Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:19:13 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <hptki3pvvqss9cshtioh2cqoh8a45ml675@4ax.com>, Al Klein ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:49:55 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >One other option would be for the CIA to fund opposition groups within >> >Iran such as the National Council for Resistance in Iran [NCRI]. >> >> One other option would be for us to keep our noses out of the internal >> affairs of other nations, like we want them to keep their noses out of >> ours. >> >> Do you think that just because you're you, you have (or your country >> has) the right to tell other countries how to run themselves? > >By following your plan, a nuclear missile will be fired at Israel in the >near future. > By whom? Not by Iran - they don't have any. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:49:59 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <g93li3lj75hc5g420kgtb3f3gjemmvb5e8@4ax.com>, Free Lunch ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:19:13 -0800, in alt.atheism >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> <Jason-0111071819140001@66-53-216-211.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>: >> >In article <hptki3pvvqss9cshtioh2cqoh8a45ml675@4ax.com>, Al Klein >> ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: >> > >> >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:49:55 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> >> >One other option would be for the CIA to fund opposition groups within >> >> >Iran such as the National Council for Resistance in Iran [NCRI]. >> >> >> >> One other option would be for us to keep our noses out of the internal >> >> affairs of other nations, like we want them to keep their noses out of >> >> ours. >> >> >> >> Do you think that just because you're you, you have (or your country >> >> has) the right to tell other countries how to run themselves? >> > >> >By following your plan, a nuclear missile will be fired at Israel in the >> >near future. >> > >> What nuclear missile? Your paranoid fantasies are hopeless. [snip discredited almost 4-year-old newspaper article] WHAT nuclear missile NOW, Jason? Something CURRENT, please? And NOT DISCREDITED? -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest James Beck Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <5p0qd2Fod26dU1@mid.individual.net>, witchypoo@broomstick.com says... > > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-3110071702060001@67-150-175-249.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > In article <kg8ii3903hjb8u27imco3supu5oqluo5oo@4ax.com>, Al Klein > > <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:18:45 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > >> >In article <fs8hi3p9uicde8hc9npmclr6r0cr3o7424@4ax.com>, Al Klein > >> ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:34 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >I disagree. Roy Mooore worships God. > >> >> > >> >> Then why did he violate the law in an attempt to place a rock in a > >> >> court house? You usually make no sense, Jason, but this is stupid > >> >> even for you. > >> > > >> >I have heard Roy Moore preach a sermon and he mentioned in that sermon > >> >that he worships God. > >> > > >> Then why did he violate the law in an attempt to place a rock in a > >> court house? > > > > He claims to have the law on his side related to this issue. > > He can claim whatever he wants, but he's still wrong. > The results, also, tend to show otherwise. If his claim were accurate, they wouldn't have had to haul that monstrosity off. Jim Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:00:09 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >The president of Iran is a religious nut case. So is the president of the US. > Why do you trust him with nuclear-capable missiles Why do you trust Bush with nuclear-capable missiles or nuclear materials? > or nuclear materials? What's wrong with nuclear materials? As long as you stay far enough away from them (a mile is MORE than far enough), they're totally harmless. (Ever have a coronary stress test? What they inject into your IV is "nuclear material".) > >Read this CBS news story: > > >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/31/world/main1460846.shtml > >Iranian Shahab-3 ballistic missiles roll past during a military parade >last September PROPAGANDA that's OVER TWO YEARS OLD. and proves NOTHING! -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:23:59 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >Their plan is to make their own nuclear weapons. Not according to the people who have actually inspected their facilities. They claim that there is NO SIGN that Iran is trying to make bomb grade fissionables. > Of couse, they would >still need to buy the raw materials needed make nuclear weapons. And they'd need to make or buy the facilities to turn the raw materials into weapons. About the same as any other nation (except those that already have nukes - LIKE THE US). -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:27:05 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <pntki3lerepl5c21ecr6c8c533k77ee9ml@4ax.com>, Al Klein ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 23:40:22 +0100, Tokay Pino Gris >> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: >> >> >> >You started out your silly argument by saying that iran builds nuclear >> >facilities. NOW you accuse them that they can BUY the stuff. >> >> >Who is next? Saudi Arabia? Turkey? Italy? Germany? Denmark? >> >> Any non-Christian countries would be okay to Jason. If we destroy the >> world doing it, it's that much sooner that he'll be in heaven. > >Iran is the problem since they have a religious nut case as a president. So does the US, so we're "the problem" too. And we already HAVE nuclear weapons, AND the means to deliver them ANYWHERE in the world. And our religious nut leader HAS threatened to use them. Iran's president HASN'T threatened to use nukes, since Iran has none. Sane people would consider US to be the FAR MORE DANGEROUS threat. Oh - most of the world DOES consider us to be far more dangerous to world peace than Iran is. I guess most of the world is more intelligent than you are, Jason. >If you don't believe me, read this: > >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/14/wiran14.xml > >Divine mission' driving Iran's new leader > >By Anton La Guardia >Last Updated: 12:33am GMT 15/01/2006 Almost 2 years old. Since then we have PROOF that they have NO nuclear weapons program. What are they doing NOW? -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:42:27 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >Believe it or not, the plan is to make nuclear weapons. Not IRAN'S plans. We KNOW that they aren't building any plants to produce weapons-grade fissionables. > Google "Iran nuclear weapons" and you will probably get thousands of hits. I Googled "Jason idiot" and I got 1,790,000 hits. So? >You are living in a dream world if you believe that a nation that has >hundreds of oil wells is spending millions of dollars to produce electric >power. What else would they use electric generators (which is what they ARE building) for? Artificial lightning? > The truth is that the end goal is to make nuclear weapons then we have nothing to worry about. Anyone who thinks he can create weapons-grade fissionables in the reactors Iran is building doesn't know enough to produce bombs. Or much of anything else. >Oil can be used to produce electric power. It's A LOT more economically efficient to sell the oil and produce electricity with nuclear reactors. More ecologically efficient too. So your PROOF that Iran is producing, or even attempting to produce, WEAPONS-GRADE nuclear material is? -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:34:41 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >Read the following statement which is from the above report. I agree that >it is an educated guess that Iran was involved: > >>But the sources provided no other evidence to suggest involvement by any >>of those countries. Two sources familiar with the Cole investigation say >>the C-4 finding has placed Iran on the radar for investigators, but one >>source said that suspecting Iran would be merely the result of "an >>educated guess." > You can agree with anything you like, but it was just a calculated assertion, not educated in any way. ("I believe it" doesn't mean "educated", Jason - it usually means just the opposite - IDIOTIC.) -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:30:01 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <51vki3h2c0f7a8r75hb7oh6tbjgvv2ucbs@4ax.com>, Al Klein ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:38:39 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >In article <fgcuu8$v9f$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> ><prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> >> >> As usual, Jason can't read but simply asserts crap as fact that the >> >> article doesn't say. >> >> >It's an "educuated guess that Iran was involved." >> >> No, it's a conclusion in search of evidence. Because some idiot WANTS >> it to be Iran, it's his "educated guess". The "education" part is >> nonsense, since there absolutely no evidence of where the C-4 was >> made. There's no evidence that, even if it WAS made by Iran, the >> manufacturer or the country had any hand in using it. If an American >> soldier is killed in Iraq by a Russian AK-47 made in Russia, is Russia >> responsible for his death? >> >> I'll buy the "guess" part, though. Your justification for killing (at >> least) a few million people is A GUESS ? Typical Christian murderer >> - if you want to kill, you'll find - or make up - "evidence" to >> justify it. Are you sure that attacking Iran isn't a revelation you >> received from God? > >The fact that Iran is making nuclear weapons DOESN'T EXIST. An assertion IS NOT a "fact". >55% of Americans agree with me. Which, even if it were true, would only prove that 55% of Americans are morons. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 09:17:50 -0400, Mike <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >Jason wrote: >> It's an "educuated guess that Iran was involved." >Do you know what "educated guess" means? It means "we don't KNOW." So >quit stating it as fact. Do you ALSO realize that source was NOT saying >"it's MY educated guess" but that the source was denigrating someone >else's claim as nothing MORE than an "educated guess"? "Denigrating"? Remember, you're trying to talk to Jason. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest cactus Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <BMAWi.13216$4V6.13079@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, cactus > <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <5omf8rFnnmk1U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" >>> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >>> >>>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> >>>> >>>> snip >>>>> I don't honestly know whether the dope smokers were Christians or >>>>> atheists. I would guess that some were Christians and some were >>>>> non-Christians. >>>> Hmm, well let's see. I smoked a lot of pot as a teenager and was the only >>>> non-christian around. Guess who I smoked pot with? >>> back sliders >>> >>> >> They weren't real Christians, were they? > > Most back sliders usually get back on the correct road and start walking > forward--not backwards. When I was in college, I was a back slider in > relation to having sex outside of marriage. So you weren't a Christian then? However, I did NOT smoke dope > or take any illegal drugs. I no longer have sex outside of marriage. I am > now on the correct road and my goal is to not slide off the road or slide > backwards on the road. > Jason > > You ducked the question. Do you consider backsliders not to be Christians, even when they claim to be? Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <BMAWi.13216$4V6.13079@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, cactus <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <5omf8rFnnmk1U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> > >> > >> snip > >>> I don't honestly know whether the dope smokers were Christians or > >>> atheists. I would guess that some were Christians and some were > >>> non-Christians. > >> Hmm, well let's see. I smoked a lot of pot as a teenager and was the only > >> non-christian around. Guess who I smoked pot with? > > > > back sliders > > > > > They weren't real Christians, were they? Most back sliders usually get back on the correct road and start walking forward--not backwards. When I was in college, I was a back slider in relation to having sex outside of marriage. However, I did NOT smoke dope or take any illegal drugs. I no longer have sex outside of marriage. I am now on the correct road and my goal is to not slide off the road or slide backwards on the road. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <dMAWi.13215$4V6.4720@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, cactus <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <MPG.218fd28dceffbf7f98a275@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James > > Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > > > >> In article <Jason-2610071454470001@67-150-120-210.lsan.mdsg- > >> pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... > >>> In article <MPG.218bea98da6359c298a270@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James > >>> Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> In article <fft631$on4$1@news04.infoave.net>, prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com > >>>> says... > >>>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>>> I guess they could move to that state where doctors are allowed > > to legally > >>>>>> kill them. Is the name of that state Oregon? They are trying to > > pass that > >>>>>> same law in California. Believe it or not, I hope they make it > > legal for > >>>>>> doctors to kill patients that are in terrible pain that want to > > die. Of > >>>>>> course, the patients should sign legal forms indicating they > > want to die. > >>>>> Let me get this straight: it's OK for a doctor to prescribe an overdose > >>>>> of painkiller to kill someone in pain but it's not OK for others > > to kill > >>>>> someone (aka "murder is a sin") AND it's not OK for someone to kill > >>>>> themselves, no matter how much pain, right? > >>>>> > >>>>> Doctor kills you: OK. > >>>>> > >>>>> I kill you: bad. > >>>>> > >>>>> You kill yourself: bad. > >>>>> > >>>>> Got it. > >>>>> > >>>> If you go to the doctor to get killed, that is still suicide. > >>>> You sought the doctor, he didn't come for you like some kind of soul > >>>> hunter. > >>>> Jason's convoluted thought processes are a wonder to behold. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Jim > >>> Google "mercy killing". It's very different than a young healty person > >>> committing suicide or 1st degree murder. > >>> > >> Split hairs all you want. > >> Your good book says suicide is wrong. > >> Seeking out someone to kill you is suicide. > >> Plain and simple. > >> If I pull a gun on a cop with the intention of having him/her kill me it > >> is called suicide by cop. Is it any different if it is some other > >> person I use? No, and you know it. You have just been subjected to a > >> situation in your life that has made you reconsider some of the > >> teachings of your book. You have modified your beliefs based on some > >> pain and suffering you have seen. Maybe it is time to reconsider some > >> of your other beliefs. > >> > >> Jim > > > > The option is for people to watch their relatives spend several weeks or > > even several months dying in terrible pain and agony. I watched my father > > die in pain and agony of lung cancer. I wish that a doctor would have > > committed a mercy killing. > > Why should a doctor jeopardize his or her immortal soul to make you feel > better? > > People that are not in favor of mercy killing > > should not authorize doctors or nurses to conduct mercy killings on their > > relatives. I have signed legal forms (living will) that orders doctors to > > not resuscitate me or hook me up to machines that keep me alive unless > > Sarah or myself gives the doctors permission to use those machines. > > Millions of people have legal living wills on file with their mates and > > lawyers. > > Jason > > > > I don't know how God feels about Doctors that conduct mercy killings. It's possible that God considers mercy killing to be a form of LOVE. Jesus preached more about love than any other subject. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <5p0qj1Fo5dddU2@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-3110072104090001@66.53.221.39... > > In article <szkbqae8zbm.fsf@eris.io.com>, The Chief Instigator > > <patrick@eris.io.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) writes: > >> > >> >In article <5orgquFoc38tU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > >> ><witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote > >> >> snip > >> >> > The problem in that case was that Terry Shiavo did NOT have a living > >> >> > will > >> >> > and also failed to tell the many members of her family what she > > wanted the > >> >> > members of her family to do if she was ever in a comma. > >> > >> >> First of all, the word you're looking for is "coma". Second of all, > >> >> she > >> >> apparently made her wishes clear to her husband and that's all that > > matters. > >> > >> >He was probably lying. > >> > >> How the hell would YOU know? > > > > The members of her family stated that he was lying. I believed them. > > Why? You DO know that her parents loved their son-in-law until he refused > to share Terry's medical settlement with them, right? > > BTW, there was nothing to stop him from divorcing Terry. He did not want to do that. Was he a Catholic? I seem to recall reading that Catholics don't believe in divorce. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <WNAWi.13217$4V6.9292@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, cactus <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <fg5te3$89h$02$3@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >>> In article <MPG.218fd28dceffbf7f98a275@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James > >>> Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> In article <Jason-2610071454470001@67-150-120-210.lsan.mdsg- > >>>> pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... > >>>>> In article <MPG.218bea98da6359c298a270@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James > >>>>> Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> In article <fft631$on4$1@news04.infoave.net>, prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com > >>>>>> says... > >>>>>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>>>>> I guess they could move to that state where doctors are allowed > >>> to legally > >>>>>>>> kill them. Is the name of that state Oregon? They are trying to > >>> pass that > >>>>>>>> same law in California. Believe it or not, I hope they make it > >>> legal for > >>>>>>>> doctors to kill patients that are in terrible pain that want to > >>> die. Of > >>>>>>>> course, the patients should sign legal forms indicating they > >>> want to die. > >>>>>>> Let me get this straight: it's OK for a doctor to prescribe an overdose > >>>>>>> of painkiller to kill someone in pain but it's not OK for others > >>> to kill > >>>>>>> someone (aka "murder is a sin") AND it's not OK for someone to kill > >>>>>>> themselves, no matter how much pain, right? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Doctor kills you: OK. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I kill you: bad. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You kill yourself: bad. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Got it. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> If you go to the doctor to get killed, that is still suicide. > >>>>>> You sought the doctor, he didn't come for you like some kind of soul > >>>>>> hunter. > >>>>>> Jason's convoluted thought processes are a wonder to behold. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Jim > >>>>> Google "mercy killing". It's very different than a young healty person > >>>>> committing suicide or 1st degree murder. > >>>>> > >>>> Split hairs all you want. > >>>> Your good book says suicide is wrong. > >>>> Seeking out someone to kill you is suicide. > >>>> Plain and simple. > >>>> If I pull a gun on a cop with the intention of having him/her kill me it > >>>> is called suicide by cop. Is it any different if it is some other > >>>> person I use? No, and you know it. You have just been subjected to a > >>>> situation in your life that has made you reconsider some of the > >>>> teachings of your book. You have modified your beliefs based on some > >>>> pain and suffering you have seen. Maybe it is time to reconsider some > >>>> of your other beliefs. > >>>> > >>>> Jim > >>> The option is for people to watch their relatives spend several weeks or > >>> even several months dying in terrible pain and agony. I watched my father > >>> die in pain and agony of lung cancer. I wish that a doctor would have > >>> committed a mercy killing. > >> Why didn't you do it? > > > > I was 12 years old. There were several people in the hospital room. If I > > had been an adult, I probably would have found a way to do it--perhaps by > > unhooking one of the machines that were keeping him alive. > > That would have made you a murderer in the eyes of the law. If you > planned to do it, it would be first degree murder. > > >> People that are not in favor of mercy killing > >>> should not authorize doctors or nurses to conduct mercy killings on their > >>> relatives. I have signed legal forms (living will) that orders doctors to > >>> not resuscitate me or hook me up to machines that keep me alive unless > >>> Sarah or myself gives the doctors permission to use those machines. > >>> Millions of people have legal living wills on file with their mates and > >>> lawyers. > >>> Jason > >>> > >>> > > > > It's not an issue. I honestly don't know for sure whether or not I would have been able to do it. I continue to believe that doctors should be able to legally do it. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <5p0qllFp0mepU2@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-3110071336220001@67-150-123-199.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > In article <5orgc3Fnl0toU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> news:Jason-3010071233260001@66-53-215-221.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > >> > In article <5ooqf6Fnh429U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > >> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> news:Jason-2910071114400001@67-150-122-25.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > >> >> > In article <5omfbiFnmodfU2@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > >> >> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote > >> >> >> > >> >> >> snip > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > There is a heaven and there is a hell. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Then prove it. > >> >> > > >> >> > Prove that there was a primordial pond. Tell me the exact location > >> >> > of > >> >> > the > >> >> > primordial pond. > >> >> > >> >> Since I never claimed there was a primordial pond, I don't have to > >> >> prove > >> >> anything. > >> >> > >> >> YOU made the assertion about heaven and hell. YOU prove it. > >> > > >> > The location: another dimension > >> > >> Uh huh. Prove it. > > > > If I knew the exact dimension where heaven is located, I would tell you. > > It's my guess that it's in the 9th Dimension ) > > Prove there's a 9th dimension. I'll tell you exactly where it is. It's between the 8th and the 10th dimension ) Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <2JAWi.13212$4V6.10320@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, cactus <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <5omerlFnoteuU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> > >> > >> snipo > >>> A million years from now--you may be saying over and over and over again: > >>> > >>> I was warned about hell and I failed to do anything about it. > >>> > >>> I was warned about hell and I failed to do anything about it. > >> The really sad thing is that I think you get off on this idea. > > > > That's not true. It would be great if everyone went to heaven. > > Assuming it exists. > > The world > > would be a much better place if everyone in the world was a Christian. > > Horseshit. Christians have had 2000 years to make the world a better > place, and seem to have done much more harm than good. Two millennia of > squandered opportunities. > > It > > would end all wars. > > The same way that the nazis and fascists were going to end wars - by > killing everyone who disagreed with them. > > The money that is spent on wars and weapons could be > > spent to feed all of the hungry people in the world such as in the Sudan. > > It wouldn't be. Christians would be too busy spending the money > evangelizing. > > > > > We have to deal with non-Christians so it's impossible to have a perfect world. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <MPG.219508a6202bdb4898a2a8@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > In article <5p0qd2Fod26dU1@mid.individual.net>, witchypoo@broomstick.com > says... > > > > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:Jason-3110071702060001@67-150-175-249.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > > In article <kg8ii3903hjb8u27imco3supu5oqluo5oo@4ax.com>, Al Klein > > > <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > > > > > >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:18:45 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > > >> >In article <fs8hi3p9uicde8hc9npmclr6r0cr3o7424@4ax.com>, Al Klein > > >> ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:34 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >> >I disagree. Roy Mooore worships God. > > >> >> > > >> >> Then why did he violate the law in an attempt to place a rock in a > > >> >> court house? You usually make no sense, Jason, but this is stupid > > >> >> even for you. > > >> > > > >> >I have heard Roy Moore preach a sermon and he mentioned in that sermon > > >> >that he worships God. > > >> > > > >> Then why did he violate the law in an attempt to place a rock in a > > >> court house? > > > > > > He claims to have the law on his side related to this issue. > > > > He can claim whatever he wants, but he's still wrong. > > > > The results, also, tend to show otherwise. > If his claim were accurate, they wouldn't have had to haul that > monstrosity off. > > Jim Have you heard of the free exercise clause? Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <5p0qa3Fov6d5U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote > > snip > > I am shocked that so many atheists have so much trust in religious nut > > cases like the president of Iran and one of the chief clerics in Iran. > > We don't have faith in ANY religious nutcases, whether they be xian, moslem, > etc., etc. When I advocated the destruction of the nuclear facilities in Iran, various posters came to the defence of the religious nutcase in Iran. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <fgf89f$93i$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > Iran is the problem since they have a religious nut case as a president. > > Jason, you've already sat there and admitted that you'd rather see > 8,000,000 people definitely die in NYC rather than blow up a sub full of > "religious nut case" and some kids when those "religious nut case" > are definitely armed with multiple nukes and ready, willing and able to > use them in a matter of hours. Now you want to blow up the "religious > nut case" as well as possibly thousands of innocent people in order > to POSSIBLY save several million when you don't know if these "religious > nut case" even HAVE any nukes at all yet, much less the authority or > will to use them. > > Can you get any MORE deranged? 55% of Americans agree with me related to this issue. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <eqfmi3htkvr19ihvc180s6ck82lha5356b@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:23:59 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >Their plan is to make their own nuclear weapons. > > Not according to the people who have actually inspected their > facilities. They claim that there is NO SIGN that Iran is trying to > make bomb grade fissionables. > > > Of couse, they would > >still need to buy the raw materials needed make nuclear weapons. > > And they'd need to make or buy the facilities to turn the raw > materials into weapons. > > About the same as any other nation (except those that already have > nukes - LIKE THE US). They have already modified their long range missiles so that nuclear warheads can be mounted on them. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/31/world/main1460846.shtml (CBS/AP) Iran's successful test of a nuclear-capable missile demonstrates its "very active and aggressive military program" that is worrisome to the world, the State Department said Friday. The announcement in Tehran said the missile's range would depend on the weight of its warhead. Iran's air force chief, Gen. Hossein Salami, said independently guided payloads could hit several targets simultaneously. State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said he had no technical details on the test firing, but "I think it demonstrates that Iran has a very active and aggressive military program under way." The description, he said, includes "efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, as well as delivery systems." Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <u8gmi35mf26e2p6dfet4vfg24jd69t41fi@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:42:27 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >Believe it or not, the plan is to make nuclear weapons. > > Not IRAN'S plans. We KNOW that they aren't building any plants to > produce weapons-grade fissionables. > > > Google "Iran nuclear weapons" and you will probably get thousands of hits. > > I Googled "Jason idiot" and I got 1,790,000 hits. So? > > >You are living in a dream world if you believe that a nation that has > >hundreds of oil wells is spending millions of dollars to produce electric > >power. > > What else would they use electric generators (which is what they ARE > building) for? Artificial lightning? > > > The truth is that the end goal is to make nuclear weapons > > then we have nothing to worry about. Anyone who thinks he can create > weapons-grade fissionables in the reactors Iran is building doesn't > know enough to produce bombs. Or much of anything else. > > >Oil can be used to produce electric power. > > It's A LOT more economically efficient to sell the oil and produce > electricity with nuclear reactors. More ecologically efficient too. > > So your PROOF that Iran is producing, or even attempting to produce, > WEAPONS-GRADE nuclear material is? Why bother testing nuclear-capable missiles if Iran does not plan to eventually place nuclear war heads on those missiles. Wake up from your dream world and see the evidence that is in front of you. Here it is: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/31/world/main1460846.shtml (CBS/AP) Iran's successful test of a nuclear-capable missile demonstrates its "very active and aggressive military program" that is worrisome to the world, the State Department said Friday. The announcement in Tehran said the missile's range would depend on the weight of its warhead. Iran's air force chief, Gen. Hossein Salami, said independently guided payloads could hit several targets simultaneously. State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said he had no technical details on the test firing, but "I think it demonstrates that Iran has a very active and aggressive military program under way." The description, he said, includes "efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, as well as delivery systems." Quote
Guest cactus Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <dMAWi.13215$4V6.4720@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, cactus > <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <MPG.218fd28dceffbf7f98a275@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James >>> Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: >>> >>>> In article <Jason-2610071454470001@67-150-120-210.lsan.mdsg- >>>> pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... >>>>> In article <MPG.218bea98da6359c298a270@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James >>>>> Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In article <fft631$on4$1@news04.infoave.net>, prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com >>>>>> says... >>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>> I guess they could move to that state where doctors are allowed >>> to legally >>>>>>>> kill them. Is the name of that state Oregon? They are trying to >>> pass that >>>>>>>> same law in California. Believe it or not, I hope they make it >>> legal for >>>>>>>> doctors to kill patients that are in terrible pain that want to >>> die. Of >>>>>>>> course, the patients should sign legal forms indicating they >>> want to die. >>>>>>> Let me get this straight: it's OK for a doctor to prescribe an overdose >>>>>>> of painkiller to kill someone in pain but it's not OK for others >>> to kill >>>>>>> someone (aka "murder is a sin") AND it's not OK for someone to kill >>>>>>> themselves, no matter how much pain, right? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Doctor kills you: OK. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I kill you: bad. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You kill yourself: bad. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Got it. >>>>>>> >>>>>> If you go to the doctor to get killed, that is still suicide. >>>>>> You sought the doctor, he didn't come for you like some kind of soul >>>>>> hunter. >>>>>> Jason's convoluted thought processes are a wonder to behold. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Jim >>>>> Google "mercy killing". It's very different than a young healty person >>>>> committing suicide or 1st degree murder. >>>>> >>>> Split hairs all you want. >>>> Your good book says suicide is wrong. >>>> Seeking out someone to kill you is suicide. >>>> Plain and simple. >>>> If I pull a gun on a cop with the intention of having him/her kill me it >>>> is called suicide by cop. Is it any different if it is some other >>>> person I use? No, and you know it. You have just been subjected to a >>>> situation in your life that has made you reconsider some of the >>>> teachings of your book. You have modified your beliefs based on some >>>> pain and suffering you have seen. Maybe it is time to reconsider some >>>> of your other beliefs. >>>> >>>> Jim >>> The option is for people to watch their relatives spend several weeks or >>> even several months dying in terrible pain and agony. I watched my father >>> die in pain and agony of lung cancer. I wish that a doctor would have >>> committed a mercy killing. >> Why should a doctor jeopardize his or her immortal soul to make you feel >> better? >> >> People that are not in favor of mercy killing >>> should not authorize doctors or nurses to conduct mercy killings on their >>> relatives. I have signed legal forms (living will) that orders doctors to >>> not resuscitate me or hook me up to machines that keep me alive unless >>> Sarah or myself gives the doctors permission to use those machines. >>> Millions of people have legal living wills on file with their mates and >>> lawyers. >>> Jason >>> >>> > > I don't know how God feels about Doctors that conduct mercy killings. It's > possible that God considers mercy killing to be a form of LOVE. Jesus > preached more about love than any other subject. > > But your sect considers killing Christians to be murder. That means that a Christian doctor would jeopardize his or her immortal soul by performing a mercy killing. If you really believed in it, you would be willing to risk your soul to do it. I don't think that you would. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 In article <5p0q55Fp0lemU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-0111071837500001@66-53-216-211.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > In article <fgdkp4$qd2$00$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >> > In article <fgc7u9$32j$02$8@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > >> > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Jason wrote: > >> >>> In article <MPG.2192bf729011ee7498a297@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, > >> >>> James > >> >>> Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> In article <Jason-3110071313440001@67-150-123-199.lsan.mdsg- > >> >>>> pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... > >> >>>>> In article <l79hi3tc5n5ncp4440nt82vhvijdm0pqgj@4ax.com>, Al Klein > >> >>>>> <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:32:06 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) > >> >>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> If you believe that the president of Iran is making nuclear > > materials to > >> >>>>>>> be used for peaceful purposes > >> >>>>>> The SCIENTISTS who have inspected the facilities KNOW he is. > >> >>>>> Nuclear materials can be used to make nuclear weapons. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> Ah, but it has to be CERTAIN materials. > >> >>> Iran either already has those CERTAIN materials or can easily buy > >> >>> those > >> >>> CERTAIN materials. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> Buy? Sure... but why build a nuclear power plant then? > >> >> > >> >> Oh, maybe power? > >> >> > >> >> Tokay > >> > > >> > So they can start an assembly line for the production of nuclear > >> > weapons. > >> > >> Nope. Not yet. Not on their own. > >> > >> > > >> > The goal is to buy the machines, computers, reactors, uranium and > >> > anything > >> > else that is needed to produce nuclear materials and nuclear weapons. > >> > >> Well, that is true for almost any country. Compared to what the running > >> of a country actually does cost, the prices of nuclear weapons are > >> peanuts. What you want to do? Nuke us all? > >> > >> > > >> > Why waste money buying nuclear weapons when it is possible to produce > >> > their own nuclear weapons for many years to come. > >> > >> They