Argument to Support Law that Atheists Cannot Hold Office...

[BoSoxGal]

Missed that!!

That's my last word.

Bet it's not!!

I'm so tempted, Gob, to respond to this post by asking Daisy to just terminate my account here.

I won't, because I truly, truly enjoy posts from Scooter, Sue, Meade, Big RR, Econoline, kristina, Beer Sponge, etc. (Daisy on the rare occasion we hear from her) - the one hour of PlanB that I allow myself on most days is one of the pleasures in my life, and I'm not going to be driven away by mean people.

So I'm just going to have to miss the cool bits in the thousands of posts you and LJ make here, as well as a few others who post less but like to create conflict with me or others by telling them how to post and telling them what they've posted is inappropriate.

I'm going to pass on your brilliant bits in favor of the peace of mind of missing all the squabbling. I have enough of real peoples' real life problems and conflicts weighing on my mind every single day of my life as it is. I come here for the community of clever people, not for the fights.

Mean people suck; blaming that meanness on somebody's else's alleged meanness, or arrogance, or whatever, doesn't excuse your own.

[Lord Jim]

like to create conflict with me or others by telling them how to post and telling them what they've posted is inappropriate.

Oh brother...

You mean like this:

It gets very tiresome watching the never-ending pig pile on rubato, guys.

and this:

Wow, some of you have a real hard on for rubato!

That sure looks like "trying to create conflict with others" by "telling them what they've posted is inappropriate" to me...

Especially since in both cases, (and others I don't have time to look up) you've chosen to jump in out of the blue and stir the pot without one single disparaging word having been directed at you ...

Seems to me that the very definition of seeking to "create conflict" is to try to pick a fight with others who have not tried to pick one with you...(and surely from past experience and observation, you had to know that picking a fight is what would be the effect of those posts...)

[MajGenl.Meade]

bsg, LJ has a point there. I'm only too happy to advise him what not to post (endless invective when actually he has good arguments which are much stronger and more fun to read).

I may be wrong, but I don't think anyone's told you what to post. If they did, please don't destroy my illusion - it's all I have

I'd much rather you just continued. We each are what we are and we each add something (except Poster X who shall remain nameless)

[Joe Guy]

[Crackpot]

Is he related to speed poster?

[Lord Jim]

BSG, since you returned to the board, I have not once posted anything that could be remotely interpreted as attempting to initiate any sort of personal conflict with you. (Obviously I have disagreed with you in many discussions because we come from completely different places ideologically, but that's certainly to be expected.) Nor have I posted one single comment in any "personal conflict" exchange between you and any other poster here.

So when you include me (as you seemed to do in your latest post) as someone who has been "trying to create conflict" with you, your criticism is not well taken.

[Gob]

Missed that!!

That's my last word.

Bet it's not!!

I'm so tempted, Gob, to respond to this post by asking Daisy to just terminate my account here.

I won't, because I truly, truly enjoy posts from Scooter, Sue, Meade, Big RR, Econoline, kristina, Beer Sponge, etc. (Daisy on the rare occasion we hear from her) - the one hour of PlanB that I allow myself on most days is one of the pleasures in my life, and I'm not going to be driven away by mean people.

So I'm just going to have to miss the cool bits in the thousands of posts you and LJ make here, as well as a few others who post less but like to create conflict with me or others by telling them how to post and telling them what they've posted is inappropriate.

I'm going to pass on your brilliant bits in favor of the peace of mind of missing all the squabbling. I have enough of real peoples' real life problems and conflicts weighing on my mind every single day of my life as it is. I come here for the community of clever people, not for the fights.

Mean people suck; blaming that meanness on somebody's else's alleged meanness, or arrogance, or whatever, doesn't excuse your own.

I was right!!!

ETA. Maybe if you dropped the "Head Girl" act you'd enjoy yourself more.

[BoSoxGal]

No, you weren't. I'm not posting to LJ again about the rubato-bashing. I'm talking about MY feelings about engaging in conflict of any kind.

I don't know why you think I'm acting 'head girl'. What does that mean? What is it about my posting that makes you assert that proposition? Is it because when I post my opinions I'm assertive about them? So is everybody else here. Is it because as a member of this community I've on many occasions asked people to stop pig-piling on each other with utter crap when they don't like the others' posts, or personality, or what have you? I am asking, not ordering. I have the right as any member of this community does to express my opinion.

I suppose you are making it very clear that I don't have the right to do that without also being subject to attack on occasion. Message received. I can't control anybody else, nor do I expect to. But as Eleanor Roosevelt said, we each have the power not to allow someone else to make use feel bad (she said it better).

Maybe, after all, I'm not the sort of person who should post on an internet board with people I'm fond of. I take the fights personally - even if they don't involve me. I grew up in a very hostile home of origin with abusive parents who beat on each other emotionally and physically and beat on us kids the same - I'm very sensitive to even the requirement to observe such hostility, and in my all-too-short life, I'd rather not see much more of that.

If being a regular person with imperfections, like all of us here have, gives certain posters the right to call me batshit crazy, or whatever other nasty things I've been called at times over the years, then I also have the right to think those people are mean and they suck.

Truth is, even if I WAS the most arrogant prick on the board, it doesn't excuse being vilified by others - that actually makes them bigger pricks, in my book. It's like saying 'if they torture, we get to torture, too'. I'm more the 'turn the other cheek' type. I just don't think the way to deal with people you don't like is to follow them and respond to them - often when they aren't even addressing you - looking for conflict.

But whatever.

[Gob]

It was just a hint that your constant long lectures may not be well received, and that you may enjoy yourself more if you stopped the pontificating on other's styles of posting, that was all..

[RayThom]

... make a tasty grape juice and jelly.

Years ago I witnessed a hit-and-run accident. After checking the victim's injuries I then called the police from a nearby telephone booth. The police took my statement at the scene and some months later I was summonsed to appear in criminal court as a witness for the plaintiff. No problem, it got me out of work for the day.

OK, so I'm called to the witness stand to testify (I didn't hold my testicles however) and the bailiff held a bible under my left hand and says, "do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So help you God." I hesitated for a moment and then looked at the JP and told him I didn't believe in god but would affirm my testimony as nothing but the truth under penalties of perjury. ("Pin drop" sound from the peanut gallery goes here.) After a slight pause the JP says I was now sworn in and to be seated.

After about a half hour of grilling from both sides I was dismissed from the stand. Being the only eye witness, and a very credible one, I felt I gave solid testimony. I later found out that the defendant beat the leaving-the-scene rap. I couldn't help but feel that my secular humanism came into play while the jurors mulled over the evidence.

And I was never called back to testify in any subsequent civil suit. It's the power of god's hand coupled with eternal damnation, I suppose. It's amazing the pseudo/quasi faith the masses place in an unseen and unproven divine and/or spiritual ruler. All lip service rather than real service, it appears to me.

Dominus vobiscum... Ite, missa est.

[MajGenl.Meade]

So was he found guilty of the accident itself? One assumes damage to the car... some evidence that it was his car other than your identification (of the number plate/license plate??)

It would be a shame indeed for testimony to be downgraded because the witness happened to affirm rather than take that other oath

Were it me on the bench or in a jury, I would not be impressed one bit by the fact of someone swearing to tell the truth on a stack of Bibles, so help them God. Liars come in all shades of faith (and lack thereof)

[wesw]

I believe I read some thing about ," swear not , on the lord or your own head, lest ye be condemned. let your yes be your yes and your no be your no." something to that effect anyway.

[RayThom]

It appeared that the defendant eventually admitted to the accident but with no license, no insurance, and leaving the scene, I guess his lawyer was able to create a whole lotta' reasonable doubt. The Delaware County judiciary has been widely known as a "let's make a deal" kind of system. (Justice is on your side... now how much justice can you afford?)

To paraphrase James Crumley, "Son, never trust a man who doesn't believe in God because he's probably a self-righteous sort, a man who thinks he knows right from wrong all the time..." That's the mindset a freethinker battles every day. It ain't easy being a 15%-er.

Who is right and who is wrong? People are just dying to find out... or not.