Discussion:
The rock solid Christian moral code
(too old to reply)
Gilbert Lawrence
2006-07-01 10:07:29 UTC
Permalink
In the on-going discussion between the two groups, can one or more from the two parties respond to the following perspectives and query?

I cannot understand why atheists cannot proclaim their virtues without condemning / denigrating religion. And the reverse is also true! Thus all can show some degree of sensitivity and good judgement.

The question I have is: How does one distinguish between a "true atheist" who does not believe in the God but does believe and act for the humanity of mankind; compared to the "bebdo" who uses the excuse of no God so that they can continue his/her nefarious ways.

In fact even "sensible atheists" of today may have a "cop-out attitude" that their contribution do not count. Perhaps we need an atheist Mother Theresa. This is not so silly. India did have an Annie Bessant who came to India. She had no religion, but she had a philosophy and a large following in India.
Kind Regards, GL
cornel
2006-07-02 18:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Hi Gilbert
With great respect, nay with the greatest of respect, you are engaged in
generating mythical monsters. In this schema of yours, the atheists are the
bad guys and the theists are the good guys. Where on earth do you get the
evidence for this kind of utter nonsense I ask?

Does the confessional which is readily accessible to Roman Catholics
automatically make some of the biggest crooks and murderers in Christendom,
as in the Mafia, the kind of good guys you find acceptable because they
simultaneously proclaim to be theists and consistently attend church on
Sundays for the sacraments?

I believe it is incumbent on you to demonstrate, with good examples, where
atheists have been in any way disrespectful to theists on Goanet. In
contrast, there have been a number of consistent snide comments from at
least one seriously uninformed nut of a theist (this does not include you)
against those labelled "atheists" by this very same nut.

In my considered view, atheists generally mind their own business. They do
not try to gain 'converts' to their way of thinking, which has often been
arrived at after very considerable thought. Above all, in general, they do
not disparage theists.Your dichotomy of the "true atheist" and the "bebdo"
is just laughable in the context of the seriousness with which atheists take
their views about life on earth and relations between peoples.

I want to suggest that, it is the self-proclaimed non-atheists, like you, on
Goanet, who are in many ways having a go at the atheists i.e. if there are
any at all. To date, I have encountered just one person on GX and perhaps
the same person on Goanet who has stated an unambigious atheistic position.
So, who on earth are you referring to when you talk about "the atheists?"
The next paragraph will help you to understand a litle more about
atheists/atheisim which I am afraid you haven't got a clue about as is
evident from your post below.

Atheists (who share the philosophy of atheism) have never fielded armies to
fight others. However, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Islam most
certainly have done
so and continue to do so.

Now, do have a good think about the above paragraph Gilbert and let us have
a reasoned response to it please.
Regards
Cornel

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gilbert Lawrence" <gilbertlaw at adelphia.net>
To: <goanet at goanet.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Goanet] The rock solid Christian moral code
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
In the on-going discussion between the two groups, can one or more from
the two parties respond to the following perspectives and query?
I cannot understand why atheists cannot proclaim their virtues without
condemning / denigrating religion. And the reverse is also true! Thus all
can show some degree of sensitivity and good judgement.
The question I have is: How does one distinguish between a "true atheist"
who does not believe in the God but does believe and act for the humanity
of mankind; compared to the "bebdo" who uses the excuse of no God so that
they can continue his/her nefarious ways.
In fact even "sensible atheists" of today may have a "cop-out attitude"
that their contribution do not count. Perhaps we need an atheist Mother
Theresa. This is not so silly. India did have an Annie Bessant who came
to India. She had no religion, but she had a philosophy and a large
following in India.
Kind Regards, GL
Santosh Helekar
2006-07-03 12:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Here are some comments, answers and questions in
response to a recent Goanet post.
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
I cannot understand why atheists cannot proclaim
their >virtues without condemning / denigrating
religion. And >the reverse is also true!
Actually it is very simple to understand. The answer
to the above question is that there are no virtues to
being an atheist, just as there are no virtues to
being a theist. There is no virtue in proclaiming that
you are virtuous because of your specific beliefs. No
virtue in chauvinism and self-righteousness.
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
The question I have is: How does one distinguish
between a "true atheist" who does not believe in the
God but does believe and act for the humanity of
mankind; compared to the "bebdo" who uses the excuse
of no God so that they can continue his/her nefarious
ways.
This is a very comical comparison. I think it
demonstrates a lack of sensitivity and good judgment.
But the answer is very simple. A bebdo is a drunk. If
he proclaims that there is no god when he has had too
much to drink then ask him if there is one when he is
sober.
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
In fact even "sensible atheists" of today may have
a "cop-out attitude" that their contribution do not
count.
Who is a sensible atheist? How does one distinguish
him/her from an insensible one? Are there sensible and
insensible theists as well?
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
Perhaps we need an atheist Mother Theresa.
Why? Why should anybody care if someone believes in
god(s) or not?
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
She had no religion, but she had a philosophy and a
large following in India.
What is good about having a philosophy and a large
following?

