"Robert L. Bass" wrote in message
news
You should have been drowned when they baptized you.

I wonder if you would actually be willing to kill someone for saying that
they believe. More to the point, I hope I would have the strength of
character to stand up for my beliefs if that was about to happen. :^)


History is replete with a massive number of Christians who have
killed others for their beliefs.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Robert L. Bass" wrote in message
news
"Drown all the Christians!"

That's been tried. They've also been hung, speared, jailed, beheaded,
crucified, etc (though not all at once) over the centuries.

That's only because other religions are as bad as Christianity, rather
than because Christianity is a superior religion.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Robert L. Bass" wrote in message
...
The right wing Christians would screem for
him to be pulled off of the shelves because
he was gay.

You're confusing Christians in general with the radical right.

For the most part, the radical right is a Fundamentalist
Christian agenda.

Most of us
are much more tolerant than you might think. Bear in mind that the
radical
"Christian Right" is neither Christian nor right much of the time. Just
as
Muslims have a small group of crazies who think they serve Allah by
murdering innocent civilians, there are a small group of loud-mouthed,
Bible-thumping jerks who use Christianity as an excuse to attack everyone
different from themselves. Most Muslims find their crazies repugnant and
most Christians find our own group of crazies despicable.


I have doubts about your tolerance of those who don't accept your
premises of the Absolute truth of Jesus and his unique perfection.


Please don't confuse Christianity with the politics of Pat Robertson and
other such monsters. We're not all machine gun-toting lemmings following
deluded, racist bigots to the precipice and killing "heathen" along the
way.
There are plenty of us who don't believe in abortion but we don't ally
ourselves with the nut-cases who bomb clinics and murder doctors. We may
not believe in homosexuality but that doesn't mean we condemn homosexuals.

As a conservative Christian I believe that it is my responsibility to try
to
live right and to exercise my faith -- not to force you to believe as I
do.

Well, than it must NOT be the "absolute truth" that Jesus is the one
and only son of God. It is merely just your "belief" that he is.






----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Drown all the Christians!"

That's been tried. They've also been hung, speared, jailed, beheaded,
crucified, etc (though not all at once) over the centuries. Somehow
Christianity not only remains but spreads despite all those efforts to
stamp
it out. Maybe there's more to it than you realize. :^)

I realize that millions of nitwits want to be brainwashed and have
other people tell them what to do. Your "christian" beliefs are the
cause of most of this country's social problems, and they cost us all
billions of bucks every year in misspent tax dollars.

Hmm. I believe in Jesus. I believe in individual responsibility, personal
charity and basic decency. I also believe that it's not my job to tell you
or anyone else how to live. My idea of "righteousness" has more to do with
what I must do than what you must do. How much did the state "misspend"
because of those beliefs?

Perhaps you have me confused with some loud-mouthed, right wing bigots who
use "Christianity" as a political banner. If so, you're mistaken. Just
like blacks, Puerto Ricans, Brazilians and Muslims; not all Christians are
cut from the same mold.

Maybe you're right though. Crucifying the worst
of your lot seems better than a quiet drowning.

You're too kind. :^)

Most audiophile rags will publish a great review
of any product for which the manufacturer has
taken out a 4-color, full page ad.

Did Jesus whisper this in your ear?

Nope. Elvis. :^)

William Sommerwerck wrote:


If you can't heal,
you're not a Christian.

Not an accurate statement. A better one would be if you can heal you may
be a Christian.

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:


History is replete with a massive number of Christians who have
killed others for their beliefs.

No group has a monopoly on that one..

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:37:16 -0400, "Robert L. Bass"
wrote:

Most audiophile rags will publish a great review
of any product for which the manufacturer has
taken out a 4-color, full page ad.

Did Jesus whisper this in your ear?

Nope. Elvis. :^)

Costello?

I saw a few comments about you supposedly posting "pedophile fantasies"

No, I don't think he has accused me of that.

Sorry. That must have been the other gentleman. The same rule applies
though. If I didn't see him do it I take accusations posted in USENET with
a large grain of salt.

It looks like the two of you have had an
ongoing war of words for a while.

Absolutely.

I see both of you posting unpleasantness about each other.

Absolutely.

None of that has much to do
with Yamaha, Denon, Jesus or me.

