From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: How big _is_ Texas?
Date: 12 Jan 93 19:05:25 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1993Jan7.203315.25224@news.ysu.edu> ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller) writes:

>>> Awwww....poor baby....he doesn't like the humor so he flames on the
>>> basis of a misspelled word.

>> I did not find the humor expressed to be exceptionally profound and
>> was thus not moved by it one way or the other.  Nor am I enamored of
>> Texas (or even Alaska, for that matter) to any extent.  But I do find
>> the lack of self-discipline and self-respect (often exhibited, for
>> example, in the lack of writing skills) of today's students to be
>> exceptionally disturbing.

> Excuse me?  Where did I ever make the claim I was a student?  Don't make
> baseless assumptions.

I don't suppose that you have ever made such a claim.  Nonetheless, I
must say that I find it quite incredible that a member of the faculty
(or even of the professional staff) of an .edu site would spell or
write so atrociously.  Thus, I surmise that it would be much more
reasonable to assume that you are a member of the cleaning staff.

>>> This idiot flames me for spelling, yet he can't spell a word right
>>> when he has a model a few lines above it...

>> But at least I had the good sense to include alt.flame.spelling in the
>> distribution.

> But you still misspelled the word.  You flaming me on the basis that I
> have made a misspelling when you, in that flame, demonstrate that your
> own spelling skills are not superior, especially when you have the
> model for that word on the same screen.  This is what I find so
> amusing.

So how much mileage do you hope to get out of one error -- which in
reality happens to be a _TYPING_ error rather than a spelling error?

> You see, Kaldis, I neve made the claim that I was a good speller.
                     ^^^^

Yes, I see.

> You, in flaming me for a misspelling, show that you believe you are.

You have mentioned that you have read a number of my posts.  Just how
many spelling errors have you ever seen in them?  (But then this is a
silly question.  After all, how would you know?)

>>> Did I ever imply that anyone wishing to enter or decline entering a
>>> church had a lack of freewill?  No.

>> Well, as a matter of fact, on the contrary, yes you did.  To suggest
>> that the construct "freewill Christianity" is an oxymoron is to say
>> that these are two mutually exclusive concepts.  This implies that
>> those who frequent church lack freewill.

> I see.  So you contend that all those who would enter a church classify
> themselves as Christian?  An unwarranted assertion, at best.

Suddenly, when the criticism has shifted from me to you, you seem to
be far less observant of the exact details of the passage in question.
I did not say "enter church", I said "_FREQUENT_ church".  Those who
frequent church are not generally thought of as non-Christians.

Moreover, I originally took exception to the construction "friendly
atheist".  Your demeanor, both here and in email, can hardly be
characterized as "friendly".

>>> I simply comment on the concept

>> Is it really nothing more than a "concept"?  Just simply a thought, a
>> notion, an idea?  Or is it in fact something more?  Like perhaps an
>> intuition, a perception, or an observation?

> Why does it matter?  Does my making the observation in some way bring
> harm to you?

It matters in that you are quite imprecise in the way you express
yourself, and you seem to be quite willing to excuse what appears to
me to be a lackadaisical attitude in your personal habits.

>>> that those who most strongly embrace Christianity tend to loose touch
>>                [An exercise: is this really correct usage?]^^^^^

> No more so than "athiest" in your above quote was.

Don't skirt the issue.  Just how much mileage do you hope to get out
of a typing error?

>>> with their free will, at least those of my aquaintence.

> But you miss the larger question here?: is this a manifestation of the
> fundamental nature of Christianity, or is it a corruption of it by at
> least some of its adherents?

> The general concept of Christianity is "Believe or go to hell".

Is it your contention that the entirety of Christianity can be
expressed in the above characterization?

> There are very few martyrs.  If that is the choice, where is the free
> will?

The choice is yours.  If you wind up in Hell, it will not be because
you were never given the opportunity to avoid it.

>>> So what?  Is it your contention that leaving trailing blanks somehow
>>> denotes some manner of deviance?  [...]

>> No, it is my contention that it denotes some manner of carelessness.

> If I had wanted my .sig to use all available space, I would have
> designed it so.  It is exactly as I want it, therefor, no carelessness
> is evident.

Say it again -- maybe this time you might convince someone of it.
Your .sig is the way it is because of your carelessness, and you do
not bother to correct it because you are lazy.

>> (Here is the hypocrisy.)  Rutgers, unlike you, is tolerant of
>> diversity of opinion, and is fully cognizant that such an attitude is
>> absolutely necessary -- even indispensible -- if free inquiry is to
>> flourish.  (Not that I'm acting as a spokesman on behalf of Rutgers,
>> mind you.  But this has been my observation.)

> Oh, I'm very tolerant of diversity of opinion.  I simply am intolerant
> of people who, like you, insist that diversity of opinion does not
> include the right to decent in a free society.
                       ^^^^^^

Learn to write, you moron!  You mean "dissent", not "decent".  We can
maybe overlook leaving off the last letter of a word, or even
transposing a couple of letters, but this is intolerable.

Now, as you can see, it is _STUPIDITY_ that I am intolerant of.  But
where, I challenge you, have I _EVER_ said what you above claim that I
have: that diversity of opinion does not include dissent?  This is
something you have concocted out of thin air, presumably because you
have run out of substance to criticize me about.
-- 
The views expressed herein are   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously   ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
as this would hold such views??? ||
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush