though both of my kids chose to not be real interested I
tried to introduce them to all sorts of points of view and belief
systems. THough I myself am a Christian I tried to introduce them to
Buddhism (spelling) Islam and other belief systems. I told them
straight out that I don't have all the answers.

Well at least you got a chance to talk to him about it before they decided.
My 4 year old son told me quite seriously a few months back, "Daddy, I have
decided to accept Jesus into my heart." We haven't been very religious with
him either. Left me and the wife feeling already that this child is going to
be making a lot of decisions on his own - not that he doesn't listen to us, but
when he feels something deeply his mind is just made up, and pretty fast too.

When he tries to use reverse psychology on us, now that's funny...

Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

"WillStG" wrote in message
...

though both of my kids chose to not be real interested I
tried to introduce them to all sorts of points of view and belief
systems. THough I myself am a Christian I tried to introduce them to
Buddhism (spelling) Islam and other belief systems. I told them
straight out that I don't have all the answers.

Well at least you got a chance to talk to him about it before they
decided.
My 4 year old son told me quite seriously a few months back, "Daddy, I
have
decided to accept Jesus into my heart."


Then how does a 4 year old know who Jesus is? Do you really expect us to
believe a 4 year old thinks about his/her afterlife and God? That they can
even understand what they are saying? You are so full of ****.


--

-Hev
find me he
www.michaelSCREWspringerROBOTS.com

"Hev" wrote in message
...
"WillStG" wrote in message
...

though both of my kids chose to not be real interested I
tried to introduce them to all sorts of points of view and belief
systems. THough I myself am a Christian I tried to introduce them to
Buddhism (spelling) Islam and other belief systems. I told them
straight out that I don't have all the answers.

Well at least you got a chance to talk to him about it before they
decided.
My 4 year old son told me quite seriously a few months back, "Daddy, I
have
decided to accept Jesus into my heart."


Then how does a 4 year old know who Jesus is? Do you really expect us to
believe a 4 year old thinks about his/her afterlife and God? That they can
even understand what they are saying? You are so full of ****.


That 4 year old has a better grasp at life than you do.

"squig" wrote in message
...
"Hev" wrote in message
...
"WillStG" wrote in message
...

though both of my kids chose to not be real interested I
tried to introduce them to all sorts of points of view and belief
systems. THough I myself am a Christian I tried to introduce them to
Buddhism (spelling) Islam and other belief systems. I told them
straight out that I don't have all the answers.

Well at least you got a chance to talk to him about it before they
decided.
My 4 year old son told me quite seriously a few months back, "Daddy, I
have
decided to accept Jesus into my heart."


Then how does a 4 year old know who Jesus is? Do you really expect us to
believe a 4 year old thinks about his/her afterlife and God? That they
can
even understand what they are saying? You are so full of ****.


That 4 year old has a better grasp at life than you do.


Nice way to compare your beliefs to a 4 year olds. You have been
brainwashed. Breaking free will mean living a more honest life and perhaps
epiphanies of freedom.

--
-hev
find me he
www.michaelROBOTSspringerBEGONE .com

Then how does a 4 year old know who Jesus is? Do you really expect us
to
believe a 4 year old thinks about his/her afterlife and God? That they
can
even understand what they are saying? You are so full of ****.


That 4 year old has a better grasp at life than you do.


Nice way to compare your beliefs to a 4 year olds. You have been
brainwashed. Breaking free will mean living a more honest life and perhaps
epiphanies of freedom.


Well, the Bible does say that we are to have the same faith as a child --
guess I'm doing it right, then. I can't get any more free than I am and I
haven't been brainwashed. Isn't it self-righteous to say that someone isn't
living an honest life?

"squig" wrote in message
...
Then how does a 4 year old know who Jesus is? Do you really expect us
to
believe a 4 year old thinks about his/her afterlife and God? That they
can
even understand what they are saying? You are so full of ****.


That 4 year old has a better grasp at life than you do.


Nice way to compare your beliefs to a 4 year olds. You have been
brainwashed. Breaking free will mean living a more honest life and
perhaps
epiphanies of freedom.


Well, the Bible does say that we are to have the same faith as a child --
guess I'm doing it right, then. I can't get any more free than I am and I
haven't been brainwashed. Isn't it self-righteous to say that someone
isn't
living an honest life?


