### Apollo BBS Archive - May 18, 1990

    Message: 65765
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Roger
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 05:35:03

     To say that I am in agreement with your humanistic views is to
    misunderstand my posting completely, Roger.
     I happen to believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of Almighty God,
    although I do not believe that that particular belief is a prerequisite for
    salvation. The ONLY precondition for salvation is a personal belief in Jesus
    Christ as Saviour and Lord of one's life. Our salvation is by God's grace
    alone, not by the book He gave us as a guide to Him.

    Message: 65766
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Humanism
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 05:40:07

     Respect for others, love for one another, tolerance, all those are fine
    sounding words, and honorable attitudes to be sure. Secular humanism becomes
    a dangerous religion when it places those attributes above our love for God,
    and our position with Him. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, and thy
    neighbor as thyself." God is first, the central figure of the universe.
    Humanism places man in that position. "Thou shalt have no other gods before
    me." Humanism makes man the god-figure. That is dangerous.

    Message: 65767
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Roger/faith
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 05:42:50

     I have shown you Roger, but your limited mind cannot accept my "proof".
    "Faith IS the substance of things hoped for, the EVIDENCE of things not
    seen."
     My faith IS my "proof". I don't really need to prove anything to you in
    terms that you may find acceptable. My faith is a personal thing between God
    and me.

    Message: 65768
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Religion
    Subject: 65741/Middleton
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 05:46:51

     MY! How loving, compassionate and Christian that message was!
     Vent, Michael, vent!

    Message: 65769
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 06:45:33

    Re:  "If you don't you sure don't like anyone who doesn't believe that it
    is."

    That's not true.

    Re:  "Do you think I am a Christian?"

    It's hard for me to tell.

    Re:  "Do you think it is possible to become a Christian if you don't think
    the Bible is the Word of God?"

    I wouldn't say it is impossible.

    But it is very possible to be a Christian even if you think the Bible has
    some errors.  The criteria for being a Christian is believing in Jesus
    Christ.  It doesn't matter what church you go to, or even if you go to
    church.  It doesn't depend on your politics, your friends, etc.  It depends
    on what you do with Jesus.

    Message: 65770
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul/Precondition
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 07:23:41

    Yes, and even the faith to believe comes from God. There is not one iota of
    salvation that we can credit ourselves with. Good thing, too.

    Message: 65771
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Roger/65769
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 07:28:59

    Or, what Christ does with us. I feel that a person cannot be called to faith
    without hearing the Word of God, for it's author is the Holy Spirit, and
    through the hearing/reading of the Bible that the Holy Spirit can do His
    work in the heart and mind of an individual. So, I feel that anyone who
    completely debunks the Bible has severely impaired their means of receiving
    faith.

    Message: 65772
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: daryl/agnostic
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 07:36:19

    I am an agnostic Christian.

    I have explained this at least three times.

    Message: 65773
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Daryl/65735
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 07:38:21

    Sigh. I thought so. No hope. I was hoping someone could provide at least
    a shred of evidence.

    Message: 65774
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Daryl/Responses
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 07:39:42

    And by their works we shall know you. So far I have seen nothing that
    indicates that you are a member of the body of Christ.

    Message: 65775
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Daryl/Cross
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 07:40:58

    Better read I Corinthians, for Paul disagrees with you.

    Message: 65776
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Paul's danger
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 07:44:00

    What is the danger and to whom is it dangerous ?

    Message: 65778
    Author: Hans Glans
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Christians
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 08:13:22

    I ran into a man yesterday, that tried to inform me, that I was going to
    hell. He said it in a nice way, and was apologetic. Still, I was somewhat
    offended. He said his father had died yesterday, but he was not concerned,
    he knew his father was saved. I would not be all smiley the day after my dad
    died, in fact, I wasn't. My dad died 4 years ago. This fellow was basically
    telling me that MY dad went to hell, and his didn't.  Great.

    Message: 65779
    Author: $ Melissa Dee
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 08:50:35

    "I'm gonna lie down, shorts down, ready fore(sic) them to use a grease-less
    shaft on me on this topic..."
    Gee, that sure sounds squeaky clean to me!  So, Cliff, were do you draw your
    lines on obsenity?  I would also like to see Rod's post now that I see what
    garbage is being allowed on the Public Board.

    Message: 65780
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff on MLK
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 10:02:22

    In the paper this morning was a spread about Mecham - he's trying to get it
    on the ballot so the people can vote on a MLK day instead of our politicians
    forcing it upon us. According to the article, even one of the advocates of a
    MLK holiday, Mr. Arnie Zaler, said "that if Mecham collects enough
    signatures, voters will narrowly approve a King holiday. I think it will be
    close, it will be tough, but in the end we will win!" Narrowly approve! If
    that is the case, even coming out of the mouth of an advocate, why in the
    hell haven't we been able to vote on it already? Why did our govenor just go
    ahead and sign that paper without the people's consent? A Vote if there was
    any doubt at all that they didn't want a King day??? Once again our
    politicians have proved they could give a hoot in hell about the people of
    this state! I do not think Mecham is or was an angel and certainly didn't
    like some of the things he did and said - but in the light of everything, I
    feel he was at least trying to do what the people wanted over all. Some of
    us may not have liked it, but at least we would of had some say so. He
    certainly wasn't a forked tongued politician that we've become use to - he
    was at least honest and that was refreshing. I think he still has an
    enormous backing of the people in this state or else he wouldn't still be in
    there fighting. I also think the people of this state DOES NOT WANT A MLK
    DAY either!!! I personally don't care one way or the other, but I don't like
    how they are going about it! I believe in the will of the people - our
    politicians don't! Rose Mofford! What a joke! -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 65781
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Public Apology
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 10:51:03

    I have removed the messages with the offending material.
    I'm truly sorry if anyone was offeneded by the last couple
    sentences I wrote.

    Sincerely,
              Me.

    Message: 65782
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Hans Glans
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 10:55:03

    Would he be telling the truth to tell you that you are well on your
    way to heaven?

    Which do you preferr, lies or truth?

    Message: 65783
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Mike / 65741
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 11:01:18

    If Jesus, as you say, did not teach that by discarding our old selfish
    hearts and accepting him into our lives as our saviour, die on the
    cross for our sins and teach us that through him we can be redeemed
    and new in Gods eyes.....

    Just what do you think, in *YOUR* religion, did he teach ?

    Whosoever shall believe in him shall not perish but have everlasting
    life.

    I don't read about a party anywhere.

    Message: 65784
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Carter's Apology
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 11:10:08

    Apology accepted, Mike.  Please try not to let it happen again.

    Message: 65785
    Author: $ Melissa Dee
    Category: Politics
    Subject:  Mecham
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 12:19:10

    He may tell the truth but then he forgets about it.  I heard on KFYI this
    morning of TWO times that he was recorded saying something and then denied
    it.
    He asked if this guy who was interviewing him was a jew.  The guy said "No,
    I'm Catholic" and when that quote was put into his book, Mecham denied ever
    saying it and demanded that the interviewer produce the tape.  He did.
    Mecham had no comment after the tape was played, or none that I know of.
    As for MLK, he may have slept around, I don't know about the communitist
    theory, but that is not why people want to honor him.  He was a strong
    catylist for change and the civil rights laws being upheld.  Minorities
    of all race, color and sex should thank him for doing so.  Now, whether that
    means he deserves a holiday, I don't know.  But let's look at some of the
    other people with holidays.
    Columbus.  Gee, what a guy.  He discovered America, by accident, while
    looking for India.  He also was a big part of the reason the Native American
    Indians were enslaved.
    Lincoln and Washington.  Washington slept around and owned slaves.
    Lincoln also was pro-slavery.
    Isn't it interesting that these men being honored with a holiday have all
    had something to do with enslavement?  Oh, except St. Patrick but no one
    gets the day off for him.
    But you're right.  It deserves to be put to a vote.  But it looks pretty bad
    when almost every other state already has a MLK day.

    Message: 65786
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Religion
    Subject: bob/mormon
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 13:18:53

    Actually, the names found in the book of Mormon would not be recorded
    because these are the lost tribes of Israel transplanted to America. I think
    that your doubting attitude shows that the Holy Spirit is not working in
    your heart as it is in mine, and that you ought to get down on your knees
    and pray to Almighty God for faith.

    Message: 65787
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff/Commandments
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 18:36:06

         As I explained, forcing religious doctrines upon people who
    are not of that religion is what I find repugnant. Those
    Commandments which do not translate into a prohibition of fraud
    or coercion may be fine for those who have chosen to live
    according to religious doctrine, but they are not universally
    applicable to a free society. If it specifics you must have,
    the sixth, eighth, and ninth Commandments address fraud and
    coercion, and the rest do not. The validity of the rest depend on
    individual circumstances such as religious belief and other
    factors.
       See You Later,
          Dean H.

    Message: 65788
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Daryl
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 18:37:00

       You say, 'By becoming a Christian a person does not volunteer
    "to be judged by biblical standards."' And, 'We as Christians
    follow God's commands because we WANT to, out of loving obedience
    to Him, not because we HAVE to, out of fear of a merciless
    judge.'
       The distinction between 'volunteering' and 'following commands
    because you want to' is negligible. The real point is that
    Christians act as if rules which arise from their own beliefs
    should apply to others as well.
       You seem to have gone over from discussing the validity of
    those rules to making vague, backhanded accusations couched in
    terms of forgiveness. Is there a reason for this, or is it just a
    lack of better arguments?
       See You Later,
          Dean H.

    Message: 65789
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bob T.
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 18:37:26

       When forcing obedience in others it helps the one doing the
    forcing to claim that it is done out of love rather than hate,
    but the effect upon the ones being forced is about the same.
       See You Later,
          Dean H.

    Message: 65790
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff L.
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 18:38:19

       You are certainly entitled to your opinion of what I say as
    'bologne'. I argue in favor of individual rights wherever
    possible, and as much as it surprises me, there are people who
    think that is all wrong. Everyone pays the minimum of lip service
    to individual rights, as you did in saying, 'The rights of an
    individual are just fine, but what about.....'. There is always
    an easier way out than respecting the rights of the individual,
    and everyone seems to want to take it.
       Yes, it would be easier to turn national defense (lets change
    it back to the War Department in the name of honesty!) completely
    over to the military. Sure they could have won in Vietnam if no
    civilian input had been allowed. There is a larger question of
    what kind of nation this would be under those circumstances, just
    as there is a larger question of what kind of nation we get by
    using child abuse as an excuse to make war on our own people.
       Rather than deal with that child abuse for the crime that it
    is, we blame the drug the mother used, and wage a perfectly
    corrupt and unwinnable war against the right of the individual to
    voluntarily buy, sell, or use drugs WITHOUT abusing a child.

       How do you get the mommy not to abuse drugs? Obviously not by
    making them illegal, or we wouldn't be having this conversation.
    Each person who becomes dependent must reach their own decision
    to become free of that dependence, and the incentive that will
    work may vary from one person to the next. For me, it was a
    desire to see myself develop into a healthier, better looking,
    more socially acceptable, and more self-fulfilled person than I
    could be on alcohol.
      The programs which help a person kick a destructive habit by
    submitting to a 'higher power' as you put it, often work well in
    the short term. But by breaking the person's self-image down to
    make this 'higher power' an essential leap of faith, and
    basically substituting that 'higher power' for the force in life
    that dependency had been, they set them up for an even worse fall
    when the going gets tough and the sheen wears off their new
    'higher power' drug. The high success rate credited to these
    programs ignores the fact that their clients go back into the
    gutter afterward at almost the same rate, and often in even worse
    shape.

       Don't kick yourself for being selfish. Rational self interest,
    which differs from plain selfishness only in that it is a little
    more thoughtful of consequences and future interests, is the
    incentive for practically all that is worthwhile.
       You ask if I could leave my wife. No, and I can't imagine any
    circumstances in which I would want to. We vowed to be as one and
    never keep any secrets from each other back when we decided to
    marry. That, and a continuing love affair between us, has kept us
    as close as ever for over fifteen years. Maybe that approach
    wouldn't work for everyone, but I can't imagine doing it any
    other way myself.
       See You Later,
          Dean H.

    Message: 65793
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Ann/MLK day
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 19:22:24

    The recent wrong was to "correct the mistake" which the legislature made
    last year by substituting MLK day for Columbus day.  With the new law, BOTH
    will exist, which should make most Italian-Americans very happy.
    Unfortunately, the Native Americans are now upset because they don't like
    the results of Columbus's visits...

    Message: 65794
    Author: $ Steve MacGregor
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: MLK Day
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 20:24:26

      I think it should be a referendum on the ballot:

    RESOLVED:  we should give all public employees a paid day off in honor of
    the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr, and raise taxes appropriately to pay
    the expenses incurred thereby.

    [ ]  Aye
    [ ]  Nay        (Choose one)

                                     =(O,O)=  Hoot!

    Message: 65795
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger/James White
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 20:29:42

    I had a chat recently with him on Zepher (a friend convinced me to log on).
    It was tedious and unproductive.  I also found his rebuttals murky,
    inadequate, and uncompelling, even when they were intelligible.

    Message: 65796
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: In search of
    Subject: Roger/DNA testing
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 20:50:00

    I don't have the article in front of me.  I recall that its main thrust was
    the difference between DNA testing in a diagnostic setting and its
    application to forensic work.  Apparently, it isn't all that reliable when
    the stringent standards and methods of DNA analysis are relaxed, as they are
    when forensic labs use proprietary rather than standard, peer-reviewed
    techniques, and when samples are subject to the sort of contamination that
    naturally occurs at a crime scene, and with forensic samples which, due to
    their quantity and unknown source, cannot verified by the ordinary
    safeguards which can require a sufficient amount of unadulterated blood,
    semen, etc., which are necessary to eliminate various possible errors.
    There appear to be two main companies which perform DNA lab testing, and
    their bias has become evident.  An expert witness from one company testified
    in a case that there was a one in one-hundred-million chance that the match
    in question was false positive.  Other, less biased and perhaps more
    rigorous testing was performed by experts from Harvard and MIT, and
    examining the same data, they determined that the chance was one in
    twenty-four.  The case was unusual in that it is exceptional for defendants
    , many of whom have court appointed lawyers, to be able to manage research
    and testing in their defense; in this case, the time and expense was
    donated.
    There was, for at least twenty-five years, a technique known as the parafin
    (sp?) test which supposedly detected the presence of nitrates, (as in
    gunpowder) on the hands of suspects in shooting crimes.  It was not until
    the 1960s, after countless convictions based on this test had occured,
    ...that the unreliability of this test, and in particular its susceptibility
    to false positives, was discovered and proven.  It seems that all kinds of
    substances, from tobacco to tobacco ash to urine to colored nail polish can
    produce a positive reaction.  Oh well.

    Message: 65798
    Author: Scott Windsor
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: R
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 21:21:08

    "It take two to tango..."
    Well, yes, but the mathmatics doesn't have to add up!  I knew a guy, (my old
    roommate), who used to bring home a different girl every night!  Now, he is
    only one, but the girls are several!  See how the math gets all jumbled?

    +---------------< Scott >-------------+
    !            CP/M WORLD SYSOP         !
    !        OPen door # 1 on Trinity     !
    !  (Type OP;1 at Main System Prompt)  !
    !            (602) 938-6866           !
    !                                     !
    !  We support CP/M, TRS-80, Tandy 100 !
    !     Tandy 200, C-128 and MORE!      !
    !     (Plus LOTS of MS-DOS stuff      !
    !            on TRINITY)              !
    +----------< CHECK US OUT! >----------+

    Message: 65799
    Author: Scott Windsor
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Jesus never died?
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 21:37:16

    Jesus never died?  Hmmm, if He gave up his human "package" if you will, but
    never ceased to live, then who went to Hell in our place?  Jesus died, went
    to Hell and the third day He rose again from the dead!

    Scott

    Message: 65800
    Author: Scott Windsor
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Humanism/Roger
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 21:57:33

    The danger with humanism is that it replaces God with Man.  The humanist is
    man centered in everything he does, the Christian is supposed to be, (and I
    know we all fail at times), centered on God, others then self.  The humanist
    believes he can occomplish all things apart from God, when it comes time for
    salvation, I think they will fall a little short, as you can't do that
    without God!

    Scott

    Message: 65801
    Author: Scott Windsor
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Proof of Faith
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 21:59:17

    Roger,
    Faith is the belief in things not seen, how can Paul "show" you anything?
    If you are given the Faith to see, you wouldn't even need to ask the
    question.

    Scott

    Message: 65802
    Author: Jeff Lochansky
    Category: Drug Talk
    Subject: re. Dean Hathaway
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 22:40:31

    I am happy for you and your wife that you have been happly married for 15
    years, trully. I just wish I could have had the same happiness. Believe me
    it wasn't possible, I'm monagomous, I couldn't share. As to the crime of
    child abuse, how do we solve it? Obviosly we can punosh her (the woman doing
    drugs) till she bore the child, and most of the time it is to late for the
    child then. My ExWife isn't being pinished for her abuse!!! I documented her
    substace abuse in court when I tried to obtain custody of my (almost) son.
    The judge could not have cared less. When I took back my petition for
    custody because the DNA testing the judge ordered showed me not to be the
    father, the judge took no further action concerning the constant drug abuse.
    The judge was also aware of the fact that she was pregnant again. Right now
    the reason i
    I fight drugs is for the sake of children, because I have seen what they do
    to them.I wish there were an easy solution to it all. Speaking of drug
    programs, the "program" I was referring to is not sponsered by any
    organisation other then A.A.. N.A. works on the same principles as A.A..
    It is governed by !!!!!!EX ABUSERS!!!!!!!!! for abusers. Their success rate
    is astonishing. If you know anything about A.A. you know how it works.
    In my last post I have asked you for posible solutions, you havend given me
    any yet, why?, dont you have any.

    Well I'll be waiting for your response
    SEE YA =================MAD MAX==================

    Message: 65803
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Annie
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 23:11:43

    Re:  "He certainly wasn't a forked tongued politician that we've become use
    to - he was at least honest and that was refreshing."

    Yea, when he thinks someone is "damn stupid", he tells them right to their
    face.

    :-)  (-:  :-)  (-:  :-)  :-)  (-:  :-)  (-:  :-)  (-:  :-)  (-:

    Message: 65804
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Melissa
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 23:14:16

    Re:  "I heard on KFYI this morning of TWO times that he was recorded saying
    something and then denied it."

    Hey!  That's not bad for a politician!  Ol' Dennis D. has far exceeded the
    number two.

    Message: 65805
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 23:15:48

    Re:  "Actually, the names found in the book of Mormon would not be recorded
    because these are the lost tribes of Israel transplanted to America."

    Which "Bob" are you talking to Roger?  I don't remember saying anything
    about Mormons.

    Message: 65806
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Dean
    Date: 05/18/90  Time: 23:19:46

    Re:  "When forcing obedience in others it helps the one doing the
    forcing to claim that it is done out of love rather than hate,
    but the effect upon the ones being forced is about the same."

    Gee, it seems like I remember my Dad (God rest his soul) saying something to
    the effect, "this is going to hurt me more than it is going to hurt you."
    At the time I didn't believe him.  But as I think back now, what I got was
    what I needed, and I'm a better person for it.

    Message: 65807
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger
    Date: 05/19/90  Time: 05:16:30

     Agnostic Christian is a contradiction on terms, Roger. A Christian KNOWS
    what (or in whom) he believes. An agnostic doesn't know WHAT he believes. It
    should follow, therefore, that one cannot be both an agnostic and a
    Christian at once.

    Message: 65808
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Roger/danger
    Date: 05/19/90  Time: 05:22:00

     Secular humanism is dangerous in that, as I have said several times, it
    puts man before God, and this is the same desire that drove Satan out of
    heaven. It is called pride. The danger is to the individual who so believes,
    since it is a belief system based on works righteousness, and works
    righteousness never got anybody anywhere in God's economy. Our righteousness
    is as filthy rags in His sight. Our only righteosness is in the Lord, Jesus
    Christ, and it is only through Him that we have any at all, and that is a
    pure gift of grace,nothing we can boast about.

    Message: 65809
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Ann on Ev
    Date: 05/19/90  Time: 05:32:54

     Here's a rough example of what you consider Mecham's "honesty" and
    "straight talk".
     When he became governor (on a fluke), the first thing he did was to rescind
    an already declared MLK holiday, with the statement that it was illegal for
    a governor (Babbit) to declare a holiday. More recently, he has stated,
    publicly, that it was the job of the legislature to declare a holiday, which
    they had not until that time done. Then, when they finally did what they
    were elected to do (make decisions), he found fault with that, and began a
    petition drive to put the issus back on the ballot, declaring that it is noe
    the prerogative of the people to declare a holiday. The other day, when
    confronted by Pat Quaranta, of the Italian American League, with his
    bigotry, he lost his cool and pounded the table, declaring 3 or 4 times that
    "WE HAVE A KING DAY!", referring to the Sunday MLK day HE had declared when
    he was governor, exactly the thing he said originally was illegal for a
    governor to do. So there we come full circle, which is exactly the way your
    hero chatters. In circles.
     Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING that Ev Mecham does or says (not
    necessarily the same), is done and said with one motive in mind, and that is
    the promotion of Ev Mecham into the limelight of the public eye. He is a
    bigot, a liar and a self-serving fool.
     (This is neither a support nor a condemnation of a MLK day for Arizona, but
    just a comment on the nature of the little man with the small mind and big
    mouth who would be governor, again.)

    Message: 65810
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Steve #65794
    Date: 05/19/90  Time: 08:35:42

    Now THAT IS THE REAL REASON for a MLK day! Bottom line! All the rest is lip
    service. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 65811
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bobby - damn stupid!
    Date: 05/19/90  Time: 08:42:29

    Yeah - he's said things like that - what other politician would have the
    nerve - gaul? They are so rigid their almost not human because they must
    walk a middle line all of the time. Must? Maybe not. But I will admit I've
    seen no other like him. He at the same time makes me admire and hate him!
    But will say, I feel he was for and with the people of this state. The way
    he goes about it is 'iffy' sometimes! -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 65812
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff L.
    Date: 05/19/90  Time: 09:25:57

      I explained what was wrong with the solutions you advised and stated that
    substance abuse could only be beaten when the abuser became committed to
    doing it for their own reasons. I also mentioned that the wildly successful
    A.A. and N.A. programs are practically fraudulent when they claim such a
    high success rate because so many of their clients revert afterward. I
    recap those messages because you say I haven't given you any possible
    solutions.
      Before we can agree on possible solutions we need to agree that current
    approaches are destructive and doomed to failure. I refer to the war on
    drugs here. Solutions based on the individual incentives needed to beat
    dependency, and offered in an atmosphere of openness and honesty, sound like
    much better alternatives to me.
       See You Later,
          Dean H.

    Message: 65813
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bob/force
    Date: 05/19/90  Time: 09:31:08

      You make a fine case for the paternal, all-powerful state by comparing its
    relationship to the individual to that between father and child. That is not
    a proper relationship between government and citizen in a free society.
    Likewise, it is not a proper role for religion to impose upon those who do
    not share in their beliefs. It deftly illustrates exactly the attitude
    behind such manipulation.
       See You Later,
          Dean H.

Content of this site is © Mark Firestone or whomever wrote it. All rights reserved.