HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.origins
Subject: Re: Bogus TAE reasoning, and why I get caught every time
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 02:49:54 EST
Reply-To: kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us
Organization: Kalki's Infoline BBS, Aiken, SC, USA

robd@cherry09.cray.com (Robert Derrick) writes:

> Broughton, Wayne Jeremy (waynebro@juliet.caltech.edu) wrote:
> : and I (Robert Derrick) wrote...
> 
>   [long goofy argument (on my part) about time dilation, speed,

> In the first case, the third guy was Kalki,

Huh? What do you claim I said concerning time dilation, etc...?

> I guess I have a strong opinion about what these guys are trying to
> prove, and so I read freely between the lines.  This may be unsafe,
> but I feel that if I were to mistate their position, they would be
> the first to correct me.  Neither one ever did.

Jeez, this letter sounds like a Ronald Reagan speech. What exactly are
you talking about?

[on and on about something or other]

Sincerely,
Kalki Dasa


       -------------------------------------------------------
      |  Don't forget to chant:   Hare Krishna Hare Krishna   |
      |                           Krishna Krishna Hare Hare   |
      |                           Hare Rama Hare Rama         |
      |                           Rama Rama Hare Hare         |
      |                                                       |
      |   Kalki's Infoline BBS Aiken, South Carolina, USA     |
      |        (kalki33!kalki@lakes.trenton.sc.us)            |
       -------------------------------------------------------
From: David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Keep Christ In Christmas
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov 17 1992
Date: 15 Dec 92  13:02:56

Topic: "Keep Christ in Christmas"
Who1: kmagnacca@eagle.wesleyan.edu
ID: <1992Dec10.053613.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu>
With: parsons@cis.ksu.edu (Scott S Parish )
And: fsrey@trantor.acf-lab.alaska.edu (Rex E. Young)
 
RY> I do take offense to the rising tide of extreme Christians attempting
RY> to put their majority on school boards. As mr. 'jc' said in his 
RY> posting, this is dangerous, and must be countered. I would pull my
RY> children from school and teach them at home before I would allow
RY> people with such narrow beliefs dictate how my children would be
RY> educated. [deletions] 
 
SP> Substitute "Liberals" or "atheists" or "homosexuals" for
SP> "Christians" in that first sentence and you can see the similar
SP> view taken by Christians of the current system of education. What
SP> do you think the up-roar in New York about the Children of the
SP> Rainbow curriculum is all about? Many Christians are taking their
SP> children out of the public school system for just this reason. Many
SP> Christians are becoming involved in local politics for just this
SP> reason too.
 
K> "Much as I hate to admit it, Scott does have a point here. In 
K> talking about the Christians as "dangerous" we're using the same
K> sort of moral absolutism they do in characterizing homosexuals,
K> etc. I too think it's dangerous and should be countered, but I
K> don't think it should be put forth in such a preachy, "this way 
K> is RIGHT" manner.
 
But Scott is NOT right. There is no room for Christian occultism,
superstition, mysticism, willfull ignorance in the education system.
Scott fails to understand that the education system -is supposed to
be- atheistic, because our Constitution says so, and the Supreme
Court says the Constitution says so. If Scott doesn't like it, he
can go live in Iran, where it -IS- one nation under God.
 
Do you feel that Creationism is not a clear and present danger? I
sure-as-taxes do!
 
Is not enforced, teacher-lead prayer a very evil tyrany, deserving
of any and all means to resist it, including armed resistance? I
think so.
 
K> Karl

--- Maximus 2.00
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman)
Subject: Re: party ideas
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:37:21 GMT

In article <kmr4.488.724455997@po.CWRU.edu> kmr4@po.CWRU.edu (Keith M. Ryan) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.142409.14824@hemlock.cray.com> maf@cray.com (Mike Fenton) writes:
(request for party ideas, deleted)
>
>	How about adding some Nietzsche and Einstein posters? 
>
>	Don't forget an old favorite, bible burning bon-fire.
>		Relive the inquisition!
>
>		[ make sure you check with local fire codes ]
>
>	All dress up as your favorite religious person, Jesus, the Pope,
>Mary, etc...

