Time to ban A_Nony_Mouse?

FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Time to ban A_Nony_Mouse?

Greets,

As I've said a number of times, my primary interest in this site is the science posts.  The number of high quality references to recent scientific discoveries is very high and I enjoy reading links about various discoveries.  I read about the pending announcement of the Higg's boson here before any other non-news websites I visit, and the recently announced ability to view the inside of living cells hasn't made it to any other website I visit.

During a number of conversations about purchasing a new web server, I also mentioned that I felt that the "secular humanism" mission of this website was an admirable goal, and I've offered publicly and privately to provide some amount of financial support, provided various conditions are met, to that end.  In my experience, when people of widely divergent world-views agree on something, it seems to have a much better chance of being a "good idea" (assuming all parties agree it is a "good idea&quotEye-wink than not.

It's also been my observation that when people of divergent opinions think that something is a "bad idea", or a person is a "bad person", there's a very good chance that others would likewise agree than not.

That seems to be the case with A_Nony_Mouse -- the number of people who are decrying his naked bigotry isn't small.  His willingness to attack people as puppets of Jews simply because they call him out on his bigotry is evidence that his bigotry knows no bounds.  If he just attacked Jews, I'd be fine with that -- Jews seem to get used to it after a while -- but anyone who doesn't cower to his repeated attacks is labeled a sympathizer and a puppet of the Jews.  His willingness to make absurd claims that are not, in any way, based on Scientific evidence is inconsistent with what seems to be the approach this website takes: presenting clearly supported scientific evidence as a way of combating ignorance.

Between his bigotry and anti-Science stances on the subject of his bigotry, his attitudes seem to be completely inconsistent with two key goals: present clearly supported scientific evidence about the nature of reality, and creating a society that's free from the types of hatred that he spews on a regular basis.

For these reasons, I would like to suggest that he be banned, or at the very minimum given a nice long vacation.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Greets,

As I've said a number of times, my primary interest in this site is the science posts.  The number of high quality references to recent scientific discoveries is very high and I enjoy reading links about various discoveries.  I read about the pending announcement of the Higg's boson here before any other non-news websites I visit, and the recently announced ability to view the inside of living cells hasn't made it to any other website I visit.

That's a great compliment.  I've tried to put an emphasis on science.  This includes advertising our site on science sites to encourage an intellectual crowd here. 

 

Quote:
During a number of conversations about purchasing a new web server, I also mentioned that I felt that the "secular humanism" mission of this website was an admirable goal, and I've offered publicly and privately to provide some amount of financial support, provided various conditions are met, to that end.  In my experience, when people of widely divergent world-views agree on something, it seems to have a much better chance of being a "good idea" (assuming all parties agree it is a "good idea&quotEye-wink than not.

It's also been my observation that when people of divergent opinions think that something is a "bad idea", or a person is a "bad person", there's a very good chance that others would likewise agree than not.

That I am aware of, RationalResponders.com doesn't have a "secular humanism misson."  

This site and most of it's core members have actually taken aim at the term "humanism" for various reasons, so you might mean something else.  

 

Quote:
That seems to be the case with A_Nony_Mouse -- the number of people who are decrying his naked bigotry isn't small.  His willingness to attack people as puppets of Jews simply because they call him out on his bigotry is evidence that his bigotry knows no bounds.  If he just attacked Jews, I'd be fine with that -- Jews seem to get used to it after a while -- but anyone who doesn't cower to his repeated attacks is labeled a sympathizer and a puppet of the Jews.  His willingness to make absurd claims that are not, in any way, based on Scientific evidence is inconsistent with what seems to be the approach this website takes: presenting clearly supported scientific evidence as a way of combating ignorance.

Yup, you sum it up well.  He's clearly not all there, but we don't have a rule against that.  I don't just make judgement calls and ban anyone I think is crazy, it rarely happens.  If I did, too many people would have to go.  You don't like what he's saying?  Tell him why he's wrong.  After you have done so your post will remain on the site for others to read right alongside his.  People might hate him, but this site is about letting people determine that for themselves.  At least as much as possible.  

 

Quote:

Between his bigotry and anti-Science stances on the subject of his bigotry, his attitudes seem to be completely inconsistent with two key goals: present clearly supported scientific evidence about the nature of reality, and creating a society that's free from the types of hatred that he spews on a regular basis.

For these reasons, I would like to suggest that he be banned, or at the very minimum given a nice long vacation.

My "feelings" instruct me to ban him, I've "felt" like that since the first few days of knowing him.  My rationale and pursuit of freethought instruct me to allow him to post and hope others respond to his bigotry.  I feel if he would ever grow as a person it would be because someone has convinced him.  Yes I believe many have tried... he might just be nucking futs.  I think he agrees with RRS and its approach of acting hostile towards religion.  He's had common ground with people here before, he just rarely has it on any page that also includes the word "jew."  

All atheists get special account privileges except him.  True story... mods are instructed not to upgrade his account to the same standard as other atheists.  He is not allowed in our private forum as he isn't someone that we (mods) would ever choose to fraternize with.

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Furry, Noony is NOT playing

Furry, Noony is NOT playing with a full deck. But making suggestions or demands about bans when someone is merely being a jerk does not constitute a ban. I am quite sure at times you thought of me as a "jerk".

I almost went your route with a guy named "Jean Calvin", AND as far as I know he still has not been banned, but probably got chased away by the rest of us calling him on his bigotry.

What set me off about him was that he as a Christian blamed America for the Tsunami that killed 13,000 Japanese. He claimed it was a warning to the rest of humanity that we need to find God.

What that fuck face did not know when he posted that crap, was that my x-wife was Japanese. I at first called for his ban. But someone else rightfully said "Brian, let him hang himself with his own rope"

Noony IS NOT all there the way someone who thinks the moon landing was faked is not all there.

But, regardless, although I know you are NOT a bigot like he is, I wont, and don't give you a pass because I like you.

Brian's rules are pretty simple. Dont spam, don't create soc puppets and dont call for violence or advocate crime. Standard stuff even newspapers apply to.

I do have sympathy for Palestinians, NOT on a label issue or religious issue, but merely on a suffering issue. And I do find a huge problem with ANY group claiming land over a "chosen people" motif. It was just as wrong for Hitler to sell Germans bloodline as divine entitlement.

Even Christians in America falsely try to claim that freedom of religion started with the Mayflower. NO! Freedom of religion started with the First Amendment and "No religious test".

As much as a liberal socially as I suspect you are, what is lost on you, is what is lost on him. I don't see you as a bigot, but I do see you as stuck on the past as much as he is.

He is nuts. But because I think he is, does not mean I agree with everything every Jew says or everything Israel does.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Lion IRC
Theist
Lion IRC's picture
Posts: 158
Joined: 2011-03-16
User is offlineOffline
Beer halls and censorship

!

The problem with banning and isolating people whose views we disagree with is that they tend to congregate behind closed doors, under carpets, in German beer halls, applauding each other and making unanimous, echo-chamber agreements about stuff like the Wehrmacht.

Sapient wrote:
...You don't like what he's saying?  Tell him why he's wrong.  After you have done so your post will remain on the site for others to read right alongside his.  People might hate him, but this site is about letting people determine that for themselves...

Agreed 100%. Thank you Sapient. You've got my vote!


Sapient wrote:
...My "feelings" instruct me to ban him, I've "felt" like that since the first few days of knowing him.  My rationale and pursuit of freethought instruct me to allow him to post and hope others respond to his bigotry...

See that Darkchilde? See that Durro? Why ban your ideological opponent just because someone pushed your ignorant, paranoid, aggro/emo, hypocrisy buttons?


In the contest of ideas, if you can out-think and out-reason your opponent, do you really wanna ban/censor them? If I was "winning" an argument with someone about bigotry, I'd be running down the street yelling "Wait. Come back A_Nony_Mouse...I havent finished with you yet."  

 


 


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3683
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
  Banning him ?  Oh please

  Banning him ?  Oh please let's be less Orwellian than that, shall we ?


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote: 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Banning him ?  Oh please let's be less Orwellian than that, shall we ?

The irony on both sides Noony vs Furry is "Two legs good, four legs bad",

If there is one thing Sapient will never be is an Orwellian Character. He is the opposite of Faux News.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3683
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:The irony on

Brian37 wrote:

The irony on both sides Noony vs Furry is "Two legs good, four legs bad",

If there is one thing Sapient will never be is an Orwellian Character. He is the opposite of Faux News.

                                         

                                                 I'm referring to his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four and "thoughtcrimes" and the crushing of dissent.

"Most people are ass holes." Jesus of Nazareth


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

The irony on both sides Noony vs Furry is "Two legs good, four legs bad",

If there is one thing Sapient will never be is an Orwellian Character. He is the opposite of Faux News.

I'm referring to his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four and "thoughtcrimes" and the crushing of dissent.

Well, =I= got that reference, but I do think there could be a bit of Animal Farm going as well.  I mean, I got the "Troll" badge for what I think was a lot less.

There's a point where "thought crimes" pass far beyond merely being about thoughts or dissenting opinions, and that's where they are so far removed from anything like reality =and= have the potential to cause harm that giving them a voice is condoning whatever the whacko who's spouting them is advocating.

In the case of Nony, he's factually wrong =and= spouting the kinds of bigotry that only serves to stoke the fires that are burning in the Middle East.  I get that most people here think my favorite book of Family History is replete with myths and folk lore.  I get that.  Message received.  But Nony goes past the point of saying it's folk lore and makes claims that have history been used by stark raving mad anti-Semetic loons to justify still more violence against the Jewish people.  Saying the Torah is "wrong" -- I can live with that.  Repeating the Documentary Wild Guess -- fine with that as well.  But the claim that Jews aren't =actually= of Middle Eastern origin is widely used by such nice people as the Iranians as a reason to eradicate the State of Israel.  The primary purpose of denying a Middle Eastern origin for world-wide Jewry =is= invalidating any claims what so ever to any Jews living anywhere in the Middle East.  More here --

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars#Theory_of_Khazar_ancestry_of_Ashkenazi_Jews

Given the amount of hate-speech and violence associated with that theory, it's plainly obvious to me that Nony is, in fact, advocating violence because that theory serves as the primary justification among many =for= violence.

One of the references in that article is to the Dearborn Independent, the newspaper Henry Ford used to promote "The Protocol of the Elders of Zion", which was another bit of crazed bigotry that has been used to justify violence of Jews -- the claim being that Jews control the entire world, but I still can't get Brian37 to fart a Lamborghini out of his ass for me.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Definitely a bigot. He's so

Definitely a bigot. He's so ridiculous the only options are to rage or laugh. Only evangelical types tend to be as irrational.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Sage_Override
atheistBlogger
Sage_Override's picture
Posts: 582
Joined: 2008-10-14
User is offlineOffline
I don't know enough about

I don't know enough about the guy/girl/whatever so, I couldn't care less, but everyone around here is a little unhinged in some way; some more than others obviously.  That being said, he doesn't deserve to be ousted like some kind of a leper because if Brian removed everyone on here with outlandish, radically unsound ideas that don't make sense and offend a majority of the community, most, if not all, the theists would be exiled almost immediately from posting here.  Unless he poses a real life threat to you or anyone else on this board, Furry, leave it alone.

"When the majority believes in what is false, the truth becomes a quest." - Me


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3140
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Or instead of banning him,

Or instead of banning him, study him. Isn't that the scientific thing to do?

Good science isn't just looking at things you like and are pleasant. There's a lot one can learn by putting pond scum under the microscope. There are probably  interesting reasons why Nony is the way he is.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Or instead of

EXC wrote:

Or instead of banning him, study him. Isn't that the scientific thing to do?

Good science isn't just looking at things you like and are pleasant. There's a lot one can learn by putting pond scum under the microscope. There are probably  interesting reasons why Nony is the way he is.

Having had a bit more time to consider whatever his trip happens to be, my opinion is that he's one of these people who latches on to a hate group because the "like groups" aren't willing to have him.  Then, when fails to get whatever attention he's trying to get, he ratchets up the "crazy" until he gets some kind of reaction, negative as it may be.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:FurryCatHerder

Sapient wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Greets,

As I've said a number of times, my primary interest in this site is the science posts.  The number of high quality references to recent scientific discoveries is very high and I enjoy reading links about various discoveries.  I read about the pending announcement of the Higg's boson here before any other non-news websites I visit, and the recently announced ability to view the inside of living cells hasn't made it to any other website I visit.

That's a great compliment.  I've tried to put an emphasis on science.  This includes advertising our site on science sites to encourage an intellectual crowd here.

You have a pretty intellectual crowd!  My son showed up in response to Dawkin's book, I think it was, but after I joined, I stayed for the science, not that Dawkin's isn't scientific, I think he was just looking for more ways to tweak the teachers at the religious school he went to.  I sat down with him when he brought home "Darwin's Black Box" and promptly debunked it.  But I still believe in G-d!  And the New Orleans Saints, the designated hitter rule =and= sudden death overtime.

Quote:
Quote:
During a number of conversations about purchasing a new web server, I also mentioned that I felt that the "secular humanism" mission of this website was an admirable goal, and I've offered publicly and privately to provide some amount of financial support, provided various conditions are met, to that end.  In my experience, when people of widely divergent world-views agree on something, it seems to have a much better chance of being a "good idea" (assuming all parties agree it is a "good idea&quotEye-wink than not.

It's also been my observation that when people of divergent opinions think that something is a "bad idea", or a person is a "bad person", there's a very good chance that others would likewise agree than not.

That I am aware of, RationalResponders.com doesn't have a "secular humanism misson."  

This site and most of it's core members have actually taken aim at the term "humanism" for various reasons, so you might mean something else.

I mean that you seem to have a bent towards "making the planet a better rock to live on".  I could be wrong, but that's the impression I get, and I don't just mean your campaign to stamp out religious beliefs, I mean an overall bent towards improving the state of existence for Humanity in general.  If I'm wrong, I take back everything nice I ever said about you Eye-wink

Quote:
Quote:
That seems to be the case with A_Nony_Mouse -- the number of people who are decrying his naked bigotry isn't small.  His willingness to attack people as puppets of Jews simply because they call him out on his bigotry is evidence that his bigotry knows no bounds.  If he just attacked Jews, I'd be fine with that -- Jews seem to get used to it after a while -- but anyone who doesn't cower to his repeated attacks is labeled a sympathizer and a puppet of the Jews.  His willingness to make absurd claims that are not, in any way, based on Scientific evidence is inconsistent with what seems to be the approach this website takes: presenting clearly supported scientific evidence as a way of combating ignorance.

Yup, you sum it up well.  He's clearly not all there, but we don't have a rule against that.  I don't just make judgement calls and ban anyone I think is crazy, it rarely happens.  If I did, too many people would have to go.  You don't like what he's saying?  Tell him why he's wrong.  After you have done so your post will remain on the site for others to read right alongside his.  People might hate him, but this site is about letting people determine that for themselves.  At least as much as possible.

I'm really not clear what good allowing him to stay is doing him =or= the website as a whole.  Obviously I'm biased, and I'm going to give you a religious basis -- "Thou shalt not curse the deaf, nor put a stumblingblock before the blind, but shalt fear thy God: I [am] the LORD." -- but it seems that this site is not all that good for him.  I've not run into anyone who has anything positive to say about him, and he seems to get worked up in ways that seem unhealthy for himself.  Sure, he could go somewhere else and be a loon, but perhaps he'd learn something from the experience.

But I could be wrong.

Quote:
Quote:
Between his bigotry and anti-Science stances on the subject of his bigotry, his attitudes seem to be completely inconsistent with two key goals: present clearly supported scientific evidence about the nature of reality, and creating a society that's free from the types of hatred that he spews on a regular basis.

For these reasons, I would like to suggest that he be banned, or at the very minimum given a nice long vacation.

My "feelings" instruct me to ban him, I've "felt" like that since the first few days of knowing him.  My rationale and pursuit of freethought instruct me to allow him to post and hope others respond to his bigotry.  I feel if he would ever grow as a person it would be because someone has convinced him.  Yes I believe many have tried... he might just be nucking futs.  I think he agrees with RRS and its approach of acting hostile towards religion.  He's had common ground with people here before, he just rarely has it on any page that also includes the word "jew."  

All atheists get special account privileges except him.  True story... mods are instructed not to upgrade his account to the same standard as other atheists.  He is not allowed in our private forum as he isn't someone that we (mods) would ever choose to fraternize with.

I don't see it happening.  I understand that this site is generally hostile towards religion -- hell, I'm hostile towards "religion" -- but he seems to feed off of religious hostility, which makes me think that if he's going to learn manners it isn't on an anti-religious website.  In other words, remove that provocation from the table.

Anyway, I wanted to thank you for your time and once again thank you for the website.  You do seem to have quite the cast of characters, which I guess makes me a character Eye-wink

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
He'll never learn. The value

He'll never learn. The value in having him is multifold, however. It allows his opinions, which are shared by millions, to be vetted and torn apart publically. Though he'll never change, someone else might. Or may be prevented from adopting the same flawed concepts.
It shows atheists are a diverse group, something christians in particular have trouble figuring out.
And like it or not, his position against Israel is fully justified, and his arguments pertaining specifically to Israel are almost always on the mark.
It's when he goes on his anti-jew rants that he totally crosses the line of sanity and reason.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1250
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
He would likely take a ban

He would likely take a ban as vindication of his views (" The Zionists could not respond to my evidence, to they silenced me instead " ).

Much as holocaust denier David Irving sought martyr status after his office got firebombed.

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:He would

zarathustra wrote:

He would likely take a ban as vindication of his views (" The Zionists could not respond to my evidence, to they silenced me instead " ).


Much as holocaust denier David Irving sought martyr status after his office got firebombed.

Good point.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:And like it or

Vastet wrote:
And like it or not, his position against Israel is fully justified, and his arguments pertaining specifically to Israel are almost always on the mark.

I've not seen anything from him about Israel that is more than marginally justified.  Mostly he repeats very old and tired myths about Jewish origins and implies that there were no Jews is modern Israel prior to the rise of Zionism.  He also ignores the expulsion of Jews from Arab states and other acts of violence against Jews both within and without Eretz Yisrael.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Vastet

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Vastet wrote:
And like it or not, his position against Israel is fully justified, and his arguments pertaining specifically to Israel are almost always on the mark.

I've not seen anything from him about Israel that is more than marginally justified.  Mostly he repeats very old and tired myths about Jewish origins and implies that there were no Jews is modern Israel prior to the rise of Zionism.  He also ignores the expulsion of Jews from Arab states and other acts of violence against Jews both within and without Eretz Yisrael.

Noony is a bigot and bat nuts insane. But that does not mean he is wrong. It just means he cant see Jews as human.

Where both sides are wrong I have been consistent with. Both sides pick arbitrary points in history and stupidly say "THIS is where it began", which misses the more important goal of the future in finding a non label centered solution in the form of common law and common human interest.

What causes Israel's actions is the same thing that causes Palestine's reactions. Dwelling in the past in tribal tradition instead of looking at it as a problem with the human condition.

Both sides need to stop dwelling in the past and stop the stupid tribal bullshit and see individuals as individuals and not labels. IF both sides can get a majority of people too do that, things will change for the better.

Again, it is WHY in America we have Joe Lieberman, a Jew, Keith Elleson a Muslim, and atheist Pete Stark in our Congress.

BOTH don't seek secular goals. Israel at best to me is a Jewish version of Turkey. It may tolerate non-Jews and most certainly better than non-Muslims would get treated in Palestine. But it still has a pecking order mentality.

Our Constitution which insists on a neutral government insists that a pecking order cannot be established via government.

I am quite sure you would love to see Palestine become as secular as America, where even a Jew could run for PM of Palestine. Australia has already had it's first atheist PM and a woman to boot. That will not happen in either a Jewish state or Muslims state.

Neither side will have peace as long as the focus is on past traditions and tribalism. The only way the problems will get solved is through secularism and looking to a common future through common human needs.

Rail against Noony for his bigotry. But don't burry your head in your own tribal past and falsely claim that your Jewishness makes you special.

Go read Jefferson's Virginia Religious Freedom Act. It became the prototype for Madison's First Amendment. Jefferson did what Christianity failed to do prior. He got very dogmatic people to agree that differences in sects of religion should not constitute anyone being special.

Israel's goal of becoming a Jewish state is BAD for humanity. If either Israel or Palestine want to prove to me, or the rest of the world, that they want to move into the future with the rest of the pluralistic west, they have to give up on their tribalism, and seek common law, not common tradition, or common religion. I don't see either side doing that.

Muslims are not special by proxy of tradition or birth place. Jews are not special by proxy of tradition or birth place. Read Hitchens book about Jefferson. Even on the issue of class, Hitchens recounted Jefferson's own realization that he was NOT special merely because he was born in the upper class.

Secularism and protection of pluralism is the only cure. If Israel seeks a Jewish state,  and not simply a western pluralistic state, it is no better to me than the tribalism that existed prior to the American Revolution.

There should be no Muslim state or Jewish state. There should be governments that have the anti-monopoly law of neutrality in the form of secular governments. Tribalism is what is causing the problem. Secularism is the cure to tribalism.

I wish Jefferson could be alive to today. If anyone could get this shit to stop, he could.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian,No, I'd prefer for

Brian,

No, I'd prefer for Israel to be a theocracy.  The issue you seem to have is that Jewish =civil= and =criminal= law are both rooted in =religious= law.  There is no distinction.

Consider this -- in the United States there is the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.  There's no such "non-religious" right because an accused is considered to be an invalid witness on any subject where their =guilt= is in question.  An accused, under Jewish religious law, is only a valid witness for their own =innocence=.  Likewise, the entire American practice of using =criminals= as witnesses has no counterpart in Jewish =religious= law -- a criminal is an invalid witness for anything but their own innocence.

Which would you prefer -- a situation in which an accused can be compelled to testify against themself, or one in which any suggestion of criminal behavior means they can't be trusted to tell the truth about being a criminal?  Me, I prefer the Jewish approach.