Cheers,

Santosh
George Pinto
2006-07-04 03:45:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
The question I have is: How does one distinguish between a "true atheist" who does not
believe in the God but does believe and act for the humanity of mankind; compared to
the "bebdo" who uses the excuse of no God so that they can continue his/her nefarious ways.
By sheer coincidence I met "Theo Bebdo" today outside the Aldona church today. His name "Theo"
from the word theist. I asked him if he was high on religion. No he answered, just high on some
Siolim feni.

How can you be drunk Theo, leaving church in such a condition. Nothing unusual he replied, I was
drunk before and during church too. Consistency is what matters, just like a rock solid moral
code.

I was bewildered. How could a theist be drunk? What would I write to Gilbert Lawrence about this.
So I asked Theo, are you not aware of the 10 commandments? Yes, he answered and none of them
forbid booze, specifically Siolim feni. Show me where it says don't drink Siolim feni in the 10
commandments and I will quit drinking immediately. He had a point.

Anything else you would like to add to the rock solid moral code I asked him. Yes he said, tell
those self-appointed defenders of Goan Catholicism the 11th commandment: Thou shalt not use Goan
cyber space to work out your religious insecurities, and lacking in self-esteem run down others
with different views, including hiding your intolerances in fundamentalist rhetoric when your
bigotry is visible to all the world.

Yes, Theo I will tell them. By the way, the 11th commandment is a bit long, can we break it down
into three separate commandments? Burp, burp ... theist Theo answered.

So now you know the truth.

Regards,
George
Bosco D'Mello
2006-07-04 06:02:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Pinto
By sheer coincidence I met "Theo Bebdo" today outside the Aldona
church today. His name "Theo" from the word theist.
RESPONSE: George, in your travels you seem to have hung around North Goa only.
This is a disservice to South Goans. You are a biased traveller....;-)

Thanks for your occasional humorous travelogue !!

Best - Bosco
Gilbert Lawrence
2006-07-05 20:49:30 UTC
Permalink
Hi Cornel,
I hope you have cooled down since your post on trying to determine the various groups. At the outset let me state, I am no scholar on religious theology and philosophy. I DO have an interest in religious history.

To my simple and basic thinking, religion is one that is LIVED BY and not the theoretical theological or philosophical gibberish people write and argue about ad nauseam. It may be, I consider it gibberish as I don?t follow those writings and thoughts. Yet, I hope you and others will agree with me that religion is something to LIVE and not just something to write or talk about.
Because I am such a simpleton, I can ask some basic (almost stupid) questions and make some equally basic (very stupid) observations and comments.

So now that I'd be so presumptuous to state that we agree on the basic premise, let's make sure we stick to the above trend of thought.
If one makes no claim on religion, but does live by a rock solid principles and moral code, is he / she an true ATHEIST?
If one claims a religion, but then DOES NOT live by it, by their OWN claim or actions, is he / she a true NON-ATHEIST / Believer?

Based on the above, and contrary to some claims by both Hindus and Christians, the practice of Hinduism, to me is a religion. Please let me know if you disagree. I will stop here so that we can make sure we are talking the same semantics.

