Follow up Alright, All You Dashing, Swaggering Bush Pilots

(Corrie) wrote:

around the world, it became obvious that there's no escaping what
seems like mindless religion; in fact you see it all through recorded
history on every island, every out-of-the-way isolated space. It's
gotta be genetic.

PRECISELY my point. Humans are hard-coded to worship a Power greater
than themselves. That worship may be dreadfully misguided, but it is
ALWAYS there.

Maybe that's why Neanderthal (sp of my relative?) didn't make it. He
had no religion.


This was tongue-in-cheek, Cor. (I spell just like a Neanderthal, I
know) Guess I should've added a smiley here. But really, maybe his
religion didn't galvanize his buddies together as effectively as
Sapiens' did.



Neadertal. Most paleoanthropologists today think that they were
contemporaneous with early Homo Sapiens. May possibly have interbred
with them. IIRC there are genetic studies underway to see whether
that may have happened. (Of course, if they can interbreed, they're
not really separate species. At least that's one definition of
species. There are over a dozen others, several mutually exclusive.)
It's possible that that was the source of the "Nephilim" stories in
Genesis, as well as the "Titan" stories of Greco-Roman mythology. But
Neadertal were not ancestors of modern humans.

And I hate to correct you, but there is strong evidence that
Neandertal was aware of and interacted with the spiritual world. Grog
had religion.

By all means, correct me. Good one: Grog. :-) Guess his fertility
rock was no match for spear-chucking Zealots from afar.


No matter how hard you work at digging caves to hide from religious
morans, there's just no escaping the Crusades when they sweep through
your homeland.

Wow, you really ARE ignorant about history, aren't you? The Crusades
were, oh, a few TEN THOUSAND years after the last Neandertal died.
And the word is spelled, "moron" not "moran".

Pac sezs:

No, you're mistaken Corrie. I was not referring to the actual
Crusades of the Middle Ages. If you were a true student of history,
you would know that "religious crusades" are in the thousands, and
spread all through recorded time. We find evidence of smashed-in
skulls and religious burials all through Eurasia, the middle East,
Asia, Southeast Asia, Indonesia, Africa etc. My tongue-in-cheek hypo,
about what really happened to Grog was supposed to make you laugh.
But my hypothesis that Homo Sapiens won out over the stronger
Neanderthal through the evolutionary technique of religious fervor is
entertaining, wouldn't you say? I think Corky is right that religion
is a mechanism of natural selection. (and yes, I agree with those who
say some inbreeding occurred in the same Phylum between "Grog" and
Sapiens.)

Now about "Moran." It's unfortunate you have deteriorated into a
spelling troll so quickly. But actually I'm glad you have attacked my
poor spelling. Here, Corrie, you illustrate exactly my point about
the fallacy of taking written text like the King James version of the
Bible so literally. If you where really knowledgeable about history,
you would know that the colloquial term "Moron" came from Al Capone's
1920's. And if you bother to read text from the period, you would find
the term used to be "Moran" with an "a-n" after the infamous mobster
John Moran, who, just couldn't put the dots together on a regular
basis.


Only way out is to have an even more ruthless religion that spends all their time developing bigger mind-controlling weapons.

What, pray tell, are the ruthless and mind-controlling aspects of the
Sermon on the Mount? On the other hand, you are *quite* right with
respect to secular humanism, with its weapon of the mind-controlling
prayer-free public school and the ruthlessly anti-religious liberal
university.

Most of us were brain-washed in Sunday School as adolescents Corrie.
Keeping religious displays out of schools is in keeping with the
governments' job of separating Church and State. Kids can still pray,
they just aren't allowed to disrupt others with religious displays
designed to pressure those of other faiths. If it's still too
upsetting to a Zealot parent, then you can put your kid in a private
monk school or something. It's about free choice. I don't want a
teacher to countermand the religious beliefs of our immigrants. It
used to be o.k. when a region was: all Puritan for example. It's
different now. Things had to change.

Thank God though as Adults we have an un-coerced choice. This
country was founded on the principles of Free Masons who believed in
religious tolerance above any traditional religion, which is IMHO one
of the biggest reasons why we have been so successful as a truly free
people.

For "Pollsters" who may be lurking, I do not desire to discuss this
with earthbound morANs over at alt.religion. So Corrie, Corky,
Oldcop, Bernie, others, feel free to comment here, or change my mind
about anything.

Enjoyed the banter,

pacplyer

No matter how hard you work at digging caves to hide from religious
morans, there's just no escaping the Crusades when they sweep through
your homeland.
corrie says:
Wow, you really ARE ignorant about history, aren't you? The Crusades
were, oh, a few TEN THOUSAND years after the last Neandertal died.
And the word is spelled, "moron" not "moran".

Pac sezs:

No, you're mistaken Corrie. I was not referring to the actual
Crusades of the Middle Ages. If you were a true student of history,
you would know that "religious crusades" are in the thousands, and
spread all through recorded time. We find evidence of smashed-in
skulls and religious burials all through Eurasia, the middle East,
Asia, Southeast Asia, Indonesia, Africa etc. My tongue-in-cheek hypo,
about what really happened to Grog was supposed to make you laugh.
But my hypothesis that Homo Sapiens won out over the stronger
Neanderthal through the evolutionary technique of religious fervor is
entertaining, wouldn't you say? I think Corky is right that religion
is a mechanism of natural selection. (and yes, I agree with those who
say some inbreeding occurred in the same Phylum between "Grog" and
Sapiens.)

Now about "Moran." It's unfortunate you have deteriorated into a
spelling troll so quickly. But actually I'm glad you have attacked my
poor spelling. Here, Corrie, you illustrate exactly my point about
the fallacy of taking written text like the King James version of the
Bible so literally. If you where really knowledgeable about history,
you would know that the colloquial term "Moron" came from Al Capone's
1920's. And if you bother to read text from the period, you would find
the term used to be "Moran" with an "a-n" after the infamous mobster
John Moran, who, just couldn't put the dots together on a regular
basis.


Only way out is to have an even more ruthless religion that spends all their time developing bigger mind-controlling weapons.

What, pray tell, are the ruthless and mind-controlling aspects of the
Sermon on the Mount? On the other hand, you are *quite* right with
respect to secular humanism, with its weapon of the mind-controlling
prayer-free public school and the ruthlessly anti-religious liberal
university.

Most of us were brain-washed in Sunday School as adolescents Corrie.
Keeping religious displays out of schools is in keeping with the
governments' job of separating Church and State. Kids can still pray,
they just aren't allowed to disrupt others with religious displays
designed to pressure those of other faiths. If it's still too
upsetting to a Zealot parent, then you can put your kid in a private
monk school or something. It's about free choice. I don't want a
teacher to countermand the religious beliefs of our immigrants. It
used to be o.k. when a region was: all Puritan for example. It's
different now. Things had to change.

Thank God though as Adults we have an un-coerced choice. This
country was founded on the principles of Free Masons who believed in
religious tolerance above any traditional religion, which is IMHO one
of the biggest reasons why we have been so successful as a truly free
people.

For "Pollsters" who may be lurking, I do not desire to discuss this
with earthbound morANs over at alt.religion. So Corrie, Corky,
Oldcop, Bernie, others, feel free to comment here, or change my mind
about anything.

Enjoyed the banter,

pacplyer

pac plyer wrote:
If you where really knowledgeable about history, you would know that the
colloquial term "Moron" came from Al Capone's 1920's. And if you bother
to read text from the period, you would find the term used to be "Moran"
with an "a-n" after the infamous mobster John Moran, who, just couldn't
put the dots together on a regular basis.

What a crock. The English word is derived from the Greek word moron, neuter
of moros, meaning stupid or foolish. I don't have an OED at hand to see how
far back it does in English usage, but it appeared in a Mirriam-Webster
dictionary in 1910.

No, you're mistaken Corrie. I was not referring to the actual
Crusades of the Middle Ages.

I always thought that the rule was if it's capitalized, it refers to
the medieval editions. But you are correct - historically, religion
is probably the most popular excuse for war. Personally, I think
religion was invented by Satan to keep us fueding over
inconsequentials rathe than persuing a relationship with the Creator.

My tongue-in-cheek hypo, about what really happened to Grog was
supposed to make you laugh.

Remember the smileys next time! :-D

But my hypothesis that Homo Sapiens won out over the stronger
Neanderthal through the evolutionary technique of religious fervor is
entertaining, wouldn't you say? I think Corky is right that religion
is a mechanism of natural selection. (and yes, I agree with those who
say some inbreeding occurred in the same Phylum between "Grog" and
Sapiens.)

It bears some consideration. Have you read "The Origin of
Conciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" or "Ishmael?"
Natural selection (and artificial selection) certainly work within
fairly homogenous populations. But if the quest for a relationship
with the supernatural had survival value 20,000 years ago or even
2,000 years ago, why would it not have that same survival value now?
Mazlow's ladder applies to Neandertal as well as to us today. People
haven't really changed very much, at least as far as we can tell.
(I'm reminded of the Egyptian inscription in the collection of the
British museum. An official's second wife scratched out the
references to his first wife...)

Now about "Moran." It's unfortunate you have deteriorated into a
spelling troll so quickly.

Sorry, I'm a teacher and a parent. It's automatic. :-)

If you where really knowledgeable about history,
you would know that the colloquial term "Moron" came from Al Capone's
1920's. And if you bother to read text from the period, you would find
the term used to be "Moran" with an "a-n" after the infamous mobster
John Moran, who, just couldn't put the dots together on a regular
basis.

I was never that interested in gangster history, sorry. Aviation
history (of course), ancient civilizations, medieval Europe, a bit of
Asian history, but not much on early-20th-century America. Blame my
junior-high history teacher, I guess. We read "The Jungle," watched
"The Grapes of Wrath," and read about labor disputes. It all sort of
ran together. :-/

Thanks for the history lesson - I've long been fascinated by
etymologies.

[taken out of sequence]
you illustrate exactly my point about
the fallacy of taking written text like the King James version of the
Bible so literally.

ahh-ah-ah-ah! Gotcha. I *don't* advocate taking the KJV literally.
Never have. I advocate *good scholarship* - looking at the oldest and
most complete texts, comparing them to find and consider alternate
renderings, looking at the literary and historical context, the
grammar and word usage, etc. It's a lot more work than simply quoting
KJV. Fortunately, a good deal of that effort has been collected in
*modern* translations such as the NIV and RSV.

I'd be more than happy to discuss the accuracy and authenticity of the
Biblical texts. Bottom line is that if you throw out the Bible as
"unreliable" - using the scholarly critera applied to any ancient
document, such as a Roman paymaster's records - then you also have to
throw out everything written by Socrates, Plato, Euclydies,
Aristophanes, Aristotle, Julius Ceasar, Pliny, the Venerable Bede,
etc.

PLEEEESE don' throw me in dat briar patch, Brer Fox! :-D


Only way out is to have an even more ruthless religion that spends all their time developing bigger mind-controlling weapons.

What, pray tell, are the ruthless and mind-controlling aspects of the
Sermon on the Mount? On the other hand, you are *quite* right with
respect to secular humanism, with its weapon of the mind-controlling
prayer-free public school and the ruthlessly anti-religious liberal
university.

Most of us were brain-washed in Sunday School as adolescents Corrie.

Actually, that was when I began to abandon the religion I was raised
in.

Keeping religious displays out of schools is in keeping with the
governments' job of separating Church and State. Kids can still pray,
they just aren't allowed to disrupt others with religious displays
designed to pressure those of other faiths.

Depends on your definition of "pressure." Learning how to put a
rubber on a cucumber or give a BJ in the back seat is "comprehensive
health education" according to some. But saying grace before meals is
"pressure." Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?

It's about free choice.

You support educational choice for parents, then? (no, I'm not really
trying to drag this that far OT, but I can't pass up a striaght line.)

I don't want a teacher to countermand the religious beliefs of our immigrants.

So now they countermand the religious beliefs of our citizens, and
that's ok?

Thank God though as Adults we have an un-coerced choice.

Agreed. I just read that the Red Chinese have arrested a few more
Christians for the crime of praying in their homes.


Likewise enjoying intelligent discussion of things that matter,

Corrie

Ok enough of this bs here in RAH, take it back to your bible NG Corrie,
You don't know when to stop do you?

Corrie wrote:
No, you're mistaken Corrie. I was not referring to the actual
Crusades of the Middle Ages.


I always thought that the rule was if it's capitalized, it refers to
the medieval editions. But you are correct - historically, religion
is probably the most popular excuse for war. Personally, I think
religion was invented by Satan to keep us fueding over
inconsequentials rathe than persuing a relationship with the Creator.


My tongue-in-cheek hypo, about what really happened to Grog was

supposed to make you laugh.

Remember the smileys next time! :-D


But my hypothesis that Homo Sapiens won out over the stronger
Neanderthal through the evolutionary technique of religious fervor is
entertaining, wouldn't you say? I think Corky is right that religion
is a mechanism of natural selection. (and yes, I agree with those who
say some inbreeding occurred in the same Phylum between "Grog" and
Sapiens.)


It bears some consideration. Have you read "The Origin of
Conciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" or "Ishmael?"
Natural selection (and artificial selection) certainly work within
fairly homogenous populations. But if the quest for a relationship
with the supernatural had survival value 20,000 years ago or even
2,000 years ago, why would it not have that same survival value now?
Mazlow's ladder applies to Neandertal as well as to us today. People
haven't really changed very much, at least as far as we can tell.
(I'm reminded of the Egyptian inscription in the collection of the
British museum. An official's second wife scratched out the
references to his first wife...)


Now about "Moran." It's unfortunate you have deteriorated into a
spelling troll so quickly.


Sorry, I'm a teacher and a parent. It's automatic. :-)


If you where really knowledgeable about history,
you would know that the colloquial term "Moron" came from Al Capone's
1920's. And if you bother to read text from the period, you would find
the term used to be "Moran" with an "a-n" after the infamous mobster
John Moran, who, just couldn't put the dots together on a regular
basis.


I was never that interested in gangster history, sorry. Aviation
history (of course), ancient civilizations, medieval Europe, a bit of
Asian history, but not much on early-20th-century America. Blame my
junior-high history teacher, I guess. We read "The Jungle," watched
"The Grapes of Wrath," and read about labor disputes. It all sort of
ran together. :-/

Thanks for the history lesson - I've long been fascinated by
etymologies.

[taken out of sequence]

you illustrate exactly my point about
the fallacy of taking written text like the King James version of the
Bible so literally.


ahh-ah-ah-ah! Gotcha. I *don't* advocate taking the KJV literally.
Never have. I advocate *good scholarship* - looking at the oldest and
most complete texts, comparing them to find and consider alternate
renderings, looking at the literary and historical context, the
grammar and word usage, etc. It's a lot more work than simply quoting
KJV. Fortunately, a good deal of that effort has been collected in
*modern* translations such as the NIV and RSV.

I'd be more than happy to discuss the accuracy and authenticity of the
Biblical texts. Bottom line is that if you throw out the Bible as
"unreliable" - using the scholarly critera applied to any ancient
document, such as a Roman paymaster's records - then you also have to
throw out everything written by Socrates, Plato, Euclydies,
Aristophanes, Aristotle, Julius Ceasar, Pliny, the Venerable Bede,
etc.

PLEEEESE don' throw me in dat briar patch, Brer Fox! :-D



Only way out is to have an even more ruthless religion that spends all their time developing bigger mind-controlling weapons.

What, pray tell, are the ruthless and mind-controlling aspects of the
Sermon on the Mount? On the other hand, you are *quite* right with
respect to secular humanism, with its weapon of the mind-controlling
prayer-free public school and the ruthlessly anti-religious liberal
university.

Most of us were brain-washed in Sunday School as adolescents Corrie.


Actually, that was when I began to abandon the religion I was raised
in.


Keeping religious displays out of schools is in keeping with the
governments' job of separating Church and State. Kids can still pray,
they just aren't allowed to disrupt others with religious displays
designed to pressure those of other faiths.


Depends on your definition of "pressure." Learning how to put a
rubber on a cucumber or give a BJ in the back seat is "comprehensive
health education" according to some. But saying grace before meals is
"pressure." Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?


It's about free choice.


You support educational choice for parents, then? (no, I'm not really
trying to drag this that far OT, but I can't pass up a striaght line.)


I don't want a teacher to countermand the religious beliefs of our immigrants.


So now they countermand the religious beliefs of our citizens, and
that's ok?


Thank God though as Adults we have an un-coerced choice.


Agreed. I just read that the Red Chinese have arrested a few more
Christians for the crime of praying in their homes.


Likewise enjoying intelligent discussion of things that matter,

Corrie

Jerry Springer wrote:

Ok enough of this bs here in RAH, take it back to your bible NG Corrie,
You don't know when to stop do you?

Good point Mr. Springer but why didn't you trim his post...???????

Most of us were brain-washed in Sunday School as adolescents Corrie.
Keeping religious displays out of schools is in keeping with the
governments' job of separating Church and State. Kids can still pray,
they just aren't allowed to disrupt others with religious displays
designed to pressure those of other faiths. If it's still too
upsetting to a Zealot parent, then you can put your kid in a private
monk school or something. It's about free choice. I don't want a
teacher to countermand the religious beliefs of our immigrants. It
used to be o.k. when a region was: all Puritan for example. It's
different now. Things had to change.

Thank God though as Adults we have an un-coerced choice. This
country was founded on the principles of Free Masons who believed in
religious tolerance above any traditional religion, which is IMHO one
of the biggest reasons why we have been so successful as a truly free
people.

For "Pollsters" who may be lurking, I do not desire to discuss this
with earthbound morANs over at alt.religion. So Corrie, Corky,
Oldcop, Bernie, others, feel free to comment here, or change my mind
about anything.


Hey Pac, you a Traveling Man? Any of you for that matter?

"Building The Perfect Beast" wrote in message
...

Hey Pac, you a Traveling Man? Any of you for that matter?

I can use the tools.

Rich S.