It would be sorta weird if I dressed up like colleen.
-- 
| Eric |         --- Keep "Saturn" in "Saturnalia" ---
From: v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Religion = anything that's fun is bad.
Date: 13 Dec 92 18:47:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Dec12.213637.19852@timesink.chi.il.us>, harry@timesink.chi.il.us (Harold Platypus) writes...

>I despise crusading atheists who waste taxpayers time and money and
>subject their little children to public humiliation and media circuses
>all in the name of their BELIEF SYSTEM: seperation of church and state.

So the Constitution of the United States is simply a belief system?  

You must feel really sorry for the first African American kids in the 
white public schools in the South in the '50's.   All that public humiliation
and media-circus business in the name of their BELIEF SYSTEM: racial equality. 

******************************************************************************
For God so loved the world that He gave Man Free Will and then got pissed when
we didn't meet his arbitrary standards.  Oh, and he had his Son offed when he
realized how impossible those standards were.  -- Michael 4:23
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Subject: Re: Women. . . SHUT UP!
Organization: DigiBoard, Incorporated, Eden Prairie,MN
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:20:39 GMT

mustang@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel M Engholm) writes:
>I'm getting off the subject of the original post, but here goes.  At the last
>national election, Iowa voters were asked to ratify the ERA to the Iowa
>constitution.  Part of the wording was to the effect that no one should be
>discriminated against on the basis of gender.  While they were amending the
>constitution, why not make it more general than just gender?  Why not add
>race, religion (or lack thereof :) and so forth?

This is already covered by the 14th amendment, etc.  For example, it
would be illegal for the state of Iowa to have laws that applies differently
to whites vs. non-whites, but legal for (at least some) male vs. female laws.
Some states still have age of consent laws differing by sex, but similar
laws based on race wouldn't be legal.

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: jwest@wisc (Jeff West)
Subject: Dear The Buzzard
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:25:03 CST

 
This is in response to HEATHER alias The Buzzard in the post:
  "How much smarter are atheists?"

************************

Dear The Buzzard,
  Since there seems to be 'plenty' of response to your post, most of which
was flame retardent even though there seemed to be ample reason to, I'll
add my $0.02 worth for you.

  Ridding myself of 25 years of Christian "teachings"  was not an easy
thing to do.  So if you ask if I had the adrenaline rush of emotion when I
finally disavowed my beliefs the answer is no.  It was a gradual process
and much like (as I stated in a post a few months back) denying a good
friend or cutting off an arm.  BUT since that time I can say that without
question my life has grown fuller and MORE meaningful than at anytime I
considered myself a Christian.  These last 10+ years have been an *incredible*
experience in the examination of self and world.  In regard to your seaching
for fulfillment, which incidentally I don't believe is the "meaning of life",
I feel I have made great strides in living a life that make sense to me and
look forward to the experience of the rest of my years.

  Christianity never allowed me the freedom of self examination from a
totally unbiased point of view.  In that repect I've grown as an atheist
and look back at my Christian years as a very stagnant time of my life.

  I would make one request of you.  Don't run away an hide like many others
who come here and make quick sermons claiming that they *have* looked at
their faith and found it the answer to their life.  If you enjoy intelligent
communication and do it in a non-preaching way I think you will find people
here willing to rationally discuss it with you.  It's the preaching that's
not taken well 8)  To seal the challenge we will take it as the sign of a
closed mind if we don't hear from you again.

Love?   (sure why not)
  Jeff
From: huffman@alishaw (Matt Huffman)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: mail order items
Keywords: atheist, catalog
Date: 12 Dec 92 20:48:20 GMT
Distribution: alt.atheism

For an EXCELLENT selection of atheist stickers,
t-shirts, and books, write to :

SET FREE
P.O. Box 3065-192
Garden Grove, CA. 92642

They will send you a free catalog, upon
request.
From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: party ideas
Date: 16 Dec 92 00:51:13 GMT
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things

I give a Winter Solstice party and we have a ritual torch carried
through the house to ask the sun to come back.  I'm also baking
Pagan Cookies that have pentagrams on them.  Maybe you could
back some Jesus cookies, like crosses with Jesus hanging from
his arms and legs, with red food coloring around the Five Wounds.
Yum!  Yum!