If you want to continue this dialogue, cut the theory and have a ton of common sense. The more annoyed you get, it suggest.... just may be.... perhaps.... that my "supurlem questions" are getting to the "heart and soul" of this controversy in my search for some basic practical answers. I am NOT interested in merely throwing LABELS. Neither am I interested in discussing a specific individual situation or any single religion. I would entertain a "scenario situtation" as above. I will respond to your prior post after your response to this post (and questions) and your agreement to these parameters of discussion. I hope it will be educational for all, starting with me.:=))
Kind Regards, GL
saligao
2006-07-07 00:31:59 UTC
Permalink
Dear GL and other 'seekers of the Truth',

In your query below, you have touched on a fundamental difference between
what I consider 'mature' and 'immature' atheism. The 'bebdo' falls into
the latter category together with the many others who see no need for an
overseeing supernatural deity out of convenience. These so-called atheists
will scurry back to the 'fold' at the first sign of distress or
coindidental improvement in their situation via submission to the lord and
will become 're-converted, born again evangelists' who are put on a
pedestal by the rest of their sycophants.
http://www.holyspiritinteractive.net/columns/aneelaranha/returnoftheprodigal
/

The former category of atheism is arrived at through personal investigation
and study with a reliance on the power of the human brain to comprehend
certain evolutionary facts of life and the natural and acquired history of
mankind. There is absolutely no doubt about non-existence of ANY
supernatural deity the at the end of this 'soul' searching expedition
(using the term 'soul' to denote the sum total of neuronal activity
pertaining to a single individual and the impression that makes on others).
Many agnostics have not yet reached the end of that journey, some never do.

Most atheist groups (skeptics, freethinkers, etc.) are content to debate
the meaning of life but the Secular Humanists are really the only
organization that feels that our duty in this life is to care about others
outside our immediate influence and share our resources with the less
fortunate. It is that empathy that drives our 'moral compass' towards the
'True North' and not some imaginary pole that has been devised by
theologians and inscribed on stone tablets.

Kevin Saldanha
Mississauga, ON.


Message: 11
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 3:07:29 -0700
From: Gilbert Lawrence <gilbertlaw at adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] The rock solid Christian moral code
To: goanet at goanet.org
Message-ID: <31540526.1151748449115.JavaMail.root at web11>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

In the on-going discussion between the two groups, can one or more from the
two parties respond to the following perspectives and query?

I cannot understand why atheists cannot proclaim their virtues without
condemning / denigrating religion. And the reverse is also true! Thus all
can show some degree of sensitivity and good judgement.

The question I have is: How does one distinguish between a "true atheist"
who does not believe in the God but does believe and act for the humanity
of mankind; compared to the "bebdo" who uses the excuse of no God so that
they can continue his/her nefarious ways.

In fact even "sensible atheists" of today may have a "cop-out attitude"
that their contribution do not count. Perhaps we need an atheist Mother
Theresa. This is not so silly. India did have an Annie Bessant who came to
India. She had no religion, but she had a philosophy and a large following
in India.
Kind Regards, GL


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
saligao
2006-07-07 14:20:57 UTC
Permalink
Humanists cannot reverse all the ills wrought upon this planet by the
so-called religious in one generation. It was secular thinking that gave
you the life and freedoms you enjoy today and will eventually bring peace
to a shrinking world. If left up to religious leaders, we would still have
a flat earth as the centre of the universe that is 6,000 years old and
shackles of slavery supporting a white-dominated society.

Kevin Saldanha
Mississauga, ON.

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Mario Goveia mgoveia at sbcglobal.net
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 06:46:34 -0700 (PDT)
To: saligao at allstream.net, goanet at lists.goanet.org
Subject: Re: [Goanet] The rock solid Christian moral code
Post by saligao
Most atheist groups (skeptics, freethinkers, etc.)
are content to debate the meaning of life but the
Secular Humanists are really the only
organization that feels that our duty in this life
is to care about others outside our immediate
influence and share our resources with the less
fortunate. It is that empathy that drives our
'moral compass' towards the 'True North' and not
some imaginary pole that has been devised by
theologians and inscribed on stone tablets.
Mario asks:
Kevin,
As one of those who has a recent and home-made moral
code of convenience, which you try to cover up under a
veneer of delusional intellectual bullshit, can you
please explain to me what the secular humanists have
done and are doing to address the problems in Rwanda,
Burundi, west-Africa, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and
the middle east, and how they have shared their
resources to help those less fortunate populations?
What have you secular humanists done to address the
millions of unborn that are being flushed down the
drain every day, week, month and year?
What are the secular humanists doing to address the
looming menaces of Iran and N. Korea?
Thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
Gilbert Lawrence
2006-07-07 21:56:38 UTC
Permalink
Hi Santosh,
Thanks for responding to my post and advancing the dialogue by being specific in your responses. Hopefully this dialogue will educate the rest of us, who may be misinformed if not ignorant of atheism or religion. Hope this exchange will educate me and others who may follow this thread. My (GL) reply follows your (SH) responses.
Kind Regards, GL


Santosh Helekar (SH): Here are some comments, answers and questions in response to a recent Goanet post.
GL: I cannot understand why atheists cannot proclaim their virtues without condemning / denigrating religion. And the reverse is also true!

