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 (79786)	12/28/2003 8:30:33 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

There's no tenet of atheism that says "go forth and sue." Nor is there any tenet of Christianity that says "go forth and invade the Middle East." Nor that says "oppose all legislation permitting abortion." Nor that says "picket abortion centers." So by your argument, those are not caused by Christianity. If no one pushed them around, they wouldn't sue. Karen, where has your logic gone? Nobody pushes anybody around by putting a Christmas tree in a park. Nobody pushes anybody around by putting a Noel sign on the ferry terminal. The Ferry system, for example, provides advertising space to, for one example, moped riders. Does this "push around" people in wheelchairs who can't ride mopeds? Is it promoting moped riding as a belief? Jeez, Karen, you can do better than that.

To: Lane3 who wrote (79786)	12/28/2003 9:58:17 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

Miss Holt- FYI. Don't give up on Joan of Arc. That's an excellent Confirmation name. From: LindyBill Sunday, Dec 28, 2003 4:43 AM View Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21952 France's national icon debunked as a phony The article to which LB refers DOES NOT SAY ANY SUCH THING. He goes on to say: St. Joan of Arc, has been debunked as a fake, a phony martyr used by the monarchy to fabricate a miracle and lend itself legitimacy. ALSO UNTRUE. Horbenko's theory is his lone speculation based in part on his finding of One skeleton, in particular, (that) shocked him. "The bones indicate that the woman wore heavy armour and had developed muscles that I have seen in other fighters of the age. What kind of historian is Horbenko that he is "shocked" at this? It was not uncommon for French women of that time to don armor and ride (on horseback) along with the troops.:there were actually a number of women who led armies and/or wore armor during that era, including Countess Jeanne de Penthièvre, Marcia Ordelaffi, Jeanne de Belleville, Lady de Châtillon and Countess Jeanne de Montfort. Such women were fulfilling their societal roles under the laws of feudalism rather than "breaking the rules". In an era in which political power was vested in the hands of aristocratic families, noble women were expected and required to lead, either directly or symbolically, their family's forces if their husband or son were unavailable. from Myths about Joan of Arc geocities.com which leads off with: Joan of Arc has always been the target of libelous distortions and propaganda from the first moment she came before Judge Cauchon in Rouen, a trend which has continued throughout the subsequent centuries; and the situation has become particularly grim in recent decades with the rise of "intellectual nihilism" (aka "Postmodernism"), an anti-intellectual movement which has been embraced by a small but influential subset of modern academics. It's a very informative article. As to Horbenko's speculation that has led to his speculation, HOrbenko concedes:: "So far there has been little publicity given to (my) theory. I know it must be thoroughly checked..." Amen. from nzherald.co.nz - I posted to you here because LB - in a pre-emptive strike against me, I learned just today, has disallowed me to post there. Joan of Arc is still a hero because her detractors have succeeded in proving only that they are detractors. Bye.

To: Lane3 who wrote (79786)	12/29/2003 6:23:39 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Uncle Albert speaks... "The more a man is imbued with the ordered regularity of all events the firmer becomes his conviction that there is no room left by the side of this ordered regularity for causes of a different nature. For him neither the rule of human nor the rule of divine will exists as an independent cause of natural events. To be sure, the doctrine of a personal God interfering with natural events could never be refuted, in the real sense, by science, for this doctrine can always take refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot. But I am convinced that such behavior on the part of representatives of religion would not only be unworthy but also fatal. For a doctrine which is to maintain itself not in clear light but only in the dark, will of necessity lose its effect on mankind, with incalculable harm to human progress. In their struggle for the ethical good, teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God, that is, give up that source of fear and hope which in the past placed such vast power in the hands of priests. In their labors they will have to avail themselves of those forces which are capable of cultivating the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in humanity itself. This is, to be sure, a more difficult but an incomparably more worthy task..."