BCITORGB wrote:
Tink says:
==============
Fair enough, and yet many issues arise in your question. If I try to
determine my action based on someone elses action, there is an
assumption that I am intimately aware of that person. For example if
I
say "What would frtwz do?" and I don't really know frtwz, then I
could
not answer how he would respond to a given situation. So for you to
ask, "What would Jesus do?" you assume that I know what Jesus would
do.

================

I haven't a clue what JC would do as I don't profess to be a
Christian.
Further, I don't CARE what JC would do, because I'm not a Christian.

However, every Sunday morning, there are dozens of televangelists who
claim to know what JC would say about a myriad of bizarre topics. I
thought this was a power all you Christians have. Knowing JC's
position
on issues, that is. So Tink, if you don't know what JC would do, and
you're not willing to hazard a guess, and you're not sure what JC's
teaching are and how they relate to public policy, then I suppose
that's the end of this thread.

Thanks for your input.

frtzw906

I would put the word "bizarre" in front of "televagelists", and "claim"
as well! If they have convinced you that all Christians have this
power, and know what Jesus would do, I have some Pacific coast property
I want to sell you here in Colorado. We could even go paddling together
in the ocean while you are here checking out the view.

I could tell you what I think Jesus would do, based on my personal
experience, but then I am surprised most of the time as well. TnT

BCITORGB wrote:
Tink says:
===========
You say you are not a religious person, that you do not believe in
Jesus, that you don't know Mim in a personal and intimate way, then
how
can you know what He would do, or question what I say He would do.
============

Because his teachings are universally known. I don't have to be a
Christian to know how to read. So I'll know if you're trying to BS
your
way around the issue.

frtzw90

And I would know how well read you are. So far I am impressed and
appreciate your frankness, and willingness to look into these things.
That is one reason I opened the subject here or RBP. Any bizarre
Televangelist can preach to his choir on a "Sunday morning" and get an
Amen. I have found it much more enlightining to discuss with fellow
travelers and paddlers our thoughts, hopes and desires, and if someone
is full of ****, you tell them. I have had to consider things here in a
kayak paddling group that I never heard in a Sunday school class, which
makes me stretch my brain, but then exercise is good. Doesn't
necessarily change the direction I am paddling, just how I use my
paddle. TnT

Tink says:
============
Though if you had ask your real question
in the first place, I would have been able to answer more directly,
without having to plow thrugh so much other "stuff.
============

Sorry, Tink, my question WAS clear to begin with and there was nothing
you had to plow through. But it appears you either still don't get it,
or you don't want to get it, or you're jerking me about, or you're not
interested in pursuing the discussion. At this point, if we were in
court, you'd be designated a hostile witness.

Look: I'll try to be as simplistic about this as I can. Let's pretend
that you and I are going to write a book called "JC Goes To
Washington". It's about a young politician who runs as an independent
and gets elected to the House of Representatives. Now, Tink, here's the
hook in our book: every chapter will be about a different public policy
issue. Of course there'll be a whole interesting assortment of
characters -- trade unionists, industrialists, NRA lobbyists, a host of
politicians button-holing our hero in the corridors of power etc. JC,
our hero will listen to all sides of the issues (remember, one issue
per chapter). Then, at the end of each chapter, he'll have to decide
which way to vote. Of course he'll vote based on HIS teachings (a
"higher law"). So, at the end of each chapter we'll know where JC
stands on these issues.

Is that so hard to magine Tink? Are you game?

frtzw906

Tink says:
===============
I could tell you what I think Jesus would do, based on my personal
experience, but then I am surprised most of the time as well.
==============

I'm not interested in your personal experiences (not insofar as this
topic is concerned, anyway). I'm interested in what JC is publically
known to have advocated. Everyone knows where JC stands on issues. It
is public knowledge, or have you not read the bible? If you don't know
JC's stand on issues, how can he be your prophet? Don't you look to him
for direction? If you don't know his stand, how do you know which
direction he wants you to take?

I was confused by Christian belief before, but, MAN, Tink, you've just
made it even more confusing.

You're telling me you follow JC without really knowing what he stands
for!!!???? That is`truly bizarre!

frtzw906

Tink says:
===============
to discuss with fellow
travelers
===============

just for fun, tink, look up the phrase "fellow travelers".... just for
fun, find the origins, eh?

frtzw906

"rick" wrote in message
k.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article , rick at
wrote on 3/3/05 4:30 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...

"rick" wrote in message
link.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
et, rick at
wrote on 3/2/05 10:19 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
et, rick
at
wrote on 3/2/05 6:01 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...

"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ps.com...
KMAN, I was pleased with the effort Tink took to get a
handle
on this
situation. And, from my own perspective, I've done some
reading about
various systems and have at least a passing
acquaintance
with
a variety
of European models (I now know the difference between
the
Beveridge and
the Bismark approaches to healthcare funding). In that
sense,
all of
this has been useful for me.

It's too bad rick could never see the value in such
discourse.
====================
LOL I tried, fool. All I got was a bunch of jingoistic
chest-thumping lies.

Perhaps you should stop telling them, then.
=====================
I didn't lie, liarman. People are on long waiting lists
in
Canada, and some of those people die while waiting for
that
treatment. Sites have been presented to you that prove
this,
yet
you insist on your chest-thumping lies. Why is that
liarman?
Haven't quite gotten your refutaions together yet?

I'm not lying about anything.
=====================
Yes, you are, liarman. People are on long waiting lists in
Canada, and some of those people die while waiting for that
treatment. Sites have been presented to you that prove
this, yet
you insist on your chest-thumping lies. Why is that
liarman?
Haven't quite gotten your refutaions together yet?

I don't think you've been paying attention and you are making
a fool of
yourself. You might want to ask Tinkerntom to point you to
the post (long
ago) where I conceded that the way I framed the question
allowed you to meet
the burden of proof I requested.
==============================
Yet the proof was presented, and it proves you are a liar
regardless of how you make your claim.

All it proves is that I told you the people in Newfoundland
were not waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment and I was right.

You are a scumbag, and a coward for not admitting your
dishonesty.
==========================
That was but one example to show that you were lying

Whatever you think it was, I never said that no one in Canada is waiting
for
treatment.
=================
Yes, you did.

No, I didn't. The only evidence that you presented was my response to your
story about Newfoundland, in which you claimed people were waiting 2 1/2
years for treatment. Within the same article, it is pointed out that they
are all in fact in receipt of treatment, and are waiting for a specific
test, a test that they will receive more quickly if necessary. This is not
proof that I said no one in Canada waits for treatment. I never said that,
and it's silly to suggest that I did. Everyone in every health care system
has to wait.

Stop being such a scumbag and apologize. Or are you too big of a coward?

"rick" wrote in message
k.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article , rick at


snip


I told you the people in Newfoundland were not waiting 2 1/2
years for treatment and I was right.
==============
No, you weren't. You were lying as usual. Their treatment did
not start for at least 2 1/2 years.

As stated in the article:

"While the wait is less than ideal, patients' conditions are being
investigated andfollowed by other medical means, and that anyone needing
an
emergency scan gets one," said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of
diagnostic imaging at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's.
======================
Yes, and an emergency scan may be too late. What part of all this really
is over your head? The doctor wants to start treatment

The doctor states that they are already receiving treatment, and that anyone
who needs the scan earlier will get it.

But whether you believe this means they are in treatment or not, this does
nothing to support your statement that I claimed no one in Canada waits for
treatment. The only statement of mine you have pointed out was my response
to your comment about Newfoundland. I was not speaking about "all of Canada"
or "anyone in Canada" I was disputing your claim that those people in the
article were waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment. Whether you agree with me on
that or not, you are being extremely dishonest, and a supreme scumbag by
insisting that this somehow means I claimed no one in Canada waits for
treatment.

Stop being a scumbag and apologize. Or are you too big of a coward?

On 3-Mar-2005, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

Mike, if God walked up and punched you in the nose, how would you know
that it is God that did this

If He was in the form of a person, I wouldn't know. If it was something
that could punch me in the nose but didn't look like a person or any
other common critter, I'd be suspicious. However, I don't know that
"God" would be my first guess.

Mike

On 4-Mar-2005, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

Does this mean that you do believe in God?

I am an agnostic. I have no basis for belief and no
basis to deny. Sorry if that's a bit ambiguous, but
that's where I rest.

And is this God the same God that you are referring to now the same
God, as mentioned and quoted in this statement, "the Judeo-Christian
God is presented in the Bible and that's what we have to work with"?

The Judeo-Christian God is the one I am discussing, to the exclusion
of others. There are so many gods out there, with different histories
and forms that we have to narrow the field to one I am more or less
familiar with.

Mike

On 3-Mar-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote:

Let's not talk about liberal vs conservative.

Just to confuse the issue further, there is such a thing
as a liberal conservative. The Economist states that its
political position is such. Unfortunately, the use of
the terminology in the present US political environment
makes the term a contradiction and most Americans would
have trouble with it.

Mike