Agreed.

However, Arnold's anger knows no bounds.

Still, if you're going to make statements like "I've
only seen him post about audio and in that regard
he's knowledgeable and seems fair minded enough",
you really *should* do your homework.

I respectfully disagree. My statement stands. I only said what I have
seen. If he has said something which you consider offensive in a newsgroup
which I don't read, that is between you and him. If I wanted to dig deep
enough I'm sure I could find someone somewhere who hates just about anyone
who has spent any significant time posting to USENET. By the time I finish
I won't want to converse with anyone. I don't come here to find out if Arny
has some dirty linens elsewhere. For that matter, I don't have any reason
to believe that he does. When he posts about audio I read it. Sometimes I
agree. Sometimes not. Sometimes I learn something from him. There may
even be times when he learns something from me. The same applies to you.
I'd rather know what you have to say here than try to find evidence
somewhere that you're a bad guy.

90% of the posts that he makes on RAO are...

Of no concern to me. That also applies to your posts there. You may be the
finest gentleman who has ever graced that newsgroup or the worst
sludge-tossing boor in all history. If you contribute useful stuff -- even
stuff with which I might not agree -- you're OK in my book. By the same
token if you post a bunch of abuse at me without provocation I'll probably
chalk you up as useless even if you have solved world peace in another
forum.

Fair enough?

you missed the point. Let's drop it!
Clay

--


There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US!
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
It also says that person were to follow in his footsteps
and preach and teach everywhere.

And heal people, too... Which everyone conveniently ignores. If you can't
heal,
you're not a Christian.

you missed the point. Let's drop it!
Clay

--


There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US!
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
It also says that person were to follow in his footsteps
and preach and teach everywhere.

And heal people, too... Which everyone conveniently ignores. If you can't
heal,
you're not a Christian.

Just because the bible says it doesn't mean that you have to dangle it
in my face.

badger wrote:

Just for the record.... In the bible, It says that Jesus spoke to people
everywhere and all the time.

It also says that person were to follow in his footsteps and preach and
teach everywhere.

Therefore, If Christians believe the Bible, then they have no choice but to
speak of it everywhere and all the time.

Now let's drop it guys. Let's not make it a religious forum, but let's not
get carried away trying to force non religious views either.
Clay

Just because the bible says it doesn't mean that you have to dangle it
in my face.

badger wrote:

Just for the record.... In the bible, It says that Jesus spoke to people
everywhere and all the time.

It also says that person were to follow in his footsteps and preach and
teach everywhere.

Therefore, If Christians believe the Bible, then they have no choice but to
speak of it everywhere and all the time.

Now let's drop it guys. Let's not make it a religious forum, but let's not
get carried away trying to force non religious views either.
Clay

In article , Arny Krueger
wrote:

But the idea that Christian ideas would be offensive speaks to the
narrow-mindedness and intolerance we find with certain hysterical rabid
anti-Christian people.

It all goes back to the old saying, "Choose your enemies carefully,
because they are who you will end up most resembling."

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD in great sound
20s Dance Bands - Swing - Opera - Classical - Vaudeville - Ragtime
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

In article , Arny Krueger
wrote:

But the idea that Christian ideas would be offensive speaks to the
narrow-mindedness and intolerance we find with certain hysterical rabid
anti-Christian people.

It all goes back to the old saying, "Choose your enemies carefully,
because they are who you will end up most resembling."

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD in great sound
20s Dance Bands - Swing - Opera - Classical - Vaudeville - Ragtime
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

The right wing Christians would screem for
him to be pulled off of the shelves because
he was gay.

You're confusing Christians in general with the radical right.

No. I said right wing Christians. I didn't say Christians.
No confusion there. I was quite specific.

You did indeed.

Most of us are much more tolerant than you might think.

I actually have a good friend that I would consider a right-wing
Christian in many ways. However, he's a tolerant guy, as well as being
one of the most knowlegeable people about modern popular music around.
So your statement even applies to a small segment of the right-wing
Christian community as well.

Bear in mind that the radical "Christian Right" is
neither Christian nor right much of the time. Just
as Muslims have a small group of crazies who
think they serve Allah by murdering innocent
civilians, there are a small group of loud-mouthed,
Bible-thumping jerks who use Christianity as an
excuse to attack everyone different from themselves.
Most Muslims find their crazies repugnant and
most Christians find our own group of crazies
despicable.

