From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Is it Christian values or chavinism?
Organization: Stay Awake Software
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 08:57:20 GMT

<nyikos.717897446@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
><usglkrx.717686544@gsusgi1.gsu.edu> usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman) :
>>nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>><1992Sep25.211600.23804@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) :
>>>><1992Sep18.233054.14674@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) said:
>>>>>From article by iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski):
>>>>>> In article mprc@troi.cc.rochester.edu (M. Price) writes:
>>>>>> >In nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>>>>> >    <...> the fact that Suzanne
>>>>>> >used the word "crucified" to refer to the justifiable tongue-lashing
>>>>>> >Christ gave those who debased His temple trivializes the agony and
>>>>>> >suffering He underwent in His death and spiritual separation from His
>>>>>> >Father.
>
>I've already followed up to this post, but since then I realized that
>there are many layers of deception that I haven't addressed before.

Starting with Suzanne and yourself.

>1. The original statement of M. Price, which Storga cunningly deleted,

I would prefer to be called a cunning linguist that a cunning deletist.
If you don't get the joke I suggest you grab a dictionary and start
looking just before 'cunning'.

>had to do with the "white hot flashes" of Jesus, with the comment,

If I did delete a portion of Price's post it was not with any malice or
misrepresentation intended.  I don't recall seeing any portion having to
do with 'hot flashes of Jesus' (was he experiencing menopause?).

>"Think of those poor Scribes and Pharisees, how they must have suffered."
>[This I did comment on before, along with the fact that Suzanne's 
>rejoinder, directed at M. Price and NOT Jesus, was "Yeah, he really
>crucified them," putting the "suffering" of the Scribes and Pharisees 
>into perspective.]

Really, a very poor joke on her part, and one we know offended at least
one Christian.

[note: I'm deleting portions of this post because Peter tends to ramble on
about things that have little to do with the topic at hand]
...
>3. This same Gordon Storga has brought trumped-up charges to bear on
>Suzanne which I have begun to address in posts.  

And you've done a piss poor job of it too.  Strange how Suzanne isn't even
commenting on these things that get your knickers riding so high.

-------- portion of Peter's post rebuking my statements about Suzanne ---
>People keep telling me of all kinds of horrible things Suzanne has
>posted in the past.  I haven't seen any that would even remotely
>justify the above statements, and I am calling your bluff: if you have
>any evidence Suzanne said these things, please produce them.
------ end portion ----

I posted evidence, Peter.  That you don't find the evidence compelling is
*your* problem, not mine.

----- more of Peter's post -----
>And if you can't produce anything, then as far as I'm concerned about
>your further charge of hypocrisy:
>
>Storga : velcro : : Forgach : teflon
------ end portion ----

Note the mature closing argument ("Neiner, neiner!").  But I've produced
a dozen or so statements by Suzanne that support my previous posts.
Peter has apparently changed his demand from "produce anything" to
"produce something that I can't possibly twist so that Suzanne comes
off looking like she was just kidding".

---- a question to me from Peter in a previous post -----
>Are you a Wiccan, like Eric?
--- end portion ----
>		__________________________
>nb. Storga has admitted to being a confirmed atheist.  I wonder whether
>that rules out being a Wiccan.

Technically I believe it does.  Wicca is an earth based religion.  Atheism
is not a religion.

>More about velcro, Storga, and hypocrisy in the next three lines:

Ok...

[I, Gordon, wrote this for those of you who aren't keeping score]:
>>>>Suzanne seems to ignore the castigation of other Christians who take her
>>>>to task for trivializing their god's contributions.  I notice she doesn't
>>>>apologize for it.

I don't see any mention of velcro in these lines.  I see that I mention
Suzanne apparently ignoring other Christians concerns about her
use of certain terms.  This in itself seems rather un-Christian of her,
and it's compounded by her apparent refusal to apologize to those she
might have offended.  In fact, someone did post that Suzanne's comments
offended her aunt.  I still haven't seen any explaination or apology from
Suzanne.

>QUOTE OF THE DAY:
>"Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and
>utter every kind of evil against you [falsely] because of me.
>...Thus they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
>		----The words of Jesus, spoken during the Sermon on 
>		    the Mount [Matt. 5:11-12]

Are you now claiming that you are "blessed", or are you claiming that
Suzanne is "blessed"?  Or are you claiming that I am "blessed" since you
seem to be trying to persecute me because of some things I've said wrt
Jesus?  I wonder if trying to persecute someone and failing miserably
counts...


Gordon
Pro-abortion, Pro-person, Pro-women's-rights and ex-boytoy of Susan, Muriel, 
Cathi, Nora, Jennifer, Sarah, Lynn, Diana (catwoman), Diana (Sorceress), and
Beth and married to a goddess among women, and proud of it.
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.