SH: Actually it is very simple to understand. The answer to the above question is that there are no virtues to being an atheist, just as there are no virtues to being a theist. There is no virtue in proclaiming that you are virtuous because of your specific beliefs. No virtue in chauvinism and self-righteousness.

GL replies: Humbly, I disagree with you. There is always virtue in the positives of what we all believe, do and achieve. You surely find virtue in being a neurologist and a researcher. That does not make you smarter or superior than one in another field of medicine. But it does give you pride and an incentive to strive to do an even better job, which is what "Belief" is all about.

-----------------------

GL: The question I have is: How does one distinguish between a "true atheist" who does not believe in the God but does believe and act for the humanity of mankind; compared to the "bebdo" who uses the excuse of no God so that they can continue his/her nefarious ways.

SH: This is a very comical comparison. I think it demonstrates a lack of sensitivity and good judgment. But the answer is very simple. A bebdo is a drunk. If he proclaims that there is no god when he has had too much to drink then ask him if there is one when he is sober.

GL: This comical comparison brings home a point. The chronic bebdo when he is sober is likely to say, "There is no God". That's because God (religion) demands self-control and a moral value system. So the bebdo, and others like him, who do not want to live the strict norms of their religion, may believe in "no God" / atheist as a convenient rationale. There is no compelling reason to lead a moral life if one does not believe in a moral "supreme being" with no consequences during or after this life. Call it "fear" that makes believers be good. Yet, if that's what it takes, so be it.

What is the moral force to influence or make a non-believer live within the moral norms of their society? You may claim that no force is necessary for a majority of individuals. I say, with due respect, "You live in a la..la land.":=)) Even with / in spite of the moral force / religion, there are bebdos, ani tea bair more bamtulos.:=)) How come our prisons are filled to over capacity?

Alcoholism is not the only intoxicating agent that may lead one to be a non-believer. So are drugs, power, wealth, knowledge, greed. And then there are individuals who suffer from Delusional Grandeur - pathological or pseudo intellectual.:=))

----------------------

GL: In fact even "sensible atheists" of today may have a "cop-out attitude" that their contribution do not count.
SH: Who is a sensible atheist? How does one distinguish him/her from an insensible one? Are there sensible and insensible theists as well?
GL: A sensible atheist like a sensible believer is one who for a minimum lives the moral norms of society they belong to. And perhaps tries to be even better.

----------------------

GL: Perhaps we need an atheist Mother Theresa.
SH: Why? Why should anybody care if someone believes in god(s) or not?
GL: The issue is not belief in God, but doing good to society and fellow humans under whatever rationale one may desire.

-------------------

GL: She (Annie Bessant) had no religion, but she had a philosophy and a large following in India.
SH: What is good about having a philosophy and a large following?
GL: Once again if there is no philosophy to life, there is no guidance to rationalize one's thoughts consistently. One ends with the situation, as an example, "I believe in abortion but not in female feticide".

--------------------
Cheers, Santosh.
Cheers, Gilbert.
Mario Goveia
2006-07-07 20:06:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by saligao
Humanists cannot reverse all the ills wrought upon
this planet by the so-called religious in one
generation.
Mario replies:
Forget about secular humanists "curing" ANY of
mankind's ills. The point I made was that the secular
humanists are not even in the arena, have never been
in the arena, hiding behind self-serving labels and
selective outrage that fools no one with even half a
brain.
saligao
2006-07-07 20:37:29 UTC
Permalink
Apologies to the GoaNet community for inadvertently replying to Mario on
this forum. I had resolved not to be drawn down to his level as is evident
from the tone of his messages so will not be responding to him here. I
will be happy to reply to anyone else who wishes to continue this thread.

Kevin Saldanha
Mississauga, ON.

