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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (7501)	3/5/2001 5:37:27 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 82486

Since I must leave shortly, we must leave further discussions of God to another time. It is curious that should have married a Bircher. I could never sustain that degree of incompatibility in a marriage. I have been married for 18 years, with the same woman for nearly 23, so going for compatibility has worked for us. I am afraid I am not fond of Ayn Rand, though there are points of agreement. Atlas Shrugged didn't do much for me. I figured you had a strong libertarian streak, though. 30 years in the federal bureaucracy: that is practically purgatorial!

To: Lane3 who wrote (7501)	3/5/2001 7:42:28 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 82486

I'd be interested in the logic that produces that result. I didn't think it was possible to use logic as a vehicle to get from atheism to theism, only the other direction. I thought you could only get from atheism to theism via emotion. Quite a few people have used logic as a vehicle to move to theism. I can't myself give you a personal history of this because I started at theism and then have moved slightly towards ( but not all the way to) agnostism. If you start with the right premisies you can logically prove either theism or atheism. If you want to start with the most minimal and uncontroverisal premises then it might be difficult to prove either which if you are relying solely on your logic might result in agnostism. In my opinion atheism is as much of a leap of faith as theism. If you want no faith in religious matters then IMO one would have to be an agnostic. Tim

To: Lane3 who wrote (7501)	7/26/2001 7:24:44 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

This was a very interesting post, Karen. One odd point: When I was in high school I was still a Catholic. The Catholics in my high school graduation class were threatened with excommunication if we attended our baccalaureate service, which was deemed to be a non-Catholic religious service. I attended. That was the end of Karen, the Catholic That correlates with my very early memories being raised Catholic, I recall the mother church being opposed to public school prayer in general because they weren't the "right" prayers. ( aside: I think my first memory of a real historical event is the death of Pius XII) . But I went through 12 years of Catholic school mostly in the warm afterglow of Vatican II, and in general my experience was a lot more laid back.. The nuns got pretty mellow by the time I was in high school, I think in the end they mostly left to become real people. I don't know what the mother church's position on public prayer is now. I hear that W is in trouble with some people for not being more deferential to the Pope on certain policy matters, but that's another story.

To: Lane3 who wrote (7501)	7/26/2001 8:33:34 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 82486

I was socially liberal and fiscally and constitutionally conservative. My votes have been all over the place. My philosophy is basically libertarian. "socially liberal and fiscally and constitutionally conservative" ALL RIGHT!!! True to my heart! "My votes have been all over the place." My have wandered some. I rarely see Democrats who are anything like fiscally conservative though. Mostly they have wonderful ideas that that will cost a king's ransom. "My philosophy is basically libertarian" I'll go along with the libertarians when they make sense. Often that seems just another label for "anarchist".