A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #46  
Old June 14th 16, 07:36 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
The Lizard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Good Guy wrote in news:njnlmb$7en$1
@news.mixmin.net:

On 14/06/2016 02:07, Dave Doe wrote:
There is no god, never has been, never will be.


You can't be serious man. Allah has been around for many centuries and
so has Jesus Christ. are you saying they were a bunch of crooks and
spivs defrauding the illiterate people? That's a very serious charge

to
make against Allah. People are prepared to blow themselves up to
protect the name and reputation of Allah. Are they all mentally sick
nutters?


In my opinion, yes they are. I don't believe that
God|Allah|Budda|whatever you want to call Him or Her wants His or Her
faithful followers to go blow themselves up. It is the mental illness or
idiotic impulse or stupidity that leads these people to suicide in the
name of their favorite Supreme Being. After all, if He or She wanted to
reclaim the specific follower, He or She could just reach out and take
them. So, yes, I believe they are all nutters.

I don't care if you believe, or even what you believe. If you do believe,
good for you. If you don't, that's fine too. What I believe is that I
will keep my religious beliefs to myself. If others want to publically
share their beliefs, I wish they would do so from a soapbox, not an ammo
box.


--
The Lizard


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Ads
  #47  
Old June 14th 16, 07:55 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Ed Cryer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,621
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Wolf K wrote:
On 2016-06-13 15:44, Jim H wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:50 +0100, in ,
Ed Cryer wrote:

Ken Springer wrote:
On 6/12/16 6:19 PM, Good Guy wrote:

This time it is only 50 dead and 53 critically injured!! There you
have
your peace loving religion.

Is there any religion that can match this?

Christians in the past, I'm afraid. :-(



Quite so. When you read the histories of the Crusades or the Spanish
Inquisition, you come to the conclusion quite quickly that arseholes can
climb the power ladder under almost any social system.



When it comes to the Crusades, how did the Muslims the Crusades drove
back to whence they came get as far west as Spain in the first place?

Answer - It was by sword in hand.


The Crusades were about money.


Cobblers!

Ed

  #48  
Old June 14th 16, 08:02 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Ed Cryer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,621
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Wolf K wrote:
On 2016-06-13 14:06, Ed Cryer wrote:
Good Guy wrote:

This time it is only 50 dead and 53 critically injured!! There you have
your peace loving religion.

Is there any religion that can match this?





--
--

1. /*This post contains rich text (HTML). if you don't like it then
you
can kill-filter the poster without crying like a small baby.*/
2. /*This message is best read in Mozilla Thunderbird as it uses 21st
century technology.*/


i7 Machine http://s33.postimg.org/er0wkujun/Capture.png


The worst religion, of course, which has massacred the largest numbers
is that of atheism.
The French Revolution, Nazi Germany, Cambodian Khmer Rouge.

Ed


Atheism isn't a religion, any more than theism is a religion. Fascism,
Marxism-Leninism, etc, are non-theist religions. In order to save the
sensitivities of religious people, we use the word "ideology" for them,
as if there were a fundamental difference between theist and non-theist
ideologies. There isn't.

It's ideology that's the problem. The True Revertible can't tolerate a
world that fails to conform to the ideology they believe. Sooner or
later, an ideologue will try to resort to force, and bloody force if
necessary.

As Norman said: It's all about power.

Have a good day,


You got the point; and reported it in Nietzschean language.
Theism/atheism. People band together, support each other, draw up a
table of rights and wrongs/ good and bad, and then go out and wipe out
the opposition.

How do you stop it? We lived through the 20th century; through all the
great social experiments. And did it lead anywhere? Any deeper
understanding?
Well, it sure produced a lot of attempts to stop it.
But here we are, on the brink of WWIII.
God help us.

Ed


  #49  
Old June 14th 16, 08:33 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Alek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 619
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Roger Blake wrote on 6/14/2016 2:34 PM:
On 2016-06-14, Alek wrote:
And this has been going on for some time. They may have championed
voting rights in the past but now they are focused on "voter fraud", a
very rare occurrence, to prevent poor people from voting.


People receiving government entitlements should not be permitted to vote
due to conflict of interest.


How about bailouts, tax breaks, etc.?
  #50  
Old June 14th 16, 08:37 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Stormin' Norman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,877
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:35:03 -0400, Alek wrote:

Surely you're not thinking of me. Your thinking and your ad hominem
attacks are skewed.


My post was in response to Tim Slattery. Following a thread is not that difficult, if you need advice on how
to do so, just ask.
  #51  
Old June 14th 16, 08:43 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Stormin' Norman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,877
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:31:37 -0400, Alek wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote on 6/14/2016 10:28 AM:
Stormin' Norman wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:07 -0400, Alek
wrote:

And the Republican party's history of attempting to prevent minority
voters from voting?

The above statement is blatantly absurd. It was the party of Lincoln,
the Republicans, who championed the cause and freed the slaves. It
was the party of Ulysses S. Grant, again the Republican party, which
introduced and ratified the 15th amendment to the Constitution of the
United States of America which granted suffrage (the right to vote in
public, political elections) to African Americans.


And the modern Republican party is about as far from those ideals as
it's possible to be. They specialize in gerrymandering districts to
minimize the influence of minority voters. They look for new and
innovative ways to disenfranchise minorities and the poor.


And this has been going on for some time. They may have championed
voting rights in the past but now they are focused on "voter fraud", a
very rare occurrence, to prevent poor people from voting.


Your assertion is absurd and unsubstantiated. "Voting rights", by definition, ensure those who are entitled
to vote are able to do so, they also ensure that those who are not entitled to vote cannot do so.

Your parroted talking points are illogical and irrational.
  #52  
Old June 14th 16, 08:46 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Alek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 619
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Alek wrote on 6/13/2016 5:57 PM:
Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/13/2016 1:09 PM:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:07 -0400, Alek
wrote:

And the Republican party's history of attempting to prevent minority
voters from voting?


The above statement is blatantly absurd. It was the party of Lincoln,
the Republicans, who championed the cause and freed the slaves. It
was the party of Ulysses S. Grant, again the Republican party, which
introduced and ratified the 15th amendment to the Constitution of the
United States of America which granted suffrage (the right to vote in
public, political elections) to African Americans.


I did not mention a time frame. I forget when it began but sometime
after Lincoln, Republicans worked to disenfranchise minorities.



From Salon Magazine,

"The 1964 presidential election marked the beginning of the realignment
we live with today. Where in 1962 both parties were perceived as
equally, if tepidly, supportive of civil rights, two years later 60
percent of the public identified Democrats as more likely to pursue fair
treatment, versus only 7 percent who so identified the Republican Party.
What happened?

"Groundwork for the shift was laid in the run-up to the 1964 election by
rightwing elements in the Republican Party, which gained momentum from
the loss of the then-moderate Nixon to John F. Kennedy in 1960. This
faction of the party had never stopped warring against the New Deal. Its
standard bearer was Barry Goldwater, a senator from Arizona and heir to
a department store fortune. His pampered upbringing and wealth
notwithstanding, Goldwater affected a cowboy’s rough-and-tumble persona
in his dress and speech, casting himself as a walking embodiment of the
Marlboro Man’s disdain for the nanny state. Goldwater and the
reactionary stalwarts who rallied to him saw the Democratic Party as a
mortal threat to the nation: domestically, because of the corrupting
influence of a powerful central government deeply involved in regulating
the marketplace and using taxes to reallocate wealth downward, and
abroad in its willingness to compromise with communist countries instead
of going to war against them. Goldwater himself, though, was no racial
throwback. For instance, in 1957 and again in 1960 he voted in favor of
federal civil rights legislation. By 1961, however, Goldwater and his
partisans had become convinced that the key to electoral success lay in
gaining ground in the South, and that in turn required appealing to
racist sentiments in white voters, even at the cost of black support. As
Goldwater drawled, “We’re not going to get the Negro vote as a bloc in
1964 and 1968, so we ought to go hunting where the ducks are.”

From the Constitutional Rights Foundation:

White majorities began to vote out the Republicans and replace them with
Democratic governors, legislators, and local officials. Laws were soon
passed banning interracial marriages and racially segregating railroad
cars along with the public schools.

Laws and practices were also put in place to make sure blacks would
never again freely participate in elections. But one problem stood in
the way of denying African Americans the right to vote: the 15th
Amendment, which guaranteed them this right. To a great extent,
Mississippi led the way in overcoming the barrier presented by the 15th
Amendment.

In 1890, Mississippi held a convention to write a new state constitution
to replace the one in force since Reconstruction. The white leaders of
the convention were clear about their intentions. "We came here to
exclude the Negro," declared the convention president. Because of the
15th Amendment, they could not ban blacks from voting. Instead, they
wrote into the state constitution a number of voter restrictions making
it difficult for most blacks to register to vote.

First, the new constitution required an annual poll tax, which voters
had to pay for two years before the election. This was a difficult
economic burden to place on black Mississippians, who made up the
poorest part of the state's population. Many simply couldn't pay it.

But the most formidable voting barrier put into the state constitution
was the literacy test. It required a person seeking to register to vote
to read a section of the state constitution and explain it to the county
clerk who processed voter registrations. This clerk, who was always
white, decided whether a citizen was literate or not.

The literacy test did not just exclude the 60 percent of voting-age
black men (most of them ex-slaves) who could not read. It excluded
almost all black men, because the clerk would select complicated
technical passages for them to interpret. By contrast, the clerk would
pass whites by picking simple sentences in the state constitution for
them to explain.

Mississippi also enacted a "grandfather clause" that permitted
registering anyone whose grandfather was qualified to vote before the
Civil War. Obviously, this benefited only white citizens. The
"grandfather clause" as well as the other legal barriers to black voter
registration worked. Mississippi cut the percentage of black voting-age
men registered to vote from over 90 percent during Reconstruction to
less than 6 percent in 1892. These measures were copied by most of the
other states in the South.

And finally,

http://abhmuseum.org/2012/09/voting-rights-for-blacks-and-poor-whites-in-the-jim-crow-south/

  #53  
Old June 14th 16, 08:47 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Alek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 619
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 3:37 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:35:03 -0400, Alek wrote:

Surely you're not thinking of me. Your thinking and your ad hominem
attacks are skewed.


My post was in response to Tim Slattery. Following a thread is not that difficult, if you need advice on how to do so, just ask.


Good. You weren't thinking of me. Thanks and thanks for the offer. Do
you know how to combat octagenarian brain fade?
  #54  
Old June 14th 16, 08:53 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Alek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 619
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 3:43 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:31:37 -0400, Alek wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote on 6/14/2016 10:28 AM:
Stormin' Norman wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:07 -0400, Alek
wrote:

And the Republican party's history of attempting to prevent minority
voters from voting?

The above statement is blatantly absurd. It was the party of Lincoln,
the Republicans, who championed the cause and freed the slaves. It
was the party of Ulysses S. Grant, again the Republican party, which
introduced and ratified the 15th amendment to the Constitution of the
United States of America which granted suffrage (the right to vote in
public, political elections) to African Americans.

And the modern Republican party is about as far from those ideals as
it's possible to be. They specialize in gerrymandering districts to
minimize the influence of minority voters. They look for new and
innovative ways to disenfranchise minorities and the poor.


And this has been going on for some time. They may have championed
voting rights in the past but now they are focused on "voter fraud", a
very rare occurrence, to prevent poor people from voting.


Your assertion is absurd and unsubstantiated. "Voting rights", by definition, ensure those who are entitled
to vote are able to do so, they also ensure that those who are not entitled to vote cannot do so.

Your parroted talking points are illogical and irrational.


I think that you need a nap. Are you saying that people who have voted
in the past are no longer entitled to because they do not have a photo
ID? That's absurd!!
  #55  
Old June 14th 16, 10:49 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Stormin' Norman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,877
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:47:48 -0400, Alek wrote:

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 3:37 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:35:03 -0400, Alek wrote:

Surely you're not thinking of me. Your thinking and your ad hominem
attacks are skewed.


My post was in response to Tim Slattery. Following a thread is not that difficult, if you need advice on how to do so, just ask.


Good. You weren't thinking of me. Thanks and thanks for the offer. Do
you know how to combat octagenarian brain fade?


