 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Dodge / Dodge Trucks / September 2006He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaack!
And posting with avengeance. I knew he couldn't resist our sand box for too long. Let the games begin. Ya don't suppose snohole is paying Budd to take the heat off if him do ya? Now if we could just get Little Jay to come back. beekeep > And posting with avengeance. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Now if we could just get Little Jay to come back. Well, it should make for a interesting week end. Roy > beekeep >> And posting with avengeance. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Well, it should make for a interesting week end. it should. personally, i'm gonna try to ignore the idiot, but my track record for that isn't so very good. >Roy >> beekeep Roy, that depends on you and the others. If any arguments start with me, it will be because you, theguy, beekeeper, T-bone, or someone else chooses to tell me to not practice my beliefs, to shut up, ... to censor me, to deny me my Constitutional Right to Freedom of Religion, to worship as I please. If my beliefs include verses in my sigline or responding to false teachings or misquoted Scriptures, what does that matter to you or the others?  SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> And posting with avengeance. >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Roy >> beekeep SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Roy, that depends on you and the others. > > If any arguments start with me, it will be because you, theguy, beekeeper, > T-bone, or someone else chooses I see that I get left out again....... My feelings are hurt... <G> Denny I never argue with anyone that doesn't deserve it, and you just don't deserve it. <VBG> SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Roy, that depends on you and the others. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Denny SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >I never argue with anyone that doesn't deserve it, and you just don't >deserve it. You can tell me....I can take it.....Is it 'cause of my cute furry ears??? Denny > <VBG> >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >> Denny Now, Denny, am I gonna have to call your_other_ boss, Mr. E. Bunny and tell him? You don't want to get him hopping mad, now do ya? Ya just don't deserve it. If ya did ya'll get it real good, but ya don't. Now be glad ya don't deserve it. There are some things it's better to not deserve, some things ya don't wanna ever deserve. VBG SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >>I never argue with anyone that doesn't deserve it, and you just don't >>deserve it. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >>> >>> Denny SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com On 9/8/06 5:58 PM, in article 6tnMg.594$zt1.227@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com, >> I never argue with anyone that doesn't deserve it, and you just don't >> deserve it. > > You can tell me....I can take it.....Is it 'cause of my cute furry ears??? And the fluffy ball of fur on your rear :)) dale > Denny > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >>> >>> Denny >I never argue with anyone that doesn't deserve it, and you just don't >deserve it. > ><VBG> Admit it, Budd... In a battle of wits, the wabbit is sort of out gunned.. *eg* Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm Now I wouldn't say he "outgunned", but he might have difficulty finding the battlefield without a GPS. . . .and someone to explain it to him. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 17:40:44 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Roy, that depends on you and the others. > > If any arguments start with me, it will be because you, theguy, beekeeper, > T-bone, or someone else chooses to tell me to not practice my beliefs, to > shut up, ... to censor me, to deny me my Constitutional Right to Freedom > of Religion, to worship as I please. Budd, as I see it and saw it before ya did your usual, nobody gives a damn what ya believe, if ya believe or not. But every damn thread you involved youself in immediatly turned into a religious experience. That what ya want to do that's fine, I'm sure the results will be the same. Worked for me anyway. Roy No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences". Someone else did that. I responded as I believe I am supposed, to according to my beliefs, to misquotes and untruths about Christianity, which is to offer the corrections for the quotes and truth instead of untruths. I will continue to do so. It was the refusal to accept both what the Bible actually says and what Christianity really is that caused the problem. I just caught the flak because God, according to the attackers, wasn't available. So, I was told I was "over the edge", had "lost it", "going too far", etc. Stop and think carefully, Roy, I only said the Bible says other belief systems are wrong, that the verses in the Bible have simple meanings, and that the Bible says those who do not believe as the Scriptures say you should will go to Hell. Not one darn time did I say you had to believe as I do or else. That is your choice If you want to argue with someone over what's in the Bible, take it up with God. I'm just the messenger boy. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Roy, that depends on you and the others. >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Roy SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences". > Someone else did that. That was enuff said for me but you continue on into a 4 or 5 paragraph. > I responded as I believe I am supposed, to according to my beliefs, to > misquotes and untruths about Christianity, which is to offer the [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > If you want to argue with someone over what's in the Bible, take it up > with God. I'm just the messenger boy. No you are the one who constantly interjects your belief in the bible into every response you make as you have here.. Thus my "religious experience" Not a argument just how I see it.. Roy So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? Roy, as I understand and believe the Scriptures, I am to be ready to give everyone an answer and a reason for my faith (1st Peter). I am to not hide my Light under a bushel (Matthew, Mark and Luke) and I'm to keep myself acceptable to the Lord (Matthew). I apologize for not reading your mind and in that manner discovering I'm not allowed to type as many words as I see fit to use to reply to a post. A pox on me!!!!! Tell me something, would a person of another ethnic persuasion from yourself be required to deny what that persuasion is in order to respond to a post by your rules? There's a name for that . . . . I am a Fundamental, Conservative Christian (an ethnicity by definition) and I will not deny it for you or anyone. Oh, golly, this makes six (6) paragraphs!!!! All you have to do, Roy, is not reply and let me be as I am. Either accept me or killfile / ignore me. But as long as you continue to tell me what I can or cannot do, can or cannot be, can or cannot believe, then I will reply to those comments because, by the Bill of Rights, I have the right to reply to misquotes and misinterpretations of Scripture, be the Christian I believe I should be, and believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, transcribed by 47 inspired authors in the form of 66 books with an accuracy of 99.5% when compared to the oldest copies of the books of the Bible. Have a good day. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences". >> Someone else did that. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Roy SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com So, what's your truck question? Larry Behold Beware Believe > So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected > Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? > > <<snip>> SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com What's yours? I've been around here about 10 years, and how long did you say you had been here? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > So, what's your truck question? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >> <<snip>> SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spamers that are running a scam. > So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected > Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? No Budd not in the least. I would think that you might take to alt.religion or whatever > Roy, as I understand and believe the Scriptures, I am to be ready to give > everyone an answer and a reason for my faith (1st Peter). I am to not hide > my Light under a bushel (Matthew, Mark and Luke) and I'm to keep myself > acceptable to the Lord (Matthew). You still don't get it do ya? Doubtful many here care and fewer probably want to read what ya believe in. > I apologize for not reading your mind and in that manner discovering I'm > not allowed to type as many words as I see fit to use to reply to a post. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I am a Fundamental, Conservative Christian (an ethnicity by definition) > and I will not deny it for you or anyone. No Budd in mho you are a religious nut. > Oh, golly, this makes six (6) paragraphs!!!! > > All you have to do, Roy, is not reply and let me be as I am. Either accept > me or killfile / ignore me. Yup, you were the first person I had ever used a killfile with. In fact I had figure out how to use it. >But as long as you continue to tell me what I can or cannot do, can or >cannot be, can or cannot believe, then I will reply to those comments [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >inspired authors in the form of 66 books with an accuracy of 99.5% when >compared to the oldest copies of the books of the Bible. Budd you came back just to argue that's it nothing more, it is the same BS that you spewed before ya left last time Here's my words to inspire you. Go f.ck yourself! I just don't have the time or inclnation to read your mindless crap. Now that should inspire you to really play the victim. Plonk! >> So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected >> Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? > > No Budd not in the least. I would think that you might take to > alt.religion or whatever What good would that do if the misquote or misinterpretation is in a.ad.t.?????? >> Roy, as I understand and believe the Scriptures, I am to be ready to give >> everyone an answer and a reason for my faith (1st Peter). I am to not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You still don't get it do ya? Doubtful many here care and fewer probably > want to read what ya believe in. I have no doubts about whether you care or not, you don't, but that's just the way you are about it, right? OTOH, I do care, and that's the way I am about it. >> I apologize for not reading your mind and in that manner discovering I'm >> not allowed to type as many words as I see fit to use to reply to a post. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > No Budd in mho you are a religious nut. Thank you. That's the kindest thing you've called me in a while. >> Oh, golly, this makes six (6) paragraphs!!!! >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Yup, you were the first person I had ever used a killfile with. In fact I > had figure out how to use it. Congrats. Glad I could help you increase your computer skills. >>But as long as you continue to tell me what I can or cannot do, can or >>cannot be, can or cannot believe, then I will reply to those comments [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Budd you came back just to argue that's it nothing more, it is the same BS > that you spewed before ya left last time No, it's the same facts I stated and you objected to the last time. > Here's my words to inspire you. Go f.ck yourself! I just don't have the > time or inclnation to read your mindless crap. Fine, then don't, but I'll leave the sexual perversity to those that don't believe it is the sin the Bible calls it. > Now that should inspire you to really play the victim. > > Plonk! <LOL> I am not the "Victim", Roy. I am the warrior. I have the whole Armor of God (Ephesians) SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spamers that are running a scam. > So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected > Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > my Light under a bushel (Matthew, Mark and Luke) and I'm to keep myself > acceptable to the Lord (Matthew). Here we go again. Try this, thick skull: talk religious nonsense on a religious ng ... NOT ALT.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCK. Your stupidity is not that you believe ... it's that you try to convince everyone else. If we want to be brain washed, we'll find you in alt.religion.* Craig C. Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the appearance of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group. The sad thing I find here is that a lot of people are trying to moderate the group. If you want a moderated, invitation only group, start one. If you are protecting the interest of the unknowing, as it the case with Snoballs, that is all well and fine. But, if it is just something that you simply don't like or believe, why the f.ck don't we all just ignore it? At one time, this group was full of people that talked, shared information and helped people. I would even go so far as to say that at one time, each one of us though of the others as "friends." Then there was the problems w/Lil Jay, then DD, and god knows who else. What the f.ck happen? >> So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected >> Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Craig C. > Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the > appearance of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > you simply don't like or believe, why the f.ck don't we all just ignore > it? Yup, that's what I've done. > At one time, this group was full of people that talked, shared information > and helped people. I would even go so far as to say that at one time, > each one of us though of the others as "friends." Then there was the > problems w/Lil Jay, then DD, and god knows who else. That still happens most of the time. But every so often this happens > What the f.ck happen? With regards to this thread? What you see unfolding has happened before. You'd have to go back a few months to get the gist of it. Actually you probably should read it, sorta blew me away. Roy >>> So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected >>> Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> >> Craig C. >> Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the >> appearance of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> >> What the f.ck happen? Imho it started several years ago when some of the old-timers kinda drifted away. Then a few dropped by and the drift of the group went to arguing about anything, didn't really matter what the subject was. And it didn't take long to get to the name calling and deep jabs. I think that drove off some of the other guys that got tired of reading it. I admit that it was entertaining for awhile but it does get old. Now it seems like its getting back to the 'friendly' stage with the joking and info trading. Of course, there are exceptions to everything. Denny >> Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the >> appearance of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Roy Nah Roy, not with this thread, in general with the group. I started in here around 98 which is when I got stationed in Hawaii and have been here since. I have seen (read) a lot of sh.t in here, but over the last two years or so it has gotten crazy stupid. >>>> So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected >>>> Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >>> >>> Craig C. >>> Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the >>> appearance of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > since. I have seen (read) a lot of sh.t in here, but over the last two > years or so it has gotten crazy stupid. Different levels of tolorance I guess... Things and people change so it is what it is today. I'm sure it will change again as different people flow in and out. Roy >>>>> So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected >>>>> Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>>> >>>> Craig C. Like I said a long time ago, Larry, we left the back door open too many times. SignatureBudd Cochran "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the > appearance of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group. [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >> >> Craig C. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spamers that are running a scam. > Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the appearance > of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group. Oh, kiss my a.s. I am not trying to moderate anything. However, the NAME of this ng indicates that the discussions should be about DODGE TRUCKS ... NOT GOD, JESUS, THE LAST DAYS, BIBLE, THEOLOGY or other PERSONAL CHOICE topics. > The sad thing I find here is that a lot of people are trying to moderate the > group. If you want a moderated, invitation only group, start one. And if I want to talk about god, I'll go to a group that was established for that purpose. Again, for the slow/religious retards, this is NOT a religious ng. > don't like or believe, why the f.ck don't we all just ignore it? No! This is a group for talk of Dodge trucks. Not theology. > At one time, this group was full of people that talked, shared information > and helped people. Right ... about DODGE TRUCKS. NOT about whether Christianity is the answer for mankind. >I would even go so far as to say that at one time, each > one of us though of the others as "friends." Correct. Then some "unnamed" jackass started all of the God talk. Futher proving the point of many that religion simply ruins everything. > What the f.ck happen? Religious tyranny. Craig C. Man, is this crap ever going to end??? Can't we all just get along! SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > > Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the appearance > > of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Craig C. I would say that some just don't know how to play nice. > Man, is this crap ever going to end??? Can't we all just get along! > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >> >> Craig C. > Man, is this crap ever going to end??? Can't we all just get along! That kinda sounds a bit ironic coming from you! Otherwise it sounds like a good idea. >> Man, is this crap ever going to end??? Can't we all just get along! > > That kinda sounds a bit ironic coming from you! Otherwise it sounds like a > good idea. LOL my thoughts exactly. but still, I have to give Tom credit where credit is due. Signature---------------------------- -Chris 05 CTD 06 Liberty CRD Real Trucks don't NEED spark plugs. Tom, that will be up to you. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > Man, is this crap ever going to end??? Can't we all just get along! > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >> >> Craig C. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. >Man, is this crap ever going to end??? Can't we all just get along! Budd got bored and picked up his fishing pole. He seems to be getting quite a few bites! Even some of the smarter ones have holes in their lips. beekeep Johnny conchsell is representing the sting ray that killed Crockodile Hunter. He says he's gonna get him off the hook. You still don't seem to have it figured out, Greg. Think back . . . . .I mentioned my beliefs in a post a long time back and got ripped into for it and was accused of proselytizing, and forcing my beliefs on others (all false accusations) and was told I was an idiot for believing. And it hasn't quit. Why should I not defend myself and my beliefs, Greg? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >>Man, is this crap ever going to end??? Can't we all just get along! > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Hunter. > He says he's gonna get him off the hook. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. No thank you on the a.s kissing, though you might be into that sort of thing, I don't swing that way. :) As to the rest of your rant, though this may be a group titled Alt.Auto.Dodge.Trucks as it is an un-moderated group ANYONE can talk about ANYTHING they desire. Again, if you don't like what a person has to say, or in your case, you know one person is posting something you don't want to read, then simply don't read it. BTW by your saying that the topics should ONLY be about Dodge trucks, and not about "other PERSONAL CHOICE topics." is a form of moderation. >> Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the >> appearance [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Craig C. > No thank you on the a.s kissing, though you might be into that sort of > thing, I don't swing that way. :) I know that you know what "kiss my a.s" means. Don't make this a "gay thing". > As to the rest of your rant, though this may be a group titled > Alt.Auto.Dodge.Trucks as it is an un-moderated group ANYONE can talk about > ANYTHING they desire. Again, if you don't like what a person has to say, or > in your case, you know one person is posting something you don't want to > read, then simply don't read it. How about this: If you have a religious bullshit rant/opinion to make ... EMAIL IT to the person. This group was not created for religious talk. Period. > BTW by your saying that the topics should ONLY be about Dodge trucks, and > not about "other > PERSONAL CHOICE topics." is a form of moderation. So ... if I go to church, can I take the podium and talk about Dodge trucks? Fact is: if you go to church you expect to talk about god. When I visit alt.autos.dodge.trucks, I expect to talk about Dodge trucks. There is no moderation involved ... just common sense. Craig C. On 9/10/06 5:53 PM, in article 1157932419.123901.184850@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com, "craig@metronet.com" <mcraigchr@gmail.com> wrote: >> No thank you on the a.s kissing, though you might be into that sort of >> thing, I don't swing that way. :) [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Craig C. Oh take a pill and relax dale > Oh take a pill and relax I am relaxed. No pill necessary. Thanks for your concern, however. :) You know what relaxes me? WORKING ON MY DODGE TRUCK. Which, without the valuable assistance of this ng, would not have been as relaxing. Craig C. On 9/11/06 8:23 AM, in article 1157984635.888946.251980@q16g2000cwq.googlegroups.com, "craig@metronet.com" <mcraigchr@gmail.com> wrote: >> Oh take a pill and relax > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Craig C. What really relaxed me was when I traded my rusting 2003 dodge in for a ford powerchoke :)))) Just kiddin, miss that tincan cummins ins some ways dale >> Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the >> appearance [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > TRUCKS ... NOT GOD, JESUS, THE LAST DAYS, BIBLE, THEOLOGY or other > PERSONAL CHOICE topics. No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the primary indicated topic of the group is Dodge trucks but, by virtue of being UNMODERATED, almost any topic is permitted. Oh, btw, I only talk about my beliefs when the Bible is misquoted, misinterpreted or an attack is made on my beliefs, all of which have happened in this Dodge newsgroup. >> The sad thing I find here is that a lot of people are trying to moderate >> the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > established for that purpose. Again, for the slow/religious retards, > this is NOT a religious ng. Again for the anti-Christian bigots, the group is unmoderated. Feel free to leave if it bothers you so much. >> don't like or believe, why the f.ck don't we all just ignore it? > > No! This is a group for talk of Dodge trucks. Not theology. There you go moderating again. Why don't you just go start your own group and you can only discuss your topics? >> At one time, this group was full of people that talked, shared >> information >> and helped people. > > Right ... about DODGE TRUCKS. NOT about whether Christianity is the > answer for mankind. I (me, myself, I, first person singular pronoun) have never said it is the answer to all mankinds problems, but the Bible does. >>I would even go so far as to say that at one time, each >> one of us though of the others as "friends." > > Correct. Then some "unnamed" jackass started all of the God talk. Ah, you're talking about the person that got all bent out of shape when I mentioned my personal beliefs in a thread a couple years ago. Shame on you for calling them names. > Futher proving the point of many that religion simply ruins everything. No, it proves you don't understand Christianity and have no desire to, that's all. >> What the f.ck happen? > > Religious tyranny. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!! ROTFLMBO!!!!!! Apparently, it's "religious tyranny" in your dictionary to be harrassed for having Christian beliefs, evidently. > Craig C. Killfile me, Craig, or leave the group, what ever you choose. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. > No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the primary > indicated topic of the group is Dodge trucks but, by virtue of being > UNMODERATED, almost any topic is permitted. Your religious topics are unwelcome. Are you too ignorant to see that? > Oh, btw, I only talk about my beliefs when the Bible is misquoted, > misinterpreted or an attack is made on my beliefs, all of which have > happened in this Dodge newsgroup. No, you spout your sh.t unlike any "victim" I have ever seen. Were you a.s raped by a priest? Is that the drive behind your constant religious mantra? (Even if this is the case, I'd still like you to understand that this IS NOT the ng for that discussion. Try alt.religion.a.s.rape.budd.will.he.ever.shut.up) > Again for the anti-Christian bigots, the group is unmoderated. Feel free to > leave if it bothers you so much. Or ... YOU can leave and spread your nonsense to a religious group, where it BELONGS. This is alt.autos.dodge.trucks. > There you go moderating again. Why don't you just go start your own group > and you can only discuss your topics? alt.autos.dodge.trucks. What does that mean to you? > I (me, myself, I, first person singular pronoun) have never said it is the > answer to all mankinds problems, but the Bible does. Shut the f.ck up for christ's sake. > > Correct. Then some "unnamed" jackass started all of the God talk. > > Ah, you're talking about the person that got all bent out of shape when I > mentioned my personal beliefs in a thread a couple years ago. Shame on you > for calling them names. And where did those beliefs get mentioned? alt.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS. See anything out of place there? > > Futher proving the point of many that religion simply ruins everything. > > No, it proves you don't understand Christianity and have no desire to, > that's all. My experiences with christianity aside, it still does not change the FACT that this is not the forum for such discussions. > > Religious tyranny. > > Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!! ROTFLMBO!!!!!! > > Apparently, it's "religious tyranny" in your dictionary to be harrassed for > having Christian beliefs, evidently. You are old and apparently retarded as well. ALT.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS. Dwell on it. Craig C. Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking like it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee! This is an un f.cking moderated group! Now sit the f.ck down, shut the f.ck up or get the f.ck out and STOP trying to f.cking moderate! >> No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the >> primary [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > > Craig C. >Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking like >it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee! >This is an un f.cking moderated group! Now sit the f.ck down, shut the f.ck >up or get the f.ck out and STOP trying to f.cking moderate! larry, look, the same argument you use against craig, he can use against you. this is an unmoderated ng, you are correct. that simply means that everyone can say whatever they want, including craig. now, we would hope that common sense would enter into all of this somewhere, but of course common sense is not so common. the deal really is that craig is using some common sense but you want to argue individual rights. in an unmoderated ng, i suppose that individual rights rule becuase people can be as moronic as they chose to be. never the less, you are using a philosophy that is just as valid for craig as it is for budd. craig isn't trying to moderate any more than he is trying to get budd to stop moderating this ng as a religious debate. in the end though, craig and budd can pretty much say whatever the f.ck they want to say. obviously, common sense has no place here as friendships and emotion prevail. me? i got no problem with that. i got no problem with budd. he has every right to be whatever he choses to be. he has made it pretty clear what he choses to be. i'm willing to let that go, but you really got to let craig be what he choses to be. in this case, he really is just a fairly sane voice in a fog of stupidity, but that is just my opinion. >>> No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the >>> primary [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] >> >> Craig C. you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this. My point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple. Though the title of the group indicates one thing, as with any un-moderated group, any topic is fair game. We both know that we all talk about so much in here that is not dodge truck related it is not funny. I am not a religious person, but I can not and will not fault Budd for his feelings, thoughts and beliefs and I don't think that it is right that everyone appears to be doing just that. On the other hand though (sorry Budd) I also don't feel that religion need be introduced in every single solitary discussion in here. The sig line is one thing, correcting some one on a incorrect posting is the right thing to do also, but there has to be a line drawn some where, right?. I think it ALL should just be left at that. >>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking >>like [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] >>> >>> Craig C. > you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this. My > point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple. Though the > title of the group indicates one thing, as with any un-moderated group, > any topic is fair game. We both know that we all talk about so much in > here that is not dodge truck related it is not funny. Agreed and I have, in the past joined in and had a heck of a good time teasing Den . . the person of interest in the thread. > I am not a religious person, but I can not and will not fault Budd for his > feelings, thoughts and beliefs and I don't think that it is right that > everyone appears to be doing just that. Larry, I do appreciate your honesty and forthright speaking. I also appreciate your spiritual position. I only hope that if you ever have a spirtual question you will permit a friend who cares about you answer it for you. I will not, and it's here for all to see, demand you join my church or beliefs. Fair enough, my friend? > On the other hand though (sorry Budd) ( Not a problem, friend) I also > don't feel that religion need be introduced in every single solitary > discussion in here. I don't as seen by my replies to problems and questions (with a small teasing about low tech coordinate determination systems). > The sig line is one thing, correcting some one on a incorrect posting is > the right thing to do also, but there has to be a line drawn some where, > right?. I think it ALL should just be left at that. Agreed. And it's all I've ever asked anyone to do, if they would really take the time to read what's in my replies. I won't bring up "the subject", but I won't back away from defending it. Thank you, Larry. >>>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking >>>like [quoted text clipped - 93 lines] >>>> >>>> Craig C. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. >> you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this. >> My point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple. Though [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Agreed and I have, in the past joined in and had a heck of a good time > teasing Den . . the person of interest in the thread. Well, you know, that damn wabbit is just so furry and dare I say cute! <VBFG> >> I am not a religious person, but I can not and will not fault Budd for >> his feelings, thoughts and beliefs and I don't think that it is right [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > for you. I will not, and it's here for all to see, demand you join my > church or beliefs. Fair enough, my friend? Budd, I have no problems with you, nor have I ever, so it is all good. >> On the other hand though (sorry Budd) ( Not a problem, friend) I also >> don't feel that religion need be introduced in every single solitary [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Thank you, Larry. No worries man. >>>>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking >>>>like [quoted text clipped - 98 lines] >>>>> >>>>> Craig C. >> you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this. My >> point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple. Though the [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >the time to read what's in my replies. I won't bring up "the subject", but I >won't back away from defending it. this is a fair position budd. the only other thing that i would "ask" is that you not take offense so easily. a lot of time people are just teasing you the same way that they are teasing others but you take it seriously and off we go with another huge victim thread. >Thank you, Larry. >> [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] >>>>> >>>>> Craig C. >>> you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this. >>> My [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > teasing you the same way that they are teasing others but you take it > seriously and off we go with another huge victim thread. Well, the problem is that teasing is only fun if it's not offensive to the recipient. Unfortunately, some cannot realize that I take offense at being teased about what is most dear to my soul, my beliefs. Nor do I tease someone about their beliefs, for that reason. To me, teasing a person over a misstatement he made many years ago about bunny suits is one thing, but teasing a person over what he believes in, what gives him comfort in this screwed up world, is off limits. One thing I don't quite understand is how I'm the "victim" in your eyes. I am not the victim, for according to my beliefs, I am the winner. Does that show you what I mean about how it should be off limits out of courtesy to a fellow human being? All the assaults on beliefs are damaging to a person's sense of worth. Btw, as you, and others, have mentioned more than once, you can't always determine if a statement is in jest from pixels on a screen, so you look at that person's track record with you. Denny, Larry, Nate and others have teased me enough to understand them a bit. You, for example, in this persona at least, have been mostly antagonistic. If a person regularly hits you, do you keep letting them hit you without response? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. >you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this. My >point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple. Though the >title of the group indicates one thing, as with any un-moderated group, any >topic is fair game. We both know that we all talk about so much in here >that is not dodge truck related it is not funny. i agree with you. in a way, it is funny though, i enjoy reading the wide variety of topics. dodge trucks is simply a place holder, the topic of discussion is wide open. >I am not a religious person, but I can not and will not fault Budd for his >feelings, thoughts and beliefs and I don't think that it is right that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >on a incorrect posting is the right thing to do also, but there has to be a >line drawn some where, right?. I think it ALL should just be left at that. agreed again. i really am trying to do just that. >>>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking >>>like [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] >>>> >>>> Craig C. >>you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this. My >>point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple. Though the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >wide variety of topics. dodge trucks is simply a place holder, the >topic of discussion is wide open. <snip> For sure... It's been my experience that newsgroups that stay strictly on topic usually dry up and blow away... Sure, this is a good place to get and give help about Dodge trucks, but there are only so many questions to ask/answer... the wide range of other stuff we talk about is what keeps the group going between the "real" purpose of the group.. IMHO, restricting talk here to dodge is like restricting the talk at a Lions Club meeting to charity events... After a while you have an empty room to talk to.. YMWV Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > IMHO, restricting talk here to dodge is like restricting the talk at a Lions > Club meeting to charity events... After a while you have an empty room to talk > to.. YMWV The occasional off-topic "OT" threads are a normal part of any unmoderated ng. And, (just in case you care), I don't have a problem with that. However, in the past few months, Budd has included religious AND/OR political BS into almost every single post that he has made. That is not the PURPOSE of this ng. And, dare I say, is unwelcome to many of this ng's participants. OT threads are fun ... in fact, I am guilty of contributing on many occasions. What I am griping about here is 1) how common religious talk is in this ng and 2) when someone makes a post about the torque spec on a fly wheel, the subject should not go into Jesus walking on water ... unless the torque spec is something he tripped over and got wet. Craig C. d, dare I say, is > unwelcome to many of this ng's participants. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Craig C. That's funny, See I told you that pill will relax you :)))) dale On 9/11/06 8:50 AM, in article abtag21e4h8o625d7eegbiompia15b51li@4ax.com, >>> you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this. My >>> point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple. Though the [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm Talking about Dodge sometimes get boring. Remember the times when we talked about dearranged dragon, building tator guns, dodge ewe straighting us guys out once in awhile >Talking about Dodge sometimes get boring. >Remember the times when we talked about dearranged dragon, building tator >guns, dodge ewe straighting us guys out once in awhile or the thread about GPS systems... not specifically related to Dodge, but why not tap knowledge here? Hell, I asked about woodworking newsgroups here a few years ago and got great leads.. *g* Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >On 9/11/06 8:50 AM, in article abtag21e4h8o625d7eegbiompia15b51li@4ax.com, > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >Remember the times when we talked about dearranged dragon, building tator >guns, dodge ewe straighting us guys out once in awhile absolutely. especially the tater guns. In do wish you would open your eyes, heart and mind and realize that I am not "moderating the group", just defending my beliefs. Until you break loose from that misconception, you will never see what I am really doing or trying to do. Or do you even want to? Once everyone quits telling me I can't defend my beliefs, can't respond to misquotes, etc. then I will gladly shut up about them. But, even you, who claims he's going to ignore me, continue to do the little stabs at my beliefs with the " moderating this ng as a religious debate" and "fog of stupidity" comments. Tell me how those comments help the situation? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking >>like [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] >>> >>> Craig C. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. >>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking like >>it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee! [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >what he choses to be. in this case, he really is just a fairly sane >voice in a fog of stupidity, but that is just my opinion. Holy sh.t! theguy has become the voice of reason in the group and he's pretty much expressing my opinion.. How scary is THAT? *roflmao* Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking like >>>it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee! [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis >https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm as they say mac.................if you hang around long enough you will see just about anything. lol. Relax, Larry. He's made his choices and one is to be an idiot. Thanks, friend. SignatureBudd Cochran "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking > like it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee! [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] >> >> Craig C. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. TAKE #2 howdy budd, how goes it? long time no see, bring me up to speed with whats going on in your life. nathan > Relax, Larry. He's made his choices and one is to be an idiot. > [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] >>> >>> Craig C. Hey, Nate!! What happened? I replied to your post but???? Ah, the marvels of Usenet. Anyway, I'm doing some fishing (caught and released a 16" Largemouth back in June), working on my old scooter (settled on doing a tribute paint layout to honor all branches of the services, fire, police, EMS, in a US flag style) and trying to keep the old thumper thumpin'. Health is "ok", but I'm having a little bit more trouble with my blood sugars (type 2 diabetic) and a heart stress test was inconclusive because no one told me to not take my Metropolol in the AM before the test. That medication limits the maximum heart rate to about 100 BPM. How is the family? What ya doing these days? SignatureBudd Cochran "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > TAKE #2 > [quoted text clipped - 79 lines] >>>> >>>> Craig C. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. >Relax, Larry. He's made his choices and one is to be an idiot. > >Thanks, friend. Congratulations, Budd... that was one of the more Christian and non-judgemental statements that I've heard in a long time... Hope he doesn't feel like it was a "personal attack" (tongue in cheek so hard it hurts) Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm It was the Truth. and we all know my source for Truth. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 23:04:29 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. > Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking like > it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee! > This is an un f.cking moderated group! Now sit the f.ck down, shut the f.ck > up or get the f.ck out and STOP trying to f.cking moderate! I'm not familiar with "Dee Dee Dee". Is that purely a redneck term? Bringing it back to the f.cking SUBJECT of the NG, it does start with a "D" ... as in DODGE. Craig C. > I'm not familiar with "Dee Dee Dee". Is that purely a redneck term? > > Craig C. Carlos Mencia explains what it means in this video: http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=19182 SignatureKen Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. I just happen to watch and enjoy good comedy. >> I'm not familiar with "Dee Dee Dee". Is that purely a redneck term? >> >> Craig C. > > Carlos Mencia explains what it means in this video: > http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=19182 > Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ currently, I > was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. I just happen to > watch and enjoy good comedy. Me too, where? Roy >>> I'm not familiar with "Dee Dee Dee". Is that purely a redneck term? >>> >>> Craig C. >> >> Carlos Mencia explains what it means in this video: >> http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=19182 >> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ currently, I >> was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. I just happen to >> watch and enjoy good comedy. > > Me too, where? Where born, Buffalo. Where live, Sierra Vista. > Roy >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>> Carlos Mencia explains what it means in this video: >>> http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=19182 >>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ currently, >>> I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. I just happen [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Where born, Buffalo. Where live, Sierra Vista. I was born in Troy >>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ currently, >>>> I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. I just happen [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I was born in Troy Small ng err world. I mght be moving back to the area if this job comes through. A GS-09 position at the Army Medical Center, West Point. It would be nice as I would be only a few hours instead of days away from my son. >>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. I [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > would be nice as I would be only a few hours instead of days away from my > son. I haven't been back in 30 years. Cold enough here in MA. Can't wait to get to FL. >>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I haven't been back in 30 years. Cold enough here in MA. Can't wait to get > to FL. I used to go back every year at Christmas (umm is that a religious statement?) to see my son and for the most part hated the weather. Being in AZ and HI spoiled me. Though it does get cold here in the winter, we don't get 84" of snow in 36 hours! Though for the money that job will pay, I can learn to deal with the cold and snow again. I'll just have to trade the Chevy in for a F-250 Superduty! >>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > in AZ and HI spoiled me. Though it does get cold here in the winter, we > don't get 84" of snow in 36 hours! There they spread it out over a couple of days but they get a bunch. >Though for the money that job will pay, I can learn to deal with the cold >and snow again. I'll just have to trade the Chevy in for a F-250 >Superduty! A close friend has a F-350 S/D diesel and is none to happy with it. Kicking himself for not staying with a Cummins.ymmv. >>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > A close friend has a F-350 S/D diesel and is none to happy with it. > Kicking himself for not staying with a Cummins.ymmv. I have seen and heard a lot of both good and bad with the Fords. Biggest thing I like is the room in them. Having crawled around in all three manufactures 250/2500 series trucks, the ford (imo) has the most room. This is something I want for comfort if I were to be driving from West POint to Buffalo a lot. >>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > This is something I want for comfort if I were to be driving from West > POint to Buffalo a lot. I've made a couple of trips to FL in the 05 QC with the wife and a 85 pound dog and there was plenty of room. Gotta go with what ya like though, it is your a.s that has to be happy. >>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > pound dog and there was plenty of room. > Gotta go with what ya like though, it is your a.s that has to be happy. I wonder if I should get heated leather seats? Mike?! <VBG> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > I wonder if I should get heated leather seats? Mike?! <VBG> Up there you'll want them.<G> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > >I wonder if I should get heated leather seats? Mike?! <VBG> not sure when your looking to buy but the '08 ford (i think it starts selling this january) has a new engine. the current 6l has been really problamatic. if you can, you might want to wait until the new one comes out. i have a bunch of friends with the 6l ford diesel. no one that i know would buy another but they love the rest of the truck. everythng that i have heard about this new engine has been good. >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > one that i know would buy another but they love the rest of the truck. > everythng that i have heard about this new engine has been good. Who is making the engine. If it is another navistar........ Roy >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > >Roy i think that it is, but not positive roy. i read about the new dc and the new ford diesels a while back and can't remember for sure (age?). as i recall, the new ford is a 6.4l and the new dc is a 6.7l cummins, with a new auto tranny that is a six speed?????? > i think that it is, but not positive roy. i read about the new dc and > the new ford diesels a while back and can't remember for sure (age?). > as i recall, the new ford is a 6.4l and the new dc is a 6.7l cummins, > with a new auto tranny that is a six speed?????? Yes, the new Ford is also a Navistar. While much has been written about it, with all kinds of glowing reviews, the same was said/written about the 6.0L when it first landed, too. Time will tell. As for the Dodge, currently only the chassis cabs are available with the 6.7L engine (a bored and stroked 5.9L), and they are optioned with an Aisin 6speed transmission. Starting in January, as a mid-model-year change, the regular 2500/3500 pickups will come with the 6.7L as well, and will be optioned with the DC 68RFE - an in-house-designed 6-speed auto, similar in design to the 545RFE (ie. drive clutches and holding clutches, instead of bands like the 4xRE's, and full electronic shifting). One of the truck rags recently reported on the upcoming availability of the "new Aisin 68RE" transmission. That's wrong. They're two distinctly separate transmissions. >> i think that it is, but not positive roy. i read about the new dc and >> the new ford diesels a while back and can't remember for sure (age?). [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >recently reported on the upcoming availability of the "new Aisin 68RE" >transmission. That's wrong. They're two distinctly separate transmissions. thanks tom. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > >Roy Here, see for yourself. http://people.bath.ac.uk/ccsshb/12cyl/ beekeep >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > one that i know would buy another but they love the rest of the truck. > everythng that i have heard about this new engine has been good. I'll have to look into it. Have not heard they were changing motor >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > >I'll have to look into it. Have not heard they were changing motor as i understand it both dodge and ford have to, in order to meet the new emission requirments as of january 1, 2007. over at tdr a lot of people are talking about buying a dodge now, before jan. even though the cummins will be bigger, there is a concern about the complexity of the emission control crap. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > the cummins will be bigger, there is a concern about the complexity of > the emission control crap. I thought my 05 with the cat met the 07 stuff. Might be wrong though. Roy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> currently, I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > >Roy well, what they are saying over at tdr is that jan. 1, '07, diesel trucks have to meet essentially the same emiision requirments that cars do? there were new requirments as os jan. 1 '05, and i have heard even newer ones as of jan. 1 '07. maybe mike can chime in with some facts rather than my rumors? here is a couple of stories about it, fwiw: http://media.ford.com/newsroom/release_display.cfm?release=24088 http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/country/acf/newsID/2060824.004/ford/new-6.4 -liter-powerstroke-diesel-engine-for-ford-f-series http://www.turbodieselregister.com/07pressrelease/Dodge_1_PR.pdf#search=%22new%2 0dodge%20%20diesel%20engines%22 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AZ [quoted text clipped - 91 lines] > > http://www.turbodieselregister.com/07pressrelease/Dodge_1_PR.pdf#search=%22new%2 0dodge%20%20diesel%20engines%22 We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all the other bs. Roy > We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all the > other bs. See, if you guys would knock off all the OT crap, this wouldn't be a problem! :^) (That's a joke, y'all... c'mon, laugh a little) >> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all the >> other bs. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > (That's a joke, y'all... c'mon, laugh a little) Don't be mad at me! Beekeep started this thread.<G> Roy >>> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all the >>> other bs. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Roy I get blamed for everything around here. beekeep >>>> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all the >>>> other bs. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> > I get blamed for everything around here. So you're the one that stole Red's machine.... Denny >>>>> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all the >>>>> other bs. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> > So you're the one that stole Red's machine.... Oh Bullshit!! Mac had "the machine" and was supposed to give it to Red a couple of years ago when he went north to visit a son. "The machine" never got there. At the time mac was headed north, there were a bunch of reports of a pick up with a plow running west on the interstate. Seems the driver was this pink freak with big a.s floppy ears. Any idea who that might have been??? <BFG> Roy > Denny >>>>>> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all the >>>>>> other bs. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > been??? > <BFG> I wouldn't have been me. I would never run my truck down the interstate with the blade on. Seriously, last spring we had a truck towed in at work with the engine so hot the plug wires melted. The guy was driving down the interstate with a Western blade on and never looked at this temp guage. Must have no hearing either for not hearing the chime when the temp guage went up either. He was just mad as hell that he couldn't keep up with traffic on I-75 with the blade on. He wanted us to be sure to put a motor in the ran right this time. Denny You're kidding? Tell me they are NOT giving driver's licenses to idiots like this in Ohio. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >>>>>>> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all >>>>>>> the [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Denny SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >You're kidding? Tell me they are NOT giving driver's licenses to idiots like >this in Ohio. just let me say that denny said it was "The guy", not theguy. just saying, thats all <vbg> >>>>>>>> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all >>>>>>>> the [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >> >> Denny >>You're kidding? Tell me they are NOT giving driver's licenses to idiots >>like [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > just saying, thats all <vbg> Deny, deny, deny,............................ <G> Roy No, Denny, Denny, Denny . . . . . SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >>>You're kidding? Tell me they are NOT giving driver's licenses to idiots >>>like [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Roy SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ROTFLMBO!!!! You owe me a Pepsi 1 soda. This one just got sprayed all over the wall. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >>You're kidding? Tell me they are NOT giving driver's licenses to idiots >>like [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] >>> >>> Denny SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>>>>>> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all >>>>>>> the [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Denny Wait a second! Didn't have a 9 foot on it did it? I had to move a blade for a friend who sold his truck without the plow. Anyway did a 20 mile bit city and highway with it. Told him to do nothing but watch the temp, it stayed well with in limits. Oh, did the move in August had to be 75+. Maybe the cooling system for the diesel is the way to go. Roy >> We gotta get this out of this thread it is a pia to find with all the >> other bs. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >(That's a joke, y'all... c'mon, laugh a little) Well at least you didn't say "beekeep started it. " beekeep <snip> >> well, what they are saying over at tdr is that jan. 1, '07, diesel >> trucks have to meet essentially the same emiision requirments that [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Roy might be a little easier on ya if you tried that new fangled SNIP thang... *g* Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >I have seen and heard a lot of both good and bad with the Fords. Biggest >thing I like is the room in them. Having crawled around in all three >manufactures 250/2500 series trucks, the ford (imo) has the most room. This >is something I want for comfort if I were to be driving from West POint to >Buffalo a lot. I'd like to say "dodge or nothing" but to be fair, my neighbor has an 01 f-250 super duty with the powersmoke and he's got about 150k miles on it with a lot of towing in that number... truck still runs great, though noisy as hell compared to the late-model cummins.. I had the misfortune of spending about a month in the back seat one weekend on a trip to Mexico... or at least tit SEEMED like a month... Lots of room but not much choice of seating position... typical for a 4 door truck, I'd imagine.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>> Where born, Buffalo. Where live, Sierra Vista. >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I haven't been back in 30 years. Cold enough here in MA. Can't wait to get >to FL. I hear that! Last time I was there, I was about 5.. lol My comfort zone does not include weather under 40 degrees... *g* Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>>> Where born, Buffalo. Where live, Sierra Vista. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > My comfort zone does not include weather under 40 degrees... *g* I'm trying to get out of here but I can't advance the calender. Gotta be careful, this is off topic.<G> Roy > Mac > > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >> My comfort zone does not include weather under 40 degrees... *g* > >I'm trying to get out of here but I can't advance the calender. Gotta be >careful, this is off topic.<G> > >Roy Well, we're taking the Ram when we move to Mexico but selling the Dakota because we like it too much to tear it up on dirt roads... Is that better? Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>> Thank you Ken, and for the record, though I may reside in AZ currently, >>>> I was born and raised in NY, so I am far from a redneck. I just happen [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >I was born in Troy I was the lucky one in the family, born in Calif.... my sister and 2 brothers were born in Buffalo... umm.. I think my sister, the oldest, was born in Rochester... Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking like >it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee! >This is an un f.cking moderated group! Now sit the f.ck down, shut the f.ck >up or get the f.ck out and STOP trying to f.cking moderate! Hey Larry... you need to stop holding things in and learn to express your feelings... *g* Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm I'm trying mac. >>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand! If you don't f.cking >>like [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >> No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the >> primary >> indicated topic of the group is Dodge trucks but, by virtue of being >> UNMODERATED, almost any topic is permitted. > > Your religious topics are unwelcome. Are you too ignorant to see that? No, but I do see that you are trying to tell me what ai can or cannot say in an UNMODERATED GROUP. That's either an attempt to moderate the group, or an attempt to deny me freedom of religion ( FEDERAL OFFENSE). Now, according to the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) I can do on or more things: track your location ( ask a IT about this, if you don't believe it can be done) and report it to them for filing Federal charges, killfile you ( I'd rather not in case you have a question), or ignore your tirade. Oh, what to do. >> Oh, btw, I only talk about my beliefs when the Bible is misquoted, >> misinterpreted or an attack is made on my beliefs, all of which have [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > understand that this IS NOT the ng for that discussion. Try > alt.religion.a.s.rape.budd.will.he.ever.shut.up) My, my . . .a few posts ago you jumped azwiley1 for a homosexually oriented remark, now you are doing the same. That is called "hypocrisy". >> Again for the anti-Christian bigots, the group is unmoderated. Feel free >> to >> leave if it bothers you so much. > > Or ... YOU can leave and spread your nonsense to a religious group, > where it BELONGS. This is alt.autos.dodge.trucks. Yes, it is and you are attacking my beliefs . . . shut up about my beliefs and I will shut up also. . . .or I will continue to defend them . . .the choice is yours. >> There you go moderating again. Why don't you just go start your own group >> and you can only discuss your topics? > > alt.autos.dodge.trucks. What does that mean to you? It means illuminated pixels on a screen that indicate by physical arrangement determined by a series of program lines in the softwares controlling the monitor's electromagnetic deflector coils sending electron beams to selected perforations in the scren mask resulting in thte florescing of the screen coatings in a form that represents "alt.autos.dodge.trucks". >> I (me, myself, I, first person singular pronoun) have never said it is >> the >> answer to all mankinds problems, but the Bible does. > > Shut the f.ck up for christ's sake. Can't. Christ told me to say it, for His sake, thru His Disciples's writings approximately 2000 years ago. Now, who should I follow, Jesus, the Christ or an obvious anti-christian? >> > Correct. Then some "unnamed" jackass started all of the God talk. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > And where did those beliefs get mentioned? alt.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS. > See anything out of place there? Uh, nope. And in fact, you don't either except in your little world. >> > Futher proving the point of many that religion simply ruins everything. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > My experiences with christianity aside, it still does not change the > FACT that this is not the forum for such discussions. ROTFLMBO!!!! HEY, CRAIG, SHOW ME WHERE I SAID IN THE EXACT WORDS, "THIS IS THE PLACE FOR RELIGIOUS DISCUSSIONS" IN FULL, EXACT CONTEXT. You can't because I never have. But I have said I will defend my beliefs, the Word of God, and Chrisitanity ANYWHERE >> > Religious tyranny. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Craig C. Dwell on this, Craig. You aren't my god, you are not anyone to me, and I do not have to obey you. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. > No, but I do see that you are trying to tell me what ai can or cannot say in > an UNMODERATED GROUP. That's either an attempt to moderate the group, or an > attempt to deny me freedom of religion ( FEDERAL OFFENSE). Now, according to > the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) I can do on or more things: > track your location ( ask a IT about this, if you don't believe it can be > done) and report it to them for filing Federal charges, Federal charges? You are one serious dumb f.ck. No laws have been broken, you moron. Go back to the crack pipe. >killfile you Supposedly, you already did in the last religious mess you started. I guess you were telling an untruth? You know ... that is a sin. >( I'd > rather not in case you have a question), I promise ... I won't have any questions to ask. So, you can safely remove that "burden" from you shoulders. > > No, you spout your sh.t unlike any "victim" I have ever seen. Were you > > a.s raped by a priest? Is that the drive behind your constant [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > My, my . . .a few posts ago you jumped azwiley1 for a homosexually oriented > remark, now you are doing the same. That is called "hypocrisy". A comparison. I know someone that was a.s raped by a priest. He is obsessed with god talk like you. > >> Again for the anti-Christian bigots, the group is unmoderated. Feel free > >> to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and I will shut up also. . . .or I will continue to defend them . . .the > choice is yours. I have not attacked your beliefs. I am attacking your ability to use a little common sense. > It means illuminated pixels on a screen that indicate by physical > arrangement determined by a series of program lines in the softwares > controlling the monitor's electromagnetic deflector coils sending electron > beams to selected perforations in the scren mask resulting in thte > florescing of the screen coatings in a form that represents > "alt.autos.dodge.trucks". <sigh> Not much going on upstairs is there Budd? > Can't. Christ told me to say it, for His sake, thru His Disciples's writings > approximately 2000 years ago. Now, who should I follow, Jesus, the Christ or > an obvious anti-christian? You're asking me? Well then: Niether. Be your own man ... one with just a hint of common sense. > > My experiences with christianity aside, it still does not change the > > FACT that this is not the forum for such discussions. > > ROTFLMBO!!!! HEY, CRAIG, SHOW ME WHERE I SAID IN THE EXACT WORDS, "THIS IS > THE PLACE FOR RELIGIOUS DISCUSSIONS" IN FULL, EXACT CONTEXT. You are thick skulled. You didn't say it ... you have, however, started MANY religious discussions in ALT.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS. Therefore, a reasonable person (that's one that has a hint of common sense) would assume that you have mistaken this ng for a religious one. Once again, this is ALT.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS. > You can't because I never have. But I have said I will defend my beliefs, > the Word of God, and Chrisitanity ANYWHERE Well then maybe I will bring some those mysterious "Federal Charges" against you. > Dwell on this, Craig. You aren't my god, you are not anyone to me, and I do > not have to obey you. That's where you are wrong. I am your god. I own you. Now shutup and bring me 50 virgins. Craig C. >> No, but I do see that you are trying to tell me what ai can or cannot say >> in [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Federal charges? You are one serious dumb f.ck. No laws have been > broken, you moron. Go back to the crack pipe. Sorry, but you might want to look up the website for the American Center for Law and Justice and see what laws you're breaking. >>killfile you > > Supposedly, you already did in the last religious mess you started. I > guess you were telling an untruth? You know ... that is a sin. If I newsgroup is unsubscribed and Outlook Express re-installed, tell me how the killfiles will be retained? >>( I'd >> rather not in case you have a question), > > I promise ... I won't have any questions to ask. So, you can safely > remove that "burden" from you shoulders. Famous last words? >> > No, you spout your sh.t unlike any "victim" I have ever seen. Were you >> > a.s raped by a priest? Is that the drive behind your constant [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > A comparison. I know someone that was a.s raped by a priest. He is > obsessed with god talk like you. And you were such a comfort to him . . . . >> >> Again for the anti-Christian bigots, the group is unmoderated. Feel >> >> free [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I have not attacked your beliefs. I am attacking your ability to use a > little common sense. <LOL> If you call my "religion" names ( "religion" is more properly defined as one's attempts to EARN a place in the hereafter, but I'll use it for sake of clarity) I will respond in defense. As for my "common sense", don't worry about it, it's not your concern. >> It means illuminated pixels on a screen that indicate by physical >> arrangement determined by a series of program lines in the softwares [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > <sigh> Not much going on upstairs is there Budd? No, just giving your comment more response than it deserved. >> Can't. Christ told me to say it, for His sake, thru His Disciples's >> writings [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Niether. Be your own man ... one with just a hint of common sense. SO now you're proselytizing me into your beliefs??? Btw, when I followed your "religion", I was not nearly as happy nor as certain of myself. No thanks. >> > My experiences with christianity aside, it still does not change the >> > FACT that this is not the forum for such discussions. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You are thick skulled. You didn't say it ... you have, however, > started MANY religious discussions in ALT.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS. No, I have defended my beliefs against attacks like yours . . .so, it is those that attack me or my beliefs that start the process but haven't the guts to admit it. > Therefore, a reasonable person (that's one that has a hint of common > sense) would assume that you have mistaken this ng for a religious one. Then you do not fit that discription. > Once again, this is ALT.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS. No, it is <alt.autos.dodge.trucks> >> You can't because I never have. But I have said I will defend my beliefs, >> the Word of God, and Chrisitanity ANYWHERE > > Well then maybe I will bring some those mysterious "Federal Charges" > against you. How? I'm following my beliefs and my God's instructions? ACLJ says I'm not breaking any laws by trying to defend my faith. >> Dwell on this, Craig. You aren't my god, you are not anyone to me, and I >> do [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Craig C. ROTFLMBO!!!! Tell you what, go out into the middle of the nearest lake to your home and post in here pictures verified by Guinness of you walking unsupported by any means ABOVE the water and I'll think about your status. Until then you are nobody. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. > > Federal charges? You are one serious dumb f.ck. No laws have been > > broken, you moron. Go back to the crack pipe. > > Sorry, but you might want to look up the website for the American Center for > Law and Justice and see what laws you're breaking. :-) Sue me. > If I newsgroup is unsubscribed and Outlook Express re-installed, tell me how > the killfiles will be retained? Well ... I'm sure you can find the answer to that in alt.computers.microsoft.outlook-express. I hear that ng enjoys religious banter, as well. > > I promise ... I won't have any questions to ask. So, you can safely > > remove that "burden" from you shoulders. > > Famous last words? Nope. IF I ever had ANY questions regarding religion or any other spiritual nonsense, you are positively the absolute last person I would ask. You can take that to the bank. > > A comparison. I know someone that was a.s raped by a priest. He is > > obsessed with god talk like you. > > And you were such a comfort to him . . . . I was. Then he started using it as a crutch and playing the victim, all the while beating everyone else down with his god talk. Sound familiar? > <LOL> If you call my "religion" names I don't recall calling your religion names (although I may have)... I was calling you names. > As for my "common sense", don't worry > about it, it's not your concern. Apparently it isn't your concern either. > >> Can't. Christ told me to say it, for His sake, thru His Disciples's > >> writings [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > SO now you're proselytizing me into your beliefs??? No. You asked. I was answering your question. > Btw, when I followed your "religion", I was not nearly as happy nor as > certain of myself. No thanks. And now that you've found the lord, nobody is happy. > No, I have defended my beliefs against attacks like yours . . .so, it is > those that attack me or my beliefs that start the process but haven't the > guts to admit it. You've started the discussions, Budd. Aren't you man enough to admit that? Nobody, out of the clear blue, attacked your religion. You spouted your crap to people that didn't want to hear it. When they told you they didn't want to hear it, you accused them of attacking. You crawled upon your own cross and nailed yourself to it. > > That's where you are wrong. I am your god. I own you. Now shutup and > > bring me 50 virgins. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > unsupported by any means ABOVE the water and I'll think about your status. > Until then you are nobody. You see that thing that just flew over your head ... that was the point that you missed. Done with you ... Craig C. >> > Federal charges? You are one serious dumb f.ck. No laws have been >> > broken, you moron. Go back to the crack pipe. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > :-) Sue me. I'd rather not. I'd rather reason this out but to do so would require you to meet me in the middle, something you're disinclined to do. I do suggest you look at their site, just for your own information. >> If I newsgroup is unsubscribed and Outlook Express re-installed, tell me >> how [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > alt.computers.microsoft.outlook-express. I hear that ng enjoys > religious banter, as well. Ah, either you don't know or you're just evading the question. >> > I promise ... I won't have any questions to ask. So, you can safely >> > remove that "burden" from you shoulders. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > spiritual nonsense, you are positively the absolute last person I would > ask. You can take that to the bank. That is your choice. >> > A comparison. I know someone that was a.s raped by a priest. He is >> > obsessed with god talk like you. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Sound familiar? Nope. That's not what I'm doing., but since you've convinced yourself otherwise then there's no sense in discussing it with you. >> <LOL> If you call my "religion" names > > I don't recall calling your religion names (although I may have)... I > was calling you names. You have. >> As for my "common sense", don't worry >> about it, it's not your concern. > > Apparently it isn't your concern either. Would you know it if it kicked you in the head? I doubt it. >> >> Can't. Christ told me to say it, for His sake, thru His Disciples's >> >> writings [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > No. You asked. I was answering your question. AHA!!!!! It's fine for you to answer a religious question with an anti-Chrisitan response but not for a Christian to respond in a Christian manner. You are a hypocritical bigot, IMHO. >> Btw, when I followed your "religion", I was not nearly as happy nor as >> certain of myself. No thanks. > > And now that you've found the lord, nobody is happy. In your opinion. >> No, I have defended my beliefs against attacks like yours . . .so, it is >> those that attack me or my beliefs that start the process but haven't the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > You crawled upon your own cross and nailed yourself to it. In your biased opinion. >> > That's where you are wrong. I am your god. I own you. Now shutup and >> > bring me 50 virgins. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Craig C. As I am with you, but remember, God may not be done with you, according to the Bible. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. > >> SO now you're proselytizing me into your beliefs??? > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > anti-Chrisitan response but not for a Christian to respond in a Christian > manner. You are a hypocritical bigot, IMHO. Setting the record straight ... I didn't ask a question ... and neither did anyone else, you senile, old fart. Craig C. >> >> SO now you're proselytizing me into your beliefs??? >> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Setting the record straight ... I didn't ask a question ... and neither > did anyone else, you senile, old fart. Ya want a straight record now, huh? Ok, here it is: I am whom I am. I will be whom I will be. I will respond to religious comments, misquotes, misunderstandings and misinterpretations as I see fit and you have no say in the matter. Now, the mettle of your philosophy will determine if you handle this like the person of common sense you profess being or if you continue to drag this out with your pathetic and ridiculous attempts to moderate my posts. As for me, my common sense tells me that talking to you about my beliefs is like discussing highway safety with roadkill. No sensible responses, no increase in the subject's knowledge and there will be a stink three days after death for both of you. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. >>> >> SO now you're proselytizing me into your beliefs??? >>> > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >increase in the subject's knowledge and there will be a stink three days >after death for both of you. i think im gonna throw up. >Ok, here it is: I am whom I am. I will be whom I will be. I will respond to >religious comments, misquotes, misunderstandings and misinterpretations as I >see fit and you have no say in the matter. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Popeye said "I yam what I yam." >Now, the mettle of your philosophy will determine if you handle this like >the person of common sense you profess being or if you continue to drag this >out with your pathetic and ridiculous attempts to moderate my posts. Troll, troll, troll your boat! Isn't your creel full yet? >As for me, my common sense tells me that talking to you about my beliefs is >like discussing highway safety with roadkill. No sensible responses, no >increase in the subject's knowledge and there will be a stink three days >after death for both of you. Another misquote. Ben Franklin said" Fish and visitors smell in three days." And stop talking about road kill - you're making me hungry. I can smell it now - smear of dear, wheel wubbed wabbit, swirl of squirrel. This post brought to you be the "Cell Phones Can Kill You Foundation. Dial #592 for more information. beekeep >>Ok, here it is: I am whom I am. I will be whom I will be. I will respond to >>religious comments, misquotes, misunderstandings and misinterpretations as I [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > And stop talking about road kill - you're making me hungry. I can smell it now > - smear of dear, wheel wubbed wabbit, swirl of squirrel. And those road kill armadillos here in Texas make great soup. Bob > Sorry, but you might want to look up the website for the American Center > for Law and Justice and see what laws you're breaking. Budd, come on... no one is breaking any federal laws by telling you to "shut up" in an online discussion forum. Depriving you of your first amendment rights? Only a person or entity of authority can do that - no individual can deprive another of their freedom of speech, or religion - because they have no authority over the individual. Case in point - person #1 is standing on a soapbox in the middle of a town square, going off about who knows what. Person #2, walking by, utters "aw, shut up, ya blithering idiot!". Person #1 most likely flips person #2 the bird, and continues on doing what he was doing. Now - person #3, a police officer, comes along, and tells person #1, "shut up, or I'm going to arrest you". NOW there's a potential civil rights violation. If you have a different opinion (ie. you think person #2 can be charged with a federal offense), please indicate which exact law (title and section from USC would be helpful) you feel he can be charged with breaking. >> Sorry, but you might want to look up the website for the American Center >> for Law and Justice and see what laws you're breaking. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > individual can deprive another of their freedom of speech, or religion - > because they have no authority over the individual. Really? Did you go to the site? In another group, when this happened, I contacted the ACLJ, emailed them a couple examples of the "discussions" and their response was that no one has the right in an Usenet group to tell a Christian or a person of any faith or denomination to stop talking about their beliefs as part of a discussion or in response to the situations I've mentioned previously or to harrass them about their faith or belief. As a fact, the Constitution does protect me and others in those situstions. But don't take my word for it, go to their site and ask them. > Case in point - person #1 is standing on a soapbox in the middle of a town > square, going off about who knows what. Person #2, walking by, utters > "aw, shut up, ya blithering idiot!". Person #1 most likely flips person > #2 the bird, and continues on doing what he was doing. True. > Now - person #3, a police officer, comes along, and tells person #1, "shut > up, or I'm going to arrest you". NOW there's a potential civil rights > violation. Agreed., but neither example includes the unique characteristics of a Usenet group. > If you have a different opinion (ie. you think person #2 can be charged > with a federal offense), please indicate which exact law (title and > section from USC would be helpful) you feel he can be charged with > breaking. Tom, the whole point that I'm trying to make is just what you are saying. There are many here that think they can tell me or anyone of any faith or denomination that they cannot speak about their faith or beliefs in an unmoderated group, especially in a response to a misquote, direct question, or a misunderstanding of a faith, is in violation of laws guaranteeing the right to speak, write or whistle in Morse Code about their beliefs. That's the real situation: they are the same ones that would deny anyone of any faith a chance to speak on their beliefs in a similar situation. Technically, by law, I CAN, contrary to Craig's "opinion", start a religious discussion in an unmoderated group by simply adding "OT-" before the title. In moderated groups, with the permission of the moderator(s) or owner(s), the same is true. I really wish someone, preferably someone not a friend and not biased, would take a closer look at my replies and they will see that IN THE REPLY MESSAGE BODIES, I do not proselytize or coerce, and only very carefully, in an informational form, mention my beliefs, and then post that fact for the benefit of Craig, theguy, Beekeeper, and Roy so I can drop the subject and go on with what I'm here for, answering questions. I've tried to show this but some minds are in a rut and don't want to change course And if no one then wants to accept the truth about my "religious postings" then it proves that no matter how honest a person has been in a newsgroup, lies about that person will be accepted over the truth. It also means this group, which was once praised and respected for quick, accurate responses to questions about nearly everything and no infighting, is headed into the trash pile fast. Anyway, I'm done with the mess. Someone email me if anyone cares enough about religious freedoms to take an unbiased look. I'm going fishing for a couple days. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. > Anyway, I'm done with the mess. Someone email me if anyone cares enough > about religious freedoms to take an unbiased look. I'm going fishing for a > couple days. Okay ... bye Budd. Fishing tip for ya: You shouldn't need any bait. Try the same BS with the fish that you did in this ng. I bet the fish will jump into the boat begging to be killed and eatin. Craig C. > Really? Did you go to the site? Yep... saw a bunch of cases pertaining to state governments, local governments, state and federal agencies, etc. being sued for 1A violations. Nothing on individuals. > In another group, when this happened, I contacted the ACLJ, emailed them a > couple examples of the "discussions" and their response was that no one > has the right in an Usenet group to tell a Christian or a person of any > faith or A search of their site turned up zero hits for "usenet", "newsgroup", "online forum", etc. > about their faith or belief. As a fact, the Constitution does protect me > and others in those situstions. No, Budd - it does not. The 1st amendment prohibits CONGRESS from passing any laws infringing on your right to speech, religion, assembly, etc. There is nothing in the BoR that applies to Craig, me, or anyone else from telling you to stop talking about your beliefs. > But don't take my word for it, go to their site and ask them. Nope - you're the one who made the claim - you should be the one to defend it. Again, where's the law that prevents Craig from calling you a "religious nut", and to "take your religious talk to an appropriate newsgroup"? >> Case in point - person #1 is standing on a soapbox in the middle of a >> town square, going off about who knows what. Person #2, walking by, >> utters "aw, shut up, ya blithering idiot!". Person #1 most likely flips >> person #2 the bird, and continues on doing what he was doing. > > True. Yes, true. Usenet is simply the electronic equivalent of the town square. People are free to wander in and out at will - to listen, to ignore, to rebut, or to comment. > Agreed., but neither example includes the unique characteristics of a > Usenet group. > Tom, the whole point that I'm trying to make is just what you are saying. You implied (some would say threatened) that you could have someone charged with a federal crime for posts they made to you in this group. I never said that.... you did. > Technically, by law, I CAN, contrary to Craig's "opinion", start a > religious discussion in an unmoderated group by simply adding "OT-" before > the title. Of course you can... not "by law" - by virtue of the fact that no one, other than your ISP, can stop you. You're free to post all you want. Others are just as free to tell you to go away. Such is the nature of Usenet. Now, if you ISP blocked your posts, THEN you'd have a case. But because other posters here have no authority over you, or control of your posts, then they can't be in a position to deny you your rights, can they? > Anyway, I'm done with the mess. Someone email me if anyone cares enough > about religious freedoms to take an unbiased look. I'm going fishing for a > couple days. Our discussion here has nothing to do with religion. You made an error in your legal reasoning (by stating you could charge Craig with a federal crime for his post to you), and I'm simply trying to correct that by providing the truth. Isn't that exactly what you say you try and do? Correct people's misconceptions? >> Really? Did you go to the site? > > Yep... saw a bunch of cases pertaining to state governments, local > governments, state and federal agencies, etc. being sued for 1A > violations. Nothing on individuals. A person can deny another his rights. >> In another group, when this happened, I contacted the ACLJ, emailed them >> a couple examples of the "discussions" and their response was that no one [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > A search of their site turned up zero hits for "usenet", "newsgroup", > "online forum", etc. The response I got was in an email to me. I think I may still have it on a cd. I'll look later. >> about their faith or belief. As a fact, the Constitution does protect me >> and others in those situstions. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > There is nothing in the BoR that applies to Craig, me, or anyone else from > telling you to stop talking about your beliefs. So, iow, a vigilante group or person, with no official sanction can destroy a house of worship and not be prosecuted? Or persecute a Jewish person, a Catholic? Then all the trials against the KKK burning Black churches, harrassing Jews and Catholics should be nulled and retribution made. Because I'm a Christian, I'm harrassed and called names, and I wouldn't be surprised to find there is at least one person that would want to beat me up for my beliefs. >> But don't take my word for it, go to their site and ask them. > > Nope - you're the one who made the claim - you should be the one to defend > it. Again, where's the law that prevents Craig from calling you a > "religious nut", and to "take your religious talk to an appropriate > newsgroup"? What laws were the KKK members tried under, Tom? What they're doing is no different. >>> Case in point - person #1 is standing on a soapbox in the middle of a >>> town square, going off about who knows what. Person #2, walking by, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > People are free to wander in and out at will - to listen, to ignore, to > rebut, or to comment. Or to harrass, Tom? According to you, I should be allowed to harangue them about becoming Christians, but we both know what happens when I simply quote a scripture. So much for equality, my friend. Usenet isn't as free as you imagine. >> Agreed., but neither example includes the unique characteristics of a >> Usenet group. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > charged with a federal crime for posts they made to you in this group. I > never said that.... you did. Yep, the same Federal laws as were applied to the KKK. >> Technically, by law, I CAN, contrary to Craig's "opinion", start a >> religious discussion in an unmoderated group by simply adding "OT-" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Others are just as free to tell you to go away. Such is the nature of > Usenet. Interesting, isn't though, that when I post a Christian item no one is called a name, cussed or cursed, but when some reply, it's nothing but cussing, cursing and name calling. Emotional injury is as prosecutable as physical injury. > Now, if you ISP blocked your posts, THEN you'd have a case. But because > other posters here have no authority over you, or control of your posts, > then they can't be in a position to deny you your rights, can they? I think you should be telling them this as I already know it, and they either don't know or don't care. >> Anyway, I'm done with the mess. Someone email me if anyone cares enough >> about religious freedoms to take an unbiased look. I'm going fishing for >> a couple days. > > Our discussion here has nothing to do with religion. Then what subject are you talking about? I'm taliking about my freedom to worship, to believe and to live my faith in peace. > You made an error in your legal reasoning (by stating you could charge > Craig with a federal crime for his post to you), and I'm simply trying to > correct that by providing the truth. Isn't that exactly what you say you > try and do? Correct people's misconceptions? Tom, I appreciate your effort, but I went thru worse than Craig or any in here in another group. That was why I contacted the Christian legal services. Yes, they are violating my rights on a personal level. The right to be insulted is a personal level item, as is the right to live, worship and believe in peace. And to deny a person the right to believe is always a Federal violation. Thanks for the discussion, my friend, but I would suggest you ask the ACLJ a question about usenet harrassment as I did. Then you will get the straight info from them. They will answer questions for anyone, including Atheists, unlike the ACLU. I gotta go clean a mess of Rainbows today. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > So, iow, a vigilante group or person, with no official sanction can > destroy a house of worship and not be prosecuted? Arson... vandalism... willful destruction of property.... tresspass... hate crime... plenty of choices to prosecute under. A civil rights claim could most probably be made in those circumstances, as well. But surely you're not comparing Craig's words to you in this newsgroup to a firebombing of a church??? > Because I'm a Christian, I'm harrassed and called names, and I wouldn't be > surprised to find there is at least one person that would want to beat me > up for my beliefs. If I constantly interjected myself into the conversations of others, telling them how wonderful I thought vegetarianism was, over and over and over again.... and someone finally told me to shove my celery stalks up my a.s, I should feel discriminated against for being a vegetarian? As I see it, you're not "harrassed" (I quote that, because I don't believe it has risen to the level of harrassment) or called names simply because you're a Christian. I think people get exasperated with WHAT THEY PERCEIVE to be someone preaching to them.... there's a big difference there. > What laws were the KKK members tried under, Tom? What they're doing is no > different. Again, you compare the burning of a cross on someone's lawn, and the lynching of someone in their backyard, to someone on an Internet newsgroup telling you to shut up. I'm sorry, Budd.... your logic is severely warped here. > cussing, cursing and name calling. Emotional injury is as prosecutable as > physical injury. If you truly believe that, quote the section of the United States Code that covers, SPECIFICALLY, someone in this newsgroup posting a message inviting you to "shut up". Don't give me this, "it's the same thing the KKK members were prosecuted for"... I want title, chapter, and verse. > Tom, I appreciate your effort, but I went thru worse than Craig or any in > here in another group. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER GROUP!!!! For all I know, someone in another group made threats against you... something that COULD be a criminal act. All I can speak to is what I've observed here. Craig said, "Budd, shut up!" and you threatened to have him charged in a federal court. That's nothing short of ludicrous. >> So, iow, a vigilante group or person, with no official sanction can >> destroy a house of worship and not be prosecuted? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > you're not comparing Craig's words to you in this newsgroup to a > firebombing of a church??? How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. >> Because I'm a Christian, I'm harrassed and called names, and I wouldn't >> be surprised to find there is at least one person that would want to beat [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > over again.... and someone finally told me to shove my celery stalks up > my a.s, I should feel discriminated against for being a vegetarian? Tom, I hope you're not accusing me of forcing my beliefs into conversations that have no religious content. I don't understand how correcting an error is forcing my way into the conversation and I've only done that a couple times when there was a misquote or mis interpretation.. Again, no one has actually proved I did what you said, force my way into a non-religious conversation. Stop and think, Tom, the whole thing started some time back when I commented during an argument with T-bone and theguy on my beliefs because I apologized for using language I do not want to use, and they began the attacks. And it really hasn't let up, whether I mention my beliefs in a post or not, someone drags it in or causes me to try and correct a possibly deliberatly wrong quote or misconception by themselves, just to drag it out, knowing I believe I must corect errors. It's a hate crime and they are just bullies. > As I see it, you're not "harrassed" (I quote that, because I don't believe > it has risen to the level of harrassment) or called names simply because > you're a Christian. I think people get exasperated with WHAT THEY > PERCEIVE to be someone preaching to them.... there's a big difference > there. Now you hit the nail on the head. It's what people, in their bias, PERCIEVE as happening, and then refusing to admit they went overboard much more than they claim I have. >> What laws were the KKK members tried under, Tom? What they're doing is no >> different. > > Again, you compare the burning of a cross on someone's lawn, and the > lynching of someone in their backyard, to someone on an Internet newsgroup > telling you to shut up. Why not? A hate crime is a hate crime. > I'm sorry, Budd.... your logic is severely warped here. Is it? Crimes of hate take many forms. There are more ways to hurt people than most people realize. >> cussing, cursing and name calling. Emotional injury is as prosecutable as >> physical injury. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > inviting you to "shut up". Don't give me this, "it's the same thing the > KKK members were prosecuted for"... I want title, chapter, and verse. No one where you live has ever been arrested, tried and convicted of stalking, spousal abuse, harrassment, or assault/battery/maiming/murder on a person of an ethnic group, religion or sexual persuasion? I keep trying to drop this mess, but . . . .well, you look up the laws on hate crimes, etc. I just want this whole mess to end. I just want to believe in my God as I understand I should. >> Tom, I appreciate your effort, but I went thru worse than Craig or any in >> here in another group. > > I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER GROUP!!!! For all I know, someone in > another group made threats against you... something that COULD be a > criminal act. All that I said was an admission that others had been far more brutal than those in this group. Relax, Tom, it was a compliment of sorts for the folks in this group. > All I can speak to is what I've observed here. Craig said, "Budd, shut > up!" and you threatened to have him charged in a federal court. That's > nothing short of ludicrous. Then you apparently don't see my point for some reason. So be it. I'm done discussing this. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? > Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. No... a "hate crime" is a crime first, motivated by hate. Even if he hates what you represent, there was no underlying crime committed - therefore no "hate crime". Burning a building is a crime (arson) - therefore, burning down a church because someone "hates Christians" could be classified as a hate crime. Telling you to "shut up" in a newsgroup isn't a crime. > Why not? A hate crime is a hate crime. So you really see no difference between someone posting here, "Hey Budd - back off with the religious sermons" and cold-blooded murder? Amazing... > All that I said was an admission that others had been far more brutal than > those in this group. Relax, Tom, it was a compliment of sorts for the > folks in this group. Was it also a compliment when you insinuated (I hesitate to use the word 'threaten') that you could have someone up on federal charges for telling you to shut up? See, that's my whole problem here, Budd. I have no problem with anything else you posted - none of it. Granted, I found myself getting a little exasperated at times with some of the debates that started out on some other subject, and morphed into a sermon on Christianity (disavow it all you like - that's how a lot of it came across), but I simply hit the <DELETE> key, and moved on. But when someone starts throwing around statements about "I'll sue you", "I'll have you arrested", etc. - for something that doesn't even come CLOSE to rising to the level of a crime... I gotta admit, it gets under my skin a little. > Then you apparently don't see my point for some reason. So be it. I'm done > discussing this. Nope - I obviously don't. We'll agree to disagree on this. >> How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? >> Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > >Nope - I obviously don't. We'll agree to disagree on this. And they wonder why the Romans used to thought them to the lions. beekeep >>> How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? >>> Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >> > And they wonder why the Romans used to thought them to the lions. That was funny.<GBFG> Roy > beekeep >>>> How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? >>>> Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > >Roy yeah, it really was. >> beekeep >>>>> How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? >>>>> Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > yeah, it really was. I'm sure that there is somthing wrong with us finding humor in it but wtf... Roy There is, it's called "religious persecution". Look it up. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >>>>>> How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? >>>>>> Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > > Roy SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >There is, it's called "religious persecution". Look it up. Budd... I have no idea why I'm doing this, since a wall has more chance of considering options, but what the hell: If someone tells me that I'm ann a.shole because I argue religion, they're telling me WHY they think I'm an a.shole... If someone comes into my place of worship and tells me that I can't practice my beliefs, they're getting into a religious issue and MIGHT be guilty of persecution.. For an example, if someone tells you that you shouldn't talk about your Cushman Scooter in a Dodge group, I don't think you'd have much of a case for scooter persecution... Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 07:39:32 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > scooter > persecution... The hell he doesn't!!! If he is out for a ride on it and has a religious thought then by pure linkage it is persecution. 'Cmon bro, ya gotta think like'em. Now, I don't know what that says for my mental state but... <BFG> Roy > Mac > > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm Mac, We've discussed things before and without animosity. Of that I am proud and I hope we will always be friends. We've even shared a few common interests besides Dodges. I am trying to let this thread die because I'd rather discuss Dodges anyway. But do look up what "persecution" entails. It comes in many forms, and as with insults, is generally determined by the recipient, not the speaker/writer, unless the objective of the statement is a deliberate and obvious insult / persecution. I was raised and schooled to understand that calling someone a name is a deliberate act of intended insult or persecution and is where the writer exceeds his right to freedom of speech. Budd > On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 07:39:32 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > I am trying to let this thread die because I'd rather discuss Dodges anyway. Then shut up. (I suppose you should have me arrested for that). > I was raised and schooled to understand that calling someone a name is a > deliberate act of intended insult or persecution and is where the writer > exceeds his right to freedom of speech. That is where you are dead, f.cking wrong. Freedom of speech includes the freedom for me to call you a retard, an old fart or just a plain ole religious nut job. The *only* time your standard run-of-the-mill American loses their "freedom" to say what they will is when it will cause harm/danger to others. The example I have heard is yelling "fire" in a movie theater. You have been "fighting" the point that you have the "right" to post whatever you want. Which, is true and nobody has questioned that you have the "right" just that you have no common sense about it. Yet, here you are saying that I, and others, have lost our right of freedom of speech because we called you names and insulted your tender feelings. You can't have it both ways, Budd. Instead, why don't you be reasonable and show a little common sense? The subject of this ng is Dodge trucks. Therefore, the *majority* of the things you write should be related to that subject. If the majority of the things you write pertain to different subject matter, then you should locate a ng that has been established for that subject. Get it yet? Craig C. >> I am trying to let this thread die because I'd rather discuss Dodges >> anyway. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > cause harm/danger to others. The example I have heard is yelling > "fire" in a movie theater. When do you lose the right to swing your fist around? When you punch someone in the nose with out just cause, like self defense. When you insult, you exceed the right to freedom of speech. That's how I was raised and taught. Your method is why we're in the moral mess we're in today. > You have been "fighting" the point that you have the "right" to post > whatever you want. Which, is true and nobody has questioned that you > have the "right" just that you have no common sense about it. And another one that lacks comprehension due to the liberal public school system, rears it's head and barfs liberal drivel. > Yet, here you are saying that I, and others, have lost our right of > freedom of speech because we called you names and insulted your tender > feelings. Yep. > You can't have it both ways, Budd. Instead, why don't you be > reasonable and show a little common sense? The subject of this ng is > Dodge trucks. Therefore, the *majority* of the things you write should > be related to that subject. If the majority of the things you write > pertain to different subject matter, then you should locate a ng that > has been established for that subject. Why do I have to be the one to be reasonable? Can't the name callers be reasonable? It is the name callers that want it both ways. > Get it yet? I got it, have you? Apparently not. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > When do you lose the right to swing your fist around? When you punch someone > in the nose with out just cause, like self defense. When you insult, you > exceed the right to freedom of speech. That's how I was raised and taught. > Your method is why we're in the moral mess we're in today. What one can say and what one should say may not be the same thing. When someone tells me I don't have the right to say what I want that in itself creates the mess we're in today. I was taught differently than you. I was taught to just ignore what I don't like. Walk away rather than telling that person they don't have the right. I was also taught that one can't be insulted unless allowed. Someone can call me any name they want. I'm not insulted. Why? Because I know who I am. Their words are meaningless. >> When do you lose the right to swing your fist around? When you punch >> someone in the nose with out just cause, like self defense. When you [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I'm not insulted. Why? Because I know who I am. Their words are > meaningless. Miles, This is another reason for the mess we have today. No one is held accountable for what they say or do and when the accountability is required, the blame is placed on others. I am accountable for what I say and do because I know that what I say or do is because _I_ made the decision to say or do it. The founders of our country believed the same way. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > This is another reason for the mess we have today. No one is held > accountable for what they say or do and when the accountability is required, > the blame is placed on others. Accountable to who's standards? Just because one disagrees with you and openly says so does not make them a worse, better, right or wrong person. If I say something someone doesn't like then its me who must hold myself accountable. If my views are firm then I stand firm and if the other doesn't like it then so be it. If I decide my actions were improper then it is me that does whats needed to change it. My point is that it is me and nobody else that can hold me accountable for what I say. Unfortunately, Miles, too many don't hold themselves accountable, let alone follow any other moral values. Cya SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> This is another reason for the mess we have today. No one is held >> accountable for what they say or do and when the accountability is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > it is me that does whats needed to change it. My point is that it is me > and nobody else that can hold me accountable for what I say. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Unfortunately, Miles, too many don't hold themselves accountable, let alone > follow any other moral values. Who decides what is moral or not? For me I decide for myself. Somethings I believe in, say or do maybe immoral to you and vis-versa. >> Unfortunately, Miles, too many don't hold themselves accountable, let alone >> follow any other moral values. > >Who decides what is moral or not? For me I decide for myself. >Somethings I believe in, say or do maybe immoral to you and vis-versa. Right on... that's the problem that I've always had with censorship... who decides what's "good" or "bad" for us? I think adults practice self censorship.. if it offends you, don't look/complain/etc.... If, for example, nobody wanted to see X rated movies, there wouldn't be any profit in them and they'd cease to exist.. self censorship? Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>> Unfortunately, Miles, too many don't hold themselves accountable, let >>> alone [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > any > profit in them and they'd cease to exist.. self censorship? Bro, your always right on the money first thing in the mornig. Well said!! Roy > Mac > > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>> Unfortunately, Miles, too many don't hold themselves accountable, let >>>> alone [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Roy thank you, kind sir... Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>> Unfortunately, Miles, too many don't hold themselves accountable, let alone >>> follow any other moral values. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis >https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm yep. sort of the free market system. let the consumer(s) decide? >>>> Unfortunately, Miles, too many don't hold themselves accountable, let >>>> alone [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > yep. sort of the free market system. let the consumer(s) decide? Yup Here's a radical thought: how about following the values God gave? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Unfortunately, Miles, too many don't hold themselves accountable, let >> alone follow any other moral values. > > Who decides what is moral or not? For me I decide for myself. Somethings > I believe in, say or do maybe immoral to you and vis-versa. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com And what if the person doesn't believe in God or what if this interpretations of the scriptures differ from yours??? SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Here's a radical thought: how about following the values God gave? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Who decides what is moral or not? For me I decide for myself. Somethings > > I believe in, say or do maybe immoral to you and vis-versa. > Here's a radical thought: how about following the values God gave? Which God? Yours or any of the scores of other Gods of the world? Secondly, even if we talk about the same God based on the same Bible different people will interpret Gods word in differing ways. There is no single interpretation of the Bible that all agree on 100%. Here's an example, from my experiences, of a misinterpretation of Scripture: Years ago, when I was 20, I attended a Presbyterian church with my girlfriend. The Pastor read John 3:16-17 for the verse that Sunday then spent 45 minutes telling the congregation how everyone had to earn their salvation by their works on Earth. Nowhere in those two verses, nowhere in the Bible, does it say a Christian has to earn his salvation. It says the very opposite in the Ephesians verse in my sigline. It does say a Christian will do the works of a Christian because he is now a Christian in other verses and you are to judge him by his works. Now, who would know best what Jesus meant by what He said and did, a Disciple of His or a 1st generation student of a Disciple (Paul wrote to the Ephesians) . . .or a liberal college instructed theologian nearly 2000 years after the fact? The Bible is concise, and clear to those that seek what it really has to say. So who decides what a verse means? God. The other day, the comment was made about TV evangelicals and their money-grubbing. That is not Scriptural as the Bible says, "The workman is worthy of his meat." . . .to be paid according to their service rendered. If they're preaching that you can "Name it and Claim it", for example, then they're wrong and shouldn't get a penny because that is not in the Bible. OTOH, if they're preaching that salvation is a gift from God thru the sacrifice of the Lamb of God, available to anyone, then ask for a donation, that is not outside the Scriptural meanings. The workman will receive according to his workmanship. As for other gods, if you choose to follow them, that is your choice, but I will answer any questions about my God. But ask this question of those other gods: what did they do for YOU even though you were not worthy of a moment of their time? Or do they need to be appeased so they won't make you live in mortal fear? Do they demand sacrifices or accept your sins? Do they insist you meet their rules and requirements first or do they accept you as you are, worthless? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Here's a radical thought: how about following the values God gave? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > different people will interpret Gods word in differing ways. There is no > single interpretation of the Bible that all agree on 100%. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Here's an example, from my experiences, of a misinterpretation of Scripture: Problem is Budd, that YOU are interpreting the Bible as you see it and claiming your views to be the only correct ones. You are saying everyone else who interprets it differently than yourself is misinterpreting it and is therefore wrong in their beliefs. The problem is that they say the same thing about your misinterpretations and give their 'proof' from the Bible just as you do. People are individuals and their thought process from the same inputs differ widely. Your views are YOUR interpretations whether you realize that or not. Is that how you see it? I read a Scripture, I understand what each word means as it is written, I combine them to get a complete meaning for the verse and that is what I believe. Let's take a look at one verse: John 3:16 "For God so loved the World, He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have everlasting Life." In my understanding of it: God loves us (the World) all so much He offered (gave for a sacrifice) his only Son (child) so that anyone (whosoever) believes (accepts with their heart, mind and soul) on Him ( Jesus, the Son) would not perish (die eternally in Hell) but would live forever (Eternal Life). How is that interpreting? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Here's an example, from my experiences, of a misinterpretation of >> Scripture: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > from the same inputs differ widely. Your views are YOUR interpretations > whether you realize that or not. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Is that how you see it? > > I read a Scripture, I understand what each word means as it is written, I > combine them to get a complete meaning for the verse and that is what I > believe. Yep. You form your beliefs from your own interpretation. You seem to feel it is impossible for anyone to have different beliefs than your own unless they misinterpreted something in the Bible. That assumption is arrogant in my view...that your views are the only correct ones. Everyone elses is a misinterpretation. > Let's take a look at one verse: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > How is that interpreting? That is your interpretation. Each individual who reads that may or may not have the exact same understanding. Each says the other misinterpreted it and gives their reasons. Been that way for centuries. I for one do not believe a person will be cast to Hell. Maybe they don't deserve to be in Heaven. Maybe they deserve to be punished for their sins. But casting them to the Devil rewards the Devil and gives him exactly what he wants. I do not believe God supports the Devil and would give the Devil anything, especially what the Devil wants. >> Let's take a look at one verse: >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > not have the exact same understanding. Each says the other misinterpreted > it and gives their reasons. Been that way for centuries. Agreed. And that is why there has been so many corruptions of the Scriptures, why there are so many "Christian" denominations. Get back to what is actually in the Bible. > I for one do not believe a person will be cast to Hell. Maybe they don't > deserve to be in Heaven. Maybe they deserve to be punished for their > sins. But casting them to the Devil rewards the Devil and gives him > exactly what he wants. I do not believe God supports the Devil and would > give the Devil anything, especially what the Devil wants. Then you don't want to read the Bible as it is written, you just want the parts that agree with what you believe. Unfortunately, there are none. You don't want to be told you're going to Hell, you want to be told everything's gonna be fine. I won't tell you that. You want to be able to pick and choose what you want to be "sins" and to not be told what you're doing is against God's laws. You don't want God in your life, for all you want is to be in charge and independent of any higher power. What you call "interpretation" is in reality, your way of rejecting of what the Bible says. I won't lie to a person I consider a friend nor will I do it to an enemy. See ya around, Miles. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Agreed. And that is why there has been so many corruptions of the > Scriptures, why there are so many "Christian" denominations. Get back to > what is actually in the Bible. According to whom? You? Bud, why do you feel so strongly that your views are the only right ones and anyone disagreeing with you is misinterpreting? They feel the same way about you. It's absurd to think you're 100% correct and everyone else that doesn't believe the same is wrong. > Then you don't want to read the Bible as it is written, you just want the > parts that agree with what you believe. Unfortunately, there are none. I do not believe that God supports and empowers the Devil. If the Bible says he does then the Bible is wrong, written by man centuries ago. Why would God support evil and go so far to strengthen it? > You don't want God in your life, for all you want is to be in charge and > independent of any higher power. Budd, you can tell me your views. When you go so far to tell me what my beliefs are in an insinuating negative fashion then you've gone to far. Don't preach. It is not asked for. > What you call "interpretation" is in reality, your way of rejecting of what > the Bible says. So everyone who reads the Bible and views it differently than you is wrong. You're some sort of rightous person who knows what is 100% right and anyone who disagrees with you is 100% wrong. That Budd is pure BS and shows complete arrogance. No, Miles, I'm just giving you what's written and you choose to call it a lie. "None is so blind as the man that will not see." You don't want to see yourself. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Agreed. And that is why there has been so many corruptions of the >> Scriptures, why there are so many "Christian" denominations. Get back to [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > and anyone who disagrees with you is 100% wrong. That Budd is pure BS and > shows complete arrogance. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > No, Miles, I'm just giving you what's written and you choose to call it a > lie. > > "None is so blind as the man that will not see." > > You don't want to see yourself. That might also explain why he has no mirrors in his house. <BG> >>> Agreed. And that is why there has been so many corruptions of the >>> Scriptures, why there are so many "Christian" denominations. Get back to [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >> and anyone who disagrees with you is 100% wrong. That Budd is pure BS >> and shows complete arrogance. Play nice, Larry. Miles is a good guy . . .most of the time . . .VBG SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> No, Miles, I'm just giving you what's written and you choose to call it a >> lie. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >>> and anyone who disagrees with you is 100% wrong. That Budd is pure BS >>> and shows complete arrogance. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >Then you don't want to read the Bible as it is written, you just want the >parts that agree with what you believe. And nobody could ever accuse YOU of that, right?? It must be a terrible burden, being the only one that knows the truth... If you ever get short of firewood, Budd, climb down off that cross and put it to better use.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >Is that how you see it? > >I read a Scripture, I understand what each word means as it is written, I >combine them to get a complete meaning for the verse and that is what I >believe. Perfect paragraph, Budd... IMHO, religion is a personal thing and should be a belief, not claimed as a fact... you hit it dead on there.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm A belief, yes, in a truth, not a feeling. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 21:11:28 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >Here's a radical thought: how about following the values God gave? I think the use of "IMO" might be in order once in a while... Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm Yes, you should use that if your giving an opinion. I wasn't. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 10:51:33 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> When do you lose the right to swing your fist around? When you punch someone >> in the nose with out just cause, like self defense. When you insult, you [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >they want. I'm not insulted. Why? Because I know who I am. Their >words are meaningless. Miles.. Budd might have ignored your point but I didn't... well said! Insults are powerless unless you give the other person power.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >> When do you lose the right to swing your fist around? When you punch someone >> in the nose with out just cause, like self defense. When you insult, you [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >they want. I'm not insulted. Why? Because I know who I am. Their >words are meaningless. You are absolutely correct. One day blacks may discover this about the word nigger. There are no equivilent words for the whites. As long as it upsets them they will never have the power. You have to love yourself first, believe in yourself, and never let anyone else convince you that you are less. beekeep > exceed the right to freedom of speech. That's how I was raised and taught. ' Then you were raised wrong. Shame on your parents. Were they Americans? Rights are rights, Budd. Welcome to America. > Your method is why we're in the moral mess we're in today. Intolerence, cults and a.s f.cking priests are why we are in a moral mess. All of which you seem to defend on a regular basis. > And another one that lacks comprehension due to the liberal public school > system, rears it's head and barfs liberal drivel. :-) That's funny coming from Mr. "I am who I am ... you can't change me". You sound a lot like a liberal democrat to me. (Blaming everyone else ... playing the victim ... never taking responsibility for your actions ...). Have you got some Kennedy in your blood? > > Yet, here you are saying that I, and others, have lost our right of > > freedom of speech because we called you names and insulted your tender > > feelings. > > Yep. What a pussy. > > You can't have it both ways, Budd. Instead, why don't you be > > reasonable and show a little common sense? The subject of this ng is [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Why do I have to be the one to be reasonable? :-) Again ... sounds an awful lot like the liberal speak I hear from time to time ... >Can't the name callers be > reasonable? It is the name callers that want it both ways. Poor you. No wait ... poor us. Craig C. >> exceed the right to freedom of speech. That's how I was raised and >> taught. ' > > Then you were raised wrong. Shame on your parents. Were they > Americans? Rights are rights, Budd. Welcome to America. No, I was raised according to values set down long before you were a gleam in your daddy's eye. My Step-dad served in WW-I and my Dad served in WW-II in the US Navy. Who are you to say how I was raised? No one. >> Your method is why we're in the moral mess we're in today. > > Intolerence, cults and a.s f.cking priests are why we are in a moral > mess. All of which you seem to defend on a regular basis. <LOL> Read the last chapter of the Book of Proverbs and you'll see the Hebrews had equality for women before anyone else. Obviously, you are one of those that consider crimes done in the "name of God" as being the responsibility of all Christians, yet you ignore the billions killed by other religions and ATHEISTS. Selective memory strikes again. >> And another one that lacks comprehension due to the liberal public school >> system, rears it's head and barfs liberal drivel. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > ... playing the victim ... never taking responsibility for your actions > ...). Have you got some Kennedy in your blood? I do know the liberal viewpoint, I was once a Democrat, but I grew up and wised up. The public school system began it's downward slide when Madeline O'Hare got prayer banned, Evolution began being taught as fact, and Humanism became the religion of the school system. >> > Yet, here you are saying that I, and others, have lost our right of >> > freedom of speech because we called you names and insulted your tender [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > What a pussy. Thank you for proving my point. >> > You can't have it both ways, Budd. Instead, why don't you be >> > reasonable and show a little common sense? The subject of this ng is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > :-) Again ... sounds an awful lot like the liberal speak I hear from > time to time ... Spin tactics? Leave them to the politicians, you'll just trip over them. Again, why is it the Christian that has to be reasonable? has to adjust to you standards? >>Can't the name callers be >> reasonable? It is the name callers that want it both ways. > > Poor you. No wait ... poor us. True. You're in deeper trouble than you can imagine and with someone you don't even know. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > <LOL> Read the last chapter of the Book of Proverbs No thanks. I don't have time for fiction. > Obviously, you are one of those that consider crimes done in the > "name of God" as being the responsibility of all Christians, yet you You hear what you want to hear and you certainly put words in people's mouths. > Madeline O'Hare got prayer banned, Prayer belongs at home and in church. I certainly don't want religious freaks like you swaying my (step) childs mind. >Evolution began being taught as > fact, and Humanism became the religion of the school system. If you have studied in any of the sciences, especially the natural sciences, as I have, you will know that *nothing* is taught as fact. Everything is merely a theory/hypothesis that is tested and retested. I don't expect you to understand or agree ... or take my word for it. However, I am pursuing a natural science degree currently and I can assure you that the word "FACT" is never mentioned when discussing evolution or creation. > > What a pussy. > > Thank you for proving my point. I've never met a "man" that got his feelings hurt as easily as you. In fact, I've never met a woman that got her feelings hurt as easily as you. Only toddlers and chihuahuas. > Spin tactics? Leave them to the politicians, you'll just trip over > them. Again, why is it the Christian that has to be reasonable? What was I thinking? You're absolutely correct ... christians don't have to be reasonable. It's a membership benefit. You get to act a fool anytime you want. > True. You're in deeper trouble than you can imagine and with someone > you don't even know. I'm shaking in my boots. One good thing has come from your senile rants: I stopped using google groups (no killfile capability). Now, I use XanaNews. You are now in the "BozoBin". PLLLLOOONNK. Craig C. >>>> And they wonder why the Romans used to thought them to the lions. >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Roy You've probably just committed a hate crime and will be investigated, bro... Personally, I always thought that might have been reported to the SPCA as cruelty to lions.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>>> And they wonder why the Romans used to thought them to the lions. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis >https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm Do Christians taste that bad? beekeep >>You've probably just committed a hate crime and will be investigated, bro... >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >beekeep Well, BK... I was going to say that I didn't know because I never ate one.... But a few ladies came to mind and I guess I have to say that in my experience Christians taste pretty good.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>You've probably just committed a hate crime and will be investigated, bro... >>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Mac wow. you and greg are getting in some funny stuff recently. >https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis >https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>>You've probably just committed a hate crime and will be investigated, bro... >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >wow. you and greg are getting in some funny stuff recently. well, it's a tough job, but someone has to do it.. *g* At least you didn't say that we were "getting our licks in".. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > And they wonder why the Romans used to thought them to the lions. :-) Good one. Oh, how I long for simpler times ... Craig C. So you do advocate the physical destruction of all that are not like yourself. And you claim I'm the bad guy? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> And they wonder why the Romans used to thought them to the lions. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Craig C. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> Arson... vandalism... willful destruction of property.... tresspass... >> hate crime... plenty of choices to prosecute under. A civil rights claim [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? >Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. OBVIOUSLY, or IN YOUR OPPINION? Maybe he just thinks you're a pain, Budd... IMHO, people that don't want to be labeled should stay away from label machines.. YMWV I get folks telling me all the time that they really don't give a sh.t about my OT baja posts... Life is way too short to take it personally and feel like it's a personal attack or hate crime.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. You keep bringing my name up in this and now seem to be putting the blame for all of it on me and theguy. > >> So, iow, a vigilante group or person, with no official sanction can > >> destroy a house of worship and not be prosecuted? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > How about it's a hate crime, based on the words used in public forum? > Obviously, he hates what I represent, Christians. The point is that even if this were true, hate in itself is not a crime. If he did something to you or even threatened you based on that hate then it could be a hate crime but telling someone to shut up is not a crime and if it is not a crime, it cannot be a hate crime. > >> Because I'm a Christian, I'm harrassed and called names, and I wouldn't > >> be surprised to find there is at least one person that would want to beat [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > is forcing my way into the conversation and I've only done that a couple > times when there was a misquote or mis interpretation.. You keep making these claims that you are correcting errors but the real question is who is bringing it up in the first place and what gives you the ultimate knowledge to correct anyone? > Again, no one has actually proved I did what you said, force my way into a > non-religious conversation. Stop and think, Tom, the whole thing started [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > correct a possibly deliberatly wrong quote or misconception by themselves, > just to drag it out, knowing I believe I must corect errors. Nobody needs to prove anything as you have just done so yourself by admitting to it. You, as usual, backed up your actions with your claimed religion and then took bible quotes out of context to back up your childish reactions and hateful responses. When people called you on this (your bible rewriting), you then started your extremist crap and stormed out of the NG in a big huff because everyone didn't agree with you and now claim it as nothing more than correcting others and being picked on for it. The problem with that is the assumption that you are correct in everything that you claim and say and when it comes to religion, nobody can make that claim. If you also bother to recall, once the religious crap got started, I bailed out of the thread as it became a no-win situation so blaming me for it is nothing more than a false accusation. Perhaps you are the one committing a hate crime against me. > It's a hate crime and they are just bullies. Once again, false accusations and complete bullshit. Even if you consider us bullies for doing the very same thing you have done to others, there was no crime of any kind committed. > > As I see it, you're not "harrassed" (I quote that, because I don't believe > > it has risen to the level of harrassment) or called names simply because [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > as happening, and then refusing to admit they went overboard much more than > they claim I have. And that would be your bias claiming that everyone has gone more overboard than you but the proof is in the pudding and the fact that EVERYONE is saying that lately you are the one going overboard say's it all. > >> What laws were the KKK members tried under, Tom? What they're doing is no > >> different. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Why not? A hate crime is a hate crime. Hahahahahahaha, could you possibly be any more ignorant. Please tell us how someone being killed or their property being damaged equates in any possible way to being told to shut up? > > I'm sorry, Budd.... your logic is severely warped here. > > Is it? Crimes of hate take many forms. There are more ways to hurt people > than most people realize. The problem is that hurting your feelings does not make something a crime. > >> cussing, cursing and name calling. Emotional injury is as prosecutable as > >> physical injury. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > No one where you live has ever been arrested, tried and convicted of > stalking, spousal abuse, harrassment, or assault/battery/maiming/murder on a assault/battery/maiming/murder > person of an ethnic group, religion or sexual persuasion? You are kidding.... right???? Stalking, abuse, some forms of harrassment and assault/battery/maiming/murder are all actual crimes whether based on haterd or not. Please give us the exact law that makes telling someone to shut up a crime and as Tom clearly said, if it is not a crime by itself, it cannot be a hate crime. > I keep trying to drop this mess, but . . . .well, you look up the laws on > hate crimes, etc. I just want this whole mess to end. I just want to believe > in my God as I understand I should. And nobody is trying to stop you but falsely accusing others does not demonstrate the religious beliefs you claim to have and follow. > >> Tom, I appreciate your effort, but I went thru worse than Craig or any in > >> here in another group. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Then you apparently don't see my point for some reason. So be it. I'm done > discussing this. The problem here Budd is that nobody sees your point. Perhaps that should tell you something. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. You > keep bringing my name up in this and now seem to be putting the blame for > all of it on me and theguy. Tom, I understand that everyone has their own way of dealing with situations. I found it easier to killfile the bs. I sorta figured that after once going to the well for the same bad water was enough. Also replying sorta legitimized the bs. ymmv Roy Roy, the "legitimacy" of what I write isn't determined by you, Bonini, or anyone. The Bible is my final authority. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. You >> keep bringing my name up in this and now seem to be putting the blame for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Roy SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >Roy, the "legitimacy" of what I write isn't determined by you, Bonini, or >anyone. The Bible is my final authority. ah yes, and in that you fail miserably. >>> I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. You >>> keep bringing my name up in this and now seem to be putting the blame for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >> Roy >>Roy, the "legitimacy" of what I write isn't determined by you, Bonini, or >>anyone. The Bible is my final authority. > > ah yes, and in that you fail miserably. Do I? You don't bear any fruit ( give indication) that shows you've ever opened a Bible. At least I am trying to live according to a better set of values than what you represent. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>Roy, the "legitimacy" of what I write isn't determined by you, Bonini, or >>anyone. The Bible is my final authority. > >ah yes, and in that you fail miserably. which part... turning the other cheek or loving thy neighbor?? Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >Roy, the "legitimacy" of what I write isn't determined by you, Bonini, or >anyone. The Bible is my final authority. Cool.... focus on the word MY in that sentence, Budd... My final authority, if I was self centered enough to have one, might be a different final authority than yours... doesn't make either one wrong.. It is your belief that the bible is "the way"... others might follow the Easter bunny or the Transcendental Goddamit... freedom is a wonderful thing.... Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 20:17:36 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Easter > bunny or Screw the easter bunny! Follow the wide ride pink rabbit, he's gotta know where all the good eat's are. <BFG> >the Transcendental Goddamit... freedom is a wonderful thing... It sure is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Roy > Mac > > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 20:17:36 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> > Cool.... focus on the word MY in that sentence, Budd... Why? Because I have made a choice to believe in something others ridicule? > My final authority, if I was self centered enough to have one, might be a > different final authority than yours... doesn't make either one wrong.. In _YOUR_ opinion. . . . . . One of us has an opinion that is wrong. Now,why is it wrong for me to have that opinion? You just said it is not wrong, yet others . . .never mind. > It is your belief that the bible is "the way"... others might follow the > Easter > bunny or the Transcendental Goddamit... freedom is a wonderful thing.... Yes, it is. It gives me the right to be right and you the right to be wrong, according to what I hold a belief in as Holy and True. Someday, we will both know for sure, won't we? Cya, friend. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Yes, it is. It gives me the right to be right and you the right to be wrong, > according to what I hold a belief in as Holy and True. Someday, we will both > know for sure, won't we? Yep. What will you do if you find out your beliefs are completely wrong and you've been duped? I'll probably say, "Darn." But if I'm right, what will others be saying? HMMMM? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Yes, it is. It gives me the right to be right and you the right to be >> wrong, according to what I hold a belief in as Holy and True. Someday, we >> will both know for sure, won't we? > > Yep. What will you do if you find out your beliefs are completely wrong > and you've been duped? SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >I'll probably say, "Darn." > >But if I'm right, what will others be saying? HMMMM? Probably "HORRAY!" Who would want to spend eternity in a place with you? beekeep > >I'll probably say, "Darn." > > > >But if I'm right, what will others be saying? HMMMM? > > > Probably "HORRAY!" Who would want to spend eternity in a place with you? Now that was just cold SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 08:14:51 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom >SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Now that was just cold Acually it reminded me of an old joke where a guy went to hell and found himself with a beautiful blonde and a bottle of booze. He said "This is hell?" Another guy replied "Yeah, the bottle has a hole in its bottom and the blonde doesn't." beekeep > I'll probably say, "Darn." > > But if I'm right, what will others be saying? HMMMM? Same thing. You may end up in hell as well if your beliefs are WAY off course. Well, that's the whole point, isn't it, Miles? What I believe in is what the Scriptures have written in them, word for word, without any "modern interpretation", just as they were said to the people of the time. A simple, strong, effective teaching in a less corrupted language ( fewer "re-defined" words) that tells each person exactly what they need to know. The Bible teaches: One God, called Elohim, that is Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, Holy, Righteous, Just, Love, Light,and Spirit; made up of three Persons: Jehovah (God the Father), Jesus (Yeshua,) (The Son of God, The Word, The Creator, etc.), and the Holy Spirit ( The Comforter) Jesus, the Creator of the Universe, was born of a virgin, died as the final sacrifice for our sins though innocent of sin Himself, bodily rose on the literal third day and ascended to Heaven. There is but one way to God, through His Son, Jesus, our intercessor, and no one is worthy of Salvation and you can't earn your way to Heaven...you have to ask for it. The Ten Commandments can't save you, praying to the Disciples and Saints won't save you, confessing your sins to any mortal will not save you, giving all you have away will not save you. That is what the words say in the Bible and that's what I believe. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> I'll probably say, "Darn." >> >> But if I'm right, what will others be saying? HMMMM? > > Same thing. You may end up in hell as well if your beliefs are WAY off > course. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com I see you're showing off your boat again. .. ... . ... . .. /|~~ .. . .. . , / |~~ ... . .. /| / | .. / |~~ | ,~~~~ / |~~ | /|~~~~ ~ / | | / | |\ () / | | / | | \/||\ / | | / | | \/\ / | |/ | | =====_______/ | |=====| __ | \ ========|====| / \ |__) | \'_\o_o_o-USS Budd Cockram _o_o_o_o_o__) | \ --------------------------------------/ | \ -----------TROLL------------------------ |} ~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | || ! J _/o ~~\_)\~~~ stink bait \^^\) beekeep I see your showing off your bigotry. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >I see your showing off your bigotry. I don't think that when Jesus said "become a fisher of men" that he ment trolling for rednecks on usenet. beekeep Rednecks aren't men? Oh dear, are you in for it. . . . . SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 19:55:20 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > beekeep SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Ok Budd, please show us exactly what you are correcting here. This is the very preaching that others were complaining about and that you outright denied doing. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Well, that's the whole point, isn't it, Miles? > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Same thing. You may end up in hell as well if your beliefs are WAY off > > course. What preaching? Miles and I were discussing a point about my beliefs as compared to his. I gave some reference information. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > Ok Budd, please show us exactly what you are correcting here. This is the > very preaching that others were complaining about and that you outright [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >> > Same thing. You may end up in hell as well if your beliefs are WAY off >> > course. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > What preaching? How about right after you said " The Bible teaches:" This is how just about every church service starts. > Miles and I were discussing a point about my beliefs as compared to his. I > gave some reference information. And that was what you were doing up to the point where you said what you did above. After that is was nothing more than preaching even though Miles has said more than once that he didn't want to hear it. > > Ok Budd, please show us exactly what you are correcting here. This is the > > very preaching that others were complaining about and that you outright [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > >> > Same thing. You may end up in hell as well if your beliefs are WAY off > >> > course. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> What preaching? > > How about right after you said " The Bible teaches:" This is how just > about > every church service starts. Only those that teach from the Bible. >> Miles and I were discussing a point about my beliefs as compared to his. >> I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > has > said more than once that he didn't want to hear it. Aw, there ya go speaking for others again. Just gotta do everyone's talking for them, don't ya? Tom, shut up. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > >> What preaching? > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Only those that teach from the Bible. You are correct and exactly what are the ones that are teaching from the Bible doing??? How about PREACHING!!!! > >> Miles and I were discussing a point about my beliefs as compared to his. > >> I [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Aw, there ya go speaking for others again. Just gotta do everyone's talking > for them, don't ya? What's the matter Budd, are ya getting upset because I speak the truth. Any way you want to spin it Budd, you were preaching, simple as that. Personally, I don't care if you do or don't but if you claim not to and then flat out do it a few days later Mr. "The Bible teaches", someone is going to call you on it. If you want to preach, go ahead, but don't do it and then claim that you are not and try and cover with some crap about correcting errors when someone asks you to stop. All that does is make you look like a fool and a liar. > Tom, shut up. Oh my God, according to you a federal offense has been committed, a hate crime even and by you. You are taking away my right of free speech out of hatred. Don't worry Budd, after you are convicted, I'll forgive you. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> >> What preaching? >> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > You are correct and exactly what are the ones that are teaching from the > Bible doing??? How about PREACHING!!!! How many hundreds of times have you insisted in an argument with me that a definition is not fixed? You say I'm preaching and I say I'm not. >> >> Miles and I were discussing a point about my beliefs as compared to > his. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > What's the matter Budd, are ya getting upset because I speak the truth. No, just the opposite. I'm not upset because what you're saying is a lie. > Any > way you want to spin it Budd, you were preaching, simple as that. IN YOUR (incorrect) OPINION. > Personally, I don't care if you do or don't but if you claim not to and > then > flat out do it a few days later Mr. "The Bible teaches", someone is going > to > call you on it. Well, it had better be someone that knows more about "preaching" than you because what you do in these tirades is preach against me and my beliefs . . unfortunately, you have no scriptures to support your preaching. > If you want to preach, go ahead, but don't do it and then > claim that you are not and try and cover with some crap about correcting > errors when someone asks you to stop. All that does is make you look like > a > fool and a liar. Then you coinsider all Christians to be fools and liars, Tom, because I'm following the commandment of Jesus, to go and make disciples of all men ( Matthew 28:18-20) >> Tom, shut up. > > Oh my God, according to you a federal offense has been committed, a hate > crime even and by you. You are taking away my right of free speech out of > hatred. Don't worry Budd, after you are convicted, I'll forgive you. And how many times have you told me to shut up? File the charges, Tom. I'll subpoena the Archives . . . . SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com After more thought, it just hit me about your posts . . . . If the Bible says anything negative about other religions (although it actually ignores them except for the "Altar to the Unknown God" Paul writes about), then you accuse me of "preaching" . . .yet if you say anything negative about my beliefs, you claim is discussion. Yep, that's T-boneism thru and thru. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> What preaching? > [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > off >> >> > course. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > After more thought, it just hit me about your posts . . . . > > If the Bible says anything negative about other religions (although it > actually ignores them except for the "Altar to the Unknown God" Paul writes > about), then you accuse me of "preaching" . . .yet if you say anything > negative about my beliefs, you claim is discussion. What are you talking about Budd? What have I said that is negative about your beliefs?? > Yep, that's T-boneism thru and thru. Once again, more baseless accusations. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> After more thought, it just hit me about your posts . . . . >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > What are you talking about Budd? What have I said that is negative about > your beliefs?? Another T-boneism. This time the denial part. How far back do you want to go, Tom? You have derided me and my beliefs for a few years now. All my posts, back as far as the archives retain, still are there and still contain your statements. >> Yep, that's T-boneism thru and thru. > > Once again, more baseless accusations. Once more, a T-boneism. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Another T-boneism. This time the denial part. How far back do you want to > go, Tom? You have derided me and my beliefs for a few years now. All my > posts, back as far as the archives retain, still are there and still contain > your statements. Stop telling others they are wrong for their beliefs. I disagree with your beliefs but I do not tell you that you wrong for your beliefs. Huge difference. Oh, yes, mr moderator. You disagree and refuse to consider anything different, even when it's what is written in the Bible. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Another T-boneism. This time the denial part. How far back do you want to >> go, Tom? You have derided me and my beliefs for a few years now. All my [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > your beliefs but I do not tell you that you wrong for your beliefs. Huge > difference. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Oh, yes, mr moderator. > > You disagree and refuse to consider anything different, even when it's what > is written in the Bible. You disagree and refuse to consider anything different as well. Why am I wrong but you're right? It's not a matter of moderating. I am just saying that you are a hypocrite. You have no respect for others beliefs if they differ from your own. I have told you that I respect your views. Failure to return that is what people deride you for. >> Oh, yes, mr moderator. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >if they differ from your own. I have told you that I respect your >views. Failure to return that is what people deride you for. yep... again, well said.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > >> Oh, yes, mr moderator. > >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > yep... again, well said.. Agreed! SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > >> After more thought, it just hit me about your posts . . . . > >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > posts, back as far as the archives retain, still are there and still contain > your statements. I'll make it easy for you Budd, you only need to go back to the last time I attacked your beliefs. What I said was the same thing that Greg has said not to long ago, and that is that you like to talk the talk but you never seem to walk the walk, at least not in here. When you start acting like you claim to believe, then I would have nothing to comment on about you. > >> Yep, that's T-boneism thru and thru. > > > > Once again, more baseless accusations. > > Once more, a T-boneism. And once more, another baseless accusation based on spin and lies. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > That is what the words say in the Bible and that's what I believe. What if the Bible is just a nice book written by man centuries ago? What if one of the other religions of the world are the right one? Those people believe in their 'bible' every bit as much as you believe in yours. To them they can't comprehend anything outside their books writings as being remotely possible. Somebody is right, everyone else is wrong. For me I do not believe that the vast majority of the worlds population ends up in hell. Honestly I do not believe in the Devil. Why? Because sending souls to the Devil would empower him. Why would God wish to further empower the Devil? Ignore fine but empower? >> That is what the words say in the Bible and that's what I believe. > > What if the Bible is just a nice book written by man centuries ago? How about it's a fantastic book, inspired by God, that has survived countless assaults and attempts to destroy it, intact and unchanged? How about it's 98.5% accurate, according to copies of texts from the same time periods as the original writings? None of the Oriental or Greek philosophers can have that claimed about the writings of their sayings. > What if one of the other religions of the world are the right one? In John 14:6-7, Jesus proclaims there is but one way to God. Now, either He speaks the truth or He is a madman. Ask yourself this: would you, like the Disciples, lay your life on the line ( in some cases, lions) for a madman? I have. > Those people believe in their 'bible' every bit as much as you believe in > yours. To them they can't comprehend anything outside their books > writings as being remotely possible. Somebody is right, everyone else is > wrong. I agree, somebody is right. One thing is entirely different in Chritianity from those religions: In those you have to train, cleanse, sacrifice, and work your tail off to make yourself, hopefully, worthy of the god. Jesus said, "come unto me all that are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest." > For me I do not believe that the vast majority of the worlds population > ends up in hell. Honestly I do not believe in the Devil. Why? Because > sending souls to the Devil would empower him. Why would God wish to > further empower the Devil? Ignore fine but empower? Jesus spoke more about Hell than he did about Heaven. Don't you think the Creator of the Universe would know all the places in it? According to the Hebrew Torah, Hell is a real place, created for Lucifer (Satan) and the angels that followed him, not for Humans. God doesn't send anyone to Hell, but their will be those that choose to follow Satan's lies and will be cast down to Hell at the final Judgment. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > God doesn't send > anyone to Hell, but their will be those that choose to follow Satan's lies > and will be cast down to Hell at the final Judgment. Who casts them down to hell and why? Doing so would empower the Devil. Doesn't make any sense for God to continue giving power to the Devil. I also do not believe an individual can sell their soul to the Devil. Ones soul according to the Bible doesn't belong to anyone other than God. So one can't sell something that doesn't belong to them. So again I ask, who casts these souls to the Devil and why when the result is only to empower the Devil. >> God doesn't send anyone to Hell, but their will be those that choose to >> follow Satan's lies and will be cast down to Hell at the final Judgment. > > Who casts them down to hell and why? They choose to go to Hell by rejecting God and His Word. Literally, they send themselves. Why? Why do you want to do what you want to do? You have the freedom to choose to follow God or Satan. > Doing so would empower the Devil. Doesn't make any sense for God to > continue giving power to the Devil. > > I also do not believe an individual can sell their soul to the Devil. Ones > soul according to the Bible doesn't belong to anyone other than God. Your soul was GIVEN to you, at conception, by God, to do with as YOU choose. > So one can't sell something that doesn't belong to them. So again I ask, > who casts these souls to the Devil and why when the result is only to > empower the Devil. Why do you not accept what the answers are saying? Is it because the answers are found in the Bible? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>> That is what the words say in the Bible and that's what I believe. >> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >anyone to Hell, but their will be those that choose to follow Satan's lies >and will be cast down to Hell at the final Judgment. If you are so sure about your beliefs, why haven't you gone yet? beekeep > On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:45:08 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > beekeep Maybe it's because God hasn't given up, on you, Greg, and maybe I'm the messenger He sent. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:45:08 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom >> SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Maybe it's because God hasn't given up, on you, Greg, and maybe I'm the > messenger He sent. Just a observation and nothing more. But that was FUNNY!!!! Roy >>> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:45:08 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom >>> SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Roy When's the Hal Bop comet due back? beekeep >> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:45:08 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom >> SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Maybe it's because God hasn't given up, on you, Greg, and maybe I'm the >messenger He sent. I don't think that any God is that stupid. I don't think anybody here would mind you talking the talk if we saw you walking the walk. beekeep If you had ever met me in person, then that wouldn't be a problem. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 06:27:38 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > beekeep SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 20:17:36 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom >> SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >according to what I hold a belief in as Holy and True. Someday, we will both >know for sure, won't we? OK.. I see now... you have the right to be correct, the rest of the world has the right to be wrong unless, of course, they agree with you... then they're right... I think you need to stay out of the sun for a while, Budd... (opps, was that a personal attack?) Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >Roy, the "legitimacy" of what I write isn't determined by you, Bonini, or >anyone. The Bible is my final authority. From what I've seen you post lately, my guess is that the only way you're going to get into heaven is if it has padded walls and straight jackets. Even God isn't going to put up with your attitude. beekeep > > I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. You > > keep bringing my name up in this and now seem to be putting the blame for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > once going to the well for the same bad water was enough. Also replying > sorta legitimized the bs. ymmv Once again Roy, you seem to be correct. His reply made it clear what a waste of time it is to talk to him. I sadly replied once more but this will be the last of it and even though I will not kill file him, I will follow your lead and just ignore him. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. You >> keep bringing my name up in this and now seem to be putting the blame for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Roy I need a special "not quite kill" file.... maybe one labeled "doesn't play well with others"?? Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>> I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. >>> You [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I need a special "not quite kill" file.... > maybe one labeled "doesn't play well with others"?? Bro, I really don't know. I figure from what I have read from those who have posted to this thread that it is as I said, nobody cares , they just don't want to hear it or read it. He has been asked politely and not, to knock it off but to no avail. So screw it, I don't have to look at his name on the screen with the killfile. I think I said in my second post to this thread that the results would be the same, they were. He stay's in the killfile, too f.cked up for me to attempt to deal with. Others well...lol Roy > Mac > > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. You > keep bringing my name up in this and now seem to be putting the blame for > all of it on me and theguy. Well, gee . . I mentioned I was forgoing a past actitvity because of trying to get closer to my God, refused to fall into the profanity and name calling you two prefer, for which you began denegrating me and my beliefs and now you don't want the responsibility for what you wrote. How typically liberal of you. >> >> So, iow, a vigilante group or person, with no official sanction can >> >> destroy a house of worship and not be prosecuted? [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > could be a hate crime but telling someone to shut up is not a crime and if > it is not a crime, it cannot be a hate crime. Funny how many liberal laws are on the books these days just to prosecute anyone that commits a crime based on hatred . . . . .and then you calim it's not a crime. Hmm, maybe the laws only apply to conservatives. >> >> Because I'm a Christian, I'm harrassed and called names, and I >> >> wouldn't [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > the > ultimate knowledge to correct anyone? Well, gee whiz, Tom, if I'm CORRECTING SOMEONE ELSE then I didn't post the religious stuff first. GOT IT YET????? Btw, the King James Version of the Holy Bible is my reference book, but you knew that . . .or have you forgotten? >> Again, no one has actually proved I did what you said, force my way into >> a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Nobody needs to prove anything as you have just done so yourself by > admitting to it. Ah, twist and spin and avoid the truth. I only admitted to POSTING A CORRECTION AFTER SOMEONE ELSE POSTED THE ORIGIANL MISQUOPTE OR MISINTERPRETATION. > You, as usual, backed up your actions with your claimed > religion and then took bible quotes out of context to back up your > childish > reactions and hateful responses. Out of context according to what religion, Bonini? Not according to the text in th Bible itself. > When people called you on this (your bible > rewriting), you then started your extremist crap and stormed out of the NG > in a big huff because everyone didn't agree with you and now claim it as > nothing more than correcting others and being picked on for it. No, I called them like I saw them. I still do and always will. You are a communistic liberal socialist > The problem > with that is the assumption that you are correct in everything that you > claim and say and when it comes to religion, nobody can make that claim. I don't claim perfection, but the Bible is more accurate than you want to accept. > If > you also bother to recall, once the religious crap got started, I bailed [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > a > hate crime against me. Nope, you didn't bail until recently and now your back. Btw, calling you what I have called you is based on your own words and actions. >> It's a hate crime and they are just bullies. > > Once again, false accusations and complete bullshit. Even if you consider > us bullies for doing the very same thing you have done to others, there > was > no crime of any kind committed. There you go, calling a person a bully that posts a correction to a previously posted error. SPIN, SPIN. Gee, that means that everyone that has ever told you where you were wrong about a mechanical item or repair is a bully. >> > As I see it, you're not "harrassed" (I quote that, because I don't > believe [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > than you but the proof is in the pudding and the fact that EVERYONE is > saying that lately you are the one going overboard say's it all. Funny, I'm pretty certain there are a bunch that have not posted on the matter. The only ones I have a "problem" with are those that, like you, claim to be so darn tolerant, until a Christian follows his God. >> >> What laws were the KKK members tried under, Tom? What they're doing is > no [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > possible > way to being told to shut up? Oh, Tom, we're still waiting for you to answer about 2000 questions already... but according to your precious liberal laws; a hate crime is a hate crime. >> > I'm sorry, Budd.... your logic is severely warped here. >> >> Is it? Crimes of hate take many forms. There are more ways to hurt people >> than most people realize. > > The problem is that hurting your feelings does not make something a crime. Funny how it is when it's you that gets "hurt... as in someone posting your entire name and don't give us that whiney stuff abut the person commiting the hate crime against you... unless you just want to show your hipocrisy. >> >> cussing, cursing and name calling. Emotional injury is as prosecutable > as [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > it > cannot be a hate crime. So . . . .you're saying someone can stalk, abuse, harrass, maim, murder because of love? What a terrible, inhuman set of values to have. >> I keep trying to drop this mess, but . . . .well, you look up the laws on >> hate crimes, etc. I just want this whole mess to end. I just want to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And nobody is trying to stop you but falsely accusing others does not > demonstrate the religious beliefs you claim to have and follow. Gee, Tom, I call them as I see them and I'm accused of false witness? You, otoh, accuse me of corrupted religiosity, corrupting scriptures, called me vulgar names, cast aspersions on my lineage, gender, and sexual preferences and you think you are not being a false witness? In your eyes, if you follow the God of the Bible, you're evil, but if you do evil to others, you're not evil. Yep, that's communistic liberalism. Oh, and it was predicted that you, and others, would have that opinion nearly two thousand years ago. >> >> Tom, I appreciate your effort, but I went thru worse than Craig or any > in [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > The problem here Budd is that nobody sees your point. Perhaps that should > tell you something. Yeah, it does, but not that "nobody sees your point". I see that not everyone has commented one way or another. However, the thing you need to see is that not everyone sees you as their spokesperson, so you are probably wrong . .again. I speak only for myself and my beliefs as always. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Well, gee whiz, Tom, if I'm CORRECTING SOMEONE ELSE then I didn't post the > religious stuff first. GOT IT YET????? With regards to religion, there is no correct. There is my view, your view and everyone elses view. Each decides for themselves what is correct and what the best way for them to live their lives. Nobody needs or wants your correcting any more than you do not want them to correct you. Being respectful of others beliefs is how to get out of the mess we're currently in. >> Well, gee whiz, Tom, if I'm CORRECTING SOMEONE ELSE then I didn't post >> the religious stuff first. GOT IT YET????? > > With regards to religion, there is no correct. Miles, that is your opinion and not what the Bible teaches. There are not many roads to Heaven. > There is my view, your view and everyone elses view. Each decides for > themselves what is correct and what the best way for them to live their > lives. Nobody needs or wants your correcting any more than you do not > want them to correct you. Being respectful of others beliefs is how to > get out of the mess we're currently in. And what about respect for my beliefs? You, and others, insist I respect your beliefs, but damn mine. I'm not the one wanting it both ways. I'm wanting equality to believe as I do, JUST LIKE YOU. As for correcting misquotes, misinterpretations, well, again, the Bible tells me in 1st Peter to be ready to answer any questions or in any situation and, elsewhere, to defend the Scriptures. That means to correct inaccuracies and misinterpretations. Besides, would you expect a Roto-Rooter operator to do brain surgery? Apparently, no other Christians in this group care enough to step forward to give corrections. I sure wouldn't believe anything T-bone or theguy have to say on the matter. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Apparently, no other Christians in this group care enough to step forward to > give corrections. Several have tried to give corrections. You just won't listen to them. SignatureKen >> Apparently, no other Christians in this group care enough to step forward >> to >> give corrections. > > Several have tried to give corrections. You just won't listen to them. There are Christians too ashamed of the Gospel to stand up for it, to defend it I was only given two cheeks and both got bloodied a few times in this group long ago. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>> Apparently, no other Christians in this group care enough to step forward >>> to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Budd as beekeep said: From what I've seen you post lately, my guess is that the only way you're going to get into heaven is if it has padded walls and straight jackets. Even God isn't going to put up with your attitude. beekeep if i hadn't been around the past few years i wouldn't believe this. you have literally left the real world and entered firmly onto the ground that is called dementia. it is easy to make fun of you but unfortunately is just too sad to do that anymore. i can only hope that someone close to you gets you help before you embarrass yourself anymore than you have. i don't say this as a joke, i am very serious. i honestly hope that you get some help soon. >>>> Apparently, no other Christians in this group care enough to step >>>> forward [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > anymore than you have. i don't say this as a joke, i am very serious. > i honestly hope that you get some help soon. I said the same thing a couple of times to no avail the last time we visited this.. One would hope that his family would see these threads. It is kinda like a dry drunk, no more drinking but still hasn't changed the behavior. Couple that with some anger that perhaps is due to some poor decisions that made a mess of things. Religion is something one can hang on to sorta substitute for more destructive things. But I don't see dementia at least not that I'm familiar with. My mother has it big time. What I see is a lot of anger from one who see's himself as the victim and wants attention, coupled with the dry drunk syndrome. Who knows, I'm done being concerned. I took him out of the killfile for a bit to get a feel for what you guy's were up to, man, it is really, really, ill. But it is exactly the same as it was a few months ago, only change is more have spoke up. The lurker bob was nut's on. The only thing that might explain the change that I'm familiar with is a unbalanced med situation. That is for his family to deal with they have to live with him. Roy (Snipped) > The only thing that might explain the change that I'm familiar with is a > unbalanced med situation. That is for his family to deal with they have to > live with him. > > Roy This is exactly what I was thinking. I'm glad you spoke up because I didn't. Bob > (Snipped) > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Bob Bob, as you have read this is not a group of timid people. Admittedly this is a unusual situation, but one we have been through before. Please, don't hesitate to speak up. Roy > > (Snipped) > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > is a unusual situation, but one we have been through before. Please, don't > hesitate to speak up. Yea, there are only a few of us timid people here. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> > (Snipped) >> > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Yea, there are only a few of us timid people here. Right, and you'd be one???<G> Roy > If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > >> > (Snipped) > >> > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > > Right, and you'd be one???<G> That would be correct. Thanks for noticing <BFG> SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Yea, there are only a few of us timid people here. you timid???? sheesh! Signature---------------------------- -Chris 05 CTD 06 Liberty CRD Real Trucks don't NEED spark plugs. > > Yea, there are only a few of us timid people here. > > you timid???? sheesh! What exactly are ya trying to say?!?!?!? SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> > Yea, there are only a few of us timid people here. >> >> you timid???? sheesh! > > What exactly are ya trying to say?!?!?!? LOL you know exactly what im saying Tom. Signature---------------------------- -Chris 05 CTD 06 Liberty CRD Real Trucks don't NEED spark plugs. > There are Christians too ashamed of the Gospel to stand up for it, to defend > it They defend THEIR beliefs in the Gospel. Not your beliefs. > "miles" <nope@nopers.com> wrote in message >> With regards to religion, there is no correct. > > Miles, that is your opinion and not what the Bible teaches. There are not > many roads to Heaven. Bud, this is your opinion and not what me and many others believe. There are many other 'bibles' around the world. For those that hold their own books to be the truth, your book is wrong. It's all opinion. Failing to respect others opinions is a failure in ones self. >> There is my view, your view and everyone elses view. Each decides for >> themselves what is correct and what the best way for them to live their >> lives. Nobody needs or wants your correcting any more than you do not >> want them to correct you. Being respectful of others beliefs is how to >> get out of the mess we're currently in. Exactly true. We agree on this. I disagree with any religious zealot that tries to tell me I'm wrong about this or that and refuses to accept the same in return. > And what about respect for my beliefs? You, and others, insist I respect > your beliefs, but damn mine. I'm not the one wanting it both ways. I'm > wanting equality to believe as I do, JUST LIKE YOU. Not true. You tell us our beliefs are wrong, and we reciprocate just the same about yours. It is a two-way street. Not a one-way. > As for correcting misquotes, misinterpretations, well, again, the Bible > tells me in 1st Peter to be ready to answer any questions or in any > situation and, elsewhere, to defend the Scriptures. That means to correct > inaccuracies and misinterpretations. Not everyone who worships the Bible believes exactly the same as you. Can they correct you? Hell no. You'll just tell them they are wrong and not respect their beliefs. > > I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. You > > keep bringing my name up in this and now seem to be putting the blame for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > you two prefer, for which you began denegrating me and my beliefs and now > you don't want the responsibility for what you wrote. Really Budd, care to back any of this up? Of course you don't, you never have so why start now. > How typically liberal of you. How typically full of it of you. > >> >> So, iow, a vigilante group or person, with no official sanction can > >> >> destroy a house of worship and not be prosecuted? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > anyone that commits a crime based on hatred . . . . .and then you calim it's > not a crime. Hmm, maybe the laws only apply to conservatives. LOL, you really don't have a clue even though you just said it yourself. A CRIME based on hatred and by your very own statement, if it is not already a CRIME, it cannot be a hate CRIME!!! > >> >> Because I'm a Christian, I'm harrassed and called names, and I > >> >> wouldn't [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Well, gee whiz, Tom, if I'm CORRECTING SOMEONE ELSE then I didn't post the > religious stuff first. GOT IT YET????? No, because you DID post it first. Who else in the group would be spouting that religious stuff but you? > Btw, the King James Version of the Holy Bible is my reference book, but you > knew that . . .or have you forgotten? Sure I have and it sadly happens to be the most mis-quoted book of all times. Just look at the likes of Jimmy Swaggert, Robert Tilton, the Bakers and so many other fly by night TV evangelists that got rich using that very book. > >> Again, no one has actually proved I did what you said, force my way into > >> a [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > CORRECTION AFTER SOMEONE ELSE POSTED THE ORIGIANL MISQUOPTE OR > MISINTERPRETATION. And who was the one who did it and what exactly did they post? The answer to who is you. > > You, as usual, backed up your actions with your claimed > > religion and then took bible quotes out of context to back up your [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Out of context according to what religion, Bonini? Not according to the text > in th Bible itself. And when using properly configured quotes from the Bible, the TV evangelists mentioned above got suckers to believe that giving them thousands of dollars that they did not have or could not afford to give would have the lord supply them with riches beyond their wildest dreams. How many times did that actually happen? > > When people called you on this (your bible > > rewriting), you then started your extremist crap and stormed out of the NG [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > No, I called them like I saw them. I still do and always will. You are a > communistic liberal socialist I must admit Budd, I do like talking to you, your ignorance makes me laugh. > > The problem > > with that is the assumption that you are correct in everything that you > > claim and say and when it comes to religion, nobody can make that claim. > > I don't claim perfection, but the Bible is more accurate than you want to > accept. Now that really depends on who is reading and interpreting it and sorry budd, but what you claim is not backed up by the way you act. > > If > > you also bother to recall, once the religious crap got started, I bailed [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Nope, you didn't bail until recently and now your back. Btw, calling you > what I have called you is based on your own words and actions. Really???? Care to back that on up either???? Perhaps you should Google it and see the truth. Once you started your religious crap, the only thing I said was that the public school system should not teach any religion at all. That is up to the families to decide what religion if any and the churches of the chosen religion to teach it. > >> It's a hate crime and they are just bullies. > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > There you go, calling a person a bully that posts a correction to a > previously posted error. SPIN, SPIN. Once again, you are living in the land of denial and you really need to work on that reading comprehension. I was not talking about this last load of crap you got yourself into. I am talking about the way you have been in general for years, especially toward newbie's. The only one spinning here now is you. > Gee, that means that everyone that has ever told you where you were wrong > about a mechanical item or repair is a bully. Actually Budd, that is what you are accusing us of, LOL!!! > >> > As I see it, you're not "harrassed" (I quote that, because I don't > > believe [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > matter. The only ones I have a "problem" with are those that, like you, > claim to be so darn tolerant, until a Christian follows his God. And once again, that would be the denial you live in and your own personal bias. Who are all of these magical invisable people that are in complete agreement with you. Hell Budd, even a lurker appeared (and at your request) to tell you what an idiot you are making out of yourself and even then, you stick your head in the sand and deny it. > >> >> What laws were the KKK members tried under, Tom? What they're doing is > > no [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > already... but according to your precious liberal laws; a hate crime is a > hate crime. Who exactly is "we" Budd and what questions are you talking about or is this just spin to stop from looking like a complete idiot??? Sorry Budd, but it's way to late for that. You made the comparison above now back it up or do us all a favor and shut up. > >> > I'm sorry, Budd.... your logic is severely warped here. > >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > entire name and don't give us that whiney stuff abut the person commiting > the hate crime against you... unless you just want to show your hipocrisy. I have to say Budd, you are really a crackpot. There is a big difference between identity theft and being told to shut up and if you are really this stupid.... > >> >> cussing, cursing and name calling. Emotional injury is as prosecutable > > as [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > So . . . .you're saying someone can stalk, abuse, harrass, maim, murder > because of love? What a terrible, inhuman set of values to have. How are they my values and yes, these things have been done for love as well as no real feelings at all. Not all crimes are hate crimes and not all hate is a crime. > >> I keep trying to drop this mess, but . . . .well, you look up the laws on > >> hate crimes, etc. I just want this whole mess to end. I just want to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Gee, Tom, I call them as I see them and I'm accused of false witness? That is correct because you bias is so strong, it distorts reality for you. >You, otoh, accuse me of corrupted religiosity, corrupting scriptures, called me > vulgar names, cast aspersions on my lineage, gender, and sexual preferences > and you think you are not being a false witness? Just more false accusations but if you care to back them up...... > In your eyes, if you follow the God of the Bible, you're evil, but if you do > evil to others, you're not evil. Yep, that's communistic liberalism. Oh, and > it was predicted that you, and others, would have that opinion nearly two > thousand years ago. More complete crap and bible verse twisting. There is a big difference between actually believing in the bible and just making the claim that you do and no matter what you say, your actions do not back up your claimed belief. > >> >> Tom, I appreciate your effort, but I went thru worse than Craig or any > > in [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > see is that not everyone sees you as their spokesperson, so you are probably > wrong . .again. I never claimed to be "everyone's" spokesperson but with what I have read from many others in this NG (and many of them from your friends), I can say that I am for the most part on the same page as they are right now. You can stay in denial if you wish but in reality, it just makes you look even more foolish. > I speak only for myself and my beliefs as always. The sad thing here Budd is that you only listen to yourself as well which really does make you look like an idiot. Roy was right, there is no reasoning with you so reply is you wish, I don't care and am done with you in this thread. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> > I really tried to take the high road here but you just won't let me. > You [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Really Budd, care to back any of this up? Of course you don't, you never > have so why start now. Still waiting for you to back up stuff, Bonini. P, K, B. >> How typically liberal of you. > > How typically full of it of you. Yes, I feel very full of the Spirit of God. Thank you. >> >> >> So, iow, a vigilante group or person, with no official sanction can >> >> >> destroy a house of worship and not be prosecuted? [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > a > CRIME, it cannot be a hate CRIME!!! Sorry, I forgot a the quotation marks. here: >> Funny how many liberal laws are on the books these days just to prosecute >> anyone that commits a "crime" based on hatred . . . . .and then you claim > it's >> not a crime. Hmm, maybe the laws only apply to conservatives. Right now, you can be sued for referring to a gay or lesbian as a "queer". A word, a small word has become a crime. >> >> >> Because I'm a Christian, I'm harrassed and called names, and I >> >> >> wouldn't [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > spouting > that religious stuff but you? OK, I'll type it slowly....IF I AM REPLYING TO A MISQUOTE OR MISINTERPRETATION, I DID NOT ORIGINATE THE RELIGIOUS CONTENT. And many others, like yourself. >> Btw, the King James Version of the Holy Bible is my reference book, but > you >> knew that . . .or have you forgotten? > > Sure I have and it sadly happens to be the most mis-quoted book of all > times. How would you know? > Just look at the likes of Jimmy Swaggert, Robert Tilton, the Bakers > and so many other fly by night TV evangelists that got rich using that > very > book. The Bible does tell us to examine the "fruits" of those around us, both Christian and non-Chritian, to determine their worth and relationship with God. In fact, Jesus was the one to say it. Now, if someone tells me that I need to pray for monwey and in the same breath tells me to send them money, I question their walk with God and thusly, their qualifications to teach the Word. I do not ask for money, your success can only be limited by yourself and what you define success to be and I quote directly from the Scriptures. Now, applying your "fruits" to what is already understood about you, you are not a Born-Again Christian in your soul or you have severely backslid and I'm God's call for you to come home. You know for sure which it is. >> >> Again, no one has actually proved I did what you said, force my way > into [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > And who was the one who did it and what exactly did they post? The answer > to who is you. See, Tom? You can't do anything but spin your lies and traps. I've already stated, clearly, what began yours and theguy's rants about my beliefs but you try to make it into something worse. Your fruits are showing and they are spoiled rotten. >> > You, as usual, backed up your actions with your claimed >> > religion and then took bible quotes out of context to back up your [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > supply them with riches beyond their wildest dreams. How many times did > that actually happen? Can't answer the question, can you? >> > When people called you on this (your bible >> > rewriting), you then started your extremist crap and stormed out of the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I must admit Budd, I do like talking to you, your ignorance makes me > laugh. Then a fool is laughing who knows not his end. >> > The problem >> > with that is the assumption that you are correct in everything that you [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Now that really depends on who is reading and interpreting it and sorry > budd, but what you claim is not backed up by the way you act. Do you believe in the writings of Socrates or Plato? Those writings weren't done until 800 years or more after their deaths and are only 70-80 percent accurate among themselves. The oldest copies of the texts of the Bible were written in the same century as Christ's life and are 98.5% accurate with each other. The most accurate translation into any form of English is the King James Version. ( source: Christian Apologetics and Reseach Ministries, www.carm.org) >> > If >> > you also bother to recall, once the religious crap got started, I [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > That is up to the families to decide what religion if any and the churches > of the chosen religion to teach it. <LOL> Don't have to. You've done a fine job yourself . . .again. >> >> It's a hate crime and they are just bullies. >> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > general for years, especially toward newbie's. The only one spinning here > now is you. My attitude toward newbies is always the same, if you come in here to cause trouble, you should be set in your place or run off. The purpose of the group is still the same: accurate and prompt help for Dodge truck owners. A point you have very often failed at and refuse to admit the errors. One difference: today, I would not resort to profanities in discussions of any kind. >> Gee, that means that everyone that has ever told you where you were wrong >> about a mechanical item or repair is a bully. > > Actually Budd, that is what you are accusing us of, LOL!!! No, your responses about things like how a differential works shows the truth, Tom. And you consider yourself the ultimate, don't-you-dare-correct-me-and-I'll-prove-it-by-spinning-lies-about-you expert on everything. Heck, your reply about the Bible shows that. >> >> > As I see it, you're not "harrassed" (I quote that, because I don't >> > believe [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > you > stick your head in the sand and deny it. That "lurker" didn't follow the request. He gave his opinion, not the evidence. >> >> >> What laws were the KKK members tried under, Tom? What they're doing > is [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > or > do us all a favor and shut up. "We" would be Max, Denny, Roy, Mike, Miles, Tom Lawrence, myself, possibly Nate, and probably others that have tried in the past to teach you a few things to help you answer questions and have asked yopu to back up _your_ claims & statements. And if it's too late for you to answer, then it's too late for me to give you the answers you seek from me. >> >> > I'm sorry, Budd.... your logic is severely warped here. >> >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > this > stupid.... No, Tom, the stupidity would be all yours. You made threats against me and others for posting your name, which all you "T-bone" name doesn't hide one bit, and now I'm just tired of you hollering "wolf!" about it. >> >> >> cussing, cursing and name calling. Emotional injury is as > prosecutable [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > hate > is a crime. Then it was not "love" and there is no such thing as "no emotion" unless you are "just an animal", the goal of evolutionists and liberals. >> >> I keep trying to drop this mess, but . . . .well, you look up the laws > on [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > That is correct because you bias is so strong, it distorts reality for > you. Thank you for praising my faith in my beliefs. The "bias" is not mine, it is what the Bible says. >>You, otoh, accuse me of corrupted religiosity, corrupting scriptures, > called me [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Just more false accusations but if you care to back them up...... No need. Anyone that been here for more than a year has read the names you've called me and the abuse you've heaped upon me for my faith. >> In your eyes, if you follow the God of the Bible, you're evil, but if you > do [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > More complete crap and bible verse twisting. I've told you before you need to read something besides the Liberal propaganda. > There is a big difference > between actually believing in the bible and just making the claim that you > do and no matter what you say, your actions do not back up your claimed > belief. Isaiah 5:8-30 ( calling evil, good) A correction for myself: the prophecy was nearly 3000 years ago. 2 Timothy 3:16 (correction and reproof) 1 Peter 3:15 ( to every man an answer) There's the proof, but will you read it? >> >> >> Tom, I appreciate your effort, but I went thru worse than Craig or > any [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > more > foolish. What part of your own statement do you not understand? You ASSUMED the position of spokeperson when you said "NOBODY", an all inclusive term and a thing you have so often accused ofthers of doing, often rightly so, but now, it is _YOIU_ being accused and you deny responsiblilty. >> I speak only for myself and my beliefs as always. > > The sad thing here Budd is that you only listen to yourself as well which > really does make you look like an idiot. Roy was right, there is no > reasoning with you so reply is you wish, I don't care and am done with you > in this thread. You've said that many times. It's better to be a fool for God than to be a fool trying to apologize before God. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >Btw, the King James Version of the Holy Bible is my reference book, but you >knew that . . .or have you forgotten? Then I take it that you think the original scripture is wrong? beekeep >>Btw, the King James Version of the Holy Bible is my reference book, but >>you [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > beekeep No, I think you are wrong. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>>Btw, the King James Version of the Holy Bible is my reference book, but >>>you [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >No, I think you are wrong. And just how can I be wrong? I didn't make a statement, I asked a question. beekeep > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 16:48:48 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > beekeep WTF!! You bring logic into this??? You outa your mind??? <VBG> Roy >If I constantly interjected myself into the conversations of others, telling >them how wonderful I thought vegetarianism was, over and over and over >again.... and someone finally told me to shove my celery stalks up my a.s, >I should feel discriminated against for being a vegetarian? Damn... no heated seats for you, Tom.. Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > Damn... no heated seats for you, Tom.. I'll be naming you in my lawsuit, as well. If that wasn't one of the most hate-filled, anti-vegetarian posts I've ever been subjected to... and on TOP of that, you dare to try and deny me my Constitutional Right to a warm backside. You have just committed a federal offense, and will soon be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law (the law being whatever I dream up in my own head). Best to get your affairs in order now. >>>Sorry, but you might want to look up the website for the American Center >>>for Law and Justice and see what laws you're breaking. [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > go on with what I'm here for, answering questions. I've tried to show this > but some minds are in a rut and don't want to change course Ok Budd here you go. I have been a member of this newsgroup since 1997. I don't always post but I read it everyday. I am not your friend and I am going just by what I have read here. Budd I think you have finally lost it. I don't say this to belittle you. But I truely believe you have lost it. I say this so you won't make a further fool out of yourself. So there is your unbiased opinion. Now I'm crawling back under my rock. Bob >> I really wish someone, preferably someone not a friend and not biased, >> would take a closer look at my replies and they will see that IN THE [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Bob Sorry, Bob, that's not what I asked for. What you posted is your own viewpoint about me and my beliefs. I asked for an unbiased search by someone that is not a friend or an enemy ( your comment shows bias) about the CONTENT OF MY POSTS AND REPLIES, not what you think of me as a person. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>>I really wish someone, preferably someone not a friend and not biased, >>>would take a closer look at my replies and they will see that IN THE [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Budd Once again Budd you twist the truth into what you want to hear. I am not your friend nor am I your enemy. That is what you asked for and you got it. After reading more of your posts today, I am even more certain that you have lost it. Enough said! Bob No, since you still did not post a STATEMENT / TESTIMONY that I am not proselytizing in those posts and did post an OPINION about me as a person, you did not answer my request as indicated in the request. Thanks anyway. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >>>>I really wish someone, preferably someone not a friend and not biased, >>>>would take a closer look at my replies and they will see that IN THE [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Bob SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>> No, but I do see that you are trying to tell me what ai can or cannot say >>> in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Sorry, but you might want to look up the website for the American Center for >Law and Justice and see what laws you're breaking. look, i don't to start out in budd's doghouse, so i will try to say this in regard to the issue and this is an issue that i am very familiar with. no laws were broken. period. no law was even broached with what craig said or did. now, you may not like what he said or did or you may even percieve it to be threatening in some manner, but it was not at all illegal. don't play these kinds of games because it only puts the other things that you say in doubt. this is not in any way, shape or form a violation of any law, wither criminal or civil. >>>killfile you >> [quoted text clipped - 120 lines] >unsupported by any means ABOVE the water and I'll think about your status. >Until then you are nobody. >>Sorry, but you might want to look up the website for the American Center >>for [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > this is not in any way, shape or form a violation of any law, wither > criminal or civil. Read the reply to Tom Lawrence. Maybe you'll realize something if you are look for it. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. >>>Sorry, but you might want to look up the website for the American Center >>>for [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Budd you really are a moron. Ok everyone lets talk about dodge trucks to keep craig happy. Or maybe we should talk about God, I just found out he drives a Dodge Ram. On 9/10/06 9:21 PM, in article 1157944896.364578.194390@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, "craig@metronet.com" <mcraigchr@gmail.com> wrote: >> No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the primary >> indicated topic of the group is Dodge trucks but, by virtue of being [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > Craig C. LOL! > Ok everyone lets talk about dodge trucks to keep craig happy. > Or maybe we should talk about God, I just found out he drives a Dodge Ram. [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] >> >> Craig C. Satan loves Mopars, since he likes to appear as a Viper. God is into Plymouths since He drove Adam and Eve out in a Fury. Abraham offered a truck instead of his son as a sacrifice because he found a Ram in a thicket. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > Ok everyone lets talk about dodge trucks to keep craig happy. > Or maybe we should talk about God, I just found out he drives a Dodge Ram. [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] >> >> Craig C. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. If Adam would of given Eve a little ram, that would of kept her damn mind of that apple. On 9/11/06 8:33 AM, in article 450566ba$0$19679$88260bb3@free.teranews.com, > Satan loves Mopars, since he likes to appear as a Viper. God is into > Plymouths since He drove Adam and Eve out in a Fury. Abraham offered a truck > instead of his son as a sacrifice because he found a Ram in a thicket. Younger days had sex in a back of a plymouth. I think my old girlfriend had seen a spiritual vision while she was laying on her back. She kept hollering and moaning Oh God, OH OH , Oh God dale >If Adam would of given Eve a little ram, that would of kept her damn mind of >that apple. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >She kept hollering and moaning Oh God, OH OH , Oh God >dale Mine said "Jesus Christ, I'm coming." She would have gone too but I was holding her down. beekeep On 9/12/06 4:44 AM, in article 45068f3f.518267343@usenet.radix.net, >> If Adam would of given Eve a little ram, that would of kept her damn mind of >> that apple. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > beekeep Now that's funny :))) dale > Ok everyone lets talk about dodge trucks to keep craig happy. Ah, how sweet. I was waiting for someone to finally realize that it is my happiness that REALLY matters. :-) > Or maybe we should talk about God, I just found out he drives a Dodge Ram. Now that religious discussion *does* belong in this ng. Craig C. >> So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected >> Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Craig C. And your lack of understanding is in the difference between proselytizing and correcting errors. All I've ever done is correct errors concerning the Bible. Ask a question about the Bible in a group and I'll answer it in that group. Why? Because that is where the question was posted. You know, if I still gambled, I'd almost take even odds that if I corrected a quote from, say, "Mien Kampf", Hitler's book, or offered a correction to a misunderstanding of something from the "Teachings of Chairman Mao", you wouldn't say a word about it. Look at my reply concerning the slant six, Craig. Other than my sigline which is just a sigline, not a single proselytizing word. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spamers that are running a scam. >No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences". >Someone else did that. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >If you want to argue with someone over what's in the Bible, take it up with >God. I'm just the messenger boy. this is ridiculous budd. you have been back for what now, one or two days? and look at what you have written already. you have already turned this into a religious debate and no one is even arguing with you. you have come back here with a chip on your shoulder looking for a fight. keep it up and you will find one i'm sure. no one here cares what your religion is, but it should be just that........your religion. keep it to yourself and everyone else here will do the same. it isn't even a disagreement over religion, it is over religious "style". i could care less what religion you are a member of. i could care care less what groups you belong to. you could be a nudist for all i care, but i certainly wouldn't want to discuss it with you, debate it with you or (heaven forbid) see any pictures of it. as for coming back to the ng, you certainly are welcome here. this isn't an invitation only group, anyone that choses to be here can be here. it is just so obvious that you have come back for the single purpose of picking a fight over your new found christianity. >>> Roy, that depends on you and the others. >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >> Roy >>No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences". >>Someone else did that. [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > here. it is just so obvious that you have come back for the single > purpose of picking a fight over your new found christianity. This is the same crap he ran last time. Imho if you engage him it provides a forum to spout his bs. I dropped him. Roy >>>> Roy, that depends on you and the others. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>> >>> Roy >>>No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences". >>>Someone else did that. [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > >Roy agreed. plonk >>>>> Roy, that depends on you and the others. >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>>> >>>> Roy >>No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences". >>Someone else did that. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > you. you have come back here with a chip on your shoulder looking for > a fight. keep it up and you will find one i'm sure. No, chip on the shoulder, just the Truth. As for turning it into a religious debate, all I said was I wasn't knuckling under to you, Roy, or anyone else about my beliefs or what I determine needs to be written in a reply. If you misquote Scripture or misunderstand a quote of Scripture then I will reply to correct te errors, that's all. You don't like what I post, kill file or ignore me. > no one here cares what your religion is, but it should be just > that........your religion. keep it to yourself and everyone else here [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > discuss it with you, debate it with you or (heaven forbid) see any > pictures of it. Now your censoring me again. Sorry, but my beliefs don't allow me to turn my faith on or off when I come into the group. Btw, when it comes to my beliefs, wysiwyg. > as for coming back to the ng, you certainly are welcome here. this > isn't an invitation only group, anyone that choses to be here can be > here. it is just so obvious that you have come back for the single > purpose of picking a fight over your new found christianity. <LOL> Not "new found" but rather, I finally decided to shed the rest of my worldly ways. I took Christ as my personal Savior on Father's Day, 1978. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spamers that are running a scam. > Now your censoring me again. No, Budd... "censoring you" would be him hacking into your news server and deleting your posts. Telling someone to "keep your religion to yourself" is not censorship - because you're free to ignore it (and you do). Again, you need to stop playing the victim "he's attacking me.... he's censoring me... he's stabbing me in the back..." - all claims made by you in the last few days. You just couldn't WAIT to jump back in, with both feet, and stir things up. "Theguy" made one comment, in passing, about you (I believe his words were, "as for Budd, he pretty much lost it at the end" - describing the last time you declared you were "leaving the group"), and you just happened to pick up on it? You've been scanning this group every day since your previous departure - just waiting for the opportunity to come back in and play the role of the victim. In some way, you enjoy it. You must - you keep doing it. And as far as hypocrisy goes, you should look in the mirror before accusing others of that. Back on Monday, didn't you say, "Makes me glad I'm not subscribed here anymore. Don't bother answering, I'm gone.". Yet, here you are. Budd - you were a valued member here for many years. I always liked you, and respected you, both for your knowledge and your demeanor. But something changed you last year... your skin got a whole lot thinner, and you turned up the Christian rhetoric at least 20 notches. Of course, all the above is just my opinion. In no way am I attempting to censor you, attack you, stab you in the back, or drive you away. Take it as you will. >> Now your censoring me again. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > he's censoring me... he's stabbing me in the back..." - all claims made by > you in the last few days. An attack is an attack, is it not? A "stab in the back" when someone is unable or not considered available to defend themselves is a "stab in the back" correct? Both happened, did they not? If I hadn't peeked in the group since the last time, about 3-4 weeks ago, I would probably have missed it since I only download 100 headers at a time. "Censoring" is any denial of freedom of speech. > You just couldn't WAIT to jump back in, with both feet, and stir things > up. "Theguy" made one comment, in passing, about you (I believe his words [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > back in and play the role of the victim. In some way, you enjoy it. You > must - you keep doing it. No, Tom, I am not "waiting for a chance to jump in with both feet", but if someone demeans me or my beliefs, do I not have the right to defend myself or my faith? If not the right, the Bible says I have to defend my faith, to stand up for what I believe. And that is the crux of the matter, the fact I do stand up when attacked and not roll over and play dead like some would have me do. > And as far as hypocrisy goes, you should look in the mirror before > accusing others of that. Back on Monday, didn't you say, "Makes me glad > I'm not subscribed here anymore. Don't bother answering, I'm gone.". > Yet, here you are. Yep, here I am . . .it's called "changing your mind". > Budd - you were a valued member here for many years. I always liked you, > and respected you, both for your knowledge and your demeanor. But > something changed you last year... your skin got a whole lot thinner, and > you turned up the Christian rhetoric at least 20 notches. You're right, a lot has changed. Like I mentioned in another reply, I'm trying to live closer to the Bible's requirements as I understand them thru prayer and fasting. Is it wrong to try to become a better person spiritually than you have been? That all I've done. Developing terminal illnesses cause that in some people, for me it was a need to find peace. Tom, I value you as a friend also, and have learned much from you as well. I do not want to be known just for my beliefs but I want to be known I will stand up for my beliefs. Unfortunately, some in here seem dedicated to trying to make me never able respond to a Biblical misquote. > Of course, all the above is just my opinion. In no way am I attempting to > censor you, attack you, stab you in the back, or drive you away. Take it > as you will. Tom, unlike "theguy", you came to me as close as "face to face" with your concern as the Internet allows. For that I cannot consider your words an attack, but rather the words of a concerned friend. Look at the informational replies to a few posters I've already made since I came back . . where's the proselytizing? The sigline is my signature and the replies are "just like old times". Peace to you and yours, Tom. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spamers that are running a scam. > "Censoring" is any denial of freedom of speech. So where's the denial? Your ability to post has never been pre-empted. There's a difference between Joe Citizen telling you to "shut up", and say, a judge issuing an order for you to "shut up". The latter is certainly censorship.... the former, since it has no authority, is nothing more than a suggestion - one which you are free to ignore. Heck - I have people tell me to shut up several times every day... doesn't mean I'm experiencing censorship. > Tom, unlike "theguy", you came to me as close as "face to face" with your > concern as the Internet allows. For that I cannot consider your words an > attack, but rather the words of a concerned friend. Look at the > informational replies to a few posters I've already made since I came back > . . where's the proselytizing? The sigline is my signature and the replies > are "just like old times". I do consider you a friend, Budd, and I'm glad to see you back and contributing. I just hate to see you letting yourself get drawn into these senseless debates with people who's minds you're never going to change - people for whatever reason enjoy poking you with a stick. I wish you all the best. Hey Tom, shut up! <VBG> >> "Censoring" is any denial of freedom of speech. > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > I wish you all the best. Hey, Larry, be quiet!! Ya woke me up from my nap. SignatureBudd Cochran "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > Hey Tom, shut up! <VBG> > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >> >> I wish you all the best. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. Sorry man, I didn't know your hearing aide was that sensitive. HEHE > Hey, Larry, be quiet!! Ya woke me up from my nap. > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >>> >>> I wish you all the best. ROTFLMBO!!!!! Ya got me . . . . . . . . SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > Sorry man, I didn't know your hearing aide was that sensitive. HEHE > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >>>> >>>> I wish you all the best. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. >> "Censoring" is any denial of freedom of speech. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > certainly censorship.... the former, since it has no authority, is > nothing more than a suggestion - one which you are free to ignore. Which I get chewed out for, told to take it to a religion group, etc. . . . but, just watch, Tom, I'll be chewed out for anything I post of a Christian nature, even if I'm trying to correct a quote. > Heck - I have people tell me to shut up several times every day... > doesn't mean I'm experiencing censorship. <VBG> IMHO, since this is an unmoderated group, if I or anyone of any faith or denomination, makes a comment in reply to a misquote, misconception, or misunderstanding of that belief, then NO ONE has the right or authority to desparage them, as it is a form of censorship, denying them their right to practice their beliefs. >> Tom, unlike "theguy", you came to me as close as "face to face" with your >> concern as the Internet allows. For that I cannot consider your words an [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I do consider you a friend, Budd, and I'm glad to see you back and > contributing. Thank you, sir. I do hope I will be glad to be back, sometime. I do miss some of you clowns and Denny. > I just hate to see you letting yourself get drawn into these senseless > debates with people who's minds you're never going to change - people for > whatever reason enjoy poking you with a stick. We've probably both known the bully types that pull flies wings off, steal candy/lunch money and those that start the fights with me are in the same category. > I wish you all the best. Thanks again. I've got some great friends in this group, I've got my family and my beliefs. Yep, I got the best. Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. Tom, I do have agree with Budd on at least one point he has made. Any one should be able to post information on here to correct an incorrect statement, regardless of the topic. Isn't the whole issue behind the beating of Snoballs? To correct the misleading, incorrect and plain ignorant information that falls from his mouth every time he types? >>> "Censoring" is any denial of freedom of speech. >> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Budd And I can't help it if I'm darn near expert on nearly everything darned . . . . if I'm expert on darn everything . . . .near . . . . if I'm darn everything . . . . Oh, to heck with it. . . . .if i know a few things well. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > Tom, I do have agree with Budd on at least one point he has made. Any one > should be able to post information on here to correct an incorrect [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] >> >> Budd SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity They are worthless spammers that are running a scam. No, Greg, it's me. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > And posting with avengeance. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > beekeep SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >No, Greg, it's me. Personaly, I'm glad you're back. I kind of missed ya. You help make this place interesting. beekeep Well, I'll hold off on saying I'm glad to be back, if you don't mind. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 14:33:05 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > beekeep SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >Well, I'll hold off on saying I'm glad to be back, if you don't mind. An old hound dog always finds his way home when he gets hungry. beekeep This post brought to you by the ATF. Protecting all Americans rights to get drunk, take a smoke, and go shooten, thus, making America a safer place for all Americans to enjoy. I wouldn't know. Never had a hound dog, and never let any of my dogs stray. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 17:41:49 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > for all > Americans to enjoy. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.