XPost: alt.atheism, alt.religion, aus.politics   
   XPost: uk.politics.misc, alt.politics.republicans, alt.politics.democrats   
   XPost: aus.religion   
   From: alaspectrum@netvigator.com   
      
   Virgil wrote:   
      
   > In article ,   
   >  fasgnadh  wrote:   
   >   
   > >   
   > >  > If the person making that claim is including non-beleivers in gods, as   
   > >  > well as anti-believers, in his/her definition of A-theism (without a   
   > >  > god), then babies are certainly non-believers.   
      
   Babies and young children are innocent until godbots [usually parents] get   
   hold of their brains and then for an entire lifetime they are 'hooked'   
      
   Borders on the criminal.   
      
   Every young person should be free from inculcation at home and at school, free   
   to make a calculated decision about ancient myths and whether or not to devote   
   an entire lifetime to them.   
      
      
      
      
      
      
   >   
   > >  >   
   > >   
   > > As are rocks, trees, grains of sand on the beach and my dog, Deefa!   
   > >   
   > > In fact Deefa is the most intelligent of all of you.. and unlike   
   > > Atheists, HE'S NOT BARKING MAD!    B^D   
   >   
   > And precisely how does "fasgnadh the fucked up" know that his dog,   
   > Deefa, is not an atheist? Which gods does Deefa worship?   
   >   
   > >   
   > >  > "fasgnadh" seems to be one who sneers at everone else's opinions   
   > >  > and  beliefs   
   > >   
   > > Not 'everyone elses', just these clearly absurd, infantile, irrational   
   > > undergraduate beliefs of you Athei-Sith pseudo-Buddhists!    B^D   
   >   
   > You attribute beliefs to others without evidence   
   >   
   > >   
   > > Who would cast pearls before swine?   
   >   
   > We seem to be doing it   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)