Quote: I wish I was a monkey again.

Quote:In sum, this is purely vindictive, and smacks of state-sponsored bigotry.

Quote:No, Eurotrash, it is a matter of personal accountability. It was against the regs I was bound by to speak perjoratively of my chain of command, so I did not. Alias or no, I am still me.

I guess you wouldn't understand that.

Why don't you change your alias to "Anonymous Coward?" It fits your idea on the uses of "internet anonymity."

Occhi

Quote:Why dya have such a big chip on your shoulder?
Drunk again? You know, every time you start swinging at the "ferners" somebody has to patch the walls.

I saw his post as a light-hearted joke, and not even one at your expense (until your reaction that is) nor even seriously at the ol' you-ess-ay. Just one at the ol' see-eye-ay, who are often joked about regarding privacy and internet (even tho the eff-bee-eye might be a better foil).

It pains me to see you, who probably has the biggest combination of intelligence and world experience (as opposed to some who have a lot of one or the other) on this forum sink to the depths like that. Are all Americans hair-trigger jerks? Well, if one the most erudite and experienced ones here is like that, what hope is there that the rest are not like that?? YOU EFFIN BASTRD! HOW DARE YOU! heh heh

-V

Quote:The same way that I am qualified to reflect on other philosophical concepts, like beauty. I don't need to be beautiful to know what is generally considered to be beautiful. But then, everyone has their own standard. We could pick apart that one statement, or agree that their is a generally agreed upon understanding of Atheistic philosophy. I've read most of the primary works, including Feuerbach, Marx, Engels, Nietzche, Dietzgen, Voltaire, Thomas Paine, Bertrand Russell, Chapman Cohen, Ayn Rand, and a few others...

So, am I qualified?

Quote:If you are an atheist, then you shouldn't believe in marriage. From the atheist point of view, marriage is an anachronism of treating woman as the property of the husband. Perhaps you would not even believe in that quaint old notion of monogamy.

Quote:I don't know about anyone else, but I wouldn't put anything past eppie.

Quote:Your belief about non-belief is Unbelievable!!
No.

Atheistic philosophy: there are no gods.

Beyond that is all individual opinion.

My credential: I've read primary and secondary works of Mark Twain. So there!

Also, I take the lesser parts of Non-belief and Free-Thinking and combine them into my own philosoply:
Non-Thinking.

But, back to you, whether you exist or not:
That's where you go wrong: telling us what we should think.

Perhaps if we agree to call your idea of marriage "Marriage" and mine "marriage". "Marriage" is all the things you said, some of which I do not agree with. But I certainly believe in "marriage", an agreement between two people to spend the rest of their lives together as a team -- in a very real and legally-binding sense, as Herbert's father said at Swamp Castle. I believe, at least for now, that such agreements do exist. Whether I believe, and have the opinion that, marriages are a "good" thing depends primarily upon how my wife is treating me recently.

Yes, "Marriage" and "marriage" have probably both been used to subjugate women in the past, (and "Marriage" does continue to do so IMO) but that doesn't mean that it needs to continue to be unfair in the present and future. It sounds like you're combining atheism with something else, like socialism or feminism or thisism or thatism.

Atheistic opinion varies almost as wide as theistic opinion. Atheists do not hold One Set of Beliefs, it's foolish to think so, or to say that they "should" feel one way or another about any non-religious issue (such as "marriage"). You are right to say, though, that if "Marriage" is defined as a union blessed by God, or Allah, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, then all atheists will not believe it -- by definition.

I believe monogamy exists, but it's for chumps. (.... just kidding, honey...) Seriously though, atheists can think monogamy is a good idea, and be monogamous. Or not. They are free to decide, because they don't have anyone telling them what God thinks about it. Well, they do, they just don't necessarily think what they're told to think.

(Okay, you may notice me switching back and forth between calling atheists "they" and "we"... that's because although I'm pretty atheistic, I don't consider myself an "Atheist." Figure that one out! I guess I don't call myself names based on what I'm not.)

-V

p.s. Argh, matey!

Quote:I thought I was clearer on the point. Just as with Theists, there are as many beliefs as practitioners. But, we can categorize some (perhaps too much so) and lump some together to label them Baptists for example. So it is with Atheism, one philosophy, but many divergent ideas.

A theist only acknowledges one type of "Marriage", and there is no marriage without God being involved. What you have they would call a civil union.

Quote:The same way that I am qualified to reflect on other philosophical concepts, like beauty. I don't need to be beautiful to know what is generally considered to be beautiful. But then, everyone has their own standard. We could pick apart that one statement, or agree that their is a generally agreed upon understanding of Atheistic philosophy. I've read most of the primary works, including Feuerbach, Marx, Engels, Nietzche, Dietzgen, Voltaire, Thomas Paine, Bertrand Russell, Chapman Cohen, Ayn Rand, and a few others...

So, am I qualified?

Quote:History makes a difference, and I'm ignorant...
I guess if you had American Johnny B. Nice and Osama B. Notsonice sitting in a restaurant, and Osama says sumpthin' like "I guess that pitcher's plane was too small to do much damage", I can see how Johnny should punch him in the face. The comment, read literally, doesn't offend, but tie it to history and a speaker and it has a whole different meaning.

Since I have no memory of previous posts in this case, I don't see what others might. Even admitting that, though, I still continue to see the post as innocuous and its response as over the top. Should I add "eppie-Occhi" as a "do not interject myself" pairing?? -- default: yes.

so, I'll take off my Junior Patrolman hat, and badge, and flashlight/baton, and cuffs, and stun gun, and gas canister, and communication device, roger that, and bullets, and semi-automatic, and holster, and belt oops my pants fell down I'll just put the belt back on, thanks. Yes, that was Dora and it's very difficult to find her in this size... it's for traffic stops... uh, no I can't tell you any more about that.

-V

Quote:and yet you respond. no i'm not freaking kidding. you constantly throw out these ideas that are supposedy "obvious" to you without offering any type of data to back it up. Show me the data. if it is so obvious it shouldnt take you more than five minutes to find it. instead of being rhetorically insulting put your money where your mouth is and give me a link...

i'm waiting.

Quote:If you don't see bettering yourself as a realistic option, then social programs aren't really even relevant.

Quote:I thought I was clearer on the point. Just as with Theists, there are as many beliefs as practitioners. But, we can categorize some (perhaps too much so) and lump some together to label them Baptists for example. So it is with Atheism, one philosophy, but many divergent ideas.

Quote:You still waiting?

-A

Quote:This is one of the major reasons and possibly THE major reason why in general, immigrants (legal ones that is) do well.

Quote:Why dya have such a big chip on your shoulder?

Quote:Because standard, garden variety eurotrash are the beneficiaries of two generations of being security leaches, are pblivious to that state of play, and top it off by being blinders-on ingrates.

Any other questions?

PS: Van, as kind as your other words were, Pete's got a significant edge on me in experience, as well as in erudition. All I have is a higher post count.

Occhi

Quote:Pete uses words like blunt force trauma.

Quote:You on the other hand, put away the blunt objects and tend to cause trauma with a feather. It is kinky and weird and strange. The feather never goes where you expect it to, never tickles exactly what it should, and typically comes away with unexpected results. You write poetically, with irony, double meanings, entendre.

Quote:Where Pete lops off an arm with an axe in one well placed blow, you deal the death of a thousand tiny cuts with a sheet of paper and a side of lemon juice.

If Occhi uses a single feather, I am probably guilty of using the whole chicken.

Quote:Pete's writing displays an elegant economy of words.

Maybe that makes me a Pervy Hobbit Fancier. :P

I've been cutting down on eating eggs lately, though what made me think about that I'll never know. <_<

Thanks, I think. :blush: I was not out fishing for compliments.

If I was so damned good, I'd be published. :(

Occhi