HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jwest@wisc (Jeff West)
Subject: Just for fun post
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: 29 Dec 92 11:45:28 CST

I got this off of rec.humor so many of you may have already read it.
For those of you that haven't I thought I'd repost it here.  I got
a good chuckle out of it maybe you will to.

**********

        This is a true story that happened to me only a few years ago...


        I'm a 3rd generation Cantonese-American and have pretty much
forgotten the language.  Hey, I wasn't even raised with it spoken in
my household, but I live in a predominantly Asian neighborhood anyway.
Well, Mormons, whom we all know and love(*cough*), have to save their
money during childhood so that they may go on missionary expeditions
when they hit seventeen years of age or so.  Some even become Urban
Mormons, where they trek to distant(?) parts of Suburbia, seeking
converts.
        So, one day, there was a knock at my door.  So upon answering,
Lo! And Behold!  Who should be standing there, but two young, aspiring
Jehovah's Witn-... I mean, Mormon Missionaries.  Both were Caucasian,
and one was holding a copy of Halston's Mandarin/English Dictionary.
The Mormon holding the dictionary greeted me in a foreign language,
presumably Mandarin, which I didn't understand.  However, I chose to
say nothing; I merely furrowed my brow and intensified my gaze.
Astute, as they were, the missionaries were quick to realize that I
had not comprehended a single word they said, so they squabbled:

        Missionary #1: I told you he wasn't Mandarin.
        Missionary #2: Apparently not.  He's probably wondering what
                       we're trying to say.
        Missionary #1: Maybe he's Vietnamese.
        Missionary #2: (Pulls out Vietnamese/English Dict.) Perhaps.
                       The Word of God was meant to reach all tongues.

        So the second Missionary repeated his greeting in Vietnamese.
I only shrugged my shoulders.  The other Mormon pulled out a Japanese
Dictionary, assuming that I might have been the same.  Again, I merely
shrugged, and we ran the same gauntlet for the Korean language.  I
had to admit, though, that I began to tire of this game.  Taking a
deep breath, I shouted,

        "YOU DAMN FOREIGNERS!  WHY DON'T YOU GO BACK WHERE YOU CAME
FROM AND STOP TAKING OUR JOBS?!?"

        With that, I slammed the door in a grandoise fashion and
couldn't stop laughing for two hours afterward.

-Shadowmage
(Solomon Chang)


---------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not denial.  I'm just very selective about the reality I accept.

    - Calvin & Hobbs
From: joeb@arden.linet.org (Joe Beiter)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Date: 31 Dec 92 13:41:28 GMT
Distribution: world,public
Organization: The Courts of Chaos

In article <1992Dec30.122043.410@prime.mdata.fi> iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen) writes:
>>So what are you trying to say?  That there was no IQ<-->Athesim study actually
>>and that you just said this to see what kind of responses you'd get?
>
>Yes, I never had any study, and never said so (MY study I mean, I had a study
>of some psychologist, but the topic wasn't the same, but close). And yes,
>I wanted to see what people had to say on this subject and how strongly they
>would oppose it also.

Any interesting conclusions?  I didn't follow your responses/flames very closely
but the few that I read seemed to have atheists objecting.  Givin the amount
of people that said something to the effect "Well in my experience"... what
was the consensus?

- JoeB


-- 
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
|Joe.Beiter@arden.linet.org               The Long Island Network Project   |
|The Courts of Chaos Semi-Public Access   Long Island New York: USA         |
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
From: joeb@arden.linet.org (Joe Beiter)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Fun ways to get rid of fundies...
Date: 31 Dec 92 02:17:42 GMT
Organization: The Courts of Chaos

>mornings I put on Ministry's 'Psalm 69' and sit on my balcony with a
>malevolent grin on my face. They probably can't make out the lyrics

Hey I like 'Jesus built my hotrod'.  Play that fer me next Sunday.


- JoeB - Just another Fund-ie.
  "Loud Enough to KNOCK YA DOWN!"


