XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality   
      
   On Fri, 08 May 2015 23:37:57 -0600, David Johnston  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 5/8/2015 8:03 PM, mur wrote:   
   >> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 18:42:48 -0600, David Johnston  wrote:   
   >> .   
   >>> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 19:59:12 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 18:48:48 -0600, David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >>>> .   
   >>>>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 16:56:00 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 17:15:01 -0600, David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>> On 4/7/2015 3:42 PM, David Johnston wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 4/7/2015 3:03 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 18:52:21 -0600, David Johnston    
   >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:02:15 -0400, mur. <> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 20:23:35 -0600, David Johnston <   
   avid@block.net>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 21:33:12 -0400, mur. <> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 19:37:05 -0600, David Johnston   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2015 5:11 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not actually supporting your case there.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       Yeah it does.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your quotation is quite clear.  All sinned.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>        That's a very common belief. In fact I've never met   
   anyone   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who didn't   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thus we are all damned to hell   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>      Not necessarily. Do you have any clue why?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Because if Hell doesn't exist, we aren't damned to it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      And if it does?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by default regardless of our particular   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sins.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       That would depend on the beliefs of the individual.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which are whatever the individual wants them to be.  Hence the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actual   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prospect of going to prison being a more likely deterrent.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>        So you're saying we should believe no group of people is   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more likely to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abuse children than any other?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope.  That's not what I'm saying. And really I can't recall the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> last   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> time that someone started a sentence with "So you're saying" and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> accurately conveyed what the person was saying.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>      Well so far you've provided no reason to believe I wasn't   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> correct this time.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It might in fact be the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> case that atheists are statistically more likely to molest   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> children than   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> church-goers.  You just haven't made a good argument for it or   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> established that the difference, if it exist is particularly   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> large and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> significant.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>      You still haven't provided reason to believe I wasn't   
   correct.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes I have.  I've pointed out that Judeo-Christian religion   
   doesn't   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> even   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> ban molestation.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      How did you find that out?   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> I read the Bible.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>       What does it say about people eating their own children and   
   their   
   >>>>>>>>> own feces?   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> I've pointed out that even if it did, the punishment   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> for it would be no more severe than it would be for being alive.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      We are told:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Mark 9:42   
   >>>>>>>>>>> "If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in   
   >>>>>>>>>>> me--to stumble,   
   >>>>>>>>>>> it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around   
   >>>>>>>>>>> their neck and   
   >>>>>>>>>>> they were thrown into the sea."   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> That is an admonition against drawing children into sinful   
   behavior.  It   
   >>>>>>>>>> has no bearing on sex, assuming you marry the 12 year old first.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>       People had a different interpretation of maturity back in those   
   >>>>>>>>> days,   
   >>>>>>>>> probably in part because they didn't live half as long as they do   
   today.   
   >>>>>>>>> Actually from the impression I get it's not that "they" thought it   
   was   
   >>>>>>>>> ok for   
   >>>>>>>>> girls to marry at an "earlier" age, but it's more like "we" think   
   they   
   >>>>>>>>> should   
   >>>>>>>>> wait until a later age than people in most of human history.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> so there may be more to it than you want people to believe.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You just kind of assumed that the many reports of child   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> molesting in connection to religious institutions are anomalous   
   or   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fabricated   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>      Try providing reason to believe that.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> That's what you said you were doing.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      Present your quote(s).   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Were you lying?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      No, but so far I must suspect that you may be.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Oh.  My mistake.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>       You didn't provide your quote(s).   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> So instead your position is that the reports of child   
   >>>>>>>>>> molesting in connection to religious institutions are factual and   
   not   
   >>>>>>>>>> anomalous.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>       I feel sure that some are and some are not,   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> What do you imagine the word "anomalous" means?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> And the incidentally the reason I didn't provide the quote was because   
   >>>>>>> sifting through dozens and dozens of your e-mails to find it would take   
   >>>>>>> too long and accomplish too little.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>     Translation: You did try and found that you couldn't support your   
   claim   
   >>>>>> because it was a lie   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> No, I didn't.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>     You're letting us know that you're either too half ass to try   
   supporting   
   >>>> your own claim which still clearly appears to be a lie, or that you knew   
   it was   
   >>>> a lie when you made the claim and that's why you can't try to support it.   
   >>>   
   >>> If "supporting my claim" would accomplish anything I'd do it.  Since it   
   >>> won't, I won't.  Instead lets move on.  Is it your position that the   
   >>> reports of child molesting in connection to religious institutions are   
   >>> factual   
   >>   
   >>      I'm confident some are. Aren't you?   
   >>   
   >>> and not anomalous?   
   >>   
   >>      I'm confident they all would be. Aren't you?   
   >>   
   >   
   >Only in the sense that child molestation in general is anomalous.   
      
       But you think it's not in connection to religious institutions?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)