It's perfectly okay to have a tree, as that is not Christian at
all.  Tree worship is a perfectly good Pagan rite.

Have you checked out alt.religion.santaism [sic] for more ideas?
They both wear red, you know.

-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: harry@timesink.chi.il.us (Harold Platypus)
Subject: Re: Religion = Anything that's fun is bad.
Organization: Big Bulging Buffalo Bladders -R- Us
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 07:56:22 GMT

In article <ednclark.724042511@kraken> ednclark@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Jeffrey Clark) writes:
>On my way to work each morning I pass a Learn To Swim School pool. This
>particular pool is mostly used by young children around the age of eight to
>ten years old. One particular morning I was held up due to some roadworks,
>so I got to study the children and people a lot more than usual. What I
>noticed rubbed in once again the shittiness of religion and forcing it on
>little kids.
>
> ... typical example of "religion = no fun" deleted ...
>
> ... typical example of fundamentalist barbarism deleted ...
>
>Though these things are extremes it does seem to show the trend in religions
>that if anything is fun it's out. i think it's because if you force a person
>to invest a lot of their time and enjoyment into something it makes them
>more convinced of the rightness of doing so. I beleive religion has actively
>used this attitude bending method (only recently identified by psychologists
>as Dissonance Theory) for thousands of very successful years. This is yet
>another way that being an atheist opens your mind to the things around you.
>
>Jeff.
>

Being an atheist OPENS your mind? What a crock of shit!

So organized religion has perpetrated some of the most heinous crimes
and practices ever... I don't have to be an atheist to get offended
by the Inquisition. Just remember, not everyone who believes in a
guiding intelligience subscribes to an organized religion. I think
kids should be exposed to all kinds of beliefs so they can make
their own choice. IMHO, telling kids there is NO GOD is just another
form of indoctrinating them into a almost fanatical belief system -
an evangelical anti-religion if you please.

Frankly, I find the majority of people ballsy enough to publicly
declare themselves "atheists" are nothing more than troublemakers
who finally found a mission. They stir up shit, cost the taxpayers
money and vanish into the woodwork having done nothing constructive.
If this is you, go soak yer head...
- Harry
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 06:32:41 EST
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Abortion: When does life begin?

In article <n11b8t@ofa123.fidonet.org>, David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org says:

>The abortion issue really boils down to a question of CONTROL
>and DOMINATION by rich, powerful white males, of women, to continue
>to beat women into a subserviant position, and keep women from
>compeating with men on an equal basis. The so-called "pro-life"
>cults assert altruistic intent, but LOOK at what they do, NOT what
>they SAY.

Yes, this is exactly what Phyllis Schlafly wants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Kurt  E.  Ludwick     | If PRO is the opposite of CON, then
 -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -|
 kel111@psuvm.psu.edu  |             what's the opposite of Progress...?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: D.J.Butcher@newcastle.ac.uk (Dave Butcher)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Atheists should mind their own damn business
Date: 16 Dec 92 17:51:53 GMT
Distribution: world,public
Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK NE1 7RU.


In article <1992Dec12.193142.19410@timesink.chi.il.us>, harry@timesink.chi.il.us (Harold Platypus) writes:
>In article <10941@vice.ICO.TEK.COM> bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec12.071137.16343@timesink.chi.il.us> harry@timesink.chi.il.us (Harold Platypus) writes:
>>
>>  Speaking of platypuses (platypi?), I like Robin Williams' comments
>>  on how the platypus is airtight proof that god smokes some pretty
>>  good shit.
>>
>Oh, rip the shirt... How cliche... Make fun of my name.
>A Hairy Platypus, HA HA HA...
>It's what I would expect from a bunch of heathen scum. :-)
>- Harry
How would you get a bunch of scum? It would just keep leaking everywhere.

Dave.
Nb.- Witty Quote goes here.

	D.Butcher@ncl.ac.uk
From: parsons@cis.ksu.edu (Scott S Parish )
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: "Keep Christ in Christmas"
Date: 12 Dec 92 16:00:04 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cygnus.cis.ksu.edu

sheikh@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu (rizwan a sheikh) writes:

>You missed the point of the original post, namely that these fundamentalists
>were HIDING the fact that they were fundamentalists.  None of those in your
>example acted in this manner.

