# alt.agnosticism
# Subject: Re: Better place to debate theists?
# Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:06:52 -0700
His sick fantasies include violent murder and desecration
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
This Atheist LEADER, who they all pay homage to, even sick females
like Trance Stupor who share his perversions, uses imagery full
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: a.a.(atheist.angst.)
# OT(Ordinary and Tiresome) - not-a-Joke
# Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:37:21 -0700
#
# Your Dad wanted to watch me fuck your Mom in the
# ass and offered me a kilo of crack to do it.
# I told him she was so fucking fat and oily and smelled
# like two day old urine that I'd need at least five kilos
# and a gallon of Jack.
#
# The only thing keeping me interested is putting a bag
# over your sister's head and fucking her mouth.
# I love that cooing sound when she swallows my sperm.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
As he admits, (rather unecessarily ;-) atheists have serious mental
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We're here to talk about our own personal issues as atheists
"Among all my patients in the second half of life, that is, over
thirty-five, there has not been one whose problem in the last
resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life.
It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because
he had lost that which the living religions of every age
have given their followers, and none of them has really
been healed who did not regain his religious outlook."
-Carl G. Jung Modern Man in Search of a Soul
They cannot RECOGNISE Love, because they think it means
perverted SEX!!!!!!
Talking to an atheist about Love is like speaking to the BLIND
about the colours of a sunset.
The snip it all and make ANIMAL noises.. they are captives
of their Lower Self.
Alcoholism, like syphillis and atheism, causes brain damage
and the symptoms include memory loss, as Ritalin Richo demonstrates,
by forgetting where you are, what you are doing, even WHO
you are.. IN MID SENTENCE:-
Post by Richo
If you are a shy
...
..
.
....
Comeback and finish your 'thought' when you SOBER UP,
you pisshead! B^]
Post by Richo
People take the drugs for the positive effects -
The fact that when you zoned out we were spared the rest of your
mindslime? B^D
---------
Once again we find atheists defending mind altering drugs which
kill tens of thousands every year, and attacking the religious
communities who provide the rehab and support services to
look after their burnouts.
Alcohol is involved in most road trauma, domestic violence,
child abuse.. etc etc..
And above we see richo agreeing with that summation! B^]
Game Set, Match .....again! B^]
---------


alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/



http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source

"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)



http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg




---------


"Mr Abbott made a semi-apology for going back on
his word over the provision in the parliamentary
agreement - hammered out between government,
opposition and those on the crossbenches -
for pairing the Speaker and Deputy Speaker."
- The Age 1/10/2010

"Last week, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott reneged
on a deal on voting rights..
Mr Abbott again defended his decision to break the deal"

- SMH 28/9/2010

"Tony Abbott and his wife Margie,
...set aside their differences and prayed for
mutual trust, kindness and love."

- The Australian 28/9/2010




Tony Abbott, Economic Management - FAIL:




Tony Abbott. telling the truth - Fail:




Tony Abbott - his word is WORTHLESS:



---------


"The coalition won more votes and more seats than
our opponents but sadly we did not get the
opportunity to form a government,'
- Tony Abbott, betraying truth and integrity.


Why is Tony Abbott such a LIAR and DREADFULLY BAD LOSER?

He can't accept that Gillard WON, and instead the
dishonest little grub is trying to claim the government
is NOT Legitimate! 8^o He does this by blatantly LYING
that he got the majority of seats and the majority
of votes!

If the pathetic fraud got the majority of seats he would
be sworn in as the New Government. He isn't because he DIDN'T!

If the Government is constitutionally Illegitimate, then why
hasn't he taken legal action? The answer is, he's a filthy LIAR!
and the Lieberals, falsely maligning the legitimacy
of our democracy are tantamount to TREASON

B^D Tony Abbott is back to the REAL Tony! B^[

And he did NOT get the majority of votes, the ALP did:


Votes Percentage %
Australian Labor Party 6,216,445 50.12
Liberal/National Coalition 6,185,919 49.88

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/ Final Tally
--
Congratulations to Julia Gillard on the Historic
First Election of a Female PM.

Now the nation can move forward, with decency, honesty and respect
Richo
2010-11-08 11:00:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Drunks are not the only people who have fun Peter.
You can have fun without alcohol and certainly without having
"victims".

Most humans are capable of doing things just for the enjoyment of it.
Its not logical (nor illogical).
Even non human animals , for example cats and dogs, play - they just
fuck around for the hell of it - it isn't Logical - nor is it
illogical.
Its just fun.

So - "why do people use mind/mood altering drugs" - for lots of
reasons - but one of them is the same as" why does a dog chase its
tail", or "why go for a bike ride to nowhere in particular on a sunny
day".
For kicks, for a laugh.

Mark.
fasgnadh
2010-11-08 13:44:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richo
Post by fasgnadh
Post by Richo
Post by Green Skeptic
http://gothamist.com/2010/11/06/sla_moves_to_ban_four_loko.php
Damn, this stuff *sounds* deadly -- to one's brain cells.
I've never understood why people get drunk or take narcotics for
recreational purposes.
Fun is not logical, but it *is* fun.
For who? The drunks, or their VICTIMS?
Drunks are not the only people who have fun Peter.
Of course not.. balanced humans can have fun without chemical crutches
to hide their inadequacies.
Post by Richo
You can have fun without alcohol and certainly without having
"victims".
Sure I can, life is a natural high, all the best pleasures, food,
sex, music and best enjoyed with your faculties fully alert.. not in
a fog of chemical DELUSION!

You poor sad victims of Maya.
Post by Richo
Most humans are capable of doing things just for the enjoyment of it.
Sure unless you are too pissed to get an erection!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA!

How humiliating for you!
Post by Richo
Its not logical (nor illogical).
Even non human animals , for example cats and dogs, play - they just
fuck around for the hell of it - it isn't Logical - nor is it
illogical.
Animals don't need DRUGS to play, you sad, ridiculous
little tosser! B^D
Post by Richo
Its just fun.
Sure, drug free fun is clean, unmediated by brain fog, poor
motor skills and rambling, dribling idiocy, which are the hallmarks of
inebriation!
Post by Richo
So - "why do people use mind/mood altering drugs" - for lots of
reasons -
Attempting to escape reality, because they feel alienated, inadequate,
'shy', socially inept.. as you have confessed.
Post by Richo
but one of them is the same as" why does a dog chase its
tail",
and not need mind altering, chemically induced DELUSION, to do so! B^)
Post by Richo
or "why go for a bike ride to nowhere in particular on a sunny
day".
For kicks, for a laugh.
Thanks for arguing my point. Everyone of your examples is of
natural fun, not artificial drug induced delusion!


You really are a brain addled, dopey doper aren't you!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAAAAA!
Post by Richo
Mark.
---------

As usual, the socially useful RELIGIOUS stepped in to CLEAN UP THE MESS
hedonists make of themselves:


"The first AA Group

Over the years Dr Minogue tried to get a meeting going without success.
Later he got together with Father Thomas Dunlea who was the founder of
Boy’s town in Australia. Father Dunlea had also tried to get a meeting
going around the Sutherland area. There were some meetings going before
the one that started in 1945 which is recognised as the beginning of AA
in Australia."

Pity the drug addled atheist hedonists don't acknowledge the
dedicated work of believers like Father Thomas in cleaning up
the shit left by the drug addled and their victims.

pfffffft! Useless hypocritical atheists!
Loading...