-- 
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
|Joe.Beiter@arden.linet.org               The Long Island Network Project   |
|The Courts of Chaos Semi-Public Access   Long Island New York: USA         |
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
From: muttiah@thistle.ecn.purdue.edu (Ranjan S Muttiah)
Subject: Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: world,public
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 20:45:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec27.073652.5991@en.ecn.purdue.edu> muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen) writes:
>that love Him, and they happen for a reason.  I would much rather live a
>short life with cancer and let my increased awareness of my mortality light
>a fire under my butt for God  than to glide through life accomplishing
>nothing with eternal consequence.  God will not give someone something that
>is not good for them in the long run.  If a Christian is not healed of
>cancer, then they have it for a reason that is beneficial to them as a
>spiritual being, as promised in the Bible.  Paul didn't whine about his
>adversity, nor did Jesus himself!  In fact, they seemed to shake a fare
>amount of joy out of it!

Well if Paul already had leprosy and it was untreatable for his time, then
I don't think there was much he could do.  I don't think you can bring much
happiness into your life thinking like this though.  If an ailment is curable
then it should be your (and your physician's) responsibility to seek the
proper treatment.  You have to remember that the OT and the NT were written
in terrible times (slavery, political oppression), and you have to show caution 
when extrapolating from those times.  There are lessons to be learned from 
those times: one of them being that mistakes shouldn't be repeated!  If you
say all these things to shatter to your ego (to borrow the ideas of one of 
the contributors here) for some sense of "spirituality", then that is different.
There are better ways of doing that.

I wish you happiness.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: world,public
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 01:15:50 GMT

ed_eck@milkwy.enet.dec.com wrote:
: 
: In article <1992Dec29.163307.21853@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, 
: brian@lpl.arizona.edu (Brian Ceccarelli 602/621-9615) writes...
: 
: 
:    [...]
: 
: 
: >
: >It is sad.  Truly a pity.  But guess what?  God didn't create it that way.
: >He originally created us to live forever.
:
: Not at all. Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden specifically
: so that (from later in Genesis) they would not eat of the tree of
: life and live forever ("And become like Us."). God did not give them
: eternal life when they were created and never intended mankind to have
: eternal life. At the expulsion from the garden, God only comdemned
: Adam and his descendents to toil in the fields and Eve and all women
: to bear children in pain (and kick around the serpent now and then),
: not to suffer death. There is no evidence in Genesis that God
: sentenced Man to die.

Good points.

:
:
: Also, bear in mind that when God announced his prohibition of eating
: from the tree of knowledge, Eve had not yet been created. There is
: no evidence that she had been told of the prohibition by Adam. She
: can hardly be considered guilty of transgressing a rule she didn't know
: about.

Even I, an atheist, know better than this.  Gen 3:1-3 contains the following
exchange:

S: Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?
E: We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; it is only about the
fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden the garden (the tree of life and
the tree of knowledge) that god said, "You shall not eat it or even touch it,
lest you die.

Now it may be argued that Eve only mentions one tree, while two are supposed to
exist in the middle of the garden; but, since she eats the "forbidden fruit" we
can assume she knew the restriction intellectually.

My question is, without the ability to know right from wrong, how could Adam 
and Eve truly been responsible for their actions.  It is like telling a four 
year old not to eat the cake on the counter.  If the ten year old comes along 
and entices the four year old to eat some cake then who is guilty?
-- 
Mike McAngus 			 | As if I needed Another time consuming hobby.
(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org)		 | 
The Truth is still the Truth	 | This Post exploits illiterates.
Even if you choose to ignore it. | 
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:24712 talk.religion.misc:24880
From: parsons@cis.ksu.edu (Scott S Parish )
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER
Date: 31 Dec 92 21:55:19 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: world,public
NNTP-Posting-Host: cygnus.cis.ksu.edu


mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus) writes:

Someone else writes:
>: Then we come to the end of the story.  Starting
>: in 42:7, we read that God restores Job to a position
>: twice as great as before (42:10), and chastises
>: Jobs "friends" for giving Job bad advice (42:7).