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Mario Goveia mgoveia at sbcglobal.net
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 13:06:26 -0700 (PDT)
To: saligao at allstream.net, goanet at lists.goanet.org
Subject: Re: [Goanet] The rock solid Christian moral code
Post by saligao
Humanists cannot reverse all the ills wrought upon
this planet by the so-called religious in one
generation.
Mario replies:
Forget about secular humanists "curing" ANY of
mankind's ills. The point I made was that the secular
humanists are not even in the arena, have never been
in the arena, hiding behind self-serving labels and
selective outrage that fools no one with even half a
brain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
Santosh Helekar
2006-07-08 06:31:00 UTC
Permalink
...Hopefully this dialogue will educate the rest of
us, who may be misinformed if not ignorant of atheism
or religion. Hope this exchange will educate me and
others who may follow this thread..................
Gilbert,

It is unlikely that you or I or anybody else will be
educated by idle banter on Goanet. The best you can
hope for is some comic relief. And I am talking about
genuine spontaneous humor ? not some silly disguised
posts containing fake smileys.
You surely find virtue in being a neurologist and a
researcher.
No, I don?t find any virtue in being what I am, a
brain scientist. Nobody?s profession makes him/her
virtuous.
That does not make you smarter or superior than one
in another field of medicine.
But don?t you think mailing list historians striving
to revise history for righteous ideological reasons,
are superior in some way to professional historians?
But it does give you pride and an incentive to strive
to do an even better job, which is what "Belief" is
all about.
No. People believe in different real or imaginary
things for different real or imaginary reasons or for
no reason at all.
The chronic bebdo when he is sober is likely to >say,
"There is no God". That's because God(religion)
demands self-control and a moral value system.
Why don?t you conduct a survey of bebde to find out if
this is a sensible belief of yours or not? Please show
me your raw data on this. I have never met a bebdo who
said what you are saying. My old random survey
includes about 20 of them, all of whom were admitted
in a hospital for variable lengths of time for hepatic
cirrhosis.
The bebdo, and others like him, who do not want to
live the strict norms of their religion, may believe
in "no God" / atheist as a convenient rationale.
What is the religion of this bebdo? Does his religion
impose a moral ban on the consumption of alcohol?
There is no compelling reason to lead a moral life
if one does not believe in a moral "supreme being"
with no consequences during or after this life. Call
it "fear" that makes believers be good. Yet, if
that's what it takes, so be it.
But raw data indicates that people who do not believe
in a supreme being such as atheists, Buddhists, Jains,
agnostics, skeptics, etc, commit no more crimes, are
no more immoral, support no more illegal and immoral
wars, perform no more legal abortions, use no more
condoms and contraceptives, engage in no more marital
and extra-marital sexual relationships, support no
more tortures and executions, file no more divorces,
and become no more addicted to drugs and alcohol than
people who believe in one or more moral supreme
beings.
What is the moral force to influence or make a
non->believer live within the moral norms of their
society?
The raw data indicates that it is the survival value
of innate goodness for each individual and for the
species as a whole. Rational morality is based on the
practical notion of the greatest good of the greatest
number.
I say, with due respect, "You live in a la..la
land.":=))
You say all kinds of things without having any raw
data to back them. Who then is living in La La Land?
Even with / in spite of the moral force / religion,
there are bebdos, ani tea bair more bamtulos.:=))
How come our prisons are filled to over capacity?
Please answer your own question. How come?
Alcoholism is not the only intoxicating agent that
may lead one to be a non-believer. So are drugs,
power, wealth, knowledge, greed. And then there are
individuals who suffer from Delusional Grandeur -
pathological or pseudo intellectual.:=))
Do you have raw data to support these comical claims?
A sensible atheist like a sensible believer is one
who for a minimum lives the moral norms of society
they belong to. And perhaps tries to be even better.
Aren?t you contradicting your earlier assertion? You
told us earlier that there is no compelling reason to
be moral without believing in a moral supreme being.
So how come both atheists and believers now have to be
similarly sensible in order to lead a moral life?
Once again if there is no philosophy to life, there
is no guidance to rationalize one's thoughts
consistently. One ends with the situation, as an
example, "I believe in abortion but not in female
feticide".
How about an immoral philosophy such as that of
Charles Manson, and rationalization of bad behavior?
And why is it good to have a large following?

Cheers,

Santosh
George Pinto
2006-07-09 03:48:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bosco D'Mello
RESPONSE: George, in your travels you seem to have hung around North Goa only.
This is a disservice to South Goans. You are a biased traveller....;-)
Thanks for your occasional humorous travelogue !!
Thank you Bosco. In case the Zuari bridge falls down, I have confined myself to North Goa. Since
the bridge survived 50,000 people standing on it to protest the fragility of the bridge, and also
survived a JoeGoaUK photo-shoot, I think it is safe for me to head south now. With the colonial
World Cup nearly over, I headed to the former 'Colva Canteen', now re-christened 'Cafeteria
Catholic'.

The seemingly omnipresent Pedro was at the door to greet me. Are you here for the standard fare or
would you like to see the menu, he asked me. Why, of course, I am here to see the much talked
about menu of 'Cafeteria Catholic'. He gave me a menu and seated me at a table next to Theist
Theo, Agnostic Arvind, and Atheist Angela. Man this is surreal, I said to myself. The restaurant
was full. Everyone seems to like 'Cafeteria Catholic' I commented to Pedro. No, came his reply,
they are as confused as some goanetters about who we are but come here since the waitresses are
good-looking. Then they go home and tell their wives that they came to watch Sports on our large
screen TV. It is all part of their rock-solid moral code.

Tell me Pedro, this 'Cafeteria Catholic' is not like some cyber fish-market and flea-market
combined into one? No, we have the normal fare. Like sandwiches, milk shakes, soft drinks, etc.
And our daily special is a rock-solid pie. What do you mean rock-solid pie? Yes, says Pedro, its
been on the menu for a long, long time, and only the anal-retentive keep ordering it.

So now you know the truth.

Regards,
George
Gilbert Lawrence
2006-07-09 10:06:41 UTC
Permalink
You and I have to get our definitions the same before we proceed on this topic.
If you call Buddhist and Jains as atheists, then we definitely have a semantic problem.
I am not interested in a theological or theoretical dissertation on "what is religion".
With your rock solid answers and the "raw data" below you have demystified this dialogue.
Kind Regards, GL

----------- Santosh Helekar wrote:

But raw data indicates that people who do not believe in a supreme being such as atheists, Buddhists, Jains, .........
Santosh Helekar
2006-07-09 14:03:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
If you call Buddhist and Jains as atheists, then we
definitely have a semantic problem.
You would not have had a semantic problem if you knew
the meaning of the word atheist. Buddhists and Jains
are atheists because they do not believe in a deity.
What is your definition of an atheist, and according
to which dictionary?
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
I am not interested in a theological or theoretical
dissertation on "what is religion".
What are you interested in in the context of this
discussion?

Cheers,

Santosh
Mario Goveia
2006-07-09 16:58:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by saligao
Apologies to the GoaNet community for inadvertently
replying to Mario on this forum. I had resolved
not to be drawn down to his level as is evident
from the tone of his messages so will not be
responding to him here. I will be happy to reply
to anyone else who wishes to continue this thread.
Mario clarifies:
I see that all the atheists that infest Goanet are on
the warpath :-))
I'm note sure what "tone" offended the otherwise
thick-skinned Kevin, a determined religion-basher on
Goanet, who was previously far more religious than
most of us. In case Kevin missed it, I did not say
that he had half a brain, only that even someone with
half a brain would not be fooled by his attacks on
religion and promotion of secular humanism.
Goanetters wondering about Kevin's reluctance to be
"drawn down to my level" should know that Kevin had
opined from his lofty "elevated level" perch that
religion was the cause of all evil and that atheist
"secular humanists" like himself were God's gift to
humanity :-)) [I'm paraphrasing here, but it is the
gist of what he wrote.]
I had replied asking why, if that were the case, the
secular humanists were nowhere to be found addressing
any of the recent REAL human problems the world had
faced, from Rwanda and Burundi, to west-Africa, to the
Sudan, to the middle-east, Afghanistan and Iraq. Nary
a secular humanist to be found with any solution to
any of these problems, nor the looming menace from
Iran and N. Korea.
Has anyone ever heard of an atheist secular humanist
that negotiated with Osama, Sadam, Mahmoud, Kim, Hamas
or the late unlamented Al Zarkawi to arrive at some
rational compromise to their grieviances?
All we hear from the secular humanists is strident
opposition to anyone who opposes those murderous
and/or dangerous totalitarian tyrants.
Has anyone ever heard of an atheist secular humanist
adoption agency, a hunger program, a health care
facility in rural Africa or anywhere else, a school
somewhere for the poor? On ther hand, the secular
humanists of Planned Parenthood run massive abortion
clinics in the USA.
All we hear from the secular humanists are attacks on
religion and religious people and snide suggestions
that defenders of religious choice are at a lower
level of humanity than the exalted secular humanists.
That led to the exchange shown below:
Kevin: "Humanists cannot reverse all the ills wrought
upon this planet by the so-called religious in one
generation."
Mario: "Forget about secular humanists "curing" ANY of
mankind's ills. The point I made was that the secular
humanists are not even in the arena, have never been
in the arena, hiding behind self-serving labels and
selective outrage that fools no one with even half a
brain."
So, now you know Kevin's level and my level, and can
make up your own minds.
Gilbert Lawrence
2006-07-10 09:53:08 UTC
Permalink
Hi Elisabeth,

I pledge to always remember that...
As a woman, you have a God-given right to keep changing your mind.:=))
You can oscillate between a "full blown buffet agnostic" and a "borem supurlem Catholic."
Don?t be guilty! The guys call it "provisional knowledge". (very intellectual!)
The Goans call it AC<>DC (Alternating Current<> Direct Current):=))

You and others may wonder where do I come up with these rapid-fire responses.
Lying in bed on a lazy weekend.
Now 20 years ago, I was busy doing something different.
Kind Regards, GL

---------- Elisabeth specially wrote:

I am not a cafeteria Catholic!
Frederick &quot;FN&quot; Noronha
2006-07-10 15:43:53 UTC
Permalink
Hi Gilbert, With due respect, this is unfair... you're poking fun at
Elisabeth's gender, on account of a fact you got wrong. Elisabeth is
the best judge of what *she* believes in. And the best we can do is
take her word for it! FN
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
Hi Elisabeth,
I pledge to always remember that...
As a woman, you have a God-given right to keep changing your mind.:=))
You can oscillate between a "full blown buffet agnostic" and a "borem supurlem Catholic."
Don't be guilty! The guys call it "provisional knowledge". (very intellectual!)
The Goans call it AC<>DC (Alternating Current<> Direct Current):=))
You and others may wonder where do I come up with these rapid-fire responses.
Lying in bed on a lazy weekend.
Now 20 years ago, I was busy doing something different.
Kind Regards, GL
I am not a cafeteria Catholic!
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Frederick 'FN' Noronha | Yahoomessenger: fredericknoronha
http://fn.goa-india.org | +91(832)2409490 Cell 9822122436
Elisabeth Carvalho
2006-07-10 15:18:53 UTC
Permalink
Dear Gilbert,
If you are lying (or as the Americans say laying) in
bed on a lazy weekend and thinking of rapid-fire
responses to my "AC-DC" stances (incidentally, AC-DC
is a disparaging term used for homosexuals. I think on
that account I restrict myself to the main-menu, no
cafeteria business there :), then you must come to the
boondocks and pay us rural Americans a visit.

Elisabeth
---------------------------------
Post by Gilbert Lawrence
Hi Elisabeth,
You and others may wonder where do I come up with
these rapid-fire responses.
Lying in bed on a lazy weekend.
Now 20 years ago, I was busy doing something
different.
Kind Regards, GL
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Gabe Menezes
2006-07-10 20:13:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Elisabeth Carvalho
Dear Gilbert,
If you are lying (or as the Americans say laying) in
bed on a lazy weekend and thinking of rapid-fire
responses to my "AC-DC" stances (incidentally, AC-DC
is a disparaging term used for homosexuals. I think on
that account I restrict myself to the main-menu, no
cafeteria business there :), then you must come to the
boondocks and pay us rural Americans a visit.
Elisabeth
RESPONSE: Yes Elizabeth, I did inform our other mutual friend about
the AC/DC terminology which was applied by our mutual friend to your
friend from 'Frisco, not that long ago!

He informed me that far from what I thought, he was being friendly
(:-))...and that is something to be wary of too!
--
DEV BOREM KORUM.

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...