skr 1 #26 September 6, 2004 >realized that religion is bullshit Well, a lot of individuals certainly give religion a bad name. To me where it really gets off the track the most is where people try to force their beliefs on others. But as a response to the awareness of our existance it's pretty interesting. And you don't really have to take anything on faith, you can test it for yourself. For example the Buddhists formulate it as: there's a lot of suffering going on and here's its cause and here's a way out. Well, is it true or not? I guess we can all agree that there's a lot of suffering going on, but you don't have to take anybody's word that the eight fold path is a way out. You can try that path and see for yourself whether it works or not. I guess there's a practical difficulty in that this can take quite a few life times, but if you really want to know then maybe that's just an implementation detail :-) :-) -- On the Republican / Democrat problem it looks to me like both the religious fundamentalists and the corporatists have chosen the Republican party as their vehicle for worldly power. I wish there were a third party that stood more for what I think; I'm not very happy with the Democrats, but they're the most anti-Republican vote I have so that's the boxes I've been checking lately. Skr Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #27 September 6, 2004 hmmmphhh The last time relgion and politics were combined, people got burned at the stake....Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #28 September 6, 2004 I hope I'm not the only one who, when he reads a post by skr, can't help but hear in his head: "Just two good ol' boys never meanin' no harm Beats all you never saw, been in trouble with the law since the day they was born Straight'nin' their curves Flatt'nin' their hills Someday the mountain might get 'em but the law never will Makin' their wayyyyy the only way they know how That's just a little bit more than the law would allow... Am I right, there, Uncle Jesse? Blue skies, --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skr 1 #29 September 6, 2004 Eeeeeee ... I'm more transparent than I thought! >Someday the mountain might get 'em >but the law never will It's funny you should say that. I spent my teenage years in liquor running country with images of those cars that stuck way up in the back when they were empty so they would look level when carrying a load. That whole scene, the drivers, the folklore, the tales of famous chases, was part of our mythology. >That's just a little bit more >than the law would allow... Well, it's not really breaking the law in order to be a bad guy, it's just that, well, you know, a lot of times the law doesn't exactly match the actual situation and you have to ... kind of ... well, you know ... Leave no turn unstoned in the pursuit of ... Well, you know ... Skr Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bobsled92 0 #30 September 7, 2004 QuoteNAFTA came in in 1994...during a Democratic administration. WHile I was a Rep. it was a Replubican bill that was around for quite awhile. Clinton just passed it, NOT "made it". "Downsizing" also got it's start during the 90's and evolved into the "outsourcing" of today. >>Downsizing is when a company gets smaller. >> OUTSOURCING is when jobs go ELSEWHERE in many methods and is a kin but, worse than NAFTA style of sending our jobs to others. I will remain PRO USA reguardless of the actions of others._______________________________ If I could be a Super Hero, I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year. http://www.hangout.no/speednews/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peacefuljeffrey 0 #31 September 7, 2004 QuoteQuoteNAFTA came in in 1994...during a Democratic administration. WHile I was a Rep. it was a Replubican bill that was around for quite awhile. Clinton just passed it, NOT "made it". Maybe now you see the stupidity that people constantly engage in: blaming a president for legislative mistakes. Now, I don't know if NAFTA was veto-proof; but if you think it is bad, and if Clinton wasn't willing to go along with it, you have to grant that he could have vetoed it, right? And even if it was veto-proof, the mark of a man who stands up for what he believes in would be to veto it even if the veto would be doomed to be overridden. Of course, Bill Clinton was never a man with the strength of his convictions. That's where the bullshit story of how he "didn't inhale" came from. Remember? Clinton? Lying all the time? Remember? --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bobsled92 0 #32 September 7, 2004 [ Now, I don't know if NAFTA was veto-proof; but if you think it is bad, and if Clinton wasn't willing to go along with it, you have to grant that he could have vetoed it, right? And even if it was veto-proof, the mark of a man who stands up for what he believes in would be to veto it even if the veto would be doomed to be overridden. Of course, Bill Clinton was never a man with the strength of his convictions. That's where the bullshit story of how he "didn't inhale" came from. Remember? Clinton? Lying all the time? Remember? - ____________________________________________ Clinton was rather spineless and that's what the House Majority (rep) was relying on._______________________________ If I could be a Super Hero, I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year. http://www.hangout.no/speednews/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
peacefuljeffrey 0 #31 September 7, 2004 QuoteQuoteNAFTA came in in 1994...during a Democratic administration. WHile I was a Rep. it was a Replubican bill that was around for quite awhile. Clinton just passed it, NOT "made it". Maybe now you see the stupidity that people constantly engage in: blaming a president for legislative mistakes. Now, I don't know if NAFTA was veto-proof; but if you think it is bad, and if Clinton wasn't willing to go along with it, you have to grant that he could have vetoed it, right? And even if it was veto-proof, the mark of a man who stands up for what he believes in would be to veto it even if the veto would be doomed to be overridden. Of course, Bill Clinton was never a man with the strength of his convictions. That's where the bullshit story of how he "didn't inhale" came from. Remember? Clinton? Lying all the time? Remember? --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bobsled92 0 #32 September 7, 2004 [ Now, I don't know if NAFTA was veto-proof; but if you think it is bad, and if Clinton wasn't willing to go along with it, you have to grant that he could have vetoed it, right? And even if it was veto-proof, the mark of a man who stands up for what he believes in would be to veto it even if the veto would be doomed to be overridden. Of course, Bill Clinton was never a man with the strength of his convictions. That's where the bullshit story of how he "didn't inhale" came from. Remember? Clinton? Lying all the time? Remember? - ____________________________________________ Clinton was rather spineless and that's what the House Majority (rep) was relying on._______________________________ If I could be a Super Hero, I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year. http://www.hangout.no/speednews/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bobsled92 0 #32 September 7, 2004 [ Now, I don't know if NAFTA was veto-proof; but if you think it is bad, and if Clinton wasn't willing to go along with it, you have to grant that he could have vetoed it, right? And even if it was veto-proof, the mark of a man who stands up for what he believes in would be to veto it even if the veto would be doomed to be overridden. Of course, Bill Clinton was never a man with the strength of his convictions. That's where the bullshit story of how he "didn't inhale" came from. Remember? Clinton? Lying all the time? Remember? - ____________________________________________ Clinton was rather spineless and that's what the House Majority (rep) was relying on._______________________________ If I could be a Super Hero, I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year. http://www.hangout.no/speednews/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
