XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion   
   From: prochoice@here.now   
      
   On Mon, 17 May 2004 21:06:04 -0500, "MrD"  in   
   alt.abortion with message-id  wrote:   
      
   >   
   >"Attila"  wrote in message   
   >news:d5aia01l6381ehqmsrr201uuqo3ggddkk8@4ax.com...   
   >> On Mon, 17 May 2004 14:28:45 -0500, "MrD"  in   
   >> alt.abortion with message-id  wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >   
   >> >"Attila"  wrote in message   
   >> >news:eljha0dqpuldic5ub1qgt5qes1npitg7ti@4ax.com...   
   >> >> On Mon, 17 May 2004 07:52:43 -0500, "MrD"  in   
   >> >> alt.abortion with message-id  wrote:   
   >> >>   
   >> >> >   
   >> >> >"Attila"  wrote in message   
   >> >> >news:4kbha0dqhovsr8bqlmadf5as4c2ov6bhh1@4ax.com...   
   >> >> >> On Mon, 17 May 2004 06:38:18 -0500, "MrD"  in   
   >> >> >> alt.abortion with message-id  wrote:   
   >> >> >>   
   >> >> >> >>   
   >> >> >> >> I don't write lies.  Why don't you just show that atheists are   
   >not   
   >> >> >> >> forbidden to discuss Hezekiah's tunnel by discussing it?   
   >> >> >> >   
   >> >> >> >I already have, so your argument is a total disgrace to your honor.   
   >> >> >> >I'm happy to discuss the tunnel that you think is Hezekiah's.  The   
   >> >> >problem   
   >> >> >> >is that you aren't able to discuss it honestly.   
   >> >> >> >   
   >> >> >>   
   >> >> >> I would still like to know who it is that forbids atheists to   
   >discuss   
   >> >> >> anything but I suppose I will never find out.   
   >> >> >   
   >> >> >It's forbidden to discuss?   
   >> >> >   
   >> >>   
   >> >> That is what the Winnut keeps saying.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> "Why don't you just show that atheists are not   
   >> >> forbidden to discuss Hezekiah's tunnel by discussing it?"   
   >> >>   
   >> >I'm perfectly willing to discuss this tunnel, how about you?   
   >> >   
   >>   
   >> Do you mean discuss it with me or the Winnut?   
   >>   
   >> I know nothing about it but that hasn't stopped me in the past.    
   >>   
   >Winnut, as you call him, set forward an experiment whereas we can show that   
   >atheists aren't forbidden to discuss Hezekiah's supposed tunnel by   
   >discussing it.  Here we are discussing it.  Guess he's got his result.   
   >I've read just a bit about it and it's pretty clear that it's old, but it's   
   >disconcerting to find an inscription by the diggers that didn't give some   
   >homage to the king if he was so inspired as to tell them to dig in such a   
   >way that had never been tried before.  This was a first, a totally   
   >horizontal dig from two start points, connecting up.  If Hezekiah had   
   >ordered it, he would have been praised all over the place for the insight.   
   >I think it was someone much more common who thought it wise to follow the   
   >fissure in the rock  that leaked water to the pool during the higher water   
   >periods.   
   >Wow, we are just discussing away on this tunnel.   
   >   
      
   I agree a new engineering method that yielded such useful results   
   would have not only been mentioned but emulated,  The King, in fact,   
   would have wanted to get as much credit as possible by advertising   
   such a useful method far and wide.  It is much more likely someone   
   simply followed the water to see where it came from.   
      
   One problem with those pesky tunnels is how hard it is to be certain   
   exactly when they were built.   
      
   I am still waiting for someone to forbid me to discuss this, but so   
   far I have detected nothing.  Perhaps it's another one of those pesky   
   gods who is failing his responsibilities.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)