OK Crotchblow. How 'bout Crotchus de Blowselfus? Would that work? stemcell
On Oct 28, 11:12 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm warning you two firestarters! I will start posting under another name > again... > > you'd better "*THINK "*about the consequences buddy! I know other ways to > get even...wroohahahahah! > > [?] > > > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi y'all - I think Crotchbow is appealing. I don't agree with the > > article posted by Aaron. The CFA definition is fine with me. Of > > course, if we accept a theist as being a true believer and not just > > someone who attends church for social reasons etc. then they are not > > practicing freethought as their faith is illogical (Mr. Spock episode > > 284 11/2/84.) I do agree with the article in respect to all atheists > > not being freethinkers - some are just too lazy to think. > > Nevertheless, I feel that Freethinker is a good umbrella term, and as > > pointed out, is unrestrictive versus confining. > > > On Oct 27, 3:37 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think Crotchblow has a point. In the early days we went through > > > this. But before I go any further, I would like to ask Aaron what > > > prompted you to post that link? Are you considering that it would be > > > an idea to consider changing the name of MFA? It is the name. It is > > > inclusive. It is inviting (I think). Why should MFA change the name > > > just to bow down to certain groups who feel it is offensive. I am > > > getting to far along in thought so I'll just wait till I hear your > > > response to those previous questions. > > > > :-) > > > > stemcell > > > > On Oct 27, 1:47 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > This is about ownership of a definition as an organization. WE can > > > > either show ownership and give this word a bent in respect to the > > > > organizations mission, or we can leave it as an open-ended question, > > > > thereby allowing any existing and future members to give it thier own > > > > personal meaning without holding them captive to it. > > > > > Well and so, if you have a concrete mission you should have a concrete > > > > bent to brand the whole to be easily identified...Replace the > > > > organizational name with any other representation wording and what do > > > > you get? Memphis Freethough Alliance...Memphis Secular Alliance? > > > > Memphis Skeptic Alliance? Who is your target member? > > > > > FREE - unrestricted vs. captive? > > > > THINKING - not something encouraged by any diety or theism I know > > > > of.... > > > > > It works for my framework and perceptions limited though they are. > > > > > On Oct 27, 12:50 pm, Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > It was probably a mistake for me to post the first paragraph of > > > > > Lowder's essay or to offer a summary. It's too easy (and perfectly > > > > > natural) for people to respond to my blurb rather than to the essay > > > > > itself. I'm always happy to hear what my fellow freethinkers think, > > > > > but I am especially interested in your review of the specific ideas > > > > > expressed in the essay and how they might impact MFA. > > > > > >http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/features/2000/lowder1.html > > > > > > Aaron- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > 1B2.gif > < 1KViewDownload- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