>Since Xians like parables and metaphores so much:
>There was a father with two boy children.  The eldest was a bully while 
>the youngest was as obedient as could be asked.  The father kept the 
>eldest son from harassing the youngest son and the youngest son grew in 
>knowledge and contentment.
>One day the eldest son appeared before the father and sad, "Yo, dude.  
>The only reason the runt loves you is because you watch over my every 
>move and don't let me torture him as I will.  If you give me free reign, 
>your precious little brat will spit in your face."
>The father said, "No, my youngest son obeys me because he loves me and
>not because I keep you from hurting him.  Go, have your way with my 
>youngest son and he will still love me."
>So the eldest son beats the snot out of the youngest son while the father 
>stands by, headless of the suffering of the little tyke.
>When the beating is over, the youngest son asks, "Father, what did I 
>do to deserve such a beating?"
>To which the father replies, "How dare you question my motives?  Who 
>brought you into the world?  Were you there when I made your mother 
>squeal with glee?  Who supplies food on your table and a roof over 
>your head?  Who has showered you with presents on your birthdays and 
>who as bought your books so you could learn?"

Then you ask if we would like that kind of father.  First, I think
all of our parents have responded in a similar fashion (just maybe 
not with the same rhetorical questioning).  Who here can say that 
when you asked your father why he did or did not do something your
father did not respond, "Because" at least once?  That happened 
quite often when I was young as I'm sure it happened in others 
households.  Maybe not exact manner of response Job got, but very 
similar.  So before you go exaggerating the audacity and "injustice" 
of the response, take off your blinders and look around.

Next, you completely leave out what happens after the father questions
his son.  I'll finish your parable for you...

"And after the questioning, the father took his youngest child into 
the house.  He cleaned up his son's wounds, fed and clothed him--
restoring what the older brother destroyed.  From that day forward 
the father blessed his son more than he ever had before."

-- 
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: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: is it necessary to hate?
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 02:34:14 GMT

David Nye (nyeda@cnsvax.uwec.edu) wrote:
: [reply to bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA]
:
: >Does too times infinity.  <*Ptpthhhh!!!*>
:
: Only God may multiply by infinity.
:
: David Nye
: nyeda@cnsvax.uwec.edu

Why?  Isn't C equvalent to R X R where C is the complex number system and R is 
the real number system?
-- 
Mike McAngus 			 | Let the raucous sleigh bells ringle   
(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org)		 | Hail our dear old fried Chris Kringle |Tom
The Truth is still the Truth	 | Driving his reindeer across the sky   |Lehrer
Even if you choose to ignore it. | Don't stand underneath when they fly by. 
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:24818 talk.religion.misc:25004
From: pcrayne@halcyon.com (Peter C. Crayne)
Subject: Re: Iikka's Claims
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 03:13:18 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.075834.15762@hsr.no> onar@hsr.no (Onar Aam) writes:
>
>Waaaait a minute. Iikka did not write that article. *I* did in answering Iikka. 
Oops. Sorry Iikka. The moral of the story:
"(Be sure to double-check the attribution against the signature, and
trim the quoted article down as much as possible.)" -From rn.

Drat. Maybe I should have just stayed out of it. Nevertheless, I still
don't believe that Iikka has the study "on his desk.".

-Pete 
pcrayne@halcyon.com
"Maybe I should have stayed in bed."
From: mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Just how much smarter are atheists?
Date: 23 Dec 92 20:14:21 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Inc., Mountain View, California, USA

In article <3391.2B375D0C@catpe.alt.za> Ian.Douglas@f119.n7102.z5.fidonet.org (Ian Douglas) writes:
>Hi All!
>
>On 19 Dec 92, nelson peter j wrote to All:
>
> npj>  I remember reading somewhere that Koko did NOT communicate complex
> npj>  thoughts, but rather mimicked and copied her human trainer(s).
> npj>  Her language was very, very crude, and did not show abstract thought.
> npj>  As I remember it, the whole "experiment" was blown way out of proportion
> npj>  by animal-rights type people. Anybody have a reference?
>
>I also remember reading something along those lines, but was loath to mention it as it was only a memory.. :-)

On the other hand, critics of these programs adamantly refuse to admit
that primates are capable of speaking at a level comparable to a very
young human child. They seem to believe, like many Christians, that
humans are the only ones who are "self-aware" and are somehow
completely separate from the rest of the animal kingdom.