Please don't confuse Christianity with the politics of
Pat Robertson and other such monsters.

They are right wing Christians. You can't deny that
they consider themselves Christians.

I'm sure they do. I'm not in charge of deciding whose faith counts. That
will be between them and their Maker.

We're not all machine gun-toting lemmings
following deluded, racist bigots to the precipice
and killing "heathen" along the way. There are
plenty of us who don't believe in abortion but
we don't ally ourselves with the nut-cases who
bomb clinics and murder doctors. We may not
believe in homosexuality but that doesn't mean
we condemn homosexuals.

But some of you do - even some not on the right wing.

Most of the negative comments here were directed at me personally for
expressing my faith; not at "some" others. BTW, some non-Chroistians
confuse "conservative, fundamentalist" with "right wing." The former are
those who believe the tenets of the Bible, expect miracles today and (try
to) make their personal Christian beliefs the guiding principle of their
lives. "Right wing" to me means hard-nosed, politically activist,
mean-spirited and judgmental. It often means bigoted, uncaring and
supportive of all things Republican (though not all Republicans are at all
like that). It rarely has any concept of the pinciples of charity that
Jesus taught.

FTR, I'm a "fundamentalist" in that I believe that Biblical principles apply
today; that God still does miracles and that one can have a personal
*relationship* with deity. This is nothing like the ritualistic religiosity
that is sometimes held up as "faith."

As a conservative Christian I believe that it is my
responsibility to try to live right and to exercise my
faith -- not to force you to believe as I do.

That's a good way to live.

It would be even beter if I was more consistent about it. Like I said, I'm
only human. :^)

Unfortunately, a few self-appointed "leaders" have
given the rest of us a bad name. They run around
condemning others as "sinners" while ignoring the
major problems in their own lives.

I would also agree with that.

PS, I'm not confusing Melville with Whitman, who
actually *was* gay, BTW. I was just being sarcastic.

I thought they were both gay. According to popular opinion so are/were
Thomas Mann, James Baldwin, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal, Virginia
Woolf, D.H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative people without whom
the world would be a much crummier place to live.

Regards,
Robert

=============================
Bass Home Electronics, Inc
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
941-232-0791 Wireless
Nextel Private ID - 161*21755*1
http://www.bass-home.com
=============================

The right wing Christians would screem for
him to be pulled off of the shelves because
he was gay.

You're confusing Christians in general with the radical right.

No. I said right wing Christians. I didn't say Christians.
No confusion there. I was quite specific.

You did indeed.

Most of us are much more tolerant than you might think.

I actually have a good friend that I would consider a right-wing
Christian in many ways. However, he's a tolerant guy, as well as being
one of the most knowlegeable people about modern popular music around.
So your statement even applies to a small segment of the right-wing
Christian community as well.

Bear in mind that the radical "Christian Right" is
neither Christian nor right much of the time. Just
as Muslims have a small group of crazies who
think they serve Allah by murdering innocent
civilians, there are a small group of loud-mouthed,
Bible-thumping jerks who use Christianity as an
excuse to attack everyone different from themselves.
Most Muslims find their crazies repugnant and
most Christians find our own group of crazies
despicable.

Please don't confuse Christianity with the politics of
Pat Robertson and other such monsters.

They are right wing Christians. You can't deny that
they consider themselves Christians.

I'm sure they do. I'm not in charge of deciding whose faith counts. That
will be between them and their Maker.

We're not all machine gun-toting lemmings
following deluded, racist bigots to the precipice
and killing "heathen" along the way. There are
plenty of us who don't believe in abortion but
we don't ally ourselves with the nut-cases who
bomb clinics and murder doctors. We may not
believe in homosexuality but that doesn't mean
we condemn homosexuals.

But some of you do - even some not on the right wing.

Most of the negative comments here were directed at me personally for
expressing my faith; not at "some" others. BTW, some non-Chroistians
confuse "conservative, fundamentalist" with "right wing." The former are
those who believe the tenets of the Bible, expect miracles today and (try
to) make their personal Christian beliefs the guiding principle of their
lives. "Right wing" to me means hard-nosed, politically activist,
mean-spirited and judgmental. It often means bigoted, uncaring and
supportive of all things Republican (though not all Republicans are at all
like that). It rarely has any concept of the pinciples of charity that
Jesus taught.

