Comments on: New Lawsuit Challenges Gospel Exemption http://atheists.org/blog/2009/10/20/new-lawsuit-challenges-gospel-exemption A Blog of Atheist Thought Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:05:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Charlie http://atheists.org/blog/2009/10/20/new-lawsuit-challenges-gospel-exemption/comment-page-1#comment-110595 Charlie Sun, 25 Oct 2009 14:07:47 +0000 http://atheists.org/blog/?p=1984#comment-110595 Thanks for the tech support jeff....it wokred Thanks for the tech support jeff….it wokred

]]> By: Krystalline Apostate http://atheists.org/blog/2009/10/20/new-lawsuit-challenges-gospel-exemption/comment-page-1#comment-110584 Krystalline Apostate Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:19:52 +0000 http://atheists.org/blog/?p=1984#comment-110584 Well,? Any more brain farts you want to share w/the class? (Like unequivocally equating communism w/socialism?) Maybe you'll drag out Obama's birth certificate too, while you're at it. Well,? Any more brain farts you want to share w/the class?
(Like unequivocally equating communism w/socialism?)
Maybe you’ll drag out Obama’s birth certificate too, while you’re at it.

]]> By: jeff reister http://atheists.org/blog/2009/10/20/new-lawsuit-challenges-gospel-exemption/comment-page-1#comment-110579 jeff reister Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:56:15 +0000 http://atheists.org/blog/?p=1984#comment-110579 For me, it's only slow with Internet Explorer. There is something on the No God Blog web page that causes it to wait for several seconds. Firefox does not have the same problem. You can get it here... http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/ie.html?utm_id=Q208lnch&utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=ppc For me, it’s only slow with Internet Explorer. There is something on the No God Blog web page that causes it to wait for several seconds.

Firefox does not have the same problem. You can get it here…
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/ie.html?utm_id=Q208lnch&utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=ppc

]]> By: reason http://atheists.org/blog/2009/10/20/new-lawsuit-challenges-gospel-exemption/comment-page-1#comment-110574 reason Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:41:28 +0000 http://atheists.org/blog/?p=1984#comment-110574 The key question is the exemption Constitutional.At the rate we are spending soon we will be forced to choose, raise taxes or cut spending. The key question is the exemption Constitutional.At the rate we are spending soon we will be forced to choose, raise taxes or cut spending.

]]> By: Krystalline Apostate http://atheists.org/blog/2009/10/20/new-lawsuit-challenges-gospel-exemption/comment-page-1#comment-110573 Krystalline Apostate Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:30:11 +0000 http://atheists.org/blog/?p=1984#comment-110573 <blockquote>According to the Communist Manifesto, all these were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism, but Marx and Engels later expressed a desire to modernize this passage.</blockquote> & yet strangely, the largest communist country has pretty much collapsed, & the other countries that were caught in the wave (or subsequently were taken over) are slowly becoming democratic. & how many countries became translated to communism peacefully? <blockquote>You’ll probably need someone to help you understand these,</blockquote> Coming from the same dipwad who claimed that items that cost taxpayers money weren't economic and political mechanisms, I'm sure I'm not the guy who needs help understanding how the real world works. <blockquote>but if you think there’s no method to the madness in Washington, then just wait and see where we end up. Both Republicans and Democrats have systematically implemented most of the list over the years and W and O are no exceptions.</blockquote> LMAO! Wow. So a lack of belief in the supernatural makes materialists socialist, is that the lame argument you're still propounding here? A quick trip to wiki kinda pokes holes into your strident yet stupid argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism <i>Karl Marx never provided a detailed description as to how communism would function as an economic system, but it is understood that <u>a communist economy would consist of common ownership of the means of production, culminating in the negation of the concept of private ownership of capital</u>, which referred to the means of production in Marxian terminology.</i> You keep claiming you're not republican, but you have all the hysteria-inducing 'talking points' that qualify you for membership: 1. Anti-intellectualism, 2. McCarthyist rhetoric, 3. conspiratorial craziness, & other fucktardery too numerous to list.

According to the Communist Manifesto, all these were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism, but Marx and Engels later expressed a desire to modernize this passage.

& yet strangely, the largest communist country has pretty much collapsed, & the other countries that were caught in the wave (or subsequently were taken over) are slowly becoming democratic. & how many countries became translated to communism peacefully?

You’ll probably need someone to help you understand these,

Coming from the same dipwad who claimed that items that cost taxpayers money weren’t economic and political mechanisms, I’m sure I’m not the guy who needs help understanding how the real world works.

but if you think there’s no method to the madness in Washington, then just wait and see where we end up. Both Republicans and Democrats have systematically implemented most of the list over the years and W and O are no exceptions.

LMAO! Wow. So a lack of belief in the supernatural makes materialists socialist, is that the lame argument you’re still propounding here?
A quick trip to wiki kinda pokes holes into your strident yet stupid argument:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
Karl Marx never provided a detailed description as to how communism would function as an economic system, but it is understood that a communist economy would consist of common ownership of the means of production, culminating in the negation of the concept of private ownership of capital, which referred to the means of production in Marxian terminology.
You keep claiming you’re not republican, but you have all the hysteria-inducing ‘talking points’ that qualify you for membership:
1. Anti-intellectualism,
2. McCarthyist rhetoric,
3. conspiratorial craziness,
& other fucktardery too numerous to list.

]]>