A Fishing forum. FishingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » FishingBanter forum » rec.outdoors.fishing newsgroups » Fishing Photos
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Merry Christmas



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old December 15th, 2006, 09:34 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
Opus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 406
Default Merry Christmas


"johnval1" wrote in message
news

"Opus"
I give to religious causes, because I believe that they do more god*
than harm.


*should have read: good

Freudian slip?

I sense unresolved conflict Grasshopper. :-)


That or very poor typing skills.

Op --and I am a bit drugged. Gettin' over my back surgery--



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

  #22  
Old December 15th, 2006, 10:11 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
johnval1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default Merry Christmas


"Opus" wrote in message ...

Are you saying that you don't "accept" my point or just that you don't
like replacing the word PETA, for the word Christian?

If it is the case that you don't "accept" my fine and well thought out
argument, well, you can just blow me, you filthy pig-mouthed scumbag!
:~^ )

It's truly sad how an otherwise fine discussion goes all to hell, over
religion!


Consider Picasso's "blue period" piece of The Old Guitarist. A seminal
work, bridging period genres and one of the turning pieces of art pointing
out the direction of modernism.

Except, substitute Picasso with Renoir, substitute a blue theme with lively
colors, substitute the old guitarist with a young female ballet dancer in a
mid-twirl, and we have the same painting making the same arguement. Right?

What I am saying is that I do not accept the substitution of those words.
Not in the context of that specific discussion nor in any other actually.
There is no conceptual equality of those words worthy - to me at least - of
discussion.

Besides, PETA has some linkage to fishing. Come to think of it, Christ did
too when he divided the fishes and loaves to feed the gathering, but I don't
believe PETA would have approved of that menu either.

Sorry to hear about your back surgery.


  #23  
Old December 15th, 2006, 11:14 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
Opus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 406
Default Merry Christmas


"johnval1" wrote in message
t...

Consider Picasso's "blue period" piece of The Old Guitarist. A seminal
work, bridging period genres and one of the turning pieces of art pointing
out the direction of modernism.

Except, substitute Picasso with Renoir, substitute a blue theme with
lively colors, substitute the old guitarist with a young female ballet
dancer in a mid-twirl, and we have the same painting making the same
arguement. Right?


No, you replaced one painting for another, thus changing the meaning of the
art. We have been talking about a conceptual framework, in which meaning is
not changed, only the words are changed.

What I am saying is that I do not accept the substitution of those words.
Not in the context of that specific discussion nor in any other actually.
There is no conceptual equality of those words worthy - to me at least -
of discussion.


What is so special about the words Christian and diverse beliefs that makes
them unfit to be used?

What words would you use, since you "do not accept the substitution of
*those* words."

So you do understand my point, but you are oppose to the use of my word
choice? And I'm not asking you to accept anything. I am asking if you
understand my point of view.

Besides, PETA has some linkage to fishing. Come to think of it, Christ
did too when he divided the fishes and loaves to feed the gathering, but I
don't believe PETA would have approved of that menu either.


I imagine that would depend upon whether or not Jesus (himself) was dividing
the fish up among PETA members.

Sorry to hear about your back surgery.


It's not the problem. I'm tickles to death with the surgery. It was before
the surgery that was such a pain.

Take care.

Op



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

  #24  
Old December 15th, 2006, 11:51 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
johnval1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default Merry Christmas


"Opus" wrote in message
No, you replaced one painting for another, thus changing the meaning of
the art. We have been talking about a conceptual framework, in which
meaning is not changed, only the words are changed.


Well, this is the nut of the discussion. Words are the colors and shapes we
give to thoughts, ideas, and concepts. That is why war is not peace, and
love is not hate. When you change the words, you change the conceptual
framework of the discussion. Words are not interchangable parts.


What is so special about the words Christian and diverse beliefs that
makes them unfit to be used?


I believe my point was that Christianity and PETA were not interchangable.
I have no problem with the use of either word, but not as a substitute for
one another in the context of our discussion.

By the way, Christianity itself a very diverse lot.

What words would you use, since you "do not accept the substitution of
*those* words."


The words I used are the words I would accept.


So you do understand my point, but you are oppose to the use of my word
choice? And I'm not asking you to accept anything. I am asking if you
understand my point of view.