FTR, I'm a "fundamentalist" in that I believe that Biblical principles apply
today; that God still does miracles and that one can have a personal
*relationship* with deity. This is nothing like the ritualistic religiosity
that is sometimes held up as "faith."

As a conservative Christian I believe that it is my
responsibility to try to live right and to exercise my
faith -- not to force you to believe as I do.

That's a good way to live.

It would be even beter if I was more consistent about it. Like I said, I'm
only human. :^)

Unfortunately, a few self-appointed "leaders" have
given the rest of us a bad name. They run around
condemning others as "sinners" while ignoring the
major problems in their own lives.

I would also agree with that.

PS, I'm not confusing Melville with Whitman, who
actually *was* gay, BTW. I was just being sarcastic.

I thought they were both gay. According to popular opinion so are/were
Thomas Mann, James Baldwin, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal, Virginia
Woolf, D.H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative people without whom
the world would be a much crummier place to live.

Regards,
Robert

=============================
Bass Home Electronics, Inc
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
941-232-0791 Wireless
Nextel Private ID - 161*21755*1
http://www.bass-home.com
=============================

Imagine what Melville might have written
if he were our contemporary. :^)

I prefer not to.

Sorry, you're in church now. You have to do
what the preacher tells you to do.

OK. In that case I hereby order you to think for yourself, form your own
conclusions and live by them.

Imagine what Melville might have written
if he were our contemporary. :^)

I prefer not to.

Sorry, you're in church now. You have to do
what the preacher tells you to do.

OK. In that case I hereby order you to think for yourself, form your own
conclusions and live by them.

All I have to say is "Prove it!", and your argument
doesn't exist. One cannot justify faith...so YOU drop it.

Some people once said the same thing to a man born blind. He replied, "I
once was blind but now I see." I won't bore you with the details but I can
tell you that an encounter of faith over a quarter century ago changed my
whole life for the better.

You're right about one thing. You can't prove faith. Faith is its own
proof. It is "the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of things not
seen."

All I have to say is "Prove it!", and your argument
doesn't exist. One cannot justify faith...so YOU drop it.

Some people once said the same thing to a man born blind. He replied, "I
once was blind but now I see." I won't bore you with the details but I can
tell you that an encounter of faith over a quarter century ago changed my
whole life for the better.

You're right about one thing. You can't prove faith. Faith is its own
proof. It is "the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of things not
seen."

I thought they were both gay. According to popular opinion so are/were
Thomas Mann, James Baldwin, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal,
Virginia Woolf, D. H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative people
without whom the world would be a much crummier place to live.

I don't know about crummier, but definitely less interesting.

William F. Buckley would not agree with you about Mr. Veedal. I remember
watching the 1968 Democratic convention and hearing Buckley call Vidal a faggot,
and Vidal call Buckley a crypto-fascist. Ahnold telling Huffington he has a role
for her in "Terminator 4" doesn't come even close.

Add Shakespeare (almost definitely), Michaelangelo Buonarotti (definitely),
Leonardo da Vinci (pretty certain), Tchaikovsky, Britten, Bernstein, Poulenc,
Copland, Virgil Fox.

I thought they were both gay. According to popular opinion so are/were
Thomas Mann, James Baldwin, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal,
Virginia Woolf, D. H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative people
without whom the world would be a much crummier place to live.

I don't know about crummier, but definitely less interesting.

William F. Buckley would not agree with you about Mr. Veedal. I remember
watching the 1968 Democratic convention and hearing Buckley call Vidal a faggot,
and Vidal call Buckley a crypto-fascist. Ahnold telling Huffington he has a role
for her in "Terminator 4" doesn't come even close.

Add Shakespeare (almost definitely), Michaelangelo Buonarotti (definitely),
Leonardo da Vinci (pretty certain), Tchaikovsky, Britten, Bernstein, Poulenc,
Copland, Virgil Fox.

Not an accurate statement. A better one would be
if you can heal you may be a Christian.

Christians don't heal people. That responsibility falls to Someone else.

Not an accurate statement. A better one would be
if you can heal you may be a Christian.

Christians don't heal people. That responsibility falls to Someone else.

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:49:22 -0400, "Robert L. Bass"
wrote:

I saw a few comments about you supposedly posting "pedophile fantasies"

No, I don't think he has accused me of that.

Sorry. That must have been the other gentleman. The same rule applies
though. If I didn't see him do it I take accusations posted in USENET with
a large grain of salt.

It looks like the two of you have had an
ongoing war of words for a while.

Absolutely.

I see both of you posting unpleasantness about each other.

Absolutely.

None of that has much to do
with Yamaha, Denon, Jesus or me.

Agreed.

However, Arnold's anger knows no bounds.

Still, if you're going to make statements like "I've
only seen him post about audio and in that regard
he's knowledgeable and seems fair minded enough",
you really *should* do your homework.

I respectfully disagree. My statement stands. I only said what I have
seen. If he has said something which you consider offensive in a newsgroup
which I don't read, that is between you and him. If I wanted to dig deep
enough I'm sure I could find someone somewhere who hates just about anyone
who has spent any significant time posting to USENET. By the time I finish
I won't want to converse with anyone. I don't come here to find out if Arny
has some dirty linens elsewhere. For that matter, I don't have any reason
to believe that he does. When he posts about audio I read it. Sometimes I
agree. Sometimes not. Sometimes I learn something from him. There may
even be times when he learns something from me. The same applies to you.
I'd rather know what you have to say here than try to find evidence
somewhere that you're a bad guy.

90% of the posts that he makes on RAO are...

Of no concern to me. That also applies to your posts there. You may be the
finest gentleman who has ever graced that newsgroup or the worst
sludge-tossing boor in all history. If you contribute useful stuff -- even
stuff with which I might not agree -- you're OK in my book. By the same
token if you post a bunch of abuse at me without provocation I'll probably
chalk you up as useless even if you have solved world peace in another
forum.

Fair enough?

Actually no.

Why?

It would be fair if you weren't acting as Arnold's advocate. Since you
are, you're acting on very sketchy information. You need to do your
homework.

shrug

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:49:22 -0400, "Robert L. Bass"
wrote:

I saw a few comments about you supposedly posting "pedophile fantasies"

No, I don't think he has accused me of that.

Sorry. That must have been the other gentleman. The same rule applies
though. If I didn't see him do it I take accusations posted in USENET with
a large grain of salt.

It looks like the two of you have had an
ongoing war of words for a while.

Absolutely.

I see both of you posting unpleasantness about each other.

Absolutely.

None of that has much to do
with Yamaha, Denon, Jesus or me.

Agreed.

However, Arnold's anger knows no bounds.

Still, if you're going to make statements like "I've
only seen him post about audio and in that regard
he's knowledgeable and seems fair minded enough",
you really *should* do your homework.

I respectfully disagree. My statement stands. I only said what I have
seen. If he has said something which you consider offensive in a newsgroup
which I don't read, that is between you and him. If I wanted to dig deep
enough I'm sure I could find someone somewhere who hates just about anyone
who has spent any significant time posting to USENET. By the time I finish
I won't want to converse with anyone. I don't come here to find out if Arny
has some dirty linens elsewhere. For that matter, I don't have any reason
to believe that he does. When he posts about audio I read it. Sometimes I
agree. Sometimes not. Sometimes I learn something from him. There may
even be times when he learns something from me. The same applies to you.
I'd rather know what you have to say here than try to find evidence
somewhere that you're a bad guy.

90% of the posts that he makes on RAO are...

Of no concern to me. That also applies to your posts there. You may be the
finest gentleman who has ever graced that newsgroup or the worst
sludge-tossing boor in all history. If you contribute useful stuff -- even
stuff with which I might not agree -- you're OK in my book. By the same
token if you post a bunch of abuse at me without provocation I'll probably
chalk you up as useless even if you have solved world peace in another
forum.

Fair enough?

Actually no.

Why?

It would be fair if you weren't acting as Arnold's advocate. Since you
are, you're acting on very sketchy information. You need to do your
homework.

shrug

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:19:48 -0400, "Robert L. Bass"
wrote:

PS, I'm not confusing Melville with Whitman, who
actually *was* gay, BTW. I was just being sarcastic.

I thought they were both gay. According to popular opinion so are/were
Thomas Mann, James Baldwin, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal, Virginia
Woolf, D.H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative people without whom
the world would be a much crummier place to live.

Unlike Melville though, I think that everyone of the people you
mentioned were either admittedly gay or pretty much acknowledged as
such. I'm not sure that this is the same for Melville, but I could be
wrong.

You left out David Geffin and Jann Wenner of course g.

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:19:48 -0400, "Robert L. Bass"
wrote:

PS, I'm not confusing Melville with Whitman, who
actually *was* gay, BTW. I was just being sarcastic.

I thought they were both gay. According to popular opinion so are/were
Thomas Mann, James Baldwin, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal, Virginia
Woolf, D.H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative people without whom
the world would be a much crummier place to live.

Unlike Melville though, I think that everyone of the people you
mentioned were either admittedly gay or pretty much acknowledged as
such. I'm not sure that this is the same for Melville, but I could be
wrong.

You left out David Geffin and Jann Wenner of course g.

"Andrew M." writes:

All I have to say is "Prove it!", and your argument doesn't
exist. One cannot justify faith...so YOU drop it.

There are some things that cannot be proved.

From [1]:

In 1931, the Czech-born mathematician Kurt Godel demonstrated
that within any given branch of mathematics, there would always
be some propositions that couldn't be proven either true or false
using the rules and axioms ... of that mathematical branch
itself. [...] The implication is that all logical system of any
complexity are, by definition, incomplete; each of them contains,
at any given time, more true statements than it can possibly
prove according to its own defining set of rules.

And from the same site (very bottom):

Godel showed that provability is a weaker notion than truth, no
matter what axiom system is involved ...

If you want to argue with this theorem I recommend you look up your
friendly neighbourhood mathematician/logician.

[1] http://www.miskatonic.org/godel.html

--
David Magda dmagda at ee.ryerson.ca, http://www.magda.ca/
Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under
the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well
under the new. -- Niccolo Machiavelli, _The Prince_, Chapter VI

"Andrew M." writes:

All I have to say is "Prove it!", and your argument doesn't
exist. One cannot justify faith...so YOU drop it.

There are some things that cannot be proved.

From [1]:

In 1931, the Czech-born mathematician Kurt Godel demonstrated
that within any given branch of mathematics, there would always
be some propositions that couldn't be proven either true or false
using the rules and axioms ... of that mathematical branch
itself. [...] The implication is that all logical system of any
complexity are, by definition, incomplete; each of them contains,
at any given time, more true statements than it can possibly
prove according to its own defining set of rules.

And from the same site (very bottom):

Godel showed that provability is a weaker notion than truth, no
matter what axiom system is involved ...

If you want to argue with this theorem I recommend you look up your
friendly neighbourhood mathematician/logician.

[1] http://www.miskatonic.org/godel.html

--
David Magda dmagda at ee.ryerson.ca, http://www.magda.ca/
Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under
the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well
under the new. -- Niccolo Machiavelli, _The Prince_, Chapter VI

I thought they were both gay. According to popular opinion so are/were
Thomas Mann, James Baldwin, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal,
Virginia Woolf, D. H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative people
without whom the world would be a much crummier place to live.

I don't know about crummier, but definitely less interesting.

William F. Buckley would not agree with you about Mr. Veedal.

"Mister Veedal!!!" You're obviously old enough to remember Laugh-In.

I remember watching the 1968 Democratic convention

I remember too. "The whole world's watching!!! The whole world's
watching!!!" I had previously seen the brutality of the CPD firsthand but
even so I could hardly believe the extent of the violence.

and hearing Buckley call Vidal a faggot, and Vidal call
Buckley a crypto-fascist. Ahnold telling Huffington he
has a role for her in "Terminator 4" doesn't come even
close.

Arnold is a jerk of the first order. I like his wierd humor in the movies.
As a politician he'll be a disaster.

Add Shakespeare (almost definitely)...

Perhaps. Some people believe Shakespeare as the nom de plume of a woman
author.

Michaelangelo Buonarotti (definitely), Leonardo da Vinci
(pretty certain), Tchaikovsky, Britten, Bernstein, Poulenc,
Copland, Virgil Fox...

The list goes on and on. The fact is that bigotry in all its forms
invariably seeks to destroy the finest minds. It makes no difference
whether those minds are Christian, Buddhist, gay, lesbian or even atheist.

I thought they were both gay. According to popular opinion so are/were
Thomas Mann, James Baldwin, Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal,
Virginia Woolf, D. H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative people
without whom the world would be a much crummier place to live.

I don't know about crummier, but definitely less interesting.

William F. Buckley would not agree with you about Mr. Veedal.

"Mister Veedal!!!" You're obviously old enough to remember Laugh-In.

I remember watching the 1968 Democratic convention

I remember too. "The whole world's watching!!! The whole world's
watching!!!" I had previously seen the brutality of the CPD firsthand but
even so I could hardly believe the extent of the violence.

and hearing Buckley call Vidal a faggot, and Vidal call
Buckley a crypto-fascist. Ahnold telling Huffington he
has a role for her in "Terminator 4" doesn't come even
close.

Arnold is a jerk of the first order. I like his wierd humor in the movies.
As a politician he'll be a disaster.

Add Shakespeare (almost definitely)...

Perhaps. Some people believe Shakespeare as the nom de plume of a woman
author.

Michaelangelo Buonarotti (definitely), Leonardo da Vinci
(pretty certain), Tchaikovsky, Britten, Bernstein, Poulenc,
Copland, Virgil Fox...

The list goes on and on. The fact is that bigotry in all its forms
invariably seeks to destroy the finest minds. It makes no difference
whether those minds are Christian, Buddhist, gay, lesbian or even atheist.

OK. In that case I hereby order you to think for
yourself, form your own conclusions and live by them.

Trying to short us out, eh? Wicked of you.

Heh, heh, heh. :^)

OK. In that case I hereby order you to think for
yourself, form your own conclusions and live by them.

Trying to short us out, eh? Wicked of you.

Heh, heh, heh. :^)

It would be fair if you weren't acting as Arnold's
advocate. Since you are, you're acting on very
sketchy information. You need to do your homework.

Sorry, but things are not that cut and dry. I'm not acting as anyone's
advocate. I stated what I have seen. This is not a court room and I don't
have to investigate Arny, you or anyone else.

It would be fair if you weren't acting as Arnold's
advocate. Since you are, you're acting on very
sketchy information. You need to do your homework.

Sorry, but things are not that cut and dry. I'm not acting as anyone's
advocate. I stated what I have seen. This is not a court room and I don't
have to investigate Arny, you or anyone else.

PS, I'm not confusing Melville with Whitman, who
actually *was* gay, BTW. I was just being sarcastic.

I thought they were both gay. According to popular
opinion so are/were Thomas Mann, James Baldwin,
Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal, Virginia Woolf,
D.H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative
people without whom the world would be a much
crummier place to live.

Unlike Melville though, I think that everyone of the
people you mentioned were either admittedly gay or
pretty much acknowledged as such. I'm not sure that
this is the same for Melville, but I could be wrong.

Correct. I didn't mean to imply that Melville was admittedly gay. I only
meant to point out that many of the best known writers are/were.

You left out David Geffin and Jann Wenner of course g.

And many more.

PS, I'm not confusing Melville with Whitman, who
actually *was* gay, BTW. I was just being sarcastic.

I thought they were both gay. According to popular
opinion so are/were Thomas Mann, James Baldwin,
Marcel Proust, Oscar Wilde, Gore Vidal, Virginia Woolf,
D.H. Lawrence and many other wonderfully creative
people without whom the world would be a much
crummier place to live.

Unlike Melville though, I think that everyone of the
people you mentioned were either admittedly gay or
pretty much acknowledged as such. I'm not sure that
this is the same for Melville, but I could be wrong.

Correct. I didn't mean to imply that Melville was admittedly gay. I only
meant to point out that many of the best known writers are/were.

You left out David Geffin and Jann Wenner of course g.

And many more.

Robert L. Bass wrote:


You can't prove faith. Faith is its own
proof. It is "the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of things not
seen."

Bingo. The problem is with the multitudes who feel like they have to
prove it to everyone else.