Basically the argument between the researchers and critics boils down
to something like:

R: Did too!
C: Did not!
R: Did too!
C: Did not!
R: Did too!
C: Well, she copied it from your unconscious behaviour!
R: Did not!
C: Did too!
ad nauseum

Critics said these primates couldn't form original thoughts (make up
new word groupings), but they could. Critics said they couldn't form
negations, but they could. Critics said they couldn't form an
interrogative (ask a question), but they showed they could do that
too.

This is not to say that higher primates are capable of speaking fluent
English or some other human language. There seems to be a limit to the
size of logical word groupings they can form at two or three words.
However, again, this is comparable to what young humans can managed
when they are first learning to speak.

-- 
Michael Wang
mmwang@mv.us.adobe.com
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: rhuss+@EDRC.CMU.EDU (Robert Huss)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 16:57:04 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.224717.1993@prime.mdata.fi>, iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen) writes:
|> Am I seeing wrongly, or is there a connection between one's IQ and one's
|> religiousness? Of all people I know, I know only about 8 exceptionally smart
|> people (IQ>125), and all of them happen to be atheists. On the contrary, the 
|> dumbest people I've seen (eg. unable to use a remote control) are the most
|> religious. Observing other atheists that I don't know (from this group for
|> example) leads me to make a conclusion that on the average, atheists have a
|> much better sense of logic (and thus usually have a higher IQ) and think much
|> more clearly than religious people. From my own experiences, I can say that
|> freeing oneself from the grasp of religion requires a certain level of logical
|> thinking. Coincidentally, all these 8 people are mathematically gifted.
|> When I speak of atheism here, I mean it to be a lack of belief in any god or
|> superstition.
|> Opinions?
|> 
|> BTW, if this offended you, go to a church instead of coming to alt.atheism.
|> --
|>  __/|_  ,  ,--------------------------------------------------------------,
|> /o    \/:--| Iikka Paavolainen / iikkap@mits.mdata.fi, in Espoo, Finland  |
|> \__~__/\:--| "I won't have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."    |
|>    `    `  `--------------------------------------------------------------'


	It is safe to assume that the more intelligent people will have
thought about their beliefs more, and will probably reject many fundementalist
concepts.  Of my more intelligent friends, I would say they are certainly
more tolerant of other beliefs, and more likely to be liberally religious,
if not atheist.  Clear thinking is great, and we all like to be clear thinking
and have clear thinking friends, but clear thinking doesn't mean you will
become an athiest.  I have intelligent friends who have questioned the faith
that they were brought up in, but have still come to terms with some form
of religion, and are definitely not atheists.  I would say that it is highly
unlikely that you will become an atheist if you were raised in a certain
religion, and are not very intelligent.  Without intelligence it is difficult
to change any views that you were socialized towards.
	I think it is very dangerous to start believing that any group
you belong to is inherently supperior.  This has been believed time and
time again, and has been wrong time and time again.  It is likely that we
atheists tend to have friends who are atheists.  Therefore, the people
we know are both intelligent and atheist.  This is not a very good
reference for statistics.
	IMHO, intelligence will lead you to clear thinking, which may lead
you to atheism, but I think clear thinking will also lead you to tolerance.
Discussions like this are just breeding grounds for missunderstanding and
anger.  Especially comments like your last sentence.

Bob Huss.
From: mitch@novavax.UUCP (Mitch Silverman)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re^2: Violence in the bible?
Date: 30 Dec 92 21:38:24 GMT
Organization: Nova University, Fort Lauderdale, FL

schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius) writes:

>Interesting!  So, in summary, the Bible calls for the death penalty 
>in these cases:

[Long list of interesting casesomitted]

Yowzers!
But (from the articles, which I never saw, that you summarized),
can you provide *citations* to Bible verses for all the above?

Not that I doubt you, you understand, but what and where is
always more useful than just what.

Thanks for the list!

Mitchell L. Silverman              | As Voltaire never said, "I
Student, New College of            | disagree with what you say,
the University of South Florida    | but will defend to the death
mitch@cfraix.cfr.usf.edu           | your right to say it."
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: npm@dale.cts.com (Nancy Milligan)
Subject: Is Santa Claus God?
Organization: Titan Linkabit Corporation
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 23:43:51 GMT

There was an article in "Free Inquiry" about a woman who strongly
believed it was wrong to tell your children about Santa Claus.
First of all, you're lying to them and what is more devastating
to a child than to find that their own parents are liars.  Secondly,
it gives precedence to believing in patently impossible things. 
Maybe it paves the way to believing in other impossible things 
later in life -- like God, fer instance.

What do other atheists think about Santa Claus?  And for that matter,
how many of us celebrate Christmas?  Should we?  Even if we say
we're celebrating the winter Soltice, that's still a religious
holiday for druids.

I haven't made up my mind yet about the Winter holidays (i.e. Xmas).
So far it's just easier to go along with it and if someone assumes
I'm an X-tian just because I celebrate X-mas... well, they're wrong!

--
Nancy P. Milligan 				npm@dale.cts.com
Titan Linkabit					cts!dale!npm
		  Gravity is no laughing matter.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: Genital-grabbing
Organization: Semper Excelsior
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 16:32:51 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink (3.2)

>FROM:   Martin Dougiamas <martin@cs.curtin.edu.au>
>
>I was just browsing through the bible (Good News version) and came
>across this little gem:
>
>"If two men are having a fight and the wife of one tries to 
> help her husband by grabbing hold of the other man's 
> genitals, show her no mercy; cut off her hand."
>	- Deuteronomy 25:11-12
>
>Wonder if the bloke who penned that one had any personal grudge
>he wanted to have sorted out?  :-)
>
>Martin
>--
>Your eyes are weary from staring at the screen.  Your eyelids feel very heavy.


DEU 25:11  When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one
 draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth
 him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets:

DEU 25:12  Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.
  ,...,.,,
 /666;    ',    jim tims
////;    _~ -   p00168@psilink.com
(/@/----0-~-0
 ;'  . `` ~ \'
  , `    ' , >
;;|\..((   -C---->The KJV says it with such grace.
;;| >-  `.__),;;
From: mikel@Apple.COM (Mikel Evins)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Is Santa Claus God?
Date: 23 Dec 92 21:21:00 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Dec23.084148.2994@cnsvax.uwec.edu> nyeda@cnsvax.uwec.edu (David Nye) writes:
>[reply to npm@dale.cts.com]
> 
>>There was an article in "Free Inquiry" about a woman who strongly
>>believed it was wrong to tell your children about Santa Claus.
>>
>>What do other atheists think about Santa Claus?  And for that matter,
>>how many of us celebrate Christmas?  Should we?  Even if we say
>>we're celebrating the winter Soltice, that's still a religious
>>holiday for druids.
> 
>My kids believe in Santa.  When they realize they've been had, then I
>will explain to them that we were making believe because its sometimes
>fun to make believe.  I think that might actually set a precedent that
>religion is making believe as well.  

I have been explicit about the imaginary nature of Santa Claus
with my kids from day one. It doesn't seem to cause us any
difficulty in celebrating Christmas (which I think is a wonderful
holiday even when all references to Jesus are omitted).

Incidentally, I don't see anything wrong with celebrating
Christmas (or other religious holidays) with recounting of
the mythic tales associated with it. The world's mythology has
been a source of pleasure to me all me life, and I hope to
pass that experience on to my children.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism