Re: Unidentified creature stumps experts

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 09:34 PM 6/8/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gary wrote-
>Wait! It's a ... : Unidentified creature stumps experts
>
>"What in the world?" Bill Kurdian asked himself when he saw the animal
>for the first time.
>
>About the size of a fox, but with short brown hair and a long cat-like
>tail, it looked more like an animal in a National Geographic spread out
>of Africa than any critter native to the woods of central North
>Carolina.
>
>Complete article
>
>http://tinyurl.com/2vod5
Can't say it surprises me at all, NC has some interesting "varmits".
Mom and I saw something at the resevoir last spring that at first
glance we thought was a squirrel- with lemur type face coloring and
a really long thick snout and a long tail. Seemed to stay more
to the ground than the trees.  Took me a while to track it down,
and only wound up finding it shown in a museum.  None of the
locals knew what I was talking about.  I cannot recall what it was-
wrote it on a program somewhere- but it is native to the same
area as the critter above- maybe some kind of mutation black
hole in the bible belt :-)

Nah.  You know how mountain critters are about marrying cousins . . .

-- Ronn!  :)

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

O'Reilly: ACLU is America's "most dangerous organization ... second next to Al Qaeda"

[The Fool]

<>

O'Reilly: ACLU is America's "most dangerous organization ... second next
to Al Qaeda"



On June 2, FOX News Channel host Bill O'Reilly referred to the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as a "fascist organization" on his TV
program; earlier that day on his radio show, O'Reilly compared the ACLU
to Al Qaeda and announced that the ACLU is "the most dangerous
organization in the United States of America right now."

Concluding a June 2 discussion on The Radio Factor in which he criticized
the ACLU for threatening to sue Los Angeles County if the county failed
to remove a cross from its official seal -- which the ACLU argues
violates the constitutional separation of church and state -- O'Reilly
summed up his view of the organization.

>From the June 2 broadcast of The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:

O'REILLY: Finally, the ACLU -- we talked about this yesterday and I --
and, you know, I have to pick on the ACLU because they're the most
dangerous organization in the United States of America right now. There's
by far. There's nobody even close to that. They're, like, second next to
Al Qaeda.

>From the June 2 broadcast of FOX News Channel's The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: "Talking Points" wants you to know that we are rapidly losing
freedom in America. Judges are overruling the will of the people, and
fascist organizations like the ACLU are imposing their secular will.

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted 3 - 2 to reach a
compromise with the ACLU to remove the cross.


-
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the
mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every
expanded project." - James Madison

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

'Liberal Media Bias': Right-Wing Racist now a "CNN analyst"

[The Fool]

<>

"Distort D'Newsa" now a CNN analyst



Controversial right-wing pundit and author Dinesh D'Souza has a new title
-- "CNN analyst." On June 5, during coverage of former President Ronald
Reagan's death, D'Souza (known by some as "Distort D'Newsa," according to
1985 and 1991 articles in The Washington Post) appeared on a CNN breaking
news segment; on June 6, D'Souza appeared on three CNN programs: Lou
Dobbs Tonight, American Morning, and Anderson Cooper 360. On the latter
two programs, the anchors -- Soledad O'Brien and Anderson Cooper,
respectively -- identified D'Souza as a "CNN analyst."

As an undergraduate in the early 1980s at Dartmouth College, D'Souza
gained national notoriety as co-founder and editor of the conservative
newspaper The Dartmouth Review. During D'Souza's tenure as editor of the
Review, according to a September 22, 1995, article in The Washington
Post, "[T]he off-campus newspaper [The Dartmouth Review] published an
interview with a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, using a mock
photograph of a black man hanging from a campus tree, and 'outed' at
least two gay students."

>From 1987 to 1988, D'Souza served as the senior domestic policy analyst
at the White House under Reagan. Since then, backed by right-wing
foundations (which have supported his work as a research fellow at the
American Enterprise Institute and currently support his work as the
Robert and Karen Rishwain Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution),
D'Souza has written several books, including the racially charged The End
of Racism: Principles for a Multiracial Society in 1995.

According to a dossier by Media Transparency: The Money Behind the Media,
"The book argues that low-income black people are basically
'pathological' and that white racism really isn't racism at all, just a
logical response to this 'pathology.'" According to D'Souza's personal
website, in The End of Racism, D'Souza "argues that the American
obsession with race is fueled by a civil rights establishment that has a
vested interest in perpetuating black dependency." D'Souza also argued,
in a September 1995 Wall Street Journal op-ed, that "[t]he best way for
African-Americans to save private-sector affirmative action may be to
repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964."

On August 22, 1999, The Washington Post reported, "[E]fforts by
conservatives to build support among blacks were set back by the angry
reaction of African-American conservatives Glenn Loury and Robert Woodson
to books on race by two conservative authors, neither of whom is black:
Charles Murray ("The Bell Curve") and Dinesh D'Souza ("The End of
Racism"). In a highly publicized decision, Loury and Woodson resigned in
protest in 1995 from the American Enterprise Institute, where Murray and
D'Souza [were] fellows."

D'Souza's writings have appeared in major newspapers, including The Wall
Street Journal and The Washington Post. He has also appeared on such TV
programs as ABC's Nightline, CBS's Face the Nation, FOX News Channel's
Hannity & Colmes, MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, and CNBC's Dennis
Miller.


-
"You cannot cripple an opponent by outwitting him in a political debate,
 You can do it only by following Lenin's injunction: 'In political
conflicts,
 the goal is not to refute your opponent's argument, but to wipe him
 from the face of the earth.'"
 --The Art of Political War (4thReichKlan Political Manual)

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Unidentified creature stumps experts

[Kanandarqu]

Gary wrote-
>Wait! It's a ... : Unidentified creature stumps experts  
>
>"What in the world?" Bill Kurdian asked himself when he saw the animal
>for the first time.
>
>About the size of a fox, but with short brown hair and a long cat-like
>tail, it looked more like an animal in a National Geographic spread out
>of Africa than any critter native to the woods of central North
>Carolina.
>
>Complete article
>
>http://tinyurl.com/2vod5


Can't say it surprises me at all, NC has some interesting "varmits".
Mom and I saw something at the resevoir last spring that at first
glance we thought was a squirrel- with lemur type face coloring and
a really long thick snout and a long tail. Seemed to stay more
to the ground than the trees.  Took me a while to track it down,
and only wound up finding it shown in a museum.  None of the
locals knew what I was talking about.  I cannot recall what it was- 
wrote it on a program somewhere- but it is native to the same
area as the critter above- maybe some kind of mutation black
hole in the bible belt :-)

Dee
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Jesus-anity

[Dan Minette]

- Original Message - 
From: "Ronn!Blankenship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: Jesus-anity


> At 07:31 PM 6/8/04, Dan Minette wrote:
>
>
> >One final point, one also needs to be very careful in defining Paul,
since
> >only about half of the works attributed to him were written by him.  The
> >rest were written after he died.
>
>
>
> They were ghost-written?
>
>
>
> Somebody Had To Say It Maru
>
>
No, they were written by his son: Duetero-Paul. :-)

Dan M.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Jesus-anity

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 07:31 PM 6/8/04, Dan Minette wrote:

One final point, one also needs to be very careful in defining Paul, since
only about half of the works attributed to him were written by him.  The
rest were written after he died.

They were ghost-written?

Somebody Had To Say It Maru
-- Ronn!  :)

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Jesus-anity

[Dan Minette]

- Original Message - 
From: "Deborah Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 5:44 PM
Subject: Jesus-anity (was: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out)


> > Travis Edmunds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > DISCLAIMER: I'm a rather agnostic fellow who has
> > some major problems with
> > organized religion. I think that should clear up any
> > potential misunderstandings below.
> 
>
> > I really should add something more though. You say
> > that the Christianity
> > (which, like it or not IS based upon the teachings
> > of Jesus)...
>
> [Note: I tend to view the Gospel of John with a fair
> amount of reserve, as it differs from the other 3 in
> many respects, and was probably written later as
> well.]
>
> I think we have more Paul-anity, Augustine-anity, and
> even Aquinis-anity than actual Jesus-anity; many of
> his messages were - and still are - quite radical:
> Love your enemy?  Break bread with society's dregs?
> Judge not lest ye be judged likewise?

I find your quote interesting in that your sources for the views of Jesus
are older than the Paul that you question..The oldest known fragment of
those who considered Jesus the Christ is quoted in Philippians 2:6-11.

While being in the form of God
did not count equality with God
something to be grasped.

But he emptied himself
taking the form of a slave
becoming as human beings are

and being in every way like a human being
he was humbler yet,
even to accepting death, death on a cross.

And for this God raised him high
and gave him the name
which is above all other names

so that all beings
in the heavens, on earth and in the underworld
should bend the knee at the name of Jesus

and that every tongue should acknowledge
Jesus Christ as Lord
to the glory of the Father.

This probably dates back to the '40s.  Paul was from the mid 50's to the
mid 60's or so.  Mark, 67-70, Luke and Matt 80s, and John mid-late 90s,
with final redaction in the early 100s.

So, the earliest testimony to Jesus is in Paul.  The gospels are works that
reflect the early Christian community's faith in Jesus; they are not
directly attributable to Jesus.

One difficulty in trying to get to the historical Jesus is that, in
stripping away early commentators, one often uses one's own views and
feelings for what is original.  Thus, one can appreciate Schweitzer's
comment, that "a man does not so reveal himself as when he searches for the
historical Jesus."

The point of this is that, while one can obtain a good understanding of the
Christian community from primary sources that were written before
Augustine, the same cannot be said for the Christian community before Paul.
They weren't Christians then, that is fairly evident; they were Jews who
believed that the Messiah had come and the perusula was just around the
corner. Being called Christians was post Paul.  But, scholars differ
greatly when the comb the literature we do have and try to pick out the
remnants of early work.

One final point, one also needs to be very careful in defining Paul, since
only about half of the works attributed to him were written by him.  The
rest were written after he died.

Dan M.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Fight The Future: State Forces Parent to Medicate Child with Ritalin

[The Fool]

<>

June 7, 2004 — When Chad Taylor noticed his son was apparently
experiencing serious side effects from Ritalin prescribed for attention
deficit hyperactivity disorder, he decided to take the boy off the
medication. Now, he says he may be accused of child abuse. 

 
In February, 12-year-old Daniel began displaying some symptoms that his
father suspected were related to the use of Ritalin. 

"He was losing weight, wasn't sleeping, wasn't eating," Taylor told ABC
News affiliate KOAT-TV in New Mexico. "[He] just wasn't Daniel."

So Taylor took Daniel off Ritalin, against his doctor's wishes. And
though Taylor noticed Daniel was sleeping better and his appetite had
returned, his teachers complained about the return of his disruptive
behavior. Daniel seemed unable to sit still and was inattentive. His
teachers ultimately learned that he was no longer taking Ritalin. 

School officials reported Daniel's parents to New Mexico's Department of
Children, Youth and Families.Then a detective and social worker made a
home visit. 

"The detective told me if I did not medicate my son, I would be arrested
for child abuse and neglect," Taylor said.

A spokesman for New Mexico's Department of Children, Youth and Families
told KOAT-TV that they could not comment on the case because of state
confidentiality laws. John Francis, a detective for the Rio Rancho
Department of Public Safety, said that Taylor was not threatened but told
KOAT-TV that parents could be charged in situations like his.

"People can be charged with child abuse, child neglect or various other
crimes involving a child," he said. 

More Kids on Antidepressants

Taylor is among many parents facing a dilemma over whether to medicate
children who suffer from mental disorders. A recent study by Express
Scripts Inc., a medical benefits management company, found antidepressant
use increased 49 percent among consumers younger than 18 between 1998 and
2002. Preschoolers up to age 5, the study found, were the fastest-growing
users of prescription antidepressants. 
... 
-
"If evil could be branded, its emblem would be the Wal-Mart logo."
-Inthesetimes article

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Cities Say No to the Patriot Act

[Robert Seeberger]

http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,63702,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1


http://tinyurl.com/36grn


Forget drug-free and nuclear-free zones. A growing grassroots movement
seeks to make the United States a Patriot Act-free zone, one city at a
time.

Or, at the very least, the people behind the movement hope to make
their cities constitutional safe zones.

In the past two years, more than 300 cities and four states have
passed resolutions calling on Congress to repeal or change parts of
the USA Patriot Act that, activists say, violate constitutional rights
such as free speech and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.

Barring that, the resolutions declare that their communities will
uphold the constitutional rights of their residents should federal law
enforcement agents come knocking on the door of local authorities for
assistance in tracking residents. This means local authorities will
insist on complying with federal orders only in ways that do not
violate constitutional rights. The resolutions are not binding,
however, and do not affect the federal government's actions.

The national movement was launched in 2001 by the Bill of Rights
Defense Committee, an organization led by activist Nancy Talanian.
Talanian first lobbied her community -- Northhampton, Massachusetts, a
town of 30,000 people -- to stand against the act in November 2001,
when few people had heard about the legislation.

Talanian and fellow activists urged newspaper editors to write about
the legislation and hosted a public forum attended by 400 people,
including Northampton's mayor and chief of police. Word spread quickly
to other communities, four of which passed their own resolutions
before Northampton passed its declaration the following May.

Two years later, 322 municipalities and four states -- Alaska, Hawaii,
Maine and Vermont -- have Patriot Act resolutions.

Congress passed the USA Patriot Act swiftly in October 2001, 45 days
after the Sept. 11 attacks, easing restrictions on the government's
ability to dig up personal information about citizens and
non-citizens, and obtain wiretaps and search warrants. Only one
senator, Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin), and 61 House of Representative
members voted against the legislation.

Under the act, federal investigators can obtain individuals' library,
financial, health and education records from cities while barring
municipal workers from letting anyone know authorities have seized the
documents. Officials can also monitor the activities of people who
have not been identified as suspects and search a home or office
without prior notice.

The municipal resolutions, crafted individually by each community,
vary in language. They affirm, for the most part, that city employees
aiding federal authorities in national security investigations will
not violate the rights of people under investigation, such as
monitoring political and religious gatherings where people are
engaging in activities protected by the First Amendment.

Hawaii was the first to pass a statewide resolution, citing the
internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II as a motivating
factor.

Talanian said fewer than five municipalities rejected resolutions
brought before them. These included Boston and Petaluma, California, a
small town north of San Francisco.

Fred Hemmings, a Republican state senator in Hawaii who voted against
a resolution passed in his state, called the resolution a political
play by leftists bent on criticizing the government.

"There are constitutional zealots that somehow believe, especially in
times of war, that some of our adversaries should be protected by
rights given to us by the Constitution," he said. "But the people on
the left are forgetting that we're fighting a war against a nationless
enemy. It has to be fought on completely new terms."

He said although he has not read the Patriot Act in detail, he
believes "it does provide for adequate judicial oversight of any
intrusion into a person's personal life."

But Councilwoman Kathy Lantry from St. Paul, Minnesota, where a
resolution passed 6-to-1, took issue with the interpretation that only
liberals are behind the movement.

"There are many conservative councilors around the country who have
stated emphatically that there are many portions of the Patriot Act
that are in direct violation to the way that many of us thought we do
things in America," she said. "It's an easy out to say it's just a
liberal issue."

Talanian said the community movements, which act independently of her
national group and draft their own resolutions, consist of coalitions
of disparate groups, from conservative libertarians to liberal civil
rights activists.

"It's been very nonpartisan," she said. "There have been mixtures of
political parties, as well as peace and veterans groups and student
and faculty groups, working together."

Although the resolutions don't carry official weight, the communities
say they hope to send a message to Congress to change or repeal

Re: Archbishop Chaput of Denver

[Gary Denton]

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 09:53:49 -0500, Dan Minette
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> > Dan Minette wrote:

> > > From: "JDG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> > If you go through confession and absolution, in your heart, that's what
> > counts for Communion, isn't it?  So, are your sins between you and God
> > or between you and God and other parties?
> 
> It is mixed; as others have said.  In Christianity, the involvement of the
> community in confessing sins goes back a long ways.  The fact that it is in
> a gospel indicates that it goes back to the first century.
>

The Protestants have a different view of confession.  

http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1988ii/wilkin.html

http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1989i/Wilkin.html

Here is the Catholic Church view.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Forgiveness_of_Sins.asp

> 
> With the reformation, the community has been downplayed.  Recently, the
> idea of just God and me has gained some foothold.  One sees a number of
> non-connectional churches springing up.  But, the connectional churches do
> have some understanding of the involvement of community in reconciliation.



> I'll give you what was/is important to me.  Erasmus was a humanist scholar
> who took the middle ground in the reformation.  He was offered a red hat
> (cardinal) and declined it to remain more objective.  He pushed scholarship
> over later tradition in the translation of scripture.
> 
> He had a strong sense that the church needed to stay together, instead of
> splitting into, literally, warring factions.  He convinced a pope that
> there was something fundamentally wrong with the financing of the church,
> but the pope didn't have the courage to take the risk inherent in totally
> undoing the financial structure of the church.  He was regaled by both
> sides because he was more interested in unity than pointing fingers.
> 
> >From this came a tradition of thought that produced the Enlightenment. I
> see myself in the tradition of supporting unity within the church; as well
> as holding enlightenment thought as my basic philosophy.  (If I'm anything
> I'm a Kantiant; and Kant was the greatest philosopher of the
> Enlightenment.)
>>

Take the philosopher survey:

http://selectsmart.com/PHILOSOPHY

me - 1.  Kant (100%)
2.  John Stuart Mill (95%)
3.  Jean-Paul Sartre (76%)
4.  Epicureans (75%)
...

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

We combine a priori and a posteriori knowledge.

A priori knowledge is knowledge gained or justified by reason
alone, without the direct or indirect influence of experience .  A
posteriori knowledge is any other sort of knowledge, viz.  knowledge
the attainment or justification of which requires reference to
experience.

a..  We have freedom
a..  God is not essential for moral argumentation
a..  The objective facts about the human knowledge leads to
morality
a..  We must act out of a sense of duty in order to be moral
a..  Moral action does not come out of following inclinations
a..  Moral standards must be followed without qualification
a..  We must always act so that the means of our actions could be a
universal law
a..  We must always treat people as ends not means

Mill, John Stuart (1806-1873)
a..  The Utilitarian principle is correct when the quality of
pleasures is accounted for.  Utilitarianism is both a theory of the
good and a theory of the right.  Although Mill was a utilitarian, he
argued that not all forms of pleasure are of equal value, using his
famous saying "It is better to be Socrates unsatisfied, than a pig
satisfied."

a..  Liberty is the most important pleasure.

Politics, philosophy and religion are bound together.  I was much more
of a libertarian until I decided I was more of a
balance-of-powers-atarian and libertarians ignored the liberty
reducing power of concentrations of wealth.  I was a
non-denominational Protestant who had explored Catholicism in college
until I decided to research religion esp. Christianity in the 80's.

I would have thought i was more Mills than Kant but what do I know,
I'm not a philosopher.

> 
> Hope this was enough.
> 
> Dan

It got me thinking about transubstantiation, confession and the old
what philosopher are you test.

Gary "they didn't have Homer Simpson in the philosophers' Denton 

"The Simpsons and Philosophy: The D'oh! of Homer" by William Irwin

"The Gospel According to the Simpsons" by Mark Pinsky.

Homer; "You're everywhere, You're omnivorous. Oh Lord!"

"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be
ruled by evil men."
--Plato (427?-347 B.C.)
Notebook - http://elemming.blogspot.com
Easter Lemming Liberal News Digest -
http://elemming2.blogspot.com
#1 on google for liberal news
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Archbishop Chaput of Denver

[Dan Minette]

- Original Message - 
From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: Archbishop Chaput of Denver


> I snipped some stuff.  I just want to address some of what was in the
> post.
>
> Dan Minette wrote:
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "JDG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 8:27 PM
> > Subject: Archbishop Chaput of Denver
> >
> > >As Catholics, we believe that the Eucharist is not just a symbol or a
> > >sacred meal or an important ritual expressing our community. Rather it
is,
> > >quite literally, the body and blood of Jesus Christ. It's His living
> > >presence in our midst. This is what distinguishes the Catholic faith
from
> > >nearly every Protestant denomination. In fact, it's one of the central
> > >Catholic beliefs that the Protestant Reformation eventually
"protested."
> >
> > That's not as obvious as you make out. I've discussed this at length,
both
> > at the seminary where I was taking classes and with Presbyterian
clergy.
> > The real difficulty the Protestant church has is with the use of
> > Aristotelian philosophy in the description.  I asked several times, and
was
> > told that this formulation is now considered just one of many imperfect
> > descriptions of the Eucharistwith the limits of human language
> > requiring that any description fall far short of the wonder of the
reality.
> >
> > Here's the difference between the Catholic and Presbyterian views:
> >
> > Catholic: Communion has the real, non-physical presence of Jesus
> >
> > Presbyterian: Communion has the real spiritual presence of Jesus.
> >
> > I really don't think the difference is enough for us to conclude that
we
> > can turn other's away from Jesus' communion.
>
> [I'm ignoring the last sentence, but leaving it in.]
>
> Transubstantiation.
>
> My understanding, and I'm sure one of you will correct me if I'm wrong,
> is that Catholics believe in transubstantiation.  (Lutherans, too.  At
> least, that was the position of Luther)  Many Protestant
> denominations do not.  Including Presbyterians.  At least, that's my
> understanding.  (I'm a little removed from the Presbyterian heritage my
> father grew up with.)