can't. The don't have the facilities to do that. > >> > >> There are many cities in > >> > America and Europe that they want to nuke so many nuclear weapons will > >> > be > >> > needed. > >> > >> Conjecture. I.E. no evidence. > >> > >> > > >> > A farmer could buy all of the milk that is needed for his family but it > >> > would be much better if the farmer purchased 4 cows and produced enough > >> > milk not only for his family but also milk to sell to his neighbors. > >> > >> What bullshit is this example? The farmer could also buy a bazooka and > >> kill his neighbor. Why make one on his own? > >> > >> > >> Tokay > > > > The end goal of people like the president of Iran is to take over the > > world. Read this: > > So, why don't you get your lazy ass over there and assassinate him already? It's much easier to fire cruise missles at the nuclear facilities in Iran or use our bombers to drop bunker buster bombs on their nuclear facilities. I don't have the skills needed to assassinate any person. Quote
Guest cactus Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <WNAWi.13217$4V6.9292@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, cactus > <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <fg5te3$89h$02$3@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris >>> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <MPG.218fd28dceffbf7f98a275@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James >>>>> Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In article <Jason-2610071454470001@67-150-120-210.lsan.mdsg- >>>>>> pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... >>>>>>> In article <MPG.218bea98da6359c298a270@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James >>>>>>> Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In article <fft631$on4$1@news04.infoave.net>, prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com >>>>>>>> says... >>>>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I guess they could move to that state where doctors are allowed >>>>> to legally >>>>>>>>>> kill them. Is the name of that state Oregon? They are trying to >>>>> pass that >>>>>>>>>> same law in California. Believe it or not, I hope they make it >>>>> legal for >>>>>>>>>> doctors to kill patients that are in terrible pain that want to >>>>> die. Of >>>>>>>>>> course, the patients should sign legal forms indicating they >>>>> want to die. >>>>>>>>> Let me get this straight: it's OK for a doctor to prescribe an > overdose >>>>>>>>> of painkiller to kill someone in pain but it's not OK for others >>>>> to kill >>>>>>>>> someone (aka "murder is a sin") AND it's not OK for someone to kill >>>>>>>>> themselves, no matter how much pain, right? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Doctor kills you: OK. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I kill you: bad. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You kill yourself: bad. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Got it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you go to the doctor to get killed, that is still suicide. >>>>>>>> You sought the doctor, he didn't come for you like some kind of soul >>>>>>>> hunter. >>>>>>>> Jason's convoluted thought processes are a wonder to behold. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>> Google "mercy killing". It's very different than a young healty person >>>>>>> committing suicide or 1st degree murder. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Split hairs all you want. >>>>>> Your good book says suicide is wrong. >>>>>> Seeking out someone to kill you is suicide. >>>>>> Plain and simple. >>>>>> If I pull a gun on a cop with the intention of having him/her kill me it >>>>>> is called suicide by cop. Is it any different if it is some other >>>>>> person I use? No, and you know it. You have just been subjected to a >>>>>> situation in your life that has made you reconsider some of the >>>>>> teachings of your book. You have modified your beliefs based on some >>>>>> pain and suffering you have seen. Maybe it is time to reconsider some >>>>>> of your other beliefs. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jim >>>>> The option is for people to watch their relatives spend several weeks or >>>>> even several months dying in terrible pain and agony. I watched my father >>>>> die in pain and agony of lung cancer. I wish that a doctor would have >>>>> committed a mercy killing. >>>> Why didn't you do it? >>> I was 12 years old. There were several people in the hospital room. If I >>> had been an adult, I probably would have found a way to do it--perhaps by >>> unhooking one of the machines that were keeping him alive. >> That would have made you a murderer in the eyes of the law. If you >> planned to do it, it would be first degree murder. >> >>>> People that are not in favor of mercy killing >>>>> should not authorize doctors or nurses to conduct mercy killings on their >>>>> relatives. I have signed legal forms (living will) that orders doctors to >>>>> not resuscitate me or hook me up to machines that keep me alive unless >>>>> Sarah or myself gives the doctors permission to use those machines. >>>>> Millions of people have legal living wills on file with their mates and >>>>> lawyers. >>>>> Jason >>>>> >>>>> >>> > > It's not an issue. I honestly don't know for sure whether or not I would > have been able to do it. I continue to believe that doctors should be able > to legally do it. > > But what about their souls Jason? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.