From: Peter on
"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)> wrote in message
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:05:51 +0100, Chris H <chris(a)>
> wrote:
>>Now we have that straight it is time to repent, recognise your illness
>>and come into the Love of the Church..... we love boys like you in the
>>church. Especially Alter boys....
> What were they before they were altered?



From: Peter on
"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)> wrote in message
> "Peter" <peternew(a)> wrote in message
> news:4bcf2004$0$27730$8f2e0ebb(a)
>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)> wrote in message
>> news:MPWdncL2_4aCilLWnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d(a)
>>> "Peter" <peternew(a)> wrote in message
>>> news:4bccebb7$0$27701$8f2e0ebb(a)
>>>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)> wrote in message
>>>> news:2cGdnYKPS8_3VVbWnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d(a)
>>>>> I am saying, and have said several times before, that the people I am
>>>>> talking about are not those who are disabled to the extent that they
>>>>> find it impossible to work. I never wanted to cut these people
>>>>> off.....As a matter of fact, I would like to cut off the other 98% (a
>>>>> good statistic) who have all their fingers and toes and mental
>>>>> capabilities and could work, but don't, and give this money to those
>>>>> of whom you speak who can't work for one reason or another. The people
>>>>> of whom I speak, who could work but don't, ate (and have been)
>>>>> subsidized by the state of California all of my life...<BS rant
>>>>> snipped>
>>>> And the reliable source for your statistics is?
>>>> --
>>>> Peter
>>> My excellent memory.....Please don't confuse welfare recipients with
>>> those on disability.....(although I have issues with the disability
>>> funds handling also) My son worked for the state cutting checks for both
>>> for around a year, but he worked for Oregon, and not California.
>> I requested a RELIABLE AND VERIFIABLE source.
>> Obviously, all you can do is cite bull turds
>> --
>> Peter
> What you, "request" and what I am willing to work to deliver are two very
> different things......I know what I know. You may do your own research to
> come up with a different figure if you desire, but don't expect me to
> deliver it to you.

When you quote a statistic intellectual honesty demands you have a logical
basis for it. Your answer speaks volumes about your intellectual honesty, or
lack thereof.


From: Peter on
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)> wrote in message
> Peter <peternew(a)> wrote:
>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)> wrote in message
>>> Peter <peternew(a)> wrote:
>>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)> wrote in message
>>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet(a)> wrote:
>>>>>>I am curious as to how religion in the US could require someone to
>>>>>>"relinquish choice". There is no mechanism by which a citizen may
>>>>>>his voting rights to another party.
>>>>> You haven't heard anything of the various cults which demand total
>>>>> obedience of followers and use all manner of coercive techniques to
>>>>> obtain consent, freedom, and property?
>>>>Those abusers do not make all organized religions bad. It is an example
>>>>what can easily happen if we lose vigilance.
>>> Almost all religions rely upon some form of coercion to ensure a steady
>>> income. Usually it's by pretending that only the church can "save"
>>> you from damnation, or by claiming that people who do not rely upon
>>> religion are "immoral" or dangerous.
>>You know less about religions than you know about business.
>>In many religions there is no central authority, to which the money flows.
> Who said anything about a "central authority"? I referred to religions.
> Is the money that the local priest collects any different from the
> money the "central authority" collects?

In many cases yes!


From: Savageduck on
On 2010-04-22 14:59:09 -0700, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)> said:

> On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 10:05:18 -0700, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}> wrote:
>> So regardless of how that minority group in our society came to be
>> "different" they are there, and there is no valid reason for the "LAW"
>> to treat them differently. I don't particulary care what any Christian
>> denomination, Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, or whatever believes.
>> That is their internal issue, and they should neither discriminate
>> against, nor interfere with the beliefs of their fellow citizens.
> Religions do discriminate against members of other religions and
> people without a religion, but I see absolutely no problem with that.
> Many churches will not allow you to marry (and I'm referring to a
> "straight" couple) unless you are a member of that church. The
> Mormons will not even allow you to *attend* a "temple marriage" if
> you are not a Mormon. Mormon also forbid non-Mormons from attending
> endowments.
> Some religious private schools admit only children of church members
> or admit children of non-church members only if enrollment is not
> filled by church members.
> Most synagogue will not seat you on high holidays if you are not a
> member. If the "holy rollers" or "snake handlers" don't want present
> at their services, they can refuse you entrance. You can't just call
> any church and expect them to host a funeral service for you if you
> are not a member. You can't demand to be buried in their cemetery.
> There are many other instances of discrimination by churches. Much of
> it is based on the premise that a church is private property and you
> have no right to access without permission.
> It's legal discrimination, though...just as legal as it would be for
> you to refuse to admit some walk-up stranger to a party at your home.
> You can turn the JW away at your door, so it's fair that the JW can
> turn you away at their church's door.

Yup. No argument there. It's the old private club thing. It was just
wishful musing on my part when I said, "they should neither
discriminate against, nor interfere with the beliefs of their fellow

As for me thinking of joining any of those organizations, I believe it
is Groucho I will have to refer to with his, "I don't care to belong to
any club that will have me as a member."

....and he also had this one which might be applicable, Those are my
principles, and if you don't like them, ...well, I have others."



From: Bill Graham on

"Peter" <peternew(a)> wrote in message
> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)> wrote in message
> news:TaydnVY_u-H5B1PWnZ2dnUVZ_h-dnZ2d(a)
>> "Chris Malcolm" <cam(a)> wrote in message
>> news:833p8cF5onU2(a)
>>> In Bill Graham <weg9(a)> wrote:
>>>> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)> wrote in message
>>>> news:hqhncg$75b$1(a)
>>>>> You do seem to generalize from only a few instances to "pasting"
>>>>> your evident low regard for some of those in need to all such. As
>>>>> I have pointed out before, there will always be exceptions who
>>>>> may not be worthy of help - but that BY NO MEANS indicates
>>>>> that most who receive it are not in need of it for basic living
>>>>> resources, and also use it to the best of their abilities. Few get
>>>>> rich
>>>>> on welfare...;-)
>>>>> --DR
>>>> Hey! Show me these, "Most" of whom you speak.....I lived and worked in
>>>> California for over 40 years, I knew many people who were welfare
>>>> puppies. I
>>>> have only known a very few who actually deserved some help from the
>>>> taxpayers.
>>> You remind me of an old friend. After living for a year in my home
>>> city he told me was fed up with it and going back to London. The
>>> reason he gave was that it was a dreadful city, full of unemployed
>>> benefit cheats who spent all their time working out how to swindle
>>> more money out of the government. I said I hardly knew any benefit
>>> cheats. He said yes you do, and named two we both knew. I pointed out
>>> to him he had introduced me to them.
>>> In other words while he knew loads of benefit cheats, the only ones I
>>> knew people he'd introduced me to. So it was clear that the question
>>> wasn't why was the city full of benefit cheats. The question was why
>>> he knew so many of them :-)
>>>> My own experience tells me that the system is F***** up. The
>>>> statistics of less than 2% I got from reading about the welfare system
>>>> in
>>>> papers and books....I didn't just pull it out of the air.
>>> We have plenty of papers and books that say the same kind of thing
>>> about the UK. And political parties too. But we also have official
>>> statistics which show that the truth is quite different.
>>> How do the official statistics match up with these papers and books
>>> you read?
>>> --
>>> Chris Malcolm
>> I believe I already mentioned that fewer than 2% of those on welfare have
>> some disability, either physical or mental. But it doesn't matter.....You
>> are either a believer or you aren't, and there is no way I am going to
>> change your mind. I go by my own knowledge and experience.....I "escaped"
>> from California to Oregon 13 years ago.....Now, I can see Oregon rapidly
>> becoming another California, and the whole country rapidly becoming
>> another California too.....They are talking about adding a Value Added
>> Tax to everything we buy. Our government is desperately grasping at any
>> excuse to get more money from us anyway they can, and adding bureaucracy
>> after bureaucracy to spend more and more of our incomes on more and more
>> government employees.....I see no end to it, and obviously there is
>> nothing I can possibly do about it, so I am just wasting my time trying
>> to warn others about it. At this stage in my life, (I am 74) the best
>> thing I can do is just pursue my hobbies and enjoy what life I have left,
>> and let the next generation lie in whatever bed we have prepared for
>> them. I can only hope that my private papers and letters tell them that I
>> did my best to warn them of what was happening so they don't put too much
>> of the blame on me. Not that I believe it will matter after I am gone
>> anyway. I am a godless person, and do not believe in any afterlife. This
>> country is only about 250 years old.....I doubt seriously if it will last
>> another 100 years. It is obvious to me that human beings are incapable of
>> sustaining a free existence indefinitely.....I guess we are too corrupt,
>> or too lazy, or too uneducated, or all three.
> And you have never produced a reliable source for that statistic.
> --
> Peter
Why should I? I believe it, and I vote according to it. If you don't believe
it, then you should find your own statistics, and vote in accordance with
them. first you attack my logic. Then, when I prove my case logically, you
resort to attacking my facts. I am not going to search for the verification
of my facts just for your benefit. My experience tells me that my facts are
good. I have known several dozen welfare puppies and never one who was
disabled in any way, so my experience tells me that my statistic is as I
remember it. If you don't believe it, then happily give your hard earned
money to the government and tell them to give it away to welfare takers. I
can't help it if you are stupid. It is too late for me to save any money for
myself anyway.....As I say, I haven't had to pay any taxes at all for the
last 5 years or so, and it is obvious to me that I won't have to pay any for
the rest of my life. So it is YOUR money that is being poured into this
black hole, and not mine. Why should I bother to tell you about it?
Obviously, you are too stupid to benefit from my experience, so you ask me
to prove it to you.....Give me a break!