As a nonagenarian, I progressed through my octogenarian phase without any noticeable fade (according to my
family), so I can't help you.
  #56  
Old June 14th 16, 11:03 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Stormin' Norman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,877
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:53:29 -0400, Alek wrote:

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 3:43 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:31:37 -0400, Alek wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote on 6/14/2016 10:28 AM:
Stormin' Norman wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:07 -0400, Alek
wrote:

And the Republican party's history of attempting to prevent minority
voters from voting?

The above statement is blatantly absurd. It was the party of Lincoln,
the Republicans, who championed the cause and freed the slaves. It
was the party of Ulysses S. Grant, again the Republican party, which
introduced and ratified the 15th amendment to the Constitution of the
United States of America which granted suffrage (the right to vote in
public, political elections) to African Americans.

And the modern Republican party is about as far from those ideals as
it's possible to be. They specialize in gerrymandering districts to
minimize the influence of minority voters. They look for new and
innovative ways to disenfranchise minorities and the poor.

And this has been going on for some time. They may have championed
voting rights in the past but now they are focused on "voter fraud", a
very rare occurrence, to prevent poor people from voting.


Your assertion is absurd and unsubstantiated. "Voting rights", by definition, ensure those who are entitled
to vote are able to do so, they also ensure that those who are not entitled to vote cannot do so.

Your parroted talking points are illogical and irrational.


I think that you need a nap. Are you saying that people who have voted
in the past are no longer entitled to because they do not have a photo
ID? That's absurd!!


Considering one needs a photo ID to apply for food stamps, I am saying the assertion that requiring a photo ID
for voting disenfranchises the less fortunate is, at best, a red herring at worst it is an absurd lie which is
not substantiated by empirical evidence.

IMHO, those who object to proof of voter eligibility requirements have a sinister agenda. Likely it is born
from the desire to allow all people to vote, citizen and non-citizen alike, but that is also my personal
opinion.
  #57  
Old June 14th 16, 11:18 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Alek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 619
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 5:49 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:47:48 -0400, Alek wrote:

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 3:37 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:35:03 -0400, Alek wrote:

Surely you're not thinking of me. Your thinking and your ad hominem
attacks are skewed.

My post was in response to Tim Slattery. Following a thread is not that difficult, if you need advice on how to do so, just ask.


Good. You weren't thinking of me. Thanks and thanks for the offer. Do
you know how to combat octagenarian brain fade?


As a nonagenarian, I progressed through my octogenarian phase without any noticeable fade (according to my family), so I can't help you.


Good for you!
  #58  
Old June 14th 16, 11:24 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Alek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 619
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 6:03 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:53:29 -0400, Alek wrote:

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 3:43 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:31:37 -0400, Alek wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote on 6/14/2016 10:28 AM:
Stormin' Norman wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:07 -0400, Alek
wrote:

And the Republican party's history of attempting to prevent minority
voters from voting?

The above statement is blatantly absurd. It was the party of Lincoln,
the Republicans, who championed the cause and freed the slaves. It
was the party of Ulysses S. Grant, again the Republican party, which
introduced and ratified the 15th amendment to the Constitution of the
United States of America which granted suffrage (the right to vote in
public, political elections) to African Americans.

And the modern Republican party is about as far from those ideals as
it's possible to be. They specialize in gerrymandering districts to
minimize the influence of minority voters. They look for new and
innovative ways to disenfranchise minorities and the poor.

And this has been going on for some time. They may have championed
voting rights in the past but now they are focused on "voter fraud", a
very rare occurrence, to prevent poor people from voting.

Your assertion is absurd and unsubstantiated. "Voting rights", by definition, ensure those who are entitled
to vote are able to do so, they also ensure that those who are not entitled to vote cannot do so.

Your parroted talking points are illogical and irrational.


I think that you need a nap. Are you saying that people who have voted
in the past are no longer entitled to because they do not have a photo
ID? That's absurd!!


Considering one needs a photo ID to apply for food stamps,


Aha! NOT!!!

“The SNAP/Food Stamp caseworker is required to verify your identity. 7
CFR 273.2(f). There are many ways, however, that you may verify your
identity. A photo ID is only one way. You should not be denied SNAP/Food
Stamps simply because you do not have a photo ID. To prove who you are,
you can use such things as a work or school ID, an ID for health
benefits, an ID from another social services program such as TANF, wage
stubs, a birth certificate, or a voter registration card. The SNAP/Food
Stamp caseworker can also verify your identity by calling a “collateral
contact” who can confirm you who are. Shelter workers and employers are
examples of possible collateral contacts. If you have no paper
documentation of who you are, you should ask the SNAP/Food Stamp
caseworker to call a collateral contact."


IMHO, those who object to proof of voter eligibility requirements have a sinister agenda.
Likely it is born from the desire to allow all people to vote, citizen and non-citizen alike,
but that is also my personal opinion.


It is born from the desire that people who had been deemed eligible to
vote in the past should not now be denied that right because they do not
have a photo ID.

Cui bono.

  #59  
Old June 14th 16, 11:43 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Stormin' Norman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,877
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 18:24:04 -0400, Alek wrote:

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 6:03 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:53:29 -0400, Alek wrote:

Stormin' Norman wrote on 6/14/2016 3:43 PM:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:31:37 -0400, Alek wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote on 6/14/2016 10:28 AM:
Stormin' Norman wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:12:07 -0400, Alek
wrote:

And the Republican party's history of attempting to prevent minority
voters from voting?

The above statement is blatantly absurd. It was the party of Lincoln,
the Republicans, who championed the cause and freed the slaves. It
was the party of Ulysses S. Grant, again the Republican party, which
introduced and ratified the 15th amendment to the Constitution of the
United States of America which granted suffrage (the right to vote in
public, political elections) to African Americans.

And the modern Republican party is about as far from those ideals as
it's possible to be. They specialize in gerrymandering districts to
minimize the influence of minority voters. They look for new and
innovative ways to disenfranchise minorities and the poor.

And this has been going on for some time. They may have championed
voting rights in the past but now they are focused on "voter fraud", a
very rare occurrence, to prevent poor people from voting.

Your assertion is absurd and unsubstantiated. "Voting rights", by definition, ensure those who are entitled
to vote are able to do so, they also ensure that those who are not entitled to vote cannot do so.

Your parroted talking points are illogical and irrational.

I think that you need a nap. Are you saying that people who have voted
in the past are no longer entitled to because they do not have a photo
ID? That's absurd!!


Considering one needs a photo ID to apply for food stamps,


Aha! NOT!!!

The SNAP/Food Stamp caseworker is required to verify your identity. 7
CFR 273.2(f). There are many ways, however, that you may verify your
identity. A photo ID is only one way. You should not be denied SNAP/Food
Stamps simply because you do not have a photo ID. To prove who you are,
you can use such things as a work or school ID, an ID for health
benefits, an ID from another social services program such as TANF, wage
stubs, a birth certificate, or a voter registration card. The SNAP/Food
Stamp caseworker can also verify your identity by calling a collateral
contact who can confirm you who are. Shelter workers and employers are
examples of possible collateral contacts. If you have no paper
documentation of who you are, you should ask the SNAP/Food Stamp
caseworker to call a collateral contact."


IMHO, those who object to proof of voter eligibility requirements have a sinister agenda.
Likely it is born from the desire to allow all people to vote, citizen and non-citizen alike,
but that is also my personal opinion.


It is born from the desire that people who had been deemed eligible to
vote in the past should not now be denied that right because they do not
have a photo ID.

Cui bono.


For sake of argument, exactly what form(s) of ID would you consider acceptable to establish voter eligibility?
  #60  
Old June 14th 16, 11:46 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Roger Blake[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 536
Default Peace Loving Religion has done it again .........................

On 2016-06-14, Alek wrote:
How about bailouts, tax breaks, etc.?


Only a liberal would consider a tax break to be an entitlement.
HINT: It's not your money! (As far as bailouts, there should not
be any.)

Those receiving handouts will simply vote for the politicians
who promises to steal the most from their neighbors. It's a
a conflict of interest. Really there should be no federal social
programs. What keeps them going are the hordes of moochers
in the voting booth.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)

NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.