A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Social Issues
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #701  
Old February 14th 07, 09:42 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.energy.renewable
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,488
Default "Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong

no spam wrote:

Fourth, there is no way the SS system will last much longer. When it reaches the point where
you have just 2 or 3 workers to support one SS recipient AND welfare AND the rest of the other
government expenses they will just say 'screw this'.


Fortunately there are also self employed paying into social security.
There are a very large number of people who do pay SS withholding taxes, but they effectively
contribute nothing because they get a tax
credit for having kids.


My point still stands. The system can not be supported much longer. The drain will be just too
much.


You fools have been claiming that for decades now. It carrys on regardless.


Because the numbers don't lie.


No numbers involved in that stupid claim that it cant last much longer.

Demographics show that the number of retirees will soon be near equal to the number of tax payers.


Pig ignorant lie.

Right now it is limping along on life support by sucking money out of the
general fund because the dems sucked the SS fund dry many years ago.


Another pig ignorant lie.

BTW, do you know why the retirement age was set at 65? It was because the average life spand was,
IIRC, 62.


Another pig ignorant lie.

That meant that most people were supposed to die before they could get any money. IOW, it was set
up by FDR as a money maker for the government.


Another pig ignorant lie.

There is already a fairly large 'under the table' and barter economy going out there that is
not taxed now. How large do you thing its going to get when 50+% of wages are going to taxes?


It is already 50+ for many people, for very successful
self employed, the tax rate is 33 percent on the amount over
a certain amount, and the self employment SS taxes are
15.3 percent, plus local and state income tax and sales
tax on some things and real estate tax and personal
property tax.
And if they have employees, there is state and
federal unemployment tax, 7.65 percent SS contribution
on all of the employee earnings, plus workers compensation
taxes,


True but when Joe Smuck can look at his pay stub and see he's only
bring home $1 out of every $2 he's worked for I think things will change.


Have fun explaining why it didnt in europe when that happened.


It is happening.


No it isnt.

Look at France and Germany.


It isnt happening there.

The had RIOTS because the government is trying to trim back some of the goodies the government
gives out because there's not enough money to pay for them.


Pig ignorant lie. The frogs riot about all sorts of things, and it wasnt about that.

And have fun explaining Holland and scandinavia where they got no riots when that happened.

And this with the US paying for most of their defence from the 40's.


Another pig ignorant lie.

And it wont get to that rate in the US anyway.


Why not, is there going to be a big die off of old people?


Nope, because the US has a lot more younger people, mostly
due to immigration, legal and illegal and an unemployment rate
of 5% which ensures that most of those are paying their taxes.

For one thing if he's getting that big of a shaft


Wont happen, you watch.


I will be. There's a chance that what will happen will make the
retirement problems in the former USSR look like a mild recession.


Nope, not a chance. The US economy has always left that one for dead.

In fact its the strength of the US economy that allow it to
afford the military spending that is what sank the USSR
economy beneath the waves when it couldnt keep up.

think how much the people you are talking about are getting.


Neither will that.


They'll have to raise the top tax rate to 90% again.


Not a chance, you watch.


yeah and the income tax will only be applied to the top 1% money
makers and your SS number will never be used as a ID number and he never had sexual relations with
that woman and man will never fly. . .


The US will never again have a top rate of 90%, the world's
moved on forever on those very high rates, even in europe.


Ads
  #702  
Old February 15th 07, 04:31 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.energy.renewable
no spam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 142
Default "Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong

Fourth, there is no way the SS system will last much longer. When it
reaches the point where you have just 2 or 3 workers to support one
SS recipient AND welfare AND the rest of the other government
expenses they will just say 'screw this'.


Fortunately there are also self employed paying into social security.
There are a very large number of people who do pay SS withholding
taxes, but they effectively contribute nothing because they get a tax
credit for having kids.


My point still stands. The system can not be supported much longer.
The drain will be just too much.


You fools have been claiming that for decades now. It carrys on
regardless.


Because the numbers don't lie.


No numbers involved in that stupid claim that it cant last much longer.

Demographics show that the number of retirees will soon be near equal to
the number of tax payers.


Pig ignorant lie.


So your plan is to cose your eyes and plug your ears and maybe the problem
will go a way.

Right now it is limping along on life support by sucking money out of the
general fund because the dems sucked the SS fund dry many years ago.


Another pig ignorant lie.


So your plan is to cose your eyes and plug your ears and maybe the problem
will go a way.