No, I didn't miss the point of the original post.  Anyway, when was the
last time religion came up as a subject in your local elections?  I can 
only speak for my locale, but the issue has never been raised about what 
a candidate's religious affiliations are.  Are these "stealth candidates"
_actively_ hiding their affiliations or is this just kind of an after the
fact investigation?  (ie. The person gets elected, and then someone decides
to ask some questions about their religious beliefs.  In turn gets this gets
interpreted as "hiding.")  

-- 
Scott Parish                |  The Truth is still the Truth      |  John 14:6
parsons@cygnus.cis.ksu.edu  |  even if you choose to ignore it.  |
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: ags@seaman.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman)
Subject: Re: Strong vs. Weak atheism
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 07:14:20 GMT

In article <LmiVVB4w165w@mantis.co.uk> mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk> writes:
>Are there any atheists who don't believe that it's possible that they might
>be mistaken?

I think Ayn Rand might have qualified. She despised Bertrand Russell for
admitting that he could be wrong.

--
Dave Seaman
ags@seaman.cc.purdue.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Colleen
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 18:14:45 GMT

In article 11993@hogg.ed.ac.uk, iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:
} I also bare witness, speaking, `There is no God other than James Meritt'.

Hmmmm.  It seems logical to say what is, but I fail to see the logic in a
universal is-not unless it is sufficiently quantified.  I, for instance,
would not say "there is no other god", but I would say that I am one.
From: cjhs@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Quotes from the Bible.
Date: 18 Dec 92 11:26:37 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England

HEATHER LEE FYFFE (910773f@axe.acadiau.ca) wrote:
: In article <BzCy0o.1v8@apollo.hp.com> stave@apollo.hp.com (Joel H. Stave) writes:
: >(quotes are from my online version of the bible)

[ stuff on 1 Kings omitted ]

:   >>|> The sun revolves around the earth
: >Somewhere it mentions that God stops the sun in the sky.  It didn't
: >say that the sun *seemed* to stop moving in the sky, so it must be
: >literally moving, so it must go around the earth, rather than the
: >earth move around a stationary sun.
: 
: 
: Yeah, that's what it says, in Joshua (I don't know offhand exactly where).
: Once again though, remember that this was written by a man (Joshua himself I 
: believe, though I may be wrong), and for all the evidence he saw, the sun 
: stopped moving.  I'm sure we all, as children, thought the sun moved until 
: someone explained to us how WE are the ones moving... Well, noone had 
: explained it to Joshua, as noone had figured it out yet.  This statement by 
: a man is again no reason to conclude that God thinks the sun revolves around 
: the Earth.  

I just noticed something very weird here....

Heather suggests that we should admit that Joshua used an older
cosmology, and so he recorded the event as the sun stopping...

What then does Heather think *really* happened? Did the Earth stop
spinning??!

Once you have admitted that this is the writing of Joshua (or some
ancient historian) and not actually of God itself, surely the next step
is to admit that well, *actually* the sun and the Earth and the story
teller all were just doing what they do best. The sun shines, the Earth
spins and the story teller spins a bit also...

In which case it should again be emphasized that these little examples
are addressed not to rational Christians, but rather to those who hold
that the bible is literally true in every detail.

Cheers -- Chris Ho-Stuart
From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Alt.Atheism FAQ: Introduction to Atheism
Keywords: FAQ, atheism
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 12:19:40 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
> I think this FAQ is _far_ too wordy.

Just the intro bit, or the whole of it?


mathew
-- 
Lung cancer and arteriosclerosis.
For people who like to smoke.
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: proof
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 05:53:03 GMT

Daniel Starr (starr-daniel@yale.edu) wrote:
: In article <casivils.724130930@node_508ba> casivils@lescsse.jsc.nasa.gov (cra
ig sivils) writes:

[lots of stuff deleted, though I too will join in applauding Craig]

: >An empty grave
: Grave robbing.  Palestine at the time was a sufficiently fractious place
: that it wouldn't be too hard to bribe or distract the guards... if the
: guards bothered to show up at all.  Grunewald has a very beautiful painting
: of the resurrection in which the guards are sleeping... the latter half
: is entirely possible.  We have enough stories of corruption of American
: guards at the embassy in Moscow to readily believe corruption or laxity
: of some kind on the part of whatever guards were placed on Jesus of Nazareth'
s
: tomb.  (I mention guards only because a Christian claimed to me there were
: such.  For myself, I can't recall having any reliable or even Biblical source
s
: to the effect...)