The present positions of the denominations is not as clear as it once might
have appeared...if it was ever that clear in actuality.  Unfortunately for
me, only a rather long explanation will have any clarity at all...so here
goes.

Lets consider a range of statements on the Eucharist.  The strongest is
that bread and wine are changes into the body and blood of Christ is such a
spectacular fashion, that even non-Christian observers cannot help but
observe and accept that is what's happening.  The weakest that I will
consider is that it is merely a symbol.

No one actually holds the strongest view. It is clear why people don't..its
not what is seen.  Some Christians do hold the weakest view: it is symbolic
only.  I can see that there is a significant difference between this view
and the view of the Catholic church.

Other Christians, including Methodists, Catholics, Lutherans,
Episcopalians, and Presbyterians, hold a view that is in between these two.

The classic Catholic view of transubstantiation is a view very well
grounded in Aristotelian philosophy.  While a real discussion of Aristotle
would require a L6 post, I can briefly discuss the relevant parts.  I hope
its enough to give a feel.

For Aristotle, everything has both accidental and substantial properties.
Take for example, a book.  Its weight, color, dimensions are all accidental
properties.  They can be changed without changing the item from a book to
something else.  But, if one were to change the substantial property of a
book by removing the words, then it becomes something else; say a
paperweight.

The accidental properties of bread and wine are their color, taste,
texture, etc.  With transubstantiation, none of these are changed..so there
are no changes to the appearance.  Its the substance that has changed; so
in reality it is now the body and blood of Christ.

Luther wasn't thrilled with Aristotelian philosophy; although Plato was
fine for him.  He liked Augustine, but not Aquinas.  (Aquinas was based in
Aristotle, and Augustine in Plato).  So, he came up with a variation that
was not dependant on Aristotle.

In looking back on this, one needs to remember that Plato and Aristotle
were the great figures of philosophy at that time.  Augustine and Aquinas
were the great doctors of the Church.  Because our worldview is so
different, this type of view may seem a bit quaint.  But, one should
remember, we look at things far differently than the people from 1000 BCE
to 1600 CE.

Since we do look at things far differently, the Catholic church has
reviewed transubstantiation, and has decided that Aristotle is not
essential to any basic understanding.  Other formulations for a real
presen

Re: Yes in Space

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 05:20 AM 6/8/04, Robert Seeberger wrote:
--===0851509473==
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/cfa/ps/special/rocknroll/0007707.html
Minor planet number 7707 has been named in honor of the British
progressive rock group, Yes.
The citation announcing the naming appeared on Minor Planet Circular
48154 (issued on 2003 Mar. 18), from which the following is extracted
with permission:
(7707) Yes = 1993 HM1
 Discovered 1993 Apr. 17 by C. W. Hergenrother at Catalina
Station.
 Yes, a rock and roll music group, has been creating music since
1968. The band is best known for its albums The Yes Album,
Fragile }, Close to the Edge  and 90125.
xponentNeverending Marurob

But for some reason no one liked my suggestion of naming the satellite of 
Ida "Ida No," in honor of the conversation which must have taken place at 
JPL when the first photos came back from _Galileo_:

First rocket scientist:  "What's that thing over on the right-hand side of 
the picture of Ida?"

Second rocket scientist:  "Ida no."
Ida No That The IAU Would Have Approved Maru
-- Ronn!  :)

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Yes in Space

[Robert Seeberger]

http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/cfa/ps/special/rocknroll/0007707.html

Minor planet number 7707 has been named in honor of the British
progressive rock group, Yes.
The citation announcing the naming appeared on Minor Planet Circular
48154 (issued on 2003 Mar. 18), from which the following is extracted
with permission:


(7707) Yes = 1993 HM1
 Discovered 1993 Apr. 17 by C. W. Hergenrother at Catalina
Station.
 Yes, a rock and roll music group, has been creating music since
1968. The band is best known for its albums The Yes Album,
Fragile }, Close to the Edge  and 90125.
xponentNeverending Marurob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l