BTW, do you know why the retirement age was set at 65? It was because
the average life spand was, IIRC, 62.


Another pig ignorant lie.


Check the actuary tables of the time for life expectancy of the day.


before they could get any money. IOW, it was set
up by FDR as a money maker for the government.


Another pig ignorant lie.


Only one insult line today?

There is already a fairly large 'under the table' and barter economy
going out there that is not taxed now. How large do you thing its
going to get when 50+% of wages are going to taxes?


It is already 50+ for many people, for very successful
self employed, the tax rate is 33 percent on the amount over
a certain amount, and the self employment SS taxes are
15.3 percent, plus local and state income tax and sales
tax on some things and real estate tax and personal
property tax.
And if they have employees, there is state and
federal unemployment tax, 7.65 percent SS contribution
on all of the employee earnings, plus workers compensation
taxes,


True but when Joe Smuck can look at his pay stub and see he's only
bring home $1 out of every $2 he's worked for I think things will
change.


Have fun explaining why it didnt in europe when that happened.


It is happening.


No it isnt.

Look at France and Germany.


It isnt happening there.

The had RIOTS because the government is trying to trim back some of the
goodies the government gives out because there's not enough money to pay
for them.


Pig ignorant lie. The frogs riot about all sorts of things, and it wasnt
about that.


The last ones were not but read a little history.


And have fun explaining Holland and scandinavia where they got no riots
when that happened.


Ok, because they don't have large populations of immigrants sucking up their
money. Since you are not a student of history I'll tell you that Germany
took in a lot of poor Germans when the east joined the west.

And this with the US paying for most of their defence from the 40's.


Another pig ignorant lie.



So now you are saying that the US did not provide Germany and France from
the USSR and its allies during the cold war. I knew you didn't know much
about history but I didn't know you were THAT ignorant. What'd you do drop
out of school in the 3rd grade?

And it wont get to that rate in the US anyway.


Why not, is there going to be a big die off of old people?


Nope, because the US has a lot more younger people, mostly
due to immigration, legal and illegal and an unemployment rate
of 5% which ensures that most of those are paying their taxes.


So we are going to double our population in the next few years? Remember
those new workers will have to provide for themselves, their families, the
usual government cost (roads and the like) AND the retired people. Check
out the federal budget today and see how much of the tax dollar is going to
social programs.


For one thing if he's getting that big of a shaft


Wont happen, you watch.


I will be. There's a chance that what will happen will make the
retirement problems in the former USSR look like a mild recession.


Nope, not a chance. The US economy has always left that one for dead.

Your failure in history is showing again. Try a google search on the "Great
Depression". Different cause but mostly will have the same effect.

In fact its the strength of the US economy that allow it to
afford the military spending that is what sank the USSR
economy beneath the waves when it couldnt keep up.


And it will be the social spending that will sink the US "economy beneath
the waves" if we don't get it under control. Which with politicians using
tax dollars to buy votes to stay in office I don't see that happening.


think how much the people you are talking about are getting.


Neither will that.


They'll have to raise the top tax rate to 90% again.


Not a chance, you watch.


yeah and the income tax will only be applied to the top 1% money
makers and your SS number will never be used as a ID number and he never
had sexual relations with that woman and man will never fly. . .


The US will never again have a top rate of 90%, the world's
moved on forever on those very high rates, even in europe.


Not forever just until the governments need that money.





  #703  
Old February 15th 07, 06:31 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.energy.renewable
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,488
Default "Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong

no spam wrote

Fourth, there is no way the SS system will last much longer. When it reaches the point where
you have just 2 or 3 workers to support one SS recipient AND welfare AND the rest of the
other government expenses they will just say 'screw this'.


Fortunately there are also self employed paying into social
security. There are a very large number of people who do pay SS withholding taxes, but they
effectively contribute nothing because they get a tax credit for having kids.


My point still stands. The system can not be supported much longer. The drain will be just
too much.


You fools have been claiming that for decades now. It carrys on regardless.


Because the numbers don't lie.


No numbers involved in that stupid claim that it cant last much longer.


Demographics show that the number of retirees will soon be near equal to the number of tax
payers.


Pig ignorant lie.


So your plan is to cose your eyes and plug your ears and maybe the problem will go a way.


Nope, I realise that you are lying about those numbers and that it aint gunna stop any decade soon.

Right now it is limping along on life support by sucking money out of the general fund because
the dems sucked the SS fund dry many years ago.


Another pig ignorant lie.


So your plan is to cose your eyes and plug your ears and maybe the problem will go a way.


Nope, I realise that you are lying about those numbers and that it aint gunna stop any decade soon.

BTW, do you know why the retirement age was set at 65? It was because the average life spand
was, IIRC, 62.


Another pig ignorant lie.


Check the actuary tables of the time for life expectancy of the day.


Irrelevant to why that particular age was chosen. And you're just plain wrong anyway.

before they could get any money. IOW, it was set
up by FDR as a money maker for the government.


Another pig ignorant lie.


Only one insult line today?


You dont qualify for anything else.

There is already a fairly large 'under the table' and barter
economy going out there that is not taxed now. How large do you
thing its going to get when 50+% of wages are going to taxes?


It is already 50+ for many people, for very successful
self employed, the tax rate is 33 percent on the amount over
a certain amount, and the self employment SS taxes are
15.3 percent, plus local and state income tax and sales
tax on some things and real estate tax and personal
property tax.
And if they have employees, there is state and
federal unemployment tax, 7.65 percent SS contribution
on all of the employee earnings, plus workers compensation
taxes,


True but when Joe Smuck can look at his pay stub and see he's only
bring home $1 out of every $2 he's worked for I think things will change.


Have fun explaining why it didnt in europe when that happened.


It is happening.


No it isnt.


Look at France and Germany.


It isnt happening there.


The had RIOTS because the government is trying to trim back some of the goodies the government
gives out because there's not enough money to pay for them.


Pig ignorant lie. The frogs riot about all sorts of things, and it wasnt about that.


The last ones were not but read a little history.


The frogs have never ever rioted about that. The krauts in spades.

And have fun explaining Holland and scandinavia where they got no riots when that happened.


Ok, because they don't have large populations of immigrants sucking up their money.


Pig ignorant lie.

Since you are not a student of history


Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant drug crazed fantasys.

I'll tell you that Germany took in a lot of poor Germans when the east joined the west.


No news to me. Even someone as stupid as you should be able to find plenty of
comments I made about that at the time using groups.google, if someone was
actually stupid enough to lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane.

And they STILL didnt riot about half of their income going in tax at that time.

And this with the US paying for most of their defence from the 40's.


Another pig ignorant lie.


So now you are saying that the US did not provide Germany and France from the USSR and its allies
during the cold war.


Nope, that was a comment about who PAID for that, you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

I knew you didn't know much about history but I didn't know you were THAT ignorant. What'd you do
drop out of school in the 3rd grade?


Never ever could bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

And it wont get to that rate in the US anyway.


Why not, is there going to be a big die off of old people?


Nope, because the US has a lot more younger people, mostly
due to immigration, legal and illegal and an unemployment rate
of 5% which ensures that most of those are paying their taxes.


So we are going to double our population in the next few years?


Dont need to ensure that fund isnt going away any decade soon.

Remember those new workers will have to provide for themselves, their families, the usual
government cost (roads and the like) AND the retired people.


Been happening ever since that operation started.

Check out the federal budget today and see how much of the tax dollar is going to social programs.


Irrelevant to whether that fund is going away any decade soon.

And western europe has been spending a hell of a lot bigger
percentage of theirs on stuff like that and continue to do so fine.

For one thing if he's getting that big of a shaft


Wont happen, you watch.


I will be. There's a chance that what will happen will make the
retirement problems in the former USSR look like a mild recession.


Nope, not a chance. The US economy has always left that one for dead.


Your failure in history is showing again.


Nope.

Try a google search on the "Great Depression".


The US economy STILL left the USSR economy for dead even then.

Different cause but mostly will have the same effect.


Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

In fact its the strength of the US economy that allow it to
afford the military spending that is what sank the USSR
economy beneath the waves when it couldnt keep up.


And it will be the social spending that will sink the US "economy
beneath the waves" if we don't get it under control.


Have fun explaining how come that hasnt happened in
western europe where they spend FAR more on that stuff.

Which with politicians using tax dollars to buy votes to stay in office I don't see that
happening.


Corse it wont, and the US economy will carry on regardless anyway.

With a 5% unemployment rate, its doing fine.

think how much the people you are talking about are getting.


Neither will that.


They'll have to raise the top tax rate to 90% again.


Not a chance, you watch.


yeah and the income tax will only be applied to the top 1% money
makers and your SS number will never be used as a ID number and he
never had sexual relations with that woman and man will never fly.
. .


The US will never again have a top rate of 90%, the world's
moved on forever on those very high rates, even in europe.


Not forever just until the governments need that money.


Fantasy, the voters wont wear it again, you watch.


  #704  
Old February 18th 07, 05:23 AM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.energy.renewable
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Why are SUVs and Christianity similar?

no spam wrote:

The Pope is just the figurehead of the church and does not make
many decisions. It is the Cardinals that tell the Pope what to say.


Nonsense. It is Catholic dogma to excommunicate anybody who challenges the Pope's primacy.
The nature of his primacy can be debated,


If that were true then it seems to me that 90% of the US Catholics
should be kicked out. They are openly thumbing their noses at him
and his teachings on birth control, divorce and more.


They arent as hard line as the worst of you rabid fundys.


They have confession for a reason, stupid.


IIRC, confession is for you to admit your wrongs, get them forgiven and to say you won't do it
again. Not to allow you to keep on getting away with something.


They dont in fact boot people out who keep confessing
and keep saying that they wont do it again.


Never said they did. Only using it as another example of how they are not following what is taught
in the Bible.


The bulk of the rules of the roman catholic church have nothing to do with the bible.

Most obviously with the mass, services in churches, cathedrals
etc, bishops, popes, the entire church hierarchy, etc etc etc.

If you read it yourself you will find that if a fellow Christian screws up and will not stop
screwing up after several attempts to get him to correct his behavior he is to be, for lack of
better terms, put out of the Church.


The roman catholic church doesnt do it that way, as long as you
keep confessing your sins and promise to try to not do them again.

As I said, different rules for believers.


Its nothing like as black and white as you claim with the roman catholic church.

As I said, I'm not Catholic myself, but I've spent enough time
with practicing Catholics to have learned a thing or two....


Ask them if they are following the teachings of the church on all things.


Only rabid fanantics ever do that.


IOW, only the true Catholics.


You wouldnt know what a true catholic was if one bit you on your lard arse, fundy.


Sure I do. They are the ones who follow the teachings and rules of the Catholic church.


Almost no roman catholics do that on every teaching and rule of the roman catholic church.

Most have particular areas they disagree with the church about,
whether that is just sending their brats to church schools, marrying
those who are not part of the roman catholic church, eating fish
on fridays, or more fundamental stuff like birth control or whether
there can never ever be married priests etc.

It isnt even true of most priests, let alone the stupid god grovellers in that particular church.

In spades with some controversial areas like miracles etc.

Only a handful of the "practicing Catholics" I have known through my life (I dated one for a
while) were what I would call true Catholics, i.e. following the teachings of the church. The
rest looked at them as guidelines not rules.


And that has always been one way of doing a religion.


IOW, they want to be called Catholic but not have to be Catholic.


Or there might just be more than one way of doing a religion, fundy.


Not when it comes to Catholicism. (Ok I should put Roman Cathloic there is the Greek Orthodox
Cathloics.)


Wrong, as always.

Either you are a Catholic or you are not.


Wrong, as always. That particular church has never been as mindlessly
hard line as that, and that is the whole point of confession etc.

My example of a vegetarian shows that. Either you eat
meat or you don't. If you don't eat meat then you ARE a vegetarian, if you do eat meat you are NOT
a vegetarian.


Wrong, as always. That particular church has never been as mindlessly
hard line as that, and that is the whole point of confession etc.

And even vegetarians arent that hardline either,
particularly about stuff like eggs etc and even fish too.

You either follow the laws of the Catholic church and be a Catholic or you don't follow the laws
and you are not a Catholic. You can call yourself a vegetarian or Catholic or a tree if you want
but calling yourself something doesn't make you one.


You get no say what so ever on what is or is not a catholic, fundy.

Doesnt stop it being a religion and plenty of protestant cults operate like that too.


More faulty logic.


We'll see...


That's like a kid saying it must be ok to shoplift because plenty of other kids do it.


Nothing like with the more trivial rules that anyone
with a clue has noticed change over time, like
saying the mass in the local language or in latin etc.


So? Laws are changed all the time (read about prohibition in the US)
but it doesn't change the fact that you are required to obey the ones
in effect at the time.


Wrong again with hordes of 'rules' like sending their brats to church
schools, marrying those who are not part of the roman catholic church,
eating fish on fridays, or more fundamental stuff like birth control or
whether there can never ever be married priests etc.

It isnt even true of most priests, let alone the stupid god grovellers in that particular church.

A lot of people thought the prohibition laws were 'silly' and didn't follow them.


And they didnt get booted out of the country, stupid.

There were penaltys for not obeying the law, and there are
with roman catholics who confess to particular sins too.

Even Galileo didnt get booted out of the roman catholic church.

Those who didn't follow the law might have claimed to be law abiding people but they were not.


If people in the RC church don't like the rules then they have some choices:


1) Be a real Catholic. follow the rules and do nothing about them.
2) Be a real Catholic, follow the rules and try to get them changed.
3) Be a fake Catholic, ignore the rules and claim to be a Catholic.
4) Find a church with rules they agree with and join it.


5) Tell stupid fundys like you that they havent got a ****ing
clue about how that particular church does things and to
take your list and shove it where the sun dont shine and
that you'll be burning anyway because you're a protestant.

Even with mindlessly silly **** like the selling of indulgences etc.


Only the rabid fanatics chuck a trantrum and storm out.


Only fakers claim to be one thing but are really something else.


Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about what confession is about
in that particular cult. They didnt even kick Galileo out.

Most roman catholics just carry on regardless and realise that
very little doesnt change over time with the relatively trivial crap
like what women can do in the cult, what the cult's positiion is
on what schools the cult member's brats can attend, what
has to happen with marraige with non cult members, what
cult members should do church attendance wise, etc etc etc.


IOW, they want the privileges of the church but not the responsibilities that come with it.


IOW they understand how that cult actually works and you never will.

Heck most of the Catholics I know don't even follow their own rules.


Most of the "religious" people I know, regardless of faith, don't follow their own rules.


Which is my point. I'm telling you I'm a vegetarian but I eat
pork, beef, chicken and fish. Now am I a vegetarian or not?
It aint that black and white with stuff like eating fish on fridays.


Sure it is. What makes a Catholic a Catholic or a Baptist a Baptist?
Its following the rules.


Fantasy with that particular cult.


And plenty of protestant cults have no rules handed down by
bigwigs in the heirarchy, because they have no hierarchy at all.


Tell me of a few, if you can.


The Quakers for starters. They aint alone.

Your pig ignorance stands out like dogs balls.

I can tell you I'm a Catholic (not to pick on them but because we have been talking about
them) but I don't go to mass,


It aint that black and white either. What about only going occasionally ?


You are adding to my scenario to fit what you want.


Nope, I'm rubbing your stupid rabid fundy nose in the
fact that its nothing like as black and white as you claim.


Lying again and didn't even cut out the facts that prove it. I
clearly state "don't go to mass" you add "only going occasionally" to
make it fit your idea. You still haven't answered my question. Would that person be a Catholic
(the one in my question not yours) or not?


As far as that cult is concerned, yes they are.

And they wouldnt be refused absolution on imminent
death or be refused burial by the church, etc etc etc.

I said "don't go to mass," not "don't go to mass regularly,".


You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.


IOW, I am right and you are wrong and you are not man enough to admit it.


Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

have sex outside marriage, use birth control and
support abortion on demand. Now am I a Catholic?


Corse you are if you decide that the ban on birth control is stupid.


So I'm a law abiding citizen and will be allowed to remain living
free with all the other law abiding citizens if I shoot an illegal immigrants because I think
the ban on shooting illegal immigrants is stupid?


Nothing like ignoring the ban on birth control because you realise
its stupid and completely counter productive in the third world.


Try to answer the questions. It really isn't that hard. After all it is a yes or no question.


No it aint. Only rabid fundys are so blinkered that they reduce everything to black and white.

In spades with the ban on condoms in the parts of the world were HIV/AIDS is rife.


Simple, if you want to use condoms then pick a religion that allows it. Or just make up your own
religion.


That particular cult doesnt work like that. They dont even encourage those
who disagree with particular rules to leave that cult, let alone boot them out.

Doesn't bother me. What bothers me is people claiming to be something but not living up to it.


Your problem.

It doesn't matter if its a Catholic that uses condoms, a Christian who screws around or an
environmentalist who flys around in a private jet.


Pity about you flouting what that fool who was stupid enough
to get nailed up by the romans told you to do behaviour wise.

If you think the ban on birth control is stupid why
would you want to follow a church that preaches that?


Because they will likely come to their senses on that eventually just like they did on that
question about whether the sun revolves around the earth and you can ignore that particular ban
with complete impunity.


Nope,


Yep.

but if you'll notice that that rule was changed as well as many others.


There was no 'rule' on that.

Those terminal ****wits just claimed that thats what the bible said and
that that must be true. They have since come to their senses on that.

They dont even claim that the bible has anything to say about contraception
or married priests, or what women can do in the cult, etc etc etc.

Has nothing to do with my argument that you have no right to claim to be a member of a group if
you don't follow the rules of that group.


Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about what confession is about
in that particular cult. They didnt even encourage Galileo to leave.

To me the answer to both questions is a huge NO.


Yeah, but you are a rabid fanatic.


That's funny.


We'll see...


You calling someone who believes that if you don't want
go to hear about God I leave you alone a "rabid fanatic".


Its that mindless **** of yours above that if you dont agree
with some detail of what the cult currently claims are the
rules then you must leave is what makes you a rabid fanatic.


So I guess I can claim that I'm a Catholic then even though I don't believe their rules.


Pathetic, really.

You're so stupid that you havent even noticed that that particular
cult has hardly ever operated like that, and the downsides that
have happened when it has actually been stupid enough to let
rabid fanatics like you operate like that in that particular cult.


Then what rules does a person have to follow to not be called a member of a group?


That particular cult doesnt even operate like that.

Regardless of what you want it to do.

Can I claim to be a vegetarian? I eat vegetables. That pesky little fact that I also eat pork,
beef, chicken, fish, and the like has no bearing on it. At least according to your logic.



Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about what confession is about
in that particular cult. They didnt even encourage Galileo to leave.

What phrase do you call people who want to
pass laws forcing their view of religion on you?


They're rabid fanatics too. Fortunately there are **** all of
those in any decent democracy and I choose to live in one
of those myself and whatever they want, there isnt even the
remotest possibility of them ever being able to achieve that.


To use one of your oft use phrases; Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland.


Read some history. I'd suggest you read how Germany went from a civilized country to what it
became.


Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that that
wasnt anything like a decent democracy when they were
actually stupid enough to vote themselves out of existence
and let that jumped up little arsehole rule by decree.

I'll give you a head start Hitler was voted into office.


Like hell he ever was with the office of Chancellor.

Even the wahabis arent into that either and
you cant get much more rabid than them.


Read more about them.


Find a more viable line in mindless bull****.

For one thing you have just a few choices if you want to live in an Islamic country;


1) Be Islamic.
2) If you are not Islamic but are a follower of Abraham, i.e. Jewish
or Christian you can;
2a) convert to Islam
2b) pay to continue practicing your religion but your kids must
convert to Islam.


That is a pig ignorant lie.

3) If you are not Islamic and not a follower of Abraham you must convert or be killed.


Another pig ignorant lie.

You don't see many of those in the roman catholic church
anymore, most of those turned into protestants instead.


No you don't see many of them because the RC church rather
have non-Catholic Catholics filling the pews and offering plates
than having to sell some of their pretty buildings.


Have fun explaining how they delt with Luther.


You know I don't see many people in the church who hang around with Luther. Hum, could be because
that was a few years ago.


Never ever could bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

That said, there's actually a process by which Catholics can
formally question some of the tenets of the church without
being excommunicated. I forget what it's called, what can be
questioned, and the details about how it works, but it's an
involved enough process that I'm guessing the people you're
talking about are merely lapsed to some degree and not
"officially" questioning the church.... :-)


My point had very little to do with Catholics in specific. I
picked them because they are world known and I know a little
about their religion. My point was and is you can't condemn a
group based on actions of people who are only claiming to be
members of that group.


But you can condemn a group which is stuffed with rabid fanatics like you.


And what group is that


Those with such stupid ideas about following 'rules'


Such as vegetarian who think fellow vegetarians shouldn't eat meat. Now I think I get your point.


Never ever could bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

and what am I so rabidly fanatic about?


That if they dont abide by all the 'rules', they should leave.


That particular cult has never worked like that.


Seems to me that in the past they did some really nasty things to people who didn't follow their
rules.


They didnt even boot Galileo out of that cult.

Maybe I'm thinking of vegetarian instead of Catholics.


Never ever could bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Bay Area dreams that could be realized" (Humans Think They Own the Earth) Mike Vandeman Mountain Biking 0 October 12th 05 02:24 AM
"Bay Area dreams that could be realized" (Humans Think They Own the Earth) Mike Vandeman Social Issues 0 October 12th 05 02:24 AM
"Bay Area dreams that could be realized" (Humans Think They Ownthe Earth) Westie Mountain Biking 4 October 9th 05 10:33 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.