Anonymous wrote:
>
> In article <c5Hod.32249$g21.20332@fe1.texas.rr.com>,
> "Fred Garvin" <fgarvin@fgarvin.com> wrote:
>
> > It's a mute point.
>
> Might even be a "moot" point!

We wouldn't know if it was mute and couldn't tell us

 

Anonymous wrote:
>
> In article <c5Hod.32249$g21.20332@fe1.texas.rr.com>,
> "Fred Garvin" <fgarvin@fgarvin.com> wrote:
>
> > It's a mute point.
>
> Might even be a "moot" point!

We wouldn't know if it was mute and couldn't tell us

 

I didnt say the world should get a vote in the US election, my point
was to say that the rest of the world thinks a little different to
americans. And that the world is a global community. The fact that I
am even speaking to you guys shows this (i'm in australia).

I never actually said anything was wrong with christianity. Europe is
not exactly in decay, the average standard of living is around the
highest in the world. The problem I have with ultra conservative
evangelicals is that I feel that they threaten secular democracy and
tolerance - almost a return to the middle ages where there was no free
speech or tolerance. It almost seems at odds in some way with
"american ideals" such as free speech and all men being equal etc.
Its not like Europe has no blood on their hands. They've done
terrible things. Although I think their difference in mentality in
the last 50 years could be attributed to having two world wars on
their own soil. Something which America hasn't experienced.

Although secularism can go overboard like in France where they have
banned Islamic children from wearing headscarves. But I guess france
has been overzealously secular in the past, to the point of being
intolerant.

My point about the bearing arms and foreign power invading was about
the Iraqi insurgency. How some people say they are all "terrorists".
The way "---------" is used sometimes is indiscriminate. My problem
with the current way of thinking of the Bush administration is that
they see the world as black and white. the "us and them" mentality.
Both Bush and the "axis of evil" are self righteous and see God as
being on their side. funny how Osama and Bush dont really have all
that much difference between them. (oil family, grassroots support
base of religious fundamentalists, self righteousness etc.)

I mean you can stereotype anyone who doesnt like the bush
administration as a gay loving, anti-war, islamic, european socialist
hippie who speaks french. If you believe everything foxnews and the
republican party (i guess they are the same) tells you.

Its good that we can disagree, and at least your not calling me a
"sand ------" like some of the other less tolerant people in this
thread :)

 

I didnt say the world should get a vote in the US election, my point
was to say that the rest of the world thinks a little different to
americans. And that the world is a global community. The fact that I
am even speaking to you guys shows this (i'm in australia).

I never actually said anything was wrong with christianity. Europe is
not exactly in decay, the average standard of living is around the
highest in the world. The problem I have with ultra conservative
evangelicals is that I feel that they threaten secular democracy and
tolerance - almost a return to the middle ages where there was no free
speech or tolerance. It almost seems at odds in some way with
"american ideals" such as free speech and all men being equal etc.
Its not like Europe has no blood on their hands. They've done
terrible things. Although I think their difference in mentality in
the last 50 years could be attributed to having two world wars on
their own soil. Something which America hasn't experienced.

Although secularism can go overboard like in France where they have
banned Islamic children from wearing headscarves. But I guess france
has been overzealously secular in the past, to the point of being
intolerant.

My point about the bearing arms and foreign power invading was about
the Iraqi insurgency. How some people say they are all "terrorists".
The way "---------" is used sometimes is indiscriminate. My problem
with the current way of thinking of the Bush administration is that
they see the world as black and white. the "us and them" mentality.
Both Bush and the "axis of evil" are self righteous and see God as
being on their side. funny how Osama and Bush dont really have all
that much difference between them. (oil family, grassroots support
base of religious fundamentalists, self righteousness etc.)

I mean you can stereotype anyone who doesnt like the bush
administration as a gay loving, anti-war, islamic, european socialist
hippie who speaks french. If you believe everything foxnews and the
republican party (i guess they are the same) tells you.

Its good that we can disagree, and at least your not calling me a
"sand ------" like some of the other less tolerant people in this
thread :)

 

I didnt say the world should get a vote in the US election, my point
was to say that the rest of the world thinks a little different to
americans. And that the world is a global community. The fact that I
am even speaking to you guys shows this (i'm in australia).

I never actually said anything was wrong with christianity. Europe is
not exactly in decay, the average standard of living is around the
highest in the world. The problem I have with ultra conservative
evangelicals is that I feel that they threaten secular democracy and
tolerance - almost a return to the middle ages where there was no free
speech or tolerance. It almost seems at odds in some way with
"american ideals" such as free speech and all men being equal etc.
Its not like Europe has no blood on their hands. They've done
terrible things. Although I think their difference in mentality in
the last 50 years could be attributed to having two world wars on
their own soil. Something which America hasn't experienced.

Although secularism can go overboard like in France where they have
banned Islamic children from wearing headscarves. But I guess france
has been overzealously secular in the past, to the point of being
intolerant.

My point about the bearing arms and foreign power invading was about
the Iraqi insurgency. How some people say they are all "terrorists".
The way "---------" is used sometimes is indiscriminate. My problem
with the current way of thinking of the Bush administration is that
they see the world as black and white. the "us and them" mentality.
Both Bush and the "axis of evil" are self righteous and see God as
being on their side. funny how Osama and Bush dont really have all
that much difference between them. (oil family, grassroots support
base of religious fundamentalists, self righteousness etc.)

I mean you can stereotype anyone who doesnt like the bush
administration as a gay loving, anti-war, islamic, european socialist
hippie who speaks french. If you believe everything foxnews and the
republican party (i guess they are the same) tells you.

Its good that we can disagree, and at least your not calling me a
"sand ------" like some of the other less tolerant people in this
thread :)

 

PLONK X infinity + 1 = STFU.
This thread makes baby Jebus cry.

---

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence
the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on
creatures of his own creation. - Albert Einstein

 

PLONK X infinity + 1 = STFU.
This thread makes baby Jebus cry.

---

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence
the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on
creatures of his own creation. - Albert Einstein

 

PLONK X infinity + 1 = STFU.
This thread makes baby Jebus cry.

---

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence
the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on
creatures of his own creation. - Albert Einstein

 

you can say that again.then it would be a re-mote point.just a pointless
observation.
"Jan Andersson" <bugfuel@rocketcom.mail> wrote in message
news:41A35D24.8D8C92A8@rocketcom.mail...
> Anonymous wrote:
>>
>> In article <c5Hod.32249$g21.20332@fe1.texas.rr.com>,
>> "Fred Garvin" <fgarvin@fgarvin.com> wrote:
>>
>> > It's a mute point.
>>
>> Might even be a "moot" point!
>
> We wouldn't know if it was mute and couldn't tell us

 

you can say that again.then it would be a re-mote point.just a pointless
observation.
"Jan Andersson" <bugfuel@rocketcom.mail> wrote in message
news:41A35D24.8D8C92A8@rocketcom.mail...
> Anonymous wrote:
>>
>> In article <c5Hod.32249$g21.20332@fe1.texas.rr.com>,
>> "Fred Garvin" <fgarvin@fgarvin.com> wrote:
>>
>> > It's a mute point.
>>
>> Might even be a "moot" point!
>
> We wouldn't know if it was mute and couldn't tell us