[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Imagine~ Tomorrow/Saturday - Fire the Grid- 6:11 AM CST'

2007-07-13 Thread Robert Gimbel
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Great.   
> Me and Turquoise will get severely drunk on vino in honor of this 
> great moment in time.
> 
> OffWorld
> 
The Holy Vino, that's fine...it's all in the intention.
Vino Bliss, it's a fine wine indeed.
Everyone's got their own favorite form of Bliss.
The church says: Body of Christ, blood of Christ.
Ah, the Vino...



[FairfieldLife] 'See the Tree- How big it's grown...'

2007-07-13 Thread Robert Gimbel

   During the course of its life, a hundred-year- old tree: 
  a)  Has processed and fixed the amount of carbon-dioxide 
contained in 18 million cubic metres of natural air in the form of about 2500 
kg of pure carbon (C). 
   b)  Has photo-chemically converted 9,100 kg of CO  and 3,700 litres of 
H2O. 
   c)  Has stored up circa 23 million kilogram-calories (a calorific value 
equivalent to 3,500 kg of hard pit coal). 
   d)  Has made available for the respiration of human and beast 6,600 kg 
of molecular oxygen (O2). 
   e)  Against the forces of gravity, has drawn from its roots right up to 
its crown and evaporated into the atmosphere at least 2,500 tonnes of water, 
every tree is therefore a water-column and if such a col­umn, which continually 
supplies and recharges the atmosphere with water, is cut down, then this amount 
of water is lost. 
   f)   Thereby fixing a mechanical equivalent of heat equal to the 
calorific value of 2,500 kg of coal. 
   g)  Has supplied a member of the consumer society with oxygen sufficient 
for 20 years, and its nature is such, that the larger it grows, the more oxygen 
it produces. 
  
  In view of such achievements, who in the future could value this tree merely 
for its timber? 
   The combustion of 100 litres of petrol consumes about 230 kg of oxygen. That 
is, after a trip of barely 30,000 km (18,640 miles) (96 lit/1000 km), this 
tree's entire 100 year production of oxygen has been squandered. 
   Driving an average size car 30,000 km (18,640 miles) = 100 years of oxygen 
production. 
 
   If a person chooses to breathe for three years, to burn 400 lit of petrol or 
heating oil, or 400 kg of coal, then the production through photosynthesis of 1 
tonne of oxygen is required. 
   1 tonne of O2 = the O2 content of 3,620 m3 of air (+ 15°C at 1atm) 
 
   The photosynthetic production of 1 tonne of oxygen necessitates: 
   a) The building up of 0.935 tonnes C6H12O6 (carbohydrate) , 
   b) which process requires 1.37 tonnes CO2  (carbon-dioxide) and 0.56 tonnes 
H2O  (water) 
   c) The transpiration of 230 to 930 tonnes H2O  
   d) Light energy equal to 527 x 106 quanta (v = 440 X 101Z) which represents 
3.52 million kilocalories. 
 
   All this is no small achievement for a single organism!
 
 
   [Source: Walter Schauberger, son of Viktor Schauberger]
 
   [Viktor Schauberger (1885-1958) was a pioneer of the study of the subtle 
energies in nature and the importance of living water in all natural processes. 
Far ahead of his time and from his unusually detailed observations of the 
natural world, Schauberger pioneered a completely new understanding of how 
nature works. He foresaw, and tried to warn against, the global waste and 
costly ecological destruction of our age.]
 


   
-
Choose the right car based on your needs.  Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car 
Finder tool.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Imagine~ Tomorrow/Saturday - Fire the Grid- 6:11 AM CST'

2007-07-13 Thread off_world_beings
Great.   
Me and Turquoise will get severely drunk on vino in honor of this 
great moment in time.

OffWorld

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
>   July 17, 2007 at 11:11 GMT
>   document.write(localTime); — 04:11 (4:11 AM) in your time zone — 
>   
>  http://www.firethegrid.com/eng/home-fr-eng.htm
>   
> On July 17 at 11:11 GMT  document.write(localTime); — 04:11 (4:11 
AM) in your time zone — we will assemble from all corners of our 
world as a collective body of energy to meditate simultaneously for 
1 hour (60 minutes).
>   To synchronize ourselves worldwide, each time zone begins the 
Fire the Grid meditation at the GMT equivalent local time (shown in 
blue).
> 
> -
>   
>
>   NEW For those desiring futher reassurance of your LOCAL 
meditation time, please refer to the table below which contains a 
complete list of every time zone worldwide and its relationship to 
11:11 GMT.
> 
> Region
>  GMT
>-/+
>  Adjusted
>Local Time
>  Time Zone
>  Monday   16 July 2007
>  International   Date
>Line West
>eg: Eniwetok
>  Kwajalein
>  -12
>  11:11pm   (23:11)
>  Dateline   Standard Time
>  Tuesday   17 July 2007
>  Midway Island
>  Samoa
>  -11
>  12:11am   (00:11)
>  Samoa Standard Time
>  Hawaii
>  -10
>  1:11am   (01:11)
>  Hawaii   Standard Time
>  Alaska
>  -9   *
>  3:11am   (03:11)
>  Alaskan   Daylight Time
>  Pacific Time (PDT)
>eg: Vancouver
>Seattle
>Lewiston
>Portland
>Reno
>Las Vegas
>San Francisco
>Los Angeles
>San Diego
>  -8   *
>  4:11am   (04:11)
>  Pacific   Daylight Time
>  Arizona
>  -7
>  4:11am   (04:11)
>  US   Mountain Standard Time
>  Chihuahua
>  LaPaz
>  Mazatlan
>  -7   *
>  5:11am   (05:11)
>  Mexico Daylight Time 2
>  Mountain Time (MDT)
>eg: Calgary
>  Billings
>  Boise
>  Cheyenne
>  Rