Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Achilles who wrote (55643)	7/8/1999 7:10:00 PM
From: Andy Thomas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>>Belief is never total; it is always partial. <, That's where we'll have to disagree again. FWIW Andy

To: Achilles who wrote (55643)	7/8/1999 10:40:00 PM
From: truedog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

to: Achilles from: truedog When you say that "belief is never total" please make it clear that such is your opinion and can not be considered as actual fact. Perhaps, you can not believe totally in anything but, there's a whole bunch of people that totally believe in God's word. Believe it or not!!! TD

To: Achilles who wrote (55643)	7/9/1999 1:12:00 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

<< ...why should it matter to you where I stand on the spectrum between true- and non-believer?>> Ordinarily, its a shoulder shrug, one more person someplace on that continuum you mentioned. I don't go around keeping this data on each of the six billion. In this case, however, you have been posing ideas on morality and scripture. So, your perspective is worthy of examination. If you are a believer, or not, it gives your comments context which clarifies meaning. If your context is fundamental to your purpose in living I attribute one perspective to them, if on the other hand you are simply philosophizing without considering the underlying human messages that go deep and are wholistic for some people then I figure you are over simplifying and likely to muddy the waters more than clear things up. If they are pure exploration (which I'm not buying at the moment) then you would let the discussion take an open course instead of steering it back to a certain focus. At this point it seems you are not really sure yourself what presumptions you base your position on. We all have them, it helps to come clean on what they are. JMO