I do understand your point of view. And I still will not accept free
exchange of one word for the other, which would mean that I don't believe
words have meaning. What I gain from this discussion, and please correct
me if I am wrong, is that you have little use for either Christianity or
PETA, and so are willing to consider them conceptually the same. I do not.
To me they are not the same.


  #25  
Old December 16th, 2006, 04:36 AM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
Opus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 406
Default Merry Christmas


"johnval1" wrote in message
.. .

Well, this is the nut of the discussion. Words are the colors and shapes
we give to thoughts, ideas, and concepts. That is why war is not peace,
and love is not hate. When you change the words, you change the
conceptual framework of the discussion. Words are not interchangable
parts.


No they don't always and if the meaning of the word itself is not the crux
of the argument, it really doesn't matter.

I believe my point was that Christianity and PETA were not interchangable.
I have no problem with the use of either word, but not as a substitute for
one another in the context of our discussion.


Okay, I can accept that you don't believe the two words are interchangeable.
However, for the purposes of this argument, I do believe do believe them to
be interchangeable and without changing the meaning of the oveall context of
the disscussion.

The words I used are the words I would accept.


Well that seems reasonable enough for you, I'm not so certain for me?

I do understand your point of view. And I still will not accept free
exchange of one word for the other, which would mean that I don't believe
words have meaning.


Okay, let me see if I can try this one last time.

PETA's organization is antehetical to fishers and hunters, and therefore it
would seem a hunter/fisher can't rationally identify/support PETA.

The Christian faith is antethetical to agnostics and atheists, and therefore
it would seem that agnostics/atheists can't rationally identify/support the
Christian faith.

The meanings of these two statements is the same, conceptually. This isn't
to say that either statement is true or false.

If you can say that one group which is diametrically opposed to another
group can't rationally support the other, then you can say that for all
other groups that are the mirror opposites of one another, or you can say it
about none.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the meaning of the words used, except
that they must be words that will meet the criterion of the overall context.

Unless you are trying to contend that there is a certain degree of animosity
greater between PETA and hunter/fishers groups than there is between the
Christian and agnostic/atheist groups? I'd have a hard time agreeing with
that argument.


What I gain from this discussion, and please correct me if I am wrong, is
that you have little use for either Christianity or PETA, and so are
willing to consider them conceptually the same. I do not. To me they are
not the same.


You are certainly wrong. What I said was,
"I don't support PETA anymore than I support Christians that tell me I am
going to HELL because I don't believe in their god."
This was to show that I believe them (Christians who tell me that I am going
to Hell) to be diametrically opposed to my beliefs, and has noting to do
with what use I have for either group. I actually have a great deal of use
for Christians--my mother happens to be one. And as I stated previously, I
do support some Christian activities. Which brings us full circle, because
my original contention was that if I can support one group that is my polar
opposite, I can certainly support another group that may be my polar
opposite.

Op


  #26  
Old December 16th, 2006, 01:57 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
catfish2006
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default Merry Christmas


"johnval1" wrote in message t...

Merry Christmas
And a happy New Year
  #27  
Old December 17th, 2006, 04:51 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
Bob Rickard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 59
Default Merry Christmas

Opus, I personally am a Christian Agnostic. If seeing those two words
together causes you to stupidly giggle, then read the book that launched
this religion: The Christian Agnostic, published in 1940 by Lesley D.
Weatherhead, a semi-defrocked Episcopalian Bishop found guilty by many of
actually thinking & making sense. His book is long out of print, but is
still sought-after & available for many bucks... I just purchased another
copy from Amazon.com.

To cause you even more giggles, my being a Christian Agnostic has caused me
to understand, accept & appreciate Judaism, Muslimism, Buddhism, & all other
sincere faiths. To openly state what I have been hiding, I am now severely
terminal, having been sent home to die by my doctors on Oct. 31st. But... my
doctors have been declared me terminal before but my faith keeps me going as
if tomorrow was a sure thing, and for me it is!

Bob Rickard

PS: Don't be too cheap you buy the book, Opus... you have a lot to learn.
.................................................. .................................................. ......................................


"Opus" wrote in message
...

"johnval1" wrote in message
.. .

Well, this is the nut of the discussion. Words are the colors and shapes
we give to thoughts, ideas, and concepts. That is why war is not peace,
and love is not hate. When you change the words, you change the
conceptual framework of the discussion. Words are not interchangable
parts.


No they don't always and if the meaning of the word itself is not the crux
of the argument, it really doesn't matter.

I believe my point was that Christianity and PETA were not
interchangable. I have no problem with the use of either word, but not as
a substitute for one another in the context of our discussion.


Okay, I can accept that you don't believe the two words are
interchangeable. However, for the purposes of this argument, I do believe
do believe them to be interchangeable and without changing the meaning of
the oveall context of the disscussion.

The words I used are the words I would accept.


Well that seems reasonable enough for you, I'm not so certain for me?

I do understand your point of view. And I still will not accept free
exchange of one word for the other, which would mean that I don't believe
words have meaning.


Okay, let me see if I can try this one last time.

PETA's organization is antehetical to fishers and hunters, and therefore
it would seem a hunter/fisher can't rationally identify/support PETA.

The Christian faith is antethetical to agnostics and atheists, and
therefore it would seem that agnostics/atheists can't rationally
identify/support the Christian faith.

The meanings of these two statements is the same, conceptually. This
isn't to say that either statement is true or false.

If you can say that one group which is diametrically opposed to another
group can't rationally support the other, then you can say that for all
other groups that are the mirror opposites of one another, or you can say
it about none.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the meaning of the words used,
except that they must be words that will meet the criterion of the overall
context.

Unless you are trying to contend that there is a certain degree of
animosity greater between PETA and hunter/fishers groups than there is
between the Christian and agnostic/atheist groups? I'd have a hard time
agreeing with that argument.


What I gain from this discussion, and please correct me if I am wrong, is
that you have little use for either Christianity or PETA, and so are
willing to consider them conceptually the same. I do not. To me they are
not the same.


You are certainly wrong. What I said was,
"I don't support PETA anymore than I support Christians that tell me I am
going to HELL because I don't believe in their god."
This was to show that I believe them (Christians who tell me that I am
going to Hell) to be diametrically opposed to my beliefs, and has noting
to do with what use I have for either group. I actually have a great deal
of use for Christians--my mother happens to be one. And as I stated
previously, I do support some Christian activities. Which brings us full
circle, because my original contention was that if I can support one group
that is my polar opposite, I can certainly support another group that may
be my polar opposite.

Op



  #28  
Old December 17th, 2006, 07:08 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
Opus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 406
Default Merry Christmas


"Bob Rickard" wrote in message
t...
Opus, I personally am a Christian Agnostic.


I'm very happy for you.

If seeing those two words together causes you to stupidly giggle,


No, those two words together don't cause me to react in any way, "stupidly"
or otherwise.

then read the book that launched this religion: The Christian Agnostic,
published in 1940 by Lesley D. Weatherhead, a semi-defrocked Episcopalian
Bishop found guilty by many of actually thinking & making sense.


Hey, since you are so moved by books that launch religious movements, you
might be interested in L. Ron Hubbard. Mr. Hubbard launched " the
fastest-growing religion in the world today, Scientology."
http://www.aboutlronhubbard.org/


His book is long out of print, but is still sought-after & available for
many bucks... I just purchased another copy from Amazon.com.


Mr. Hubbards books are wide spread and quite cheap, I hear. I bet
Amozon.con has them too!

To cause you even more giggles,


You never caused me any, but do go on.

my being a Christian Agnostic has caused me to understand, accept &
appreciate Judaism, Muslimism, Buddhism, & all other sincere faiths.


If you take up with the Scientologists, you can some day meet space aliens!
Imagine that, you space aliens hangin' out, havin' a few beers together.
Beware though, the space aliens book, "How to Serve Humans," is really a
cookbook! Don't get on their spaceships with them!

To openly state what I have been hiding, I am now severely terminal, having
been sent home to die by my doctors on Oct. 31st.


Bad break. I just got sent home from the hospital after back surgery, and
I'm afraid it didn't go all that well either. My hands still hurt badly.
However, there is good news! The drugs that they gave me don't cause me to
have delusions of grandeur. Nor do they cause me to want to proselytize
over Usenet. Imagine that?

But... my doctors have been declared me terminal before but my faith keeps
me going as if tomorrow was a sure thing, and for me it is!


Great! I wish you the best. In the future, if you want to have a serious
conversation over Usenet, I suggest that you don't suppose that you know
someones beliefs, better than they themselves, and attempt to *a better way
for them*.
Bob Rickard

PS: Don't be too cheap you buy the book, Opus... you have a lot to learn.


I tell ya what. When you convert to Scientology, I'll buy you favorite
religion's latest publications. At 48 years of age, I find it difficult to
believe that I will learn a great deal from some nutcase in a newsgroup. Of
course we all have a lot to learn about so many things. I, personally, have
alway been fascinated by quantum physics, but I doubt I'll take it up
anytime soon.

Op --amazing, simply amazing!--


  #29  
Old December 18th, 2006, 02:30 AM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
Bob Rickard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 59
Default Merry Christmas

Scientology bears no more resemblance to a religion than people like you
bear to thinking humans.

Bob
.................................................. .................................................. .......................

"Opus" wrote in message
...

"Bob Rickard" wrote in message
t...
Opus, I personally am a Christian Agnostic.


I'm very happy for you.

If seeing those two words together causes you to stupidly giggle,


No, those two words together don't cause me to react in any way,
"stupidly" or otherwise.

then read the book that launched this religion: The Christian Agnostic,
published in 1940 by Lesley D. Weatherhead, a semi-defrocked Episcopalian
Bishop found guilty by many of actually thinking & making sense.


Hey, since you are so moved by books that launch religious movements, you
might be interested in L. Ron Hubbard. Mr. Hubbard launched " the
fastest-growing religion in the world today, Scientology."
http://www.aboutlronhubbard.org/


His book is long out of print, but is still sought-after & available for
many bucks... I just purchased another copy from Amazon.com.


Mr. Hubbards books are wide spread and quite cheap, I hear. I bet
Amozon.con has them too!

To cause you even more giggles,


You never caused me any, but do go on.

my being a Christian Agnostic has caused me to understand, accept &
appreciate Judaism, Muslimism, Buddhism, & all other sincere faiths.


If you take up with the Scientologists, you can some day meet space
aliens! Imagine that, you space aliens hangin' out, havin' a few beers
together. Beware though, the space aliens book, "How to Serve Humans," is
really a cookbook! Don't get on their spaceships with them!

To openly state what I have been hiding, I am now severely terminal,
having been sent home to die by my doctors on Oct. 31st.


Bad break. I just got sent home from the hospital after back surgery, and
I'm afraid it didn't go all that well either. My hands still hurt badly.
However, there is good news! The drugs that they gave me don't cause me
to have delusions of grandeur. Nor do they cause me to want to
proselytize over Usenet. Imagine that?

But... my doctors have been declared me terminal before but my faith keeps
me going as if tomorrow was a sure thing, and for me it is!


Great! I wish you the best. In the future, if you want to have a
serious conversation over Usenet, I suggest that you don't suppose that
you know someones beliefs, better than they themselves, and attempt to *a
better way for them*.
Bob Rickard

PS: Don't be too cheap you buy the book, Opus... you have a lot to learn.


I tell ya what. When you convert to Scientology, I'll buy you favorite
religion's latest publications. At 48 years of age, I find it difficult
to believe that I will learn a great deal from some nutcase in a
newsgroup. Of course we all have a lot to learn about so many things. I,
personally, have alway been fascinated by quantum physics, but I doubt
I'll take it up anytime soon.

Op --amazing, simply amazing!--




  #30  
Old December 18th, 2006, 02:42 AM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.fishing
Opus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 406
Default Merry Christmas


"Bob Rickard" wrote in message
t...
Scientology bears no more resemblance to a religion than people like you
bear to thinking humans.

Bob


But then again, I'm not the one proselytizing in newsgroup, am I.

And I'm not the one who chose his beliefs system after reading a book.

Get a life Bobby.

Op --I think, therefore I chose for myself!--



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Merry Christmas! Karl S Fly Fishing 67 December 23rd, 2005 04:38 AM
Merry Christmas Stinkweed General Discussion 0 December 23rd, 2005 04:29 AM
Merry Christmas Dave LaCourse Fly Fishing 27 December 30th, 2003 12:00 AM
Merry Christmas Gone Angling Bass Fishing 5 December 26th, 2003 10:09 PM
OT merry christmas Larry and a cat named Dub Fly Fishing 2 December 24th, 2003 10:04 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FishingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.