The Bible is not fact. If you say that God or religion is absolute truth it
is self-righteous. Merely pointing that out is not.



--
-hev
find me he
www.michaelROBOTSspringerBEGONE .com

"WillStG" wrote in message
...
"Hev"

Then how does a 4 year old know who Jesus is? Do you really expect us to
believe a 4 year old thinks about his/her afterlife and God? That they can
even understand what they are saying? You are so full of ****.

You have a whole list of assumptions about why someone might feel
moved
by religion Hev, and you know what they say about when you "assume". Oh
Kai
goes to Sunday School and all but we really haven't pushed religion on him


This is nothing a 4 year old comes up on his own. The brainwash will ensue
regardless.


My wife is a Montessori teacher/trainer and they believe a child will
develop naturally if you merely prepare the atmosphere and enviroment they
live
in, it is the nature of a child to develop on their own, our job is mostly
to
get out of the way.


Develop naturally? That is what you are preventing by sending him to Sunday
school! You are bombarding him with fiction presented as truth. Why not let
him become an adult and decide about religious matters for himself when he
is capable of understanding the ramifications?


--
-hev
find me he
www.michaelROBOTSspringerBEGONE .com

.I smoke about 1/3 oz./year. Cheaper than amphetamines!!!
THen they'll still label you a criminal if they ever find your stash.



My "stash" is always less than what you would find in a small roach.
Unless they invade my home and search my freezer thay won't find the BIG
bag..about 1/10 oz!!!



John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
.I smoke about 1/3 oz./year. Cheaper than amphetamines!!!
THen they'll still label you a criminal if they ever find your stash.



My "stash" is always less than what you would find in a small roach.
Unless they invade my home and search my freezer thay won't find the BIG
bag..about 1/10 oz!!!


Lightweight! Lol.
I smoke about an ounce and a half a month.


-Hev

"Hev" wrote in message
...
"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
.I smoke about 1/3 oz./year. Cheaper than amphetamines!!!
THen they'll still label you a criminal if they ever find your stash.



My "stash" is always less than what you would find in a small roach.
Unless they invade my home and search my freezer thay won't find the BIG
bag..about 1/10 oz!!!


Lightweight! Lol.
I smoke about an ounce and a half a month.


-Hev



Should we be impressed?

The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be allowed to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to vote on
such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out matters
with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an American
and is unconstitutional.

--

-Hev
find me he
www.michaelSCREWspringerROBOTS.com

squig wrote:
"Hev" wrote in message
...

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...

.I smoke about 1/3 oz./year. Cheaper than amphetamines!!!
THen they'll still label you a criminal if they ever find your stash.



My "stash" is always less than what you would find in a small roach.
Unless they invade my home and search my freezer thay won't find the BIG
bag..about 1/10 oz!!!


Lightweight! Lol.
I smoke about an ounce and a half a month.


-Hev




Should we be impressed?


no you should not even care
what a person does with thier body is of no concern to me
george

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:23:54 -0500, "Hev"
wrote:



The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be allowed to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to vote on
such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out matters
with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an American
and is unconstitutional. snip

Amen to THAT! Whoops..that's generally considered "religious"...LMAO!

dB

"Hev"
Lightweight! Lol.
I smoke about an ounce and a half a month.

Well that explains a few things.



Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

"WillStG" wrote in message
...
"Hev"
Lightweight! Lol.
I smoke about an ounce and a half a month.

Well that explains a few things.


Like your prejudices right now.



--

-Hev
find me he
www.michaelSCREWspringerROBOTS.com

"Hev" wrote in message
...


The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be allowed to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to vote
on
such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out
matters
with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an
American
and is unconstitutional.


Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the "Thou shalt
not kill" is a "religious matter"?

You don't consider sending a child to Sunday school as any kind of
"push"? I guess he would be free to join Greenpeace instead, if he
wanted to. If it occurred to him...

WillStG wrote:

by religion Hev, and you know what they say about when you "assume". Oh Kai
goes to Sunday School and all but we really haven't pushed religion on him, and
I have had many spiritual experiences and journeys in my life so it's not like
I couldn't if I wanted to. Maybe the occasional bedtime prayer.

squig wrote:
"Hev" wrote in message
...


The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be allowed to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to vote

on

such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out

matters

with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an

American

and is unconstitutional.



Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the "Thou shalt
not kill" is a "religious matter"?




No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G

Bill Van Dyk wrote:
You don't consider sending a child to Sunday school as any kind of
"push"? I guess he would be free to join Greenpeace instead, if he
wanted to. If it occurred to him...


Will when the rainbow warrior is staffed by six year olds I might
consider your POV
G

"George Gleason" wrote in message
...
squig wrote:
"Hev" wrote in message
...


The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be allowed
to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to
vote

on

such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out

matters

with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an

American

and is unconstitutional.



Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the "Thou
shalt
not kill" is a "religious matter"?




No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G

When I stop laughing from this, I may comment more on it.

"squig" wrote in message
...
"George Gleason" wrote in message
...
squig wrote:
"Hev" wrote in message
...


The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be
allowed
to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to
vote

on

such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out

matters

with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an

American

and is unconstitutional.



Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the "Thou
shalt
not kill" is a "religious matter"?




No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G

When I stop laughing from this, I may comment more on it.



Please elaborate -- I'm curious to know your source for this.

squig wrote:
"squig" wrote in message
...

"George Gleason" wrote in message
...

squig wrote:

"Hev" wrote in message
...


The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be

allowed

to

vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to

vote

on


such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out

matters


with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an

American


and is unconstitutional.



Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the "Thou

shalt

not kill" is a "religious matter"?




No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G

When I stop laughing from this, I may comment more on it.




Please elaborate -- I'm curious to know your source for this.


Beacuse I was there
it was me that first postulated
"Thou shall not Kill"
george

In article ,
"squig" wrote:

"squig" wrote in message
...
"George Gleason" wrote in message
...
squig wrote:
"Hev" wrote in message
...


The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be
allowed
to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to
vote

on

such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out

matters

with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an

American

and is unconstitutional.



Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the "Thou
shalt
not kill" is a "religious matter"?




No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G

When I stop laughing from this, I may comment more on it.



Please elaborate -- I'm curious to know your source for this.



separation of church/state should be 95db RMS, C weighted and
definitely with separate power supplies for each.
--
Digital Services Recording Studios
http://www.digisrvs.com

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 02:05:41 GMT, "squig"
spewed:

When I stop laughing from this, I may comment more on it.

Please elaborate -- I'm curious to know your source for this. snip

What's the matter, your preacher in your favorite tilt-up church tell
you differently? One thing about "fundies"...they both cannot reason
for themselves, nor can they believe in the historical record or
scientific findings.

dB

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:06:30 GMT, "squig"
wrote:

"Hev" wrote in message
...


The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be allowed to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to vote
on
such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out
matters
with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an
American
and is unconstitutional.


Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the "Thou shalt
not kill" is a "religious matter"?

Do you think the old testament is the only time in human history that
people have come up with the idea that killing is wrong?

Al

"DeserTBoB" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 02:05:41 GMT, "squig"
spewed:

When I stop laughing from this, I may comment more on it.

Please elaborate -- I'm curious to know your source for this. snip

What's the matter, your preacher in your favorite tilt-up church tell
you differently? One thing about "fundies"...they both cannot reason
for themselves, nor can they believe in the historical record or
scientific findings.

dB

You make a claim, you back it up. Since you snipped it off, here is the
original posting:

(squiq) Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

(george) No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion

I'm curious to know where he got this information. And, no, I'm going to go
hunting for it (since I don't believe it exists).

"playon" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:06:30 GMT, "squig"
wrote:

"Hev" wrote in message
...


The point of all of this non-sense is this:

Because of separation of church and state we should not even be allowed
to
vote on religious matters. And the fact is we are, today, allowed to
vote
on
such issues. Our government is not being responsible in throwing out
matters
with religious content. And that impedes my personal freedoms as an
American
and is unconstitutional.


Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the "Thou
shalt
not kill" is a "religious matter"?

Do you think the old testament is the only time in human history that
people have come up with the idea that killing is wrong?

Al

No, I didn't say that.

(squiq) Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

(george) No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion

I'm curious to know where he got this information. And, no, I'm going to go
hunting for it (since I don't believe it exists).



I answered your question.
G

"George Gleason" wrote in message
...

(squiq) Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

(george) No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion

I'm curious to know where he got this information. And, no, I'm going to
go
hunting for it (since I don't believe it exists).



I answered your question.
G

I didn't disagree with that. You proved my point, though, with your answer.

squig wrote:
"George Gleason" wrote in message
...

(squiq) Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

(george) No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion

I'm curious to know where he got this information. And, no, I'm going to

go

hunting for it (since I don't believe it exists).



I answered your question.
G


I didn't disagree with that. You proved my point, though, with your answer.


well, glad you agree with it then
we can put it to bed

"George Gleason" wrote in message
...
squig wrote:
"George Gleason" wrote in message
...

(squiq) Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

(george) No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion

I'm curious to know where he got this information. And, no, I'm going
to

go

hunting for it (since I don't believe it exists).



I answered your question.
G


I didn't disagree with that. You proved my point, though, with your
answer.


well, glad you agree with it then
we can put it to bed

I didn't say I agreed with your answer -- I said I agreed that you answered
it.

"George Gleason" wrote in message ...
snip
Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G

If you're willing to define "religion" as loosely as you're apparently
willing to define "rule", both have been around since prehistoric times,
so it's pretty much meaningless to argue about which evolved first.

"L David Matheny" wrote in message
...
"George Gleason" wrote in message
...
snip
Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G

If you're willing to define "religion" as loosely as you're apparently
willing to define "rule", both have been around since prehistoric times,
so it's pretty much meaningless to argue about which evolved first.


"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy,
education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man
would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of
punishment and hope of reward after death."

"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain
it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the
fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving
after rational knowledge."

-- Albert Einstein


--
-hev
find me he
www.michaelROBOTSspringerBEGONE .com

L David Matheny wrote:
"George Gleason" wrote in message ...
snip

Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?


No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G


If you're willing to define "religion" as loosely as you're apparently
willing to define "rule", both have been around since prehistoric times,
so it's pretty much meaningless to argue about which evolved first.



the religious have told me there is no evolution to religion
that in fact there was no morality until God delivered the big 10 to Moses
who came down from the Mt. and had thousands killed for some golden
calf nonsense
so much for "thou shall not kill"

George

squig wrote:
"George Gleason" wrote in message
...

squig wrote:

"George Gleason" wrote in message
...


(squiq) Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

(george) No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion

I'm curious to know where he got this information. And, no, I'm going

to

go


hunting for it (since I don't believe it exists).



I answered your question.
G


I didn't disagree with that. You proved my point, though, with your

answer.


well, glad you agree with it then
we can put it to bed


I didn't say I agreed with your answer -- I said I agreed that you answered
it.



See my above post
try to stay awake
G

"George Gleason" wrote in message


the religious have told me there is no evolution to religion

Try searching the web using the string "progressive revelation" to
straighten yourself out in this matter, George.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"George Gleason" wrote in message



the religious have told me there is no evolution to religion


Try searching the web using the string "progressive revelation" to
straighten yourself out in this matter, George.



It was "progressively revealed" to me what a stinking pile of ****
Christianity is

So I do understand your phrase

"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy,
education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man
would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of
punishment and hope of reward after death."

"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain
it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the
fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving
after rational knowledge."

-- Albert Einstein


I agree..that's how I approach religion. No conflict. Plus..the operative words
here are
1-"should."..which brings up the same old question.."say's who?"..who's in
charge?..who makes the rules?
...and 2-"rational"..which I would submit is more usefully pursued to the end
of workability of one's life rather than an "absolute" truth.



John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

"hev" wrote in message
news:EtEvd.6764$E_6.367@trnddc04...
"L David Matheny" wrote in message
...
"George Gleason" wrote in message
...
snip
Do you think there should not be a law against murder since the
"Thou shalt not kill" is a "religious matter"?

No beacuse this rule existed long before man invented religion
G

If you're willing to define "religion" as loosely as you're apparently
willing to define "rule", both have been around since prehistoric times,
so it's pretty much meaningless to argue about which evolved first.


"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy,
education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man
would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of
punishment and hope of reward after death."

"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain
it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through
the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through
striving after rational knowledge."

-- Albert Einstein

Next will be an exposé of sub-atomic physics from Brittney Spears.

It was "progressively revealed" to me what a stinking pile of ****
Christianity is

One man's trash..another man's treasure. It is on the receiver to choose if he
likes the gift.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637