No, it is elementary respect for the religion of others. I was sure you will use this Web source and not your own ideas to answer
In extreme cases, not respecting the 11th Commandment leads to what ISIS is doing to Christians these days. Be convinced that the original idea of keeping your religion for yourself does not belong to Carlin. Let's close this now and here. Peter On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> wrote: > First, who is Carlin? Why would I listen to the advice or opinion of a > spoiled, liberal, elitist comedian wanna-be? > > Second, I did not start the religious discussion. Others did and I am > only responding like I am responding to your allegations here. > > Third, Those who invoke the Carlin 11th commandment is automatically > guilty of it themselves, and hence betrays a deep level of hypocrisy. When > one utters "Keep thy religion to thyself." one is uttering a religious > precept. Cause that statement is in itself a religious statement. This > is what one blogger said: > > "the concept of NOT having a religious viewpoint is a false philosophic > construct. Everyone has a belief in or about God, even if that belief > consists of the view that there is no God. Atheism still constitutes a > religious perspective. > > The anti-proselyte mantra is itself a form of proselytizing, religion > antagonists' ignorance of the fact notwithstanding. For someone to say *"keep > your religion to yourself"*demonstrates the person uttering the phrase* > doesn't > practice what he or she preaches*, as they are doing precisely what > they’re admonishing the *“religious”* person *NOT* to do." > > > So, in fact Peter; Your lack of respect for the 11th commandment is > annoying. > > > Jojo > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Peter Gluck <[email protected]> > *To:* VORTEX <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Sunday, August 17, 2014 3:56 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:a new guest editorial by AXIL > > I was not insulted at all. Everybody is ignorant in some areas and fast > thinking comes only with exercise. I discover new words on a daily basis > e.g at wordsmith.org and in other sources; if I don't understand it I ask > Google:define XXXX. I knew SWOT from industrial practice; may concepts > and advises of the gurus of the US school of management as Deming, Juran, > Drucker, Rohn and tens of others are invaluable help in problem solving. > SWOT is a basic practice, nothing can replace it for R& D projects. > > I was not insulted by Jojo either, his lack of respect for the 11-th > Commandment (a la Carlin) is a bit annoying but he makes his duty. > > And i will absolve him from any past and future sin- he has made such a > wonderful statement: " *I don't understand Axil's audacity to challenge > Ed and come away claiming that he is more right than Ed. I'll take Ed's > worst speculation over Axil's best everytime"*. > A fine example of pure and sincere post-logical thinking. > So good like this one but more "earthly": > > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/03/absolutely-wonderful-example-of-post.html > > Peter > > > On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Have I insulted Peter Gluck on this thread? Nope. So what's yer >> problem? Log onto the threads where I have insulted these people and see >> for yourself their own attitudes. >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Life is too short and I have other things more important than dealing >>> with your "chip on your shoulder" childish attitude. The record shows that >>> you have insulted and have been childish to many people here before I >>> showed up. Here are just a sample of people you picked fights with. >>> >>> 1. Peter Gluck >>> 2. Lennart Thornros >>> 3. Mark at Zeropoint >>> 4. Blaze Spinnaker >>> 5. Dave Roberson >>> 6. Me. >>> >>> >>> Should I go on? >>> >>> You can hve the last insult my friend, Have at it. >>> >>> >>> Jojo >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> *From:* Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> >>> *To:* vortex-l <[email protected]> >>> *Sent:* Sunday, August 17, 2014 10:34 AM >>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:a new guest editorial by AXIL >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Everyone knows that I meant to not comment on religious stuff >>>> anymore. If you are too dumb to realize that, well my friend, that is your >>>> problem. >>>> >>> ***bullshit. Your point number 5 had nothing to do with "religious >>> stuff". And you've continued to comment on religious stuff. And you've >>> continued to respond to me, after you said you wouldn't. >>> >>> Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> >>> Aug 15 (1 day ago) >>> >>> >>> to vortex-l >>> >>> JOJO: >>> This will be my last response on this subject lest I get too hyped up >>> and bring the quick judgement of the mob here again. But let me just point >>> out a few things. >>> ........ >>> 5. I don't understand Axil's audacity to challenge Ed and come away >>> claiming that he is more right than Ed. I'll take Ed's worst speculation >>> over Axil's best everytime. >>> >>> ***You ain't true to your word. Your last set of speculations has the >>> audacity to "challenge Ed", and you are a hypocrite to boot. You deserve >>> to be keyed up on. I would not characterize it as bullying. I would >>> characterize your crappy attitude towards Axil and trying to remove him >>> from this discussion group as bullying, "as if you are the boss here. Grow >>> Up". Why should anyone listen to you? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I am sick of your bullying and attitude as if you are the boss here. >>>> GROW UP. >>>> >>>> >>>> Jojo >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> *From:* Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> >>>> *To:* vortex-l <[email protected]> >>>> *Sent:* Sunday, August 17, 2014 10:11 AM >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:a new guest editorial by AXIL >>>> >>>> But this might be the right venue for Axil's latest theory because >>>> the one guy who introduced bibilical stuff has said he wouldn't comment on >>>> this subject any longer. Well, other than the fact that he hasn't kept his >>>> word, it would be a good plan to have the discussion on this thread. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 9:07 AM, James Bowery <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The Biblical stuff has other venues. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Steve High <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hey guys is there any chance that the discussion on radiometric >>>>>> dating could be moved to another thread? Axil put a lot of work into his >>>>>> Egoout posting which I think is well-written and contains a number of >>>>>> interesting ideas. I would love to see these ideas getting batted around >>>>>> by >>>>>> the learned folk at vortex, but that seems to be getting crowded out by >>>>>> the >>>>>> discussion on radiometrics and religion. I would like to read that too, >>>>>> just on a different thread. The crux of Axil's idea seems to be that >>>>>> nanomagnetic excitation of the nucleus results in the production of >>>>>> virtual >>>>>> mesons that turn into muons that go on to promote proton-proton >>>>>> interactions. I am wondering if these individual steps have received >>>>>> scientific exposition or validation elsewhere, and can all this take >>>>>> place >>>>>> without having to deal with the dreaded gamma ray? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 4:55 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> We are talking rational history here, right? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Google hits for >>>>>>> "historicity of Bhagavad Gita" : 3 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "historicity of Jesus" : about 214,000 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Several times, I have asked people who claim to believe the Bhagavad >>>>>>> Gita, "do you really believe these are historical accounts"? Their >>>>>>> answer >>>>>>> is basically no, it's just something they believe in. They were raised >>>>>>> believing it, so they don't rock that boat. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Daniel Rocha <[email protected] >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, specifically the Bhagava Gita. This a small text about Jesus, >>>>>>>> in his previous incarnation, talking to Arjuna. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's very likely that Jesus was carpenter. He had a family to feed. >>>>>>>> Or do you think he stared at a wall until he started preaching? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2014-08-15 13:26 GMT-03:00 Jojo Iznart <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am turning the other cheek by not reciprocating with an insult. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As for your other point, I am not sure what you want to prove to >>>>>>>>> me. Are these passages from the Mahabharata? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jojo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