Matthew 27:62-66 and Matthew 28:11-15.  The latter is one of the typical
conversations that the enemies of JC have where no friend of JC would be and
yet the information is contained in the Bible.
-- 
Mike A. McAngus	(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org) | The train today to Morrow leaves today
The Truth is still the Truth           | at 8:35.  At half-past ten tomorrow is
even if you choose to ignore it.       | the time it should arrive.
                                       |                    The Kingston Trio
From: D.J.Butcher@newcastle.ac.uk (Dave Butcher)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Religion = anything that's fun is bad.
Date: 15 Dec 92 19:05:35 GMT
Distribution: world,public
Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK NE1 7RU.


In article <1992Dec13.185429.23798@timesink.chi.il.us>, harry@timesink.chi.il.us (Harold Platypus) writes:
>In article <1992Dec13.005116.16799@doug.cae.wisc.edu> mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec12.213637.19852@timesink.chi.il.us> harry@timesink.chi.il.us (Harold Platypus) writes:
>>>In article <9212121433.AA02595@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> I3150101@DBSTU1.RZ.TU-BS.DE (Benedikt Rosenau) writes:
>>>>Harold Platypus types:
>>>>>Being an atheist OPENS your mind? What a crock of shit!
>>>>
>>>>Either give evidence for your assertions or switch to another newsgroup.
>>>>
>>>Bugger off you pompous windbag... I'll post here if I damn well please!
>>
>>Sure, just don't object to the flames.  Judging from the responses so far,
>>I hope you are behind a flame shield. :)
>
>I LOVE IT! FLAME AWAY... Give me your LOATHING and HATE and I'll devour
>them like a balrog using a flaming torch for a toothpick... (-:
>
>>Ever hear of kill files?  It would be easy to kill any article mentioning
>>you. :)  Not that I would do that, but some people can.  Also, their is
>>a n key.
>
>Awwww... that's not fair. Just because I offend your sensibilities you
>advocate killing everything I post? Only an intellectual coward would do
>that... as if atheistic ramblings couldn't stand the test of discussion.
>
>>>I'll vote with my keyboard and stay as long as I like. Feel free to
>>>filter me if you dare... HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...
>>>- Harry
>>
>>Why?  I so much prefer the argument.
>>
>
>Me too... that's the only reason I'm here.
>- Harry

"Is this the right room for the argument?"
.
.
"An argument isn't just contradicting whatever the other person says."
"Yes it is!"
.
.
etc.

Dave.
Nb.- Witty Quote goes here.

	D.Butcher@ncl.ac.uk
From: nyeda@cnsvax.uwec.edu (David Nye)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Strong vs. Weak atheism
Date: 16 Dec 92 05:14:54 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

[reply to darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au]
 
>I don't know, this definition of atheism to me seems to be one not used
>in the general community, at least in my experience.  Am I alone in
>thinking that the commonly used definition of "atheism" is assumed to be
>"strong atheism"?
 
I too have been a little confused by these distinctions.  To me, an
agnostic is one who holds that it cannot be known whether or not God
exists.  An atheist is one who has come to the conclusion that God
doesn't exist.  The distinction between a strong and weak atheist seems
to be that the former admits to no possibility that he may be wrong.  It
seems imprudent to me to state a priori that one would not consider any
new evidence as it comes in, so I guess I am a weak atheist by this
definition.  On the other hand, the term "weak" suggests the presence of
some uncertainty, yet I have no doubt that God does not exist.  I
suspect the real problem lies in the definitions of "knowing" and
"believing".  As an empiricist, I believe that there is no absolutely
certain knowledge of anything in the physical world.  One goes with the
simplest theory that supports the evidence.  This is different from
saying that my convictions are weak.

David Nye
nyeda@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism