h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I think blincky's right, so I am going to unilaterally end my political debate with Della; if she wants to respond here, I can't stop her, obviously, but I won't reply.


<>

Suppose I have intuition that's in concordance with something else, say, the Two Treatises of Governmenr? Would I be sane to consider that a direct message from John Locke?

Jordan: <>

We all suffer from our own unique delusions. For example, my brother considers himself to be a fantastic dancer, against all objective evidence to the contrary.

Schizophrenics have delusions due to a medical condition, whereas theists are deluded by sloppy thinking and early social conditioning. You can give a schizophrenic medicines to control their delusions, but theists are much trickier.

NPY: <>

God says "Thou shalt not kill," and then immediately leads his people into an orgy of murder, destruction, looting, and rape. The problem isn't that I didn't finish the Ten Commandments, it's that you stopped reading there.

Della: <>

You're poorly positioned to guess what I believe, so don't. If you want to know what I think of the Crusades, you can ask.

<>

Just curious to know whether you are referring to me here.

<>

<<<>

How is that an inconsistancy? Why is it impossible to support abortion and the death penalty?

<>
Just like the other Americans I argue about this with... you damn the source and reject the conclusion, for mostly emotional reasons.

<>

Talk about big-time missing of the point! I can't believe you said that. The oil+money motivation kind-of *is* the point, I would have thought, inasmuch as it casts doubt on the whole "official story". OBL is said to have been dead since late 2001, anyway!
<< his organization certainly did have major resources present there that no one could have denied were present. I find it Even if they didn't, was that responce a reasonable responce to the situation?>>
no, I am not sure what you're asking here. Why should the Afghani Government trust Dubya and the CIA, for goodness' sake? You Americans would be better off being a bit less trusting yourselves.
<>
So, you naively believe Afghanistan did the deed using AL Q as a proxy? That's the weirdest bit of paranoia I've heard from anyone yet!
<>
Once again, I am not at all sure what you're driving at here. Are you?
<< since he would have felt that you aren't any more a Christian than me,>>
He didn't, which is why it is so hilarious that your mate Blathers likes to claim I am a fellow thinker with JtP...
<< However, Bin Laudin and al Queda's current actions show them to be at war (if you grant that they have the right to be at war) or engaged in a criminal campagain against (if you don't) the US.>>
Have you ever read '1984'? If you have, you'll be aware of a character called 'Emanuel Goldstein', who is the 'enemy' the population are taught to hate. I think of him when I hear an American bang on about OBL, Al Q and the 'war against' the USA.


<>

You believe what you want to believe. Open your mind. Check out some sources other than CNN, for goodness' sake (and for your own.)

<>

How could pulling out possibly make it any worse than it already is? But no, Bush'n'Blair will stay as long as they don't get outright rebellion from their populations. The best anti-war billboard I saw on a demo - "Why is our oil under their sand?" (Sarcastic, BTW).

<>

For someone who prides himself on his scepticism and his intellect, that's a peculiarly gullible thing to say, R Daneel...

You'd know if you were ready to accept such things in the first place, Ste.

But if one is a Christian, Muslim or other believer, one tests ones intuition against what God has already said. As far as I know, Catholics don't believe in private revelation at all, and so checking with priests is an absolute requirement before even thinking about acting on anything in a message from God.
Maybe a Catholic can confirm that, if there are any reading this thread.

<>

I'd have thought that was obvious! Both are barbaric, anti-life and I can't understand people who pick one and support it, while opposing the other.

It is as much for the sake of consistency as anything else, that I oppose war, the death penalty, and free unrestricted induced abortion.

I'm not replying to your two politics posts here, because this is supposed to be a religion thread. When I'm not swamped with homework, I'll try to get back to you on them on your own page.


<>

Given that you assume that anyone who supports one is "barbaric" and "anti-life", that doesn't mean they can't be against the other for reasons other than considering it "barbaric" and "anti-life". For example, disliking the death penalty because it implies more certainty than they have in the justice system--unlike imprisonment it is a final act, not reversible or correctable if the verdict was found to be in error. And of course, believe it or not, not everyone believes life begins at conception, and those of use who don't have no reason to consider abortion "anti-life".

But, since on matters involving religion (and it seems politics, too), you seem to enjoy resorting to insults rather than logic, I suppose I shouldn't expect anything from you other than such an unreasoned responce.

Your war comment deserves a responce, but it too I will respond to on your page, not here.

Is it just me or are we getting very political here?

<>

Here in the UK, a woman can have an abortion up to 24 weeks of the pregnancy. But it has actually been shown in studies that unborn foetuses can fel pain from about 20 weeks. Is this not an indication that the uncorn child is a living being?

Read this passage from the website http://www.covenantnews.com/abortion/archives/2005_03.html:

"MADISON -- Physicians would be required to tell a woman considering an abortion that a human fetus of 20 weeks or more gestational age likely experiences pain under a bill introduced Monday. "I don't think the abortion clinics are advising their patients that an unborn child feels pain," said state Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, who introduced Senate Bill 138. Advocates of abortion rights, however, say Grothman's bill is politically motivated, lacks scientific merit and is intended to scare women."

<>

Hmmm, not sure which is more tedious . . . rehashing Della's views on Bush and US politics or having yet another 'when does a foetus become a sentient being?' discussion.

I don't think anyone anywhere would ever argue that an 'uncorn' child isn't a living thing.

Also, less than 1 percent of abortions happen after 24 weeks, and are not 'optional'.

So . . . now what?


az

If it's so tedious, azahar, you know what you need to do.. That's right, don't read it!

I am just astounded that R Daneel is quite so naive about the events of the last four years.

I am not going to re-hash abortionwith you, or anything else for that matter.

Della, I would respond to that, except that under the Editors' new rules, I am not supposed to respond to posts like that, just Yikes them. Since I don't feel that the Yikes button is an appropriate solution here, I am unsubscribing from this thread for a time. I feel that, under the Editors' new policy, I am forbidden from responding to your posts about the events of the last four years anywhere on this site, so you have the last word on this matter. I hope that when I return to this thread, you will have dropped the topic and have stopped behaving in a manner that requires me to not respond to you to be in keeping with the Editors' new policy.

This post has been removed.

Dude... be civil.

Do you mean me, Ste?

I admit I am hacked off, there are a dozen guys from the City Council, digging up the road outside our house, and a dozen other guys being sappers, and like little moles, they are under the house, supposedly fitting insulation... We've been subjected to noise torture since 08.00 and it's 13.17.

That being said, I really am at a loss to know what R Daneel's issue is. I have been debating this very issue on the American board, with a wunch of bankers who insist in the teeth of the evidence, that there *were* WMD and that they *will* be found one day, and that the Pretzeldent is an honorable, caring and decent man, who was taken in by the evil Brits with their false claims about Niger...

It'd try the patience of a saint, and a saint I ain't...

So, for any incivility.

As far as I can see he is unwilling to discuss it on this forum because it is about religion, not Bush. Which is fair enough in my opinion. I actually felt relieved when he didn't take the bait.

He offered to discuss it elsewhere. Maybe you should go over to his PS and leave him a message?

Ste

Good point, Ste! Though I understood he'd be coming to mine...

Och, weel... I'll see him there, then.

Indeed, I think Daneel deserves a medal for refusing to rise to the bait. I'm almost curious to know why Della feels that Daneel deserves the wrath inspired by some people on another board are posting about WMD or by who is doing what outside her house.

I'm curious as to why Blathers doesn't just *ask* Della.

(For the record, it was an apology to R Daneel.. But I suppose that's a foreign concept to Blathers, huh.)

Because I said I'm *almost* curious. I'm pretty confident I would regret actually asking the question.

An apology? Where?