Re: Lucifer

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/19/2006 5:19:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, inglori@... writes:

Their own conscience...? ;-)

Just like I very much doubt that you would start stealing, raping, killing or abusing drugs even if it became legal, you may have noticed that even with much of he Western world becoming secularised and atheist - especially here in Scandinavia - there is still a rise in charity and concern for animals, the environment, the poor, sick and disabled, and a growing distaste for use of fur, war, inequality, conducting unethical business etc.

The conscience is the voice of God. So, those who follow their conscience and do right are still doing the will of God. The ancient Greeks were close to realizing this, they even had an altar for the "unknown god", one that was believed to be greater than all the others but was as yet unknown as the others were. Socrates was a follower of this god, as much as he could be since so little was known about God by the Greeks. It was only later when entered Greek territory and say these altars were to God and he knew that God. This is what helped the Greeks to accept Christianity.

About Scandinavia though, you should perhaps look a little deeper. The crime rates aren't as low as you think. A while ago I posted a link to a site where an international survey was done on crime. The rates weren't as low in all of Europe as one might think, nor was high in the US as one would think.

As for people following their consciences, I don't put much stock in that. Some people might, but that is because they have had some kind of outside training in "doing the right thing." That might not be religion, it might be family influence. But left to their own devices all of their lives, most people will not be good people. They might occasionally do something nice, but for the most part they will be very selfish and unpleasant people.

[Guest guest]

Inger,

There are many different meanings for fear, and not all of them are

related to being scared. Here is this one, from www.dictionary.com:

3. Extreme reverence or awe, as toward a supreme power.

If you substitute the concept of being scared of the consequences from

what seems to be purely a vengeful God with that of desiring not to

offend God, and combined that with the concept that God has given

commandments to bring about the best chances for happiness for man,

tempered by the need of following certain requirements for long-term

success of the eternal plan and whatever eternal truths and laws

require, then it isn't such a horrible thing.

If you trust in God (funny how US currency has imprinted on it " In God

We Trust " at the same time we have all this division as to what

constitutes God, whether God exists, and whether it is even remotely

right to even mix the whole issue at all of that with the governing of

the US) then you can see that the commandments are something given to

prevent the greatest amount of unhappiness possible by providing

proper limits to behavior. I see your argument about " Learning by

experimentation instead of following out of fear " (my words, not a

direct quote) as not only an overly optimistic view of humanity and

what they learn, and how they learn, but even whether they learn, and

whether or not they change their behavior based on what they learn. A

really easy one I can point to relates to sexual relations outside of

marriage: even if you could remove all risks to physical life and

safety (which is absolutely impossible, despite all the claims about

" safe sex " because we don't yet create things perfectly, nor do we use

them perfectly 100% of the time, for whatever reasons) from the direct

physical consequences, there are other negative consequences that

often result from that. There's way too much evidence provided ad

nauseum that demonstrates people fail to learn that it isn't nearly as

good to indulge in such behavior and deal with the consequences than

to avoid it in the first place, if you pay attention to all the

unhappiness it creates. People are very good at rationalizing, " Well,

those others simply aren't as perfect as I am: I know I won't be

affected in a bad way by this, and I know I won't cause any harm by

doing this! " and then proceed to create exactly the situations that

they've heard or know about all over again.

Note that there are commandments that at first blush seem restrictive

and limiting simply for the sake of being limiting, if you ignore that

God wants us to be happy. The funny thing is that we don't want (in

the grand scheme of things) to be completely free, but to have a

certain amount of freedom for the greatest happiness. Experiments

have been done with chickens that had full capacity to choose the size

of their cages, and the funny thing was that they chose to have cages

much smaller than the experiment allowed them to have, 100% by choice.

Also note that there's a wide variety of conscience as to what

constitutes acceptable versus unacceptable: if you will, a formalized

list of commandments/laws gives protection to those that would

otherwise become victims of those exercising their choice in such a

way that would find it unconscionable, in that at least there's a

certain amount of external regulation stating that there are personal

consequences associated with taking advantage of a fellow being in

that way.

As to being a loving thing to let us learn from our painful mistakes,

is it not more loving to instruct us first that " if you do action A,

consequence B is the result you won't like, but there's a better

alternative entirely that causes you less pain " and instead take it

like a parent saying " If you play in the middle of the railroad tracks

with the train almost there, you will almost certainly be chopped up

into a bloody pulp right before you die a horrible death, but we love

you too much to allow you near that danger " ? Limits need to exist,

and laws/commandments that instruct that we aren't to do certain

things serve as much to protect us from ourselves and performing

possibly unrecoverable actions as much as anything. There is not a

single being that is not held accountable to the laws of physics, period.

>

> :

> > It was often said that the greatest feat Satan could ever

accomplish would be to convince Man that he does not exist. If he

could do this, then people would begin to question the existence of

evil itself. If they no longer believed in evil, or at least in Divine

Judgement, then what would restrain them from following their basest

instincts and indeed being more drawn to unrighteousness?

>

> Their own conscience...? ;-)

>

> Just like I very much doubt that you would start stealing, raping,

killing or abusing drugs even if it became legal, you may have noticed

that even with much of he Western world becoming secularised and

atheist - especially here in Scandinavia - there is still a rise in

charity and concern for animals, the environment, the poor, sick and

disabled, and a growing distaste for use of fur, war, inequality,

conducting unethical business etc.

>

> And this springs from people's own hearts, from genuine compassion,

rather than from 'acting good' so that God will judge us more

favorably later on (or so that we will get a better karma in the next

life for those who believe in that). Thus I see it as more genuine

now, and something I'm sure will please any possible divine powers a

lot more than people behaving themselves out of FEAR.

>

> Sure, with the oppression of religious restriction removed, there

also follows a lot of freedom that can, has been and is being abused

in the extreme. But I really think that is something temporary and

that the 'natural consequences' (to borrow a phrase from Raven) will

make people rethink their choices and start choosing more wisely in

the future.

>

> If I were God or a parent, I'd prefer to see my children grow and

learn at their own pace and REALLY learn rather than just pretending

to behave out of fear of punishment. The latter would be hollow,

shallow, on the surface only, and subject to high risk of falling for

temptation as soon as restriction or supervision was removed. Whereas

the self-taught way is permanent, as a lesson learned by suffering the

painful consequences of one's own actions (as an individual, or as

part of humanity) is not one is likely to want to repeat ever again.

>

> I thus see the love in how things work, even when it looks bad, and

don't feel the same fear as you seem to do. I personally believe that

this love, compassion and trust that all is good even when it doesn't

look like it comes from God, and that fear comes from you-know-who. ;-)

>

> See, fear is a real trickster. It makes us see things only from the

darkest angle, and then magnifies it so they look a lot worse than

they are, temporarily clouding our awareness of everything good and

beautiful in this world and in our fellow man, often in ourselves too.

And when we act on fear, we usually end up creating the very thing we

are trying to avoid. Doesn't that sound more like the inspiration of a

less-than-devine influence?

>

> Whereas when we have complete trust and faith that even when

seemingly bad things happen, it is always for us to learn something

and grow, rather than as punishment, bad luck or worse. With that

faith, there is really nothing to be afraid of in this world, and the

only thing there is to 'fight' is our own illusory fear and other

self-created demons.

>

> Inger

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/19/2006 5:19:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, inglori@... writes:

If I were God or a parent, I'd prefer to see my children grow and learn at their own pace and REALLY learn rather than just pretending to behave out of fear of punishment. The latter would be hollow, shallow, on the surface only, and subject to high risk of falling for temptation as soon as restriction or supervision was removed. Whereas the self-taught way is permanent, as a lesson learned by suffering the painful consequences of one's own actions (as an individual, or as part of humanity) is not one is likely to want to repeat ever again.

This is exactly what God is doing. That is why we have free will and aren't robots. The problem comes from human perceptions. We were given the rules that tell us how to be righteous, that tell us what is best for us. However, humans tend to view these simple rules that have our best interests at heart as somehow being restrictive. The only reason this is so is because we want to do things that are bad for us and because we value our immediate pleasure and "freedom" so much, we reject these rules. Instead, we end up with nations and their thousands of pages of laws and complex systems.

God has given us the plan, but does not force us to stick to it. We are indeed free to stray and make mistakes. We are also free to learn from them or not.

Self-taught can just as easily go the other way as well. It is just as easy for one to self-teach themselves that evil is the road to take, especially if there are no consequences. What we see is behavior becoming character. How one behaves shapes their inner character. If one does bad things over and over again, then one becomes a worse person.

My mother is still a teacher, and she can easily tell which kids are "self-teaching". The kids that have structured homes are well behaved and respectful of others. Those that are pampered or rule the roost are badly behaved and very selfish. This is beacuse those kids have self-learned that they can manipulate to get their way and can do what they want without punishment.

As bad as it sounds, humanity and really all life responds to punishment and needs limits. Animals fear fire because they know that if they touch it, they will be punished by being burned. Thorny plants have thorns to punish animals that try to eat them, so most animals don't bother them. If people don't think they will be punished for evil acts, then they are more likely to do them. If this weren't so, then we would have no legal or court systems, possibly no government either. The very fact that we do have them is proof that humanity cannot exist without limits and punishments for exceeding those limits, wether those limits are religious or secular in nature.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/19/2006 3:59:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, inglori@... writes:

That's not punishment, thats a natural consequence (again borroing the phrase from Raven). Only HUMANS could think of the idea of inflicting punishment on another human. Thorny plants are only acting in self-defence.

And isn't self-defense nothing more than punishing agression against oneself? Animals might not be able to think in terms of punishment, but that is what it is. However, I've seen plenty of social interaction between animals that I would call punishment. What else could it be called when, say, a dog growls in warning at another dog, or a person, but attacks when the other persists? The dog is delivering punishment for violating its warning.

Let me ask you again; would YOU go out and steal, rape, murder etc if it was suddenly legal to do so? I know I wouldn't, and I very much doubt that you would either. I had this distaste for doing anything unethical WAY before I opened up to the possibility of a spiritual reality. If I got too much change back in the grocery store, it was natural for me to give it back. If someone was depressed, it was natural for me to lend them an ear. Sure, I've done some wrong things too, and have learned from them. But to say that the ONLY thing that keeps us from behaving like barbarians is Law of fear of God, is just plain untrue.

Steal and rape, no. Murder, maybe. If such things became legal, it might well be necessary to murder some people who came to attack my family or friends. However, the legal system keeps them under control to a degree, so that probably won't be necessary, and is why I have some rubber bullets for my pistol and shotgun, so I can warn or disable them before having to resort to lethal force.

I think that over time, if there was not legal code, that more and more people would be drawn into the bad ways. Take a look at the plight of blacks in the US. In the 1920's, blacks had a lower rate of crime than did whites, even with all the predjudice and discrimination against them. In the 1960's, the welfare system was set up and many of them went on it. About this same time the black family began to disintegrate. Today, the crime rate for blacks is higher than for whites, illegitimacy for children is over 80%, and in many areas the culture has degenerated into the "gansta" culture of crime and violence. Add to this that the children know that whatever crimes they commit will be sealed away when they turn 18, so they have no reason not to avoid crime as kids. However, this sets them up to become career criminals in the future.

Whites are beginning to see this same trend as so many are going down the same road as blacks did from the 1940's on. Hispanics are also following this trend.

Because of all of this, crime has been increasing and we have been getting more and more laws. These laws aren't really helping the problem as more and more people are becoming criminals in the first place, violating the old laws as well as the new.

I think a lot of this could easily be avoided with ethical and moral education of the young, and if families taught the same. During the Great Depression, crime actually went down because people turned back to religion and ethics. Again, I think some people might come to be ethical people by themselves, but the majority need help and education to get there.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/19/2006 5:16:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, inglori@... writes:

I truly feel sorry for you to have such a misantropic view. You mustn't have met much kindness in your life to have such a bleak outlook on life.

Actually I have. Most people I know are decent. However, I have also seen a lot of the bad and we have had crime in this area, of which I have been a victim of myself in addition to having been attacked in other cities. I have also studied the crime reports and the effexts things like the welfare state and lax criminal codes have on people.

Yes, most people will probably be ok, but better moral and ethical education would only make it better.

[Guest guest]

Re:

> ... funny how US currency has imprinted on it " In God

> We Trust " ...

Even funnier, when you recall how " In God We Trust " got onto the

money. Shortly before the Civiul War, a Congressman who believed in

eliminating slavery made a speech to Congress in which he stated that,

if anything ever destroyed the people and civiliization of the USA,

future generations digging up the ruins would find evidence of slavery

and would conclude from this that the USA had lived in immorality and

had never even heard about God. To prove otherwise, the Congressman

satirically said, we should leave evidence for posterity that we had

at least heard about God, morals, etc. - to leave this evidence (he

said), we should put a sentence about God on all our money, so that

when futire generations dug in the ruins of our slave-markets they

would at least find our coins and see this proof of our virtue.

Most of the other Congressmen, especially in the Southern

(slave-holding) states, did not recognize these remarks as satire.

They took it as a serious proposal,a nd voted in favor of it.

Re:

>Limits need to exist,

> and laws/commandments that instruct that we aren't to do certain

>things serve as much to protect us from ourselves and performing

>possibly unrecoverable actions as much as anything. There is not a

>single being that is not held accountable to the laws of physics, period.

A law of physics (an observed regularity) holds true: you can't break

it even if you try. A commandment (a set of words) does not hold true

in the same way: you can';t break a law of physics, but you can break

a law of the Ten Commandments or any other law-code - people do that

all the time.

Yours for better letters,

Kate Gladstone

Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest

handwritingrepair@...

http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair

325 South Manning Boulevard

Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA

telephone 518/482-6763

AND REMEMBER ...

you can order books through my site!

(Amazon.com link -

I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold)

[Guest guest]

Re:

> The conscience is the voice of God.

Why do you think so?

>So, those who follow their conscience and do right are still doing

the will of >God.

What about those who follow their conscience and do wrong? (e.g.,

Nazis or the Taliban)

Re:

>The ancient Greeks were close to realizing this, they even had an

altar for >the " unknown god " , ...

The Greeks, like some other ancient peoples, erected an " unknown god "

altar because they believed in many gods and didn't want to incur the

wrath of whichever god they happened not to have heard about -

rather like the old joke about the little boy who /a/ reads the

Scriptures of several diofferent religions, /b/ realizes he can't tell

which - if any - religion actually has things correct, and /c/

thereafter begins all his prayers with " To Whom It May Concern ... "

The Greeks didn't think of any god they hadn't heard of (any

" unknown god " ) as stronger than the ones they already had heard about

- they just thought of the " unknown god " as more dangerous to them

personally, because they didn't know his/her name and therefore they

couldn't " address " prayers or sacrifices to that god unless they built

a sort of " To Whom It May Concern " altar and killed sacrifices there

occasionally instsead of only killing at the regular altars to Zeus,

Hera, etc.

Re:

> ... Socrates was a follower of this god,

Socrates called the spirit he followed a " daimon. " He never called it

" the unknown god. " Socrates described his " daimon " as a voice in his

head that told him what to do, what not to do, which gods to sacrifice

to, what ideas to have and teach, etc. (Socrates' ideas from this

" daimon " included the idea that a properly governed society /a/ would

kill disabled or weak-bodied infants at birth and /b/ would also

prevent other " inferior " people from reproducing.)

Yours for better letters,

Kate Gladstone

Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest

handwritingrepair@...

http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair

325 South Manning Boulevard

Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA

telephone 518/482-6763

AND REMEMBER ...

you can order books through my site!

(Amazon.com link -

I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold)

[Guest guest]

:

> As bad as it sounds, humanity and really all life responds to punishment and needs limits. Animals fear fire because they know that if they touch it, they will be punished by being burned. Thorny plants have thorns to punish animals that try to eat them, so most animals don't bother them.

That's not punishment, thats a natural consequence (again borroing the phrase from Raven). Only HUMANS could think of the idea of inflicting punishment on another human. Thorny plants are only acting in self-defence.

>If people don't think they will be punished for evil acts, then they are more likely to do them. If this weren't so, then we would have no legal or court systems, possibly no government either. The very fact that we do have them is proof that humanity cannot exist without limits and punishments for exceeding those limits, wether those limits are religious or secular in nature.

I disagree. They are only proof that if we didn't have them, CRIMINALS would commit more crimes. Most people are not criminal, and would not behave like brutes even if it was allowed. However, bad behavior CAN be taught, for sure, and so can good. And sure, in times of pressure, people's worst sides often comes out - OR their best.

But genuine goodness often comes from within, regardless of what laws happen to be in place at the time. If this was not so, you would not have had people hiding Jews and smuggling RAF pilots out from under the noses of the Nazis. It was clearly against the law to do so at the time, yet a lot of people defied this law and followed their own consciences, at great risk to themselves and their families.

Let me ask you again; would YOU go out and steal, rape, murder etc if it was suddenly legal to do so? I know I wouldn't, and I very much doubt that you would either. I had this distaste for doing anything unethical WAY before I opened up to the possibility of a spiritual reality. If I got too much change back in the grocery store, it was natural for me to give it back. If someone was depressed, it was natural for me to lend them an ear. Sure, I've done some wrong things too, and have learned from them. But to say that the ONLY thing that keeps us from behaving like barbarians is Law of fear of God, is just plain untrue.

Besides, exactly how many criminals do you that who get better from punishment? Not too many, right? Those frew who do turn their lives around often do so because of LOVE, either from a fellow human, e.g. a therapist, a spouse or their love for a child, or via religion - not from being punished.

Inger

[Guest guest]

Re:

>The kids that have structured homes are well behaved and

> respectful of others. Those that are pampered or rule the roost are badly

> behaved and very selfish.

What about the kids who fit neither category - abused children, for

instance? Which way do they behave?

Yours for better letters,

Kate Gladstone

Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest

handwritingrepair@...

http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair

325 South Manning Boulevard

Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA

telephone 518/482-6763

AND REMEMBER ...

you can order books through my site!

(Amazon.com link -

I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold)

[Guest guest]

:

>The kids that have structured homes are well behaved and

> respectful of others. Those that are pampered or rule the roost are badly

> behaved and very selfish.

Kate:

What about the kids who fit neither category - abused children, for

instance? Which way do they behave?

Very good question.

I fit neither category. I got a free upbringing, but was not allowed to

" rule the roost " - nor would I have wanted to. Our home was neither

structured nor disorganised, it was just normal. My parents were respectful

and friendly with me and I with them. I was not pampered, but nor was I

disciplined, except on three occasions when I had done something I

shouldn't.

I so dislike stereotyping and simplistic authoritarian solutions to complex

problems.

Inger

[Guest guest]

> :

> >The kids that have structured homes are well behaved and

> > respectful of others. Those that are pampered or rule the roost are badly

> > behaved and very selfish.

Aspies find it easy

to get called selfish just because it doesn't occur to us to enunciate

concerns for others or to ask unprompted casual questions about them. I

can remember once getting called selfish for not asking after the

health of as family friend who had been seriously ill ( he recovered

and is alive now). It simply never occurred to me to ask after it as I

knew I would hear any news I needed to.

[Guest guest]

:

> The conscience is the voice of God. So, those who follow their conscience and do right are still doing the will of God. The ancient Greeks were close to realizing this, they even had an altar for the "unknown god", one that was believed to be greater than all the others but was as yet unknown as the others were. Socrates was a follower of this god, as much as he could be since so little was known about God by the Greeks. It was only later when entered Greek territory and say these altars were to God and he knew that God. This is what helped the Greeks to accept Christianity.

Wherever it comes from, there are still a lot of people who do not have any religious beliefs whatsoever, yet are still full of goodwill, concern, compassion and helpfulness. So religion is not a prerequisite for that, even if it helps.

> About Scandinavia though, you should perhaps look a little deeper. The crime rates aren't as low as you think. A while ago I posted a link to a site where an international survey was done on crime. The rates weren't as low in all of Europe as one might think, nor was high in the US as one would think.

I have written before that it is rising here too, as it is everywhere else. I really do think Hollywood is at least PARTLY responsible for 24/7 broadcasting the image of how 'cool' it is to commit crime and violence. Still, most people are NOT crimial, the majority are decent people - with or without religious faith. THAT was my point and that still stands.

Having a strong religious belief has never been a deterrant from committing the most horrendous crimes or acts of violence. If it was, there would be no Christians killing Muslims and no Muslims killing Christians. No religious leader asking their people to go to war. Nor would there have been any inquistion, any slavery, any Holocaust, any cruisades. Has anyone stopped to think that if there IS a God or Allah, that he/she/it/they may not be overly pleased with all this killing, raping, torturing and pillaging - often in the name of religion!?

> As for people following their consciences, I don't put much stock in that. Some people might, but that is because they have had some kind of outside training in "doing the right thing." That might not be religion, it might be family influence. But left to their own devices all of their lives, most people will not be good people. They might occasionally do something nice, but for the most part they will be very selfish and unpleasant people.

I truly feel sorry for you to have such a misantropic view. You mustn't have met much kindness in your life to have such a bleak outlook on life.

I know of a different reality that is nothing at all like the dismal one you paint. Sure, there are a lot of assholes in this world, but so what? There are also gazillions who are not.

By focusing only on the bad negative of things, you give that part energy and only help create more of it. (I do this too sometimes, but I try to keep as balanced a view as I can.)

Inger

[Guest guest]

That's a great explanation, Maurice! Can I quote that?

Inger

Re: Lucifer

> :> >The kids that have structured homes are well behaved and> > respectful of others. Those that are pampered or rule the roost are badly> > behaved and very selfish.Aspies find it easy to get called selfish just because it doesn't occur to us to enunciate concerns for others or to ask unprompted casual questions about them. I can remember once getting called selfish for not asking after the health of as family friend who had been seriously ill ( he recovered and is alive now). It simply never occurred to me to ask after it as I knew I would hear any news I needed to.

[Guest guest]

" To Whom It May Concern ... "

I quite like that :-)

-- In , " Kate Gladstone "

<handwritingrepair@...> wrote:

>

> Re:

>

>

>

>

> > The conscience is the voice of God.

>

> Why do you think so?

>

>

> >So, those who follow their conscience and do right are still doing

> the will of >God.

>

> What about those who follow their conscience and do wrong? (e.g.,

> Nazis or the Taliban)

>

> Re:

>

> >The ancient Greeks were close to realizing this, they even had an

> altar for >the " unknown god " , ...

>

> The Greeks, like some other ancient peoples, erected an " unknown

god "

> altar because they believed in many gods and didn't want to incur

the

> wrath of whichever god they happened not to have heard about -

> rather like the old joke about the little boy who /a/ reads the

> Scriptures of several diofferent religions, /b/ realizes he can't

tell

> which - if any - religion actually has things correct, and /c/

> thereafter begins all his prayers with " To Whom It May Concern ... "

> The Greeks didn't think of any god they hadn't heard of (any

> " unknown god " ) as stronger than the ones they already had heard

about

> - they just thought of the " unknown god " as more dangerous to them

> personally, because they didn't know his/her name and therefore they

> couldn't " address " prayers or sacrifices to that god unless they

built

> a sort of " To Whom It May Concern " altar and killed sacrifices there

> occasionally instsead of only killing at the regular altars to Zeus,

> Hera, etc.

>

> Re:

>

> > ... Socrates was a follower of this god,

>

> Socrates called the spirit he followed a " daimon. " He never called

it

> " the unknown god. " Socrates described his " daimon " as a voice in his

> head that told him what to do, what not to do, which gods to

sacrifice

> to, what ideas to have and teach, etc. (Socrates' ideas from this

> " daimon " included the idea that a properly governed society /a/

would

> kill disabled or weak-bodied infants at birth and /b/ would also

> prevent other " inferior " people from reproducing.)

>

>

> Yours for better letters,

> Kate Gladstone

> Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest

> handwritingrepair@...

> http://learn.to/handwrite,

http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair

> 325 South Manning Boulevard

> Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA

> telephone 518/482-6763

> AND REMEMBER ...

> you can order books through my site!

> (Amazon.com link -

> I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold)

>

[Guest guest]

What surprises me is that nowhere on these threads does anyone

suggest Satan was an Aspie (:

- s

[Guest guest]

Re:

On 3/19/06, Stan's Computer <vze2txm3@...> wrote:

> What surprises me is that nowhere on these threads does anyone

> suggest Satan was an Aspie (:

I actually have sometimes thought this! But I hesitated to mention it

in a thread that started by discussing Satanist (or allegedly

Satanist) Aspies.

One could write an interesting (though disturbing) fantasy-story on

that assumption.

One could write an equally interesting (and probably somewhat

less disturbing) story on the assumption " Prometheus was an Aspie. "

Hmmm ... what other gods/heroes/prophets/mythological figures/etc. (of

any mythology/religion/belief-system past or present) seem possible

Aspies?

Yours for better letters,

Kate Gladstone

Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest

handwritingrepair@...

http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair

325 South Manning Boulevard

Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA

telephone 518/482-6763

AND REMEMBER ...

you can order books through my site!

(Amazon.com link -

I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold)

[Guest guest]

hahaha!

Lida

What surprises me is that nowhere on these threads does anyone

suggest Satan was an Aspie (:

- s

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and

acceptance. Everyone is valued.

Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

[Guest guest]

Well I have heard of Jesus being described as aspie.

>

> What surprises me is that nowhere on these threads does anyone

> suggest Satan was an Aspie (:

>

> - s

>

[Guest guest]

>> That's a great explanation, Maurice! Can I quote that?> > Inger

Be my guest.

(itself an unselfish thing to say)

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/20/2006 2:33:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, mikecarrie01@... writes:

Sorry, I just have to answer this one. Good old statistics, they always tell the whole story, right? No.

In the 20's they were scared to death of lynching!

Were they really? Lynchings did happen and there was harassment, but the modern view is way off on how many lynchings really took place. But look at it another way: if it took the fear of being lynched to make them behave, should we bring it back today?

Because of welfare?

To a large extent yes. The programs were designed to be anti-family. For example, if a woman on welfare were married, she would get less money that if she were single, since it was presumed that the husband would also have an income. Likewise a married man would get less money. A women on welfare used to get more money for each child she had. Therefore, because the income came from the mailbox rather than a job, it made sense not bother with marriage and not to have a father figure around for the kids.

If you can find it, read: The Poverty of Welfare by Micheal D. Tanner. It takes a good look at this and other issues.

But blacks are also more apt to be arrested for crimes. Havn't you ever heard of a DWB (Driving While Black)? As one of many examples, my husband once got a traffic ticket by a policeman who lied. He was called later due to an investigation regarding this policeman when it was found that he only ticketed blacks but was putting 'caucasian' on the tickets

As unfortunate as that is, it is probably an isolated incident. Crime statistics show that young black men comprise 3% of the population but commit 40% of the crime. That's just facts. However, if one wished to do away with any form of racial profiling, OK. 90% of crime committed by black offenders is against other blacks. Which is the more racist view: to pick up black offenders or leave them to victimize black neighborhoods?

Many blacks have their children, many whites abort their children.

This cuts both ways. Many blacks also have abortions. It is tough to track down figures on abortions by who has them, but a Google search would probably turn it up.

I don't know if all children know this, but growing up in a ghetto being bothered by gangs, targeted young for running drugs--here kid, here's 5 bucks to give this package to this guy and before they know it they're involved in drugs, not being able to speak well or go to a good school or go to college, besides being black works against one. Those of us with 'good' upbringings take them for granted.

Many do know it. Those drug running kids know it because the gang bosses tell them. That and the leniency courts tend to show kids is why thusly used. The ones who broke in my house several years were talking outside of court about how it didn't matter, that when they turned 18 no one could use this stuff against them.

Some of it. I will say again that the racism in this country is BAD. Most white just people don't see it and if blacks complain where will it get them? Often they're accused of making things up, anyway. Some of the things I've seen probably wouldn't be believed if I were black because they seem unreal and ridiculous. When whites don't respect blacks they are free to act in the most ridiculous ways against them, ways they would never act around other whites. Other whites don't care--not my problem, it doesn' t affect me. How will it ever change?

Whites have gotten over a lot of the racism. Rather than go into a lot of detail, here's another book to try. 10 Things You Can't Say in America by Larry Elder, who happens to be black. His first Chapter is called: Blacks are More Racist Than Whites. He goes into detail and cites evidence to back this up. For example: any black leader or spokesman that tells blacks to do for themselves and improve themselves are shouted down as Uncle Tom, Oreo Cookie, Coconut and so on by other blacks. He has a whole paragraphs of things he hwas been called, by other blacks.

Have you ever seen how blacks act around whites they don't respect? Its not ridiculous. The times I have seen it is has been downright threatening and sometimes violent.

As for whites not caring about black problems. That's not entirely true, but many whites have gotten fed up with seeing their attempts to help blacks returned with anger. When I used to go to church regularly, when tried handing out meals to the poor folks in the poor section of town. Every time, blacks would rideup in their big cars and take all the food, saying there was nothing we could do to stop because we were giving it out free. They spit on us, curse, push some of around and so on. So we stopped. Years ago a tornado hit the town and wiped out an historic black neighborhood. Many groups came together to help rebuild and refurnish those homes at no cost to the residents. Those groups were constantly harassed for not using good enough materials, the houses weren't big enough, the furnishings weren't good enough. The residents stole tools, harassed workers, especially the female ones, kids even urinated out of windows onto people working below to the laughter and encouragement of the adults. It was so bad several groups, including some Menonites that came all the way across the state to help, left.

[Guest guest]

Take a look at the plight of blacks in > the US. In the 1920's, blacks had a lower rate of crime than did whites, even > with all the predjudice and discrimination against them.

Sorry, I just have to answer this one. Good old statistics, they always tell the whole story, right? No.

In the 20's they were scared to death of lynching!

In the 1960's, the > welfare system was set up and many of them went on it. About this same time the > black family began to disintegrate.

Because of welfare?

Today, the crime rate for blacks is > higher than for whites,

But blacks are also more apt to be arrested for crimes. Havn't you ever heard of a DWB (Driving While Black)? As one of many examples, my husband once got a traffic ticket by a policeman who lied. He was called later due to an investigation regarding this policeman when it was found that he only ticketed blacks but was putting 'caucasian' on the tickets.

illegitimacy for children is over 80%,

Many blacks have their children, many whites abort their children.

and in many areas > the culture has degenerated into the "gansta" culture of crime and violence.

Social and racial problem indeed.

> Add to this that the children know that whatever crimes they commit will be > sealed away when they turn 18, so they have no reason not to avoid crime as > kids. However, this sets them up to become career criminals in the future.

I don't know if all children know this, but growing up in a ghetto being bothered by gangs, targeted young for running drugs--here kid, here's 5 bucks to give this package to this guy and before they know it they're involved in drugs, not being able to speak well or go to a good school or go to college, besides being black works against one. Those of us with 'good' upbringings take them for granted.

> I think a lot of this could easily be avoided with ethical and moral > education of the young, and if families taught the same.

Some of it. I will say again that the racism in this country is BAD. Most white just people don't see it and if blacks complain where will it get them? Often they're accused of making things up, anyway. Some of the things I've seen probably wouldn't be believed if I were black because they seem unreal and ridiculous. When whites don't respect blacks they are free to act in the most ridiculous ways against them, ways they would never act around other whites. Other whites don't care--not my problem, it doesn' t affect me. How will it ever change?

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/21/2006 9:06:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, mikecarrie01@... writes:

I didn't read the rest of your post--I couldn't get past this. Your feelings about black people are too deeply ingrained to have discussions about them.

I don't honestly believe we should do that, however, your comment read like you were saying that all that kept black in line WAS fear of lynching. My comment was meant as a sercastic reply to what you appeared to be saying.

[Guest guest]

>

But look at it

> another way: if it took the fear of being lynched to make them

behave, should

> we bring it back today?

I didn't read the rest of your post--I couldn't get past this. Your

feelings about black people are too deeply ingrained to have

discussions about them.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/22/2006 10:56:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, irelan3166@... writes:

It would be a little bit hard to convince people that the Devil doesn't exist because there've been several cases of supernatural forces, several cases where people have been demon possessed (one of which happened when I was there), and Satanic games like the Ouija board. I've thought of an experiment to try with one of those, but my fear of messing with Satanic toys has always prevented me from trying it. My experiment would involve this. I'd get it to pretend to be my dad or someone who passed away, and I'd ask it a question. After that, I'd ask why and keep asking why after each response. I've heard however, that one of the options a Ouija board has in giving a response is "Goodbye." Would it probably do that if I tried my "why" game? If it would, I guess it wouldn't really be proof that supernatural forces are real.

God bless, Irelan

Actually it would be very easy. How easy? Ever heard the expression: "Jesus died for our sins, so sin if forgiven and sin is in!" That's all it takes. I've actually heard a few "christian" people admit to living in sin but saying it was OK since sin was no longer an issue. They're going to be in for a surprise. Anyway, that's just one example of how easy it is.

Another, all those funny costumes on Halloween, how he is depicted in cartoons and movies. I'm sure he doesn't mind being portrayed as a bumbling baffoon, especially if it makes people underestimate, or better still, forget about him.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/22/2006 11:09:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, nathaninfortuna@... writes:

All of this can be explained logically, yet I find that the times Ido, people get really mad.

Most people don't like logic because it makes them think. I had many roommates that refused to discuss anything deeper than the sports pages.