(And this is proof of G-d's existence Smiling )

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Brian,

No, I'd prefer for Israel to be a theocracy.  The issue you seem to have is that Jewish =civil= and =criminal= law are both rooted in =religious= law.  There is no distinction.

Consider this -- in the United States there is the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.  There's no such "non-religious" right because an accused is considered to be an invalid witness on any subject where their =guilt= is in question.  An accused, under Jewish religious law, is only a valid witness for their own =innocence=.  Likewise, the entire American practice of using =criminals= as witnesses has no counterpart in Jewish =religious= law -- a criminal is an invalid witness for anything but their own innocence.

Which would you prefer -- a situation in which an accused can be compelled to testify against themself, or one in which any suggestion of criminal behavior means they can't be trusted to tell the truth about being a criminal?  Me, I prefer the Jewish approach.

(And this is proof of G-d's existence Smiling )

A THEOCRACY? REALY, NOW strictly as an attitude and a claim, I am going to verbally hand your ass to you. And I have no doubt Jefferson would too.

Any value for your position I had is completely gone now. And you have no fucking clue how you are playing right into the hands of nuts like noony.

Why should a non Jew be subject to Jewish law? Because you say so? You want a theocracy, not because it values non-Jews as uncle Toms or mere guests, you want a theocracy to set up a pecking order. Just admit it.

I have no value for any claim that values pecking orders on a planet of 7 billion.

Unless Israel gives up on the idea of a theocracy, you have about as much support from me as I do for any moron here claiming America should be a "Christian state". No politician here has to swear an oath to Jesus or Yahweh or Allah.

You have no fucking clue how that MENTALITY fucks humanity over. It is no better than the Muslim state mentality.

You also have no fucking clue why Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson would fucking hate your attitude.

You cannot subject minorities IN ANY COUNTRY to your own sectarian law. Pluralism cannot be protected by a theocracy.

Congradulations Furry, you are part of the problem.

I'd suggest you go visit Terran and try to even do something simple and say "Muslims should be subject to Jewish law" and see how they react there.

In the states YOU are not subject to Christian law nor do you have to swear an oath to Jesus. I see that as a good thing. Why the fuck would you ignore that knowing how Jews, even in America were once demonized as much as atheists.

And you wonder why Muslims want to wipe Israel off the face of the planet.

If you are not yourself willing to live under the ages under Christian law, and you are not willing to live under Islamic law, I find it absurd for you to insist on Jewish law being the laws of non Jews.

If many Christians in America who insist on biblical Jesus law being law, Joe Leiberman could not be a congressmen.

Way to shoot yourself in the foot and perpetuate human division needlessly.

I do not want to live under Jewish law, or Muslim law, or Hindu law, or Buddhist law or atheist law. The only laws that are fair to all are ones based on common law. I you insist on a theocracy, you do not have my support one bit. I will support Israel and Palestine under neutral governments.

Any Christian or Muslim or Jew insisting on a theocracy deserves the harshest scorn, blasphemy, ridicule and HATE, as a claim.

Freedom cannot be any law pulled out of any holy book. Freedom of religion can only be protected through "no religious test" and separation of church and state.

If a theocracy is what you advocate, and you think you are special because you are Jewish and non Jews should be treated as second class citizens through government law, you will never get my support and that attitude will always have my scorn.

I do not owe any god my loyalty, and I am equal to you, not because I am an atheists, but because I a  human, and I do not value any fucking law or any government that does not value secular laws based on common law.

If you think it is ok to subject Muslims or Christians or atheists or Hindus to government law based on the Torah you have your head up your ass.

Your pecking order mentality is childish and bullshit. And I refuse to support ANY human OF ANY LABEL, who thinks one size fits all as far as mixing government and religion.

I will not support a Jewish state or Muslim state or Christian state or even an atheist state. Laws are what all of us are subject to and as such can only be neutral when we don't insist a monopoly on the rights to make them.

Now please go ahead and get your bullshit claim that because I am passionate that somehow I have emotional problems, out of your system.

I am cussing you out because of your pathetic pecking order attitude. It is no different when I see Christians do it here. It is no different when I hear Muslims do it.

Go to Iran and live there as a Jew and subject yourself to Muslim law. You know damned well you wont, nor should you. So do the human thing, the right thing, is to keep government neutral on the issue of religion. And don't fucking pretend that you are so fucking special that your government has the right to base laws on your holy books either.

Get your head out of your ass. I will not support a Jewish state. I will ONLY support a secular Israel and  I will support ANYONE of any label who supports neutral laws. If you don't want to keep your Torah or Talmud separate from government law, don't pretend you value pluralism. Treating non-Jews, any non-Jew, such as a Christian or atheist or Hindu or Buddhist or Muslim, as second class subject to government law based on Jewish texts is AS SICK to me a claim as when any other theocracy does it.

Jefferson would soooooooo bitch slap you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Which would you prefer

Quote:
Which would you prefer -- a situation in which an accused can be compelled to testify against themself, or one in which any suggestion of criminal behavior means they can't be trusted to tell the truth about being a criminal?  Me, I prefer the Jewish approach.

STOP THIS BULLSHIT,

Laws do not have to be based on any religion. Where we see pluralism and protection of dissent the laws are not based on the attitude that they are an invention of one label. In pluralistic societies we seek common law, just like school zones, speed limits and building codes.

If a magic book magically made people tell the truth, there would be no need for perjury laws. So if Israel has perjury laws, which I suspect they do, then that is further evidence that humans are the ones sitting in judgment and no magic book or fictional being doing that.

A god is not needed to either lie or tell the truth.

Thomas Jefferson was a United States President. DNA is made up of adenine, quinine, thymine, cytosine. There I don't believe in your god and demonstrated the ability to state facts and tell the truth.

Now I will demonstrate that I can lie as well.

Now, I can lie too. I fucked Angelina Jolie. I drive a Lamborghini. The Redskins won the Super Bowl last year. I support a Jewish state.

Why do I have the ability to either tell the truth or tell a lie? Because I am human, not because of Jesus, or Vishnu or Allah or any holy book.

I have been to plenty of court cases where people lie to courts all the time and seen it on the news all the time. But if you want to sit there and claim that Jews don't commit crimes and their books magically make them honest, does Israel have prisons? If it doesn't have prisons then there would be no need for courts. Does Israel have courts?

Stop pretending you are better because of stupid crap like tradition or birthplace. I hate it wwhen Christians and Muslims do that too. A human is a human is a human and holy books don't magically make you good or bad.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
How dare you think you have

How dare you think you have any fucking right to subject non Jews to Jewish law. How dare any Christian think they have any fucking right to subject you or I to Christian laws. How dare any Muslim think they have the fucking right to subject non-Muslims to Muslim laws.

PLEASE GET THAT before you respond and make yourself look like a fool.

A WALL BETWEEN RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT IS THE ONLY WAY TO MAINTAIN OUR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:How dare you

Brian37 wrote:

How dare you think you have any fucking right to subject non Jews to Jewish law. How dare any Christian think they have any fucking right to subject you or I to Christian laws. How dare any Muslim think they have the fucking right to subject non-Muslims to Muslim laws.

PLEASE GET THAT before you respond and make yourself look like a fool.

A WALL BETWEEN RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT IS THE ONLY WAY TO MAINTAIN OUR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS

Would you rather that Israel have American law or Israeli law?

Oh, wait -- you keep forgetting that the Jewish people are a NATION with a CULTURE and that it's only non-Jews who forget that.

Do we have the right to subject Mexicans living in the United States to American law, or do we have to allow them to practice Mexican law in the United States?

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Brian37

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

How dare you think you have any fucking right to subject non Jews to Jewish law. How dare any Christian think they have any fucking right to subject you or I to Christian laws. How dare any Muslim think they have the fucking right to subject non-Muslims to Muslim laws.

PLEASE GET THAT before you respond and make yourself look like a fool.

A WALL BETWEEN RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT IS THE ONLY WAY TO MAINTAIN OUR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS

Would you rather that Israel have American law or Israeli law?

Oh, wait -- you keep forgetting that the Jewish people are a NATION with a CULTURE and that it's only non-Jews who forget that.

Do we have the right to subject Mexicans living in the United States to American law, or do we have to allow them to practice Mexican law in the United States?

Our Constitution hands down. It is not based on any holy book. It has separation of church and state. It treats every citizen as individuals.

You are still not getting it. OUR laws are not based on ONE group's politics, race, religion or national origin. Long before Christians pissed on our Constitution our original motto was E-Pluribus Unum(out of many, one). Now if you want to argue Christians often ignore the founder's intent I'd agree. But the Constitution itself is not based on playing favorites. It is based on protection of dissent and ant-monopoly to PREVENT any one group from gaining a monopoly of power.

In a pluralistic society, you have the right to practice your religion and celebrate your history. What you do not have the right to do is subject those outside your label to your religious laws.  WE THE PEOPLE does not mean we the Jews or WE the Christians or WE the atheists or WE the Muslims or We the Mexicans.

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion" religious law does just that. I am only subject to protect your right to be a Jew, I am not subject to Jewish laws. WE are subject to the laws WE AGREE TO.

I do not have to go to a Synagogue or refrain from eating pork. You can eat fish on Friday and not go to Church on Sunday, and I don't have to worship either the Jewish god or Christian god.  And neither you or I are subject to Muslim law here either.

BECAUSE OF OUR SECULAR CONSTITUTION. It protects the rights of everyone, because of neutrality, not because of one religion, or one label.

You are tooo dense to see that you are setting up the same pecking order attitude minorities of all labels in the States had to fight by using the Constitution. The same pecking order attitude Muslims and Christians have.

Our constitution is why non-Christians are not subject to Christian laws. It is why Jews don't have to go to a Christian Church. Why Mormons don't have to go to a Mosque. And why I don't have to go to church on sunday and can enjoy a beer and watch my Redskins suck.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian,I do "get" it.  I

Brian,

I do "get" it.  I simply reject it.

Where in the Constitution is legal protection for the poor?

Oh, right -- THERE IS NONE!

I'll stick with the Constitution G-d gave me.  You stick with the one that allows the rich to oppress the poor with impunity.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Brian,I

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Brian,

I do "get" it.  I simply reject it.

Where in the Constitution is legal protection for the poor?

Oh, right -- THERE IS NONE!

I'll stick with the Constitution G-d gave me.  You stick with the one that allows the rich to oppress the poor with impunity.

Which is why IF Israel becomes a "Jewish state" I would never want to live there.

The United Kingdom up until the age of Enlightenment was a Christian state in the form of the Church of England. If you the Jew and I the atheist lived under their rule at the height of their theocracy, neither you or I would have liked that.

Now, if we both go there now, there is NO lack of freedom of religion there and the Christian religion still exists as part of their history.

Muslims have a "culture" too, but even in Turkey and Morocco which "tolerate" non Muslims, you and I are treated like second class citizens. And despite our secular Constitution here, atheists, Muslims and Jews even today, are STILL treated like second class citizens, DESPITE what the founders set up.

Is that what you want Israel to set up? An official government sanctioned statement that says "Jews are more special than non Jews".

Fine, here in the states I'll let Christians make the laws and you and I can live under their  laws because they think they are special too. That would mean since Christians are the majority Joe Leberman could not serve in our congress.

You CAN seriously see how absurd you are being quite easily. Go try to get a Jew to lead a city council invocation in a majority Baptist community in LA, and see how equal you are to them.

"I am special because I am Jewish"

NO you are not.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Lion IRC
Theist
Lion IRC's picture
Posts: 158
Joined: 2011-03-16
User is offlineOffline
@FurryCatHerder

    FurryCatHerder wrote :      "...It won't be "Divide and Conquer"...It will be more like me and the Atheists against you...."

 

How's that working out for you FurryCatHerder?

 

Are ya gettin 'em banned quick enough?

 

Does tellin 'em to "kindly butt the f.ck  out" work around here when they take "a carbide grinding wheel" to your raw nerves?

 

 

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Brian,I

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Brian,

I do "get" it.  I simply reject it.

Where in the Constitution is legal protection for the poor?

Oh, right -- THERE IS NONE!

I'll stick with the Constitution G-d gave me.  You stick with the one that allows the rich to oppress the poor with impunity.

Quote:
Where in the Constitution is legal protection for the poor?

Yes there is protection of the poor, it's called representation and voting. So unless you think only rich people should have the right to vote, poor people have the right to compete at the voting booths and put politicians in to make laws that they want too. It is NOT a one way street.

No, your god does a sucky job helping the poor, most of the world's 7 billion people live in poverty. You know why he does a sucky job? Because he doesn't exist.

My government system is simply being abused currently, it has not always been that way and it does not have to stay that way. You are again, blaming the tool (for what the abusers do with that tool). Same stupid argument believers make trying to blame scientific method, which is merely a tool and not the scientist using the tool.

And South Korea and Japan don't believe in your Jewish god, and they also dont have anywhere near the poverty rates of of more religious countries. They've done well without your Yahweh.

Our country had an economic boom between 1945 and 1980. It's downfall had nothing to do with believing in Yahweh nor was that boom caused by Yahweh. The boom was caused by the citizens changing their attitudes and taking action at the voting booth. Our downfall also started because of the collective action of some. Neither the up or the down was due to believing in the wrong god or allowing people to have different religions.

Our rise or decline was not because of Jesus or Yahweh or Vishnu or Thor. It was because our collective citizenry wasn't vigil enough to prevent the abuse.

I would only blame the poor and middle class for their complacency. I certainly wont pawn what the rich have done creating a monopoly on our politics off on a fucking fictional god or lack of belief in ANY god or picking the wrong god.

You want it both ways. If a country does well, it is because of your god. If a country does bad, it is because they didn't believe in your god. Bullshit.

A country does well or poorly because of the citizens and their governments. A monopoly of power can do as well as an open market system. A god is not required to believe in for a nation to do well economically or do poorly economically.

A monopoly of power can arise in ANYTHING, be it politics, religion or class. No  government is immune to the potential for a monopoly of power. The best the citizens can do is create laws that prevent those monopolies. If they are not constantly vigil in protecting those laws, abuse can and will happen. Our middle class and poor have not been vigil enough. I think we are waking up now. I only hope we stay awake.

We don't need to scrap our Constitution, we do need to enforce the anti-monopoly concepts we have gotten away from.

And thank you for shitting on our founders. Tell your fellow Jew Joe Lieberman that  the Constitution he swore to defend sucks because it doesn't make people swear an oath to the Jewish god. I guess that Heeb is just our token Uncle Tom.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Rather strange posts

I do not remember how many times I have asked for specific examples of what it considered "bigoted" or whatever pejorative along with the reason why it is so described. I could count all the replies I have received on the fingers of one hand even if I had no fingers.

The posts here are long on accusations but not a single example much less reasons why. I still have no use for counting fingers.

Why do not you folks who post as though there is something wrong with my posts do what I have requested? Why not do what intellectual honesty requires and define the issue and give specifics? ("You wouldn't understand if I told you!" Sorry, but if you can't explain you don't understand yourself.)

If you folks would do that you would be able to have a substantive discussion over issues rather than one that does not rise of school yard name calling.

If there are definable, substantive issues we can certainly come to an agreement on the matter.

=====

This is also an opportunity to rise above other groups where I have expressed similar opinions. If there is not simple banning the response is mostly an early teenage haughty response to the effect, 'I won't lower myself to discuss the matter with the likes of you.' That makes it glarinly obvious there is no substantive issue just an emotional one. The inability to explain emotions is also a sign of immaturity so that does not validate the emotion even for women.
 

I'll follow whatever is posted and respond as best I can. However I expect either avoidance of a response or juvenalia as a response.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Brian,

I do "get" it.  I simply reject it.

Where in the Constitution is legal protection for the poor?

Oh, right -- THERE IS NONE!

I'll stick with the Constitution G-d gave me.  You stick with the one that allows the rich to oppress the poor with impunity.

Which is why IF Israel becomes a "Jewish state" I would never want to live there.

It already is a jewish state. Have you not followed its public demands for international recognition as such?

Quote:
The United Kingdom up until the age of Enlightenment was a Christian state in the form of the Church of England. If you the Jew and I the atheist lived under their rule at the height of their theocracy, neither you or I would have liked that.

Now, if we both go there now, there is NO lack of freedom of religion there and the Christian religion still exists as part of their history.

Try entering Israel with five bibles. Try entering with "more" christian paraphenalia than one person "needs." You can't. It is illegal. If you should smuggle in a few bibles and hand them out to Jews, sorry, another crime. Attempt to explain to a Jew the redemption of Jesus Christ and you commit another crime. If someone were willing to explain the difference between these laws and those of Saudi Arabia I will much appreciate it.

And these laws apply to Israeli citizens not just foreign visitors. The difference is the visitor is escorted to the airport whereas a citizen does jail time. This is because of the potential bad press not that the law does not apply.

Christian public ceremonies are permitted only in Jerusalem. Except for Easter when there are a lot of tourists the police only observe when they are spit on and attacked by Jews. Christians are not permitted to practice in public in Saudi at any time. Thus there is a difference for what it is worth.

I can go on and on but if I did it would no doubt add to the charge of bigotry.

As I see it, correcting false statements is legitimate even if about Israel and Jews.

Quote:
Muslims have a "culture" too, but even in Turkey and Morocco which "tolerate" non Muslims, you and I are treated like second class citizens. And despite our secular Constitution here, atheists, Muslims and Jews even today, are STILL treated like second class citizens, DESPITE what the founders set up.

Which is the country your "our" and constitution you refer to? If you mean the US, you are invited to contact the ACLU if you have examples.

Quote:
Is that what you want Israel to set up? An official government sanctioned statement that says "Jews are more special than non Jews".

That is already the case in law in Israel. Israel is the same as the pre-civil rights US South in regard to legally sanctioned discrimination. The Israeli government builds housing that is for Jews only. In fact it builds entire towns that are for Jews only. This is IN Israel not a backhand shot at the West Bank squattertowns. 

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:
Would you rather that Israel have American law or Israeli law?

Considering most of Israel's housing and real estate practices are criminal in the US and have been since the passage of civil rights laws Israel could certainly benefit from US law.

Quote:
Oh, wait -- you keep forgetting that the Jewish people are a NATION with a CULTURE and that it's only non-Jews who forget that.

If it impossible to remember what is not true. There is  no definition of nation which Jews satisfy. Nor do Jews have any single culture which does not include the religion. Thus Jews are only a religion. You can try to ignore Dr. Sand but in fact he backs up his position with facts. You have only repetition of long exposed zionist nonsense. Dr. Sand is merely the most recent to debunk such nonsense.

If however you think you can define jewish "culture" absent religion please become one more person to fail miserably in the attempt. You can also look up the definitions of nations and try to fit "jews" into one of them. That will give you two miserable failures in the same post.


 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I have specified your

I have specified your bigotry a number of times. Your inability to understand or willful ignoring of such doesn't change the facts. Anyone who challenges anything you say is instantly labelled a jew lover, or closet jew, or fake atheist, or some other horse shit. You even constantly delude yourself into thinking the destruction of the jews would destroy all the abrahamic faiths, you hate jews so irrationally.

But if it made sense to you, you wouldn't be a bigot. So clearly you'll never get it. But you're good to point at as an example of a bigot. So is Watcher, but at least he not only doesn't deny it, he also has other things to talk about more often than not.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:FurryCatHerder

Brian37 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Brian,

I do "get" it.  I simply reject it.

Where in the Constitution is legal protection for the poor?

Oh, right -- THERE IS NONE!

I'll stick with the Constitution G-d gave me.  You stick with the one that allows the rich to oppress the poor with impunity.

Which is why IF Israel becomes a "Jewish state" I would never want to live there.

Fine by me -- you're over 18.  You get to make that choice.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
My problem with any

My problem with any "religious state" is the hubris of the thought of thinking one is superior. I don't like it either when a race of people or a political party thinks it is superior. Beyonds black and white hubris on economics is just as shallow and monochromatic in thinking as you with your label.

Again, you suffer from the mundane anthropomorphism of thinking your "people" are the alpha male of the entire world.  I don't care about "we don't want to take over the world". But you do want a pedestal regardless.

No nation, no race, no religion, no individual is the center of the universe, much less our planet.

Having a culture is one thing, seeing yourself by proxy of label entitling ANYONE to set up a pecking order on base of race religion or nationality, is hubris, nothing less.

You are a human first. Your Jewishness is merely your fondness of things you flock to. It is not owed any submission, pecking order, or pedestal.

NO ONE IS SPECIAL. Not me, not you not Muslims or Christians, NO ONE.

You are special first to yourself, you have to value yourself, that is a given. Then you are special to your family and friends. But just as no one likes a self centered individual, I do not like self centered politics or nations.

Blind loyalty has always been a cluster fuck to our species. You suffer from that blind loyalty yourself.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Vastet wrote:
I have specified your bigotry a number of times. Your inability to understand or willful ignoring of such doesn't change the facts. Anyone who challenges anything you say is instantly labelled a jew lover, or closet jew, or fake atheist, or some other horse shit.

If you call mere assertion to be specific while refusing to explain why it is considered bigotry a reponse then of course you have. But the failure to explain why means you have not responded to what I have asked for.

Fake atheist of course because there is no explanation as to why Judaism is the only religion an "atheist" defends. Izziehugger also as it is the only foreign occupation being defended.

Quote:
You even constantly delude yourself into thinking the destruction of the jews would destroy all the abrahamic faiths, you hate jews so irrationally.

It is equally delusional to think discrediting Jesus and Mohamed would affect the others. However attacking Judaism is no different from attacking the others yet you are right not raising an objection to it without explaining why you only object to attacks on Judaism. And immediately you insist that attacking Christianity means hating Christians and attacking Islam means hating Muslims as the general principle has to apply. If it is not a general principle then please explain why that syllogism applies only to Judaism. Specificity again. Please provide it.

Quote:
But if it made sense to you, you wouldn't be a bigot. So clearly you'll never get it. But you're good to point at as an example of a bigot. So is Watcher, but at least he not only doesn't deny it, he also has other things to talk about more often than not.

Please explain why only Judaism should be off limits. If you are not saying that, please explain why it should be treated differently from other religions. If you are saying neither please explain just what you are trying to say.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:
My problem with any "religious state" is the hubris of the thought of thinking one is superior.

When Judeans invented theocracy it was not to claim superiority but for financial benefit as priest kings. The temple tax was real. The way things worked in those days, they could get the Greeks and later the Romans to force payment of the tax regardless of where they lived in either empire. The same applied in Muslim and Christian countries. When the Orthodox Jews conducted their Inquisition against the Karaite Jews in Muslim Spain it where their religious court decisions and civil power executions. (No one expected the first Spanish Inquisition.)

The ancient tradition of maintaining their own courts and determining the punishment to be meted out by civilian authority continued as late as the late 19th c. in eastern Europe. It is the entire basis for the Pilate episode in the bible. All the who killed Jesus thing could have been raised in modern times. In accordance with the custom of the time, the Jews condemned him to death and the Romans carried it out. The same thing was done in the heresy and witch trials in Europe. The church courts tried the cases and determined the punishment which was then carried out by civil authorities.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Vastet

FurryCatHerder wrote:

I've not seen anything from him about Israel that is more than marginally justified.  Mostly he repeats very old and tired myths about Jewish origins and implies that there were no Jews is modern Israel prior to the rise of Zionism.  He also ignores the expulsion of Jews from Arab states and other acts of violence against Jews both within and without Eretz Yisrael.

I refer to Israel and its policies today, not his arguments on now irrelevant history (irrelevant because the conflict today isn't driven by that history).
Israel is a tyranny, in that much he is correct. The only bigger global offender against freedom and human rights today is America.
He is also correct that it should not exist. The UN had no right to take people's land and give it away just because Hitler was a fucknut.

But it does exist now, and destroying it is just ending a wrong with another wrong, and it wouldn't fix the situation either.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Quote:If you call mere

Quote:
If you call mere assertion to

Only a fool repeats a failed experiment over and over, expecting different results. I gave you specific examples dozens of times over the years, even in this topic. But your self delusion blinders are always working at peak efficiency. Like I said, you simply don't get it. And until you do you will remain a bigot, obvious to everyone but yourself and neonazis.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Fake atheist of course

Quote:
Fake atheist of course because there is no explanation as to why Judaism is the only religion an "atheist" defends. Izziehugger also as it is the only foreign occupation being defended.

Just proving your bigotry. I never defended judaism, I attacked your bigotry. That you can't tell the difference is further proof of your bigotry. You spew it everywhere.

Quote:
It is equally delusional to think discrediting Jesus and Mohamed would affect the others.

Unlike yourself, I'm not stupid enough to suggest that attacking one religion damages three.

Quote:
Please explain why only Judaism should be off limits.

More proof of your bigotry. Where did I ever say judaism should be off limits? Attacking every religion is good. Being a bigot in the process is counter-productive, however.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:FurryCatHerder

Vastet wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:

I've not seen anything from him about Israel that is more than marginally justified.  Mostly he repeats very old and tired myths about Jewish origins and implies that there were no Jews is modern Israel prior to the rise of Zionism.  He also ignores the expulsion of Jews from Arab states and other acts of violence against Jews both within and without Eretz Yisrael.

I refer to Israel and its policies today, not his arguments on now irrelevant history (irrelevant because the conflict today isn't driven by that history). Israel is a tyranny, in that much he is correct. The only bigger global offender against freedom and human rights today is America. He is also correct that it should not exist. The UN had no right to take people's land and give it away just because Hitler was a fucknut. But it does exist now, and destroying it is just ending a wrong with another wrong, and it wouldn't fix the situation either.

The UN did NOT take anyones land from anyone.  What they did was change the GOVERNMENT of that land, which is not the same taking land.  David Ben-Gurion made it very clear that any Arabs in what would become Israel were welcome to stay and live in peace and enjoy whatever prosperity Israel had to offer.  That Israel is the most democratic, free, prosperous, etc. nation in the region should speak volumes to how poorly the Arabs chose.

The Arabs have blown every single last chance they've had to have a peaceful co-existence with Israel, as well as to improve their standard of living.  When the Jewish population evacuated Gaza, large numbers of greenhouses were left behind.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9331863/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/looters-strip-gaza-greenhouses/#.TwhiG_Jt2KI

Quote:

Palestinians looted dozens of greenhouses on Tuesday, walking off with irrigation hoses, water pumps and plastic sheeting in a blow to fledgling efforts to reconstruct the Gaza Strip.

American Jewish donors had bought more than 3,000 greenhouses from Israeli settlers in Gaza for $14 million last month and transferred them to the Palestinian Authority. Former World Bank President James Wolfensohn, who brokered the deal, put up $500,000 of his own cash.

And the poverty in Gaza?  They practically =demand= to live in poverty --

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec05/gaza_8-19.html

Quote:
But the full picture of what comes next in Gaza remains open. It is one of the most densely populated places on earth, grinding poverty abounds, and the unemployment rate approaches a staggering 60 percent. One reliable employer in Gaza: Greenhouses that dot the arid seaside strip. A group of wealthy Americans has donated $14 million, under the leadership of former World Bank President James Wolfensohn, to save the greenhouses and the jobs they provide.

The Torah says that G-d uses other peoples to punish Israel for failing to obey G-d, but then those other people are punished far more severely.  Now, I don't believe in Gepetto Santa, the Sky Daddy Puppet Master who gives all good Jewish boys and girls whatever they want, and punishes Gentiles, but when I see something like what happened in Gaza, I start to understand that it is the arrogance of people who'd destroy the Jews which is their own eventual undoing.  Look at how utterly Germany was destroyed if you need another example.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3266
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:That

FurryCatHerder wrote:

That seems to be the case with A_Nony_Mouse -- the number of people who are decrying his naked bigotry isn't small.  His willingness to attack people as puppets of Jews simply because they call him out on his bigotry is evidence that his bigotry knows no bounds.  If he just attacked Jews, I'd be fine with that -- Jews seem to get used to it after a while -- but anyone who doesn't cower to his repeated attacks is labeled a sympathizer and a puppet of the Jews.  His willingness to make absurd claims that are not, in any way, based on Scientific evidence is inconsistent with what seems to be the approach this website takes: presenting clearly supported scientific evidence as a way of combating ignorance.

Between his bigotry and anti-Science stances on the subject of his bigotry, his attitudes seem to be completely inconsistent with two key goals: present clearly supported scientific evidence about the nature of reality, and creating a society that's free from the types of hatred that he spews on a regular basis.

For these reasons, I would like to suggest that he be banned, or at the very minimum given a nice long vacation.

I'm new to this issue as my posts and reading of these forums are limited to specific subjects, but does any one know if this person is really who they say they are? or is it a person role playing another role (usually one of dozens) in order to troll forums for the sole purpose of getting people angry?

If either is true (1) they are truly bigots or (2) they are role playing, isn't it better to mute them? I'm not sure of the forum application Mr. Sapient is using but is there are a way for users to block comments from showing up from another individual?

There are some games I play which will allow you to put other players on an ignore list so you aren't bothered by their ignorance.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3266
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:When

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

When Judeans invented theocracy...

I dispute that Judeans "invented" theocracy.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

When Judeans invented theocracy...

I dispute that Judeans "invented" theocracy.

Especially since he claims that Judaism is a fairly recent (read: less than 3,500 years old ...) invention and that we're really Greeks somehow.

Egypt was a Theocracy while we were still slaves there, and the Egyptian empire was well before the Greeks.  Or Judeans ...

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:I'm

digitalbeachbum wrote:
I'm new to this issue as my posts and reading of these forums are limited to specific subjects, but does any one know if this person is really who they say they are? or is it a person role playing another role (usually one of dozens) in order to troll forums for the sole purpose of getting people angry?

There are =plenty= of real people just like him all over the Internet.

My personal take on him is that he's either a reject from an anti-Semetic hate group or has some pretty severe mental problems.  The better trolls (people who do it on purpose ...) don't make such outrageous posts that people tune them out.  The toe a very fine line between pissing everyone off =completely= and keep people engaged.  Nony just seems to piss people off and lead them to the conclusion he's disturbed.

I don't doubt that he's an atheist, but I don't think he's an "Equal Opportunity Atheist".  My guess, as to his origins, is that he was brought up in or near some kind of "Christian Identity Movement" Christian household, toed the Christian Identity line for years, then gave up on G-d because he wasn't getting his way somehow.  The key indicators of the Christian Identity background are his repeated assertions that the Jewish people aren't =really= Jews, that we're somehow Khazars.  His hatred of Jews is probably why he's got a love-fest going on for Muslims, not that he actually cares about Islam, which he doesn't seem to do all that much either.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
No Furry, the UN stole land

No Furry, the UN stole land and gave it to the jews so they'd have a place to go after WWII. Which is fine. But it should have been taken from Germany or maybe Italy, the perpetrators of the holocaust. Not some primitive nomadic cultures. And what happened was remarkably similar to the colonisation of North America. With every passing year the local arabs were more marginalised in favour of the mass introdus (I coined a phrase Sticking out tongue) of jews, until you get to today where the vast majority of arabs around Israel are in concentration camps. You can't pretend the creation of a government in a place where there was none isn't theft. That knocking homes down isn't theft. The arabs had no choice in the matter, it was forced on them. Which is theft. Period.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
And Israel has been JUST as

And Israel has been JUST as unwilling to pursue peace as the Palestinians. For decades they've violated multiple international laws on human rights and building more colonies and hammering the civilian populace with an overwhelmingly powerful military that has yet been completely ineffective at preventing return fire from hamas and other organisations.

Both sides are at fault. If Israel wanted peace they'd restore independence to the Palestinians and remove ALL colonies built illegally. I'd comment on what Palestinians would do if they wanted peace but you already did well enough in that regard.

And your example of Germany is flawed. It got crushed because Hitler bit off more than he could chew, not because he was exterminating a supposed culture. Opening a front with Russia lost him the war. No other single action can be pointed to which caused Germany so much hardship.
Germany is also one of the strongest countries in the world today, so it clearly didn't hurt them for long.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3266
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

When Judeans invented theocracy...

I dispute that Judeans "invented" theocracy.

Especially since he claims that Judaism is a fairly recent (read: less than 3,500 years old ...) invention and that we're really Greeks somehow.

Egypt was a Theocracy while we were still slaves there, and the Egyptian empire was well before the Greeks.  Or Judeans ...

given that "theocracy" is basically a religious government where the god(s) are the supreme ruler then the Judeans are not the first and the certainly did not invent it.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3266
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:No Furry, the

Vastet wrote:
No Furry, the UN stole land and gave it to the jews so they'd have a place to go after WWII. Which is fine. But it should have been taken from Germany or maybe Italy, the perpetrators of the holocaust. Not some primitive nomadic cultures. And what happened was remarkably similar to the colonisation of North America. With every passing year the local arabs were more marginalised in favour of the mass introdus (I coined a phrase Sticking out tongue) of jews, until you get to today where the vast majority of arabs around Israel are in concentration camps. You can't pretend the creation of a government in a place where there was none isn't theft. That knocking homes down isn't theft. The arabs had no choice in the matter, it was forced on them. Which is theft. Period.

You are forgetting why the Jews wanted that land. Do you think the UN took a dart and threw it at the map and said "oh, here is where we will place them"?

Nope. This was holy land and the connection to it was deep for all those involved. It had been fought over many thousands of years all for some bullshit reason.

And the "theft" of land is nothing new. One society conquers one society, displaces another, absorbs another all for the same bullshit reasons.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Especially since he claims that Judaism is a fairly recent (read: less than 3,500 years old ...) invention and that we're really Greeks somehow.

Egypt was a Theocracy while we were still slaves there, and the Egyptian empire was well before the Greeks.  Or Judeans ...

 

Judaism is less than 3,500 years old.  Archaeological evidence is that monotheism in the area does not appear in the area until approximately 600 BCE.  Which makes it more like 2,700 years old.  Prior to that everyone was polytheistic - Sun-Father, Moon-Mother, Star-Children.  Very typical astronomical polytheism, similar to many other polytheistic religions of that time.  Wishing otherwise does not address the evidence.

The Canaanites (the people were NOT known as Jews at that time) were NOT slaves in Egypt.  They were farmers, merchants, civil servants and a few were slaves/criminals.  People freely moved back and forth between the highlands, the coast, and the Nile delta depending on climatic changes.  The people who built the pyramids were very well treated.  Archaeologists have excavated their living quarters, examined their garbage dumps, and cataloged their tombs.  The people who built the pyramids for the pharaohs ate better than the average Egyptian, had nice things and were buried with honor right next to the pyramids they helped build.  NOT the treatment one would expect to have been given to slaves and certainly no reason for leaving Egypt.  Current theory is the pyramids were built by people during their down time of year (after harvest and before planting, eg) and were supported by the pharaoh while they were on site in exchange for their labor and artistic skills.

I don't buy the Greek theory and neither does any other reputable historian/archaeologist that I have heard of.  So Anony is only partially correct. And he will not like it that I don't buy into this theory.  Tough, he has to give me peer reviewed evidence before I will even consider it.  The archaeological evidence is available for you in peer reviewed journals, so go look it up.  Read something other than the bible for factual history and not wishful thinking.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1250
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:No Furry, the

Vastet wrote:
No Furry, the UN stole land and gave it to the jews so they'd have a place to go after WWII. Which is fine. But it should have been taken from Germany or maybe Italy, the perpetrators of the holocaust.

I think it would be simpler for the U.S. to give up 40 miles of desert in the Southwest for the purpose.  The quality of land would be similar, and it would be less costly than the amount in aid given to Israel every year, not to mention the anger (however incongruent) of 1 billion muslims.   

Vastet wrote:
And what happened was remarkably similar to the colonisation of North America.

It will likely grow more similar to apartheid-era South Africa as the Arab-Israeli population overtakes the Jewish population, as its higher birthrate ensures it will.

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:And Israel has

Vastet wrote:
And Israel has been JUST as unwilling to pursue peace as the Palestinians. For decades they've violated multiple international laws on human rights and building more colonies and hammering the civilian populace with an overwhelmingly powerful military that has yet been completely ineffective at preventing return fire from hamas and other organisations. Both sides are at fault. If Israel wanted peace they'd restore independence to the Palestinians and remove ALL colonies built illegally. I'd comment on what Palestinians would do if they wanted peace but you already did well enough in that regard. And your example of Germany is flawed. It got crushed because Hitler bit off more than he could chew, not because he was exterminating a supposed culture. Opening a front with Russia lost him the war. No other single action can be pointed to which caused Germany so much hardship. Germany is also one of the strongest countries in the world today, so it clearly didn't hurt them for long.

 

Finally, someone with sense.  Thank you.

Too bad very few people will listen to us.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.