Well I'll be damned......here's ANOTHER one!
--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "Joe" <geezerfreak@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues"
> > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Goddamn Barry! You just handed me at least an hour of my
> > > > life back today responding to Judy. Thanks man.
> > >
> > > De nada. Call me a codependent Victorian, but no one
> > > gets away with calling The Simpsons "mean" when I'm
> > > around. That's treading on *my* religion. :-) Besides,
> > > I'm about to head out on a Road Trip, and I figure me
> > > chiming in again will make her so mad she'll have
> > > posted out before I even get where I'm going. :-)
> >
> > Whaddya know Barry.....you're right! Look at her go!
>
> Lessee now, that would be three posts, two responding to
> Barry's two posts, and the other to Curtis's.
>
> Wow! I sure am posting out fast, just as Barry predicted!
>
> <cackle>
>
> It's funny, religious people believe stuff for which
> there's no evidence; but the religion critics here (I
> don't dare use the word "antireligionists" because it
> upsets Barry) believe stuff for which there not only is
> no evidence, but for which all the evidence is *to the
> contrary*--even when that contrary evidence is right
> smack under their noses.
>
> As Tartbrain has sagely observed, "Trying to correct
> other's false beliefs before correction all of ones own
> false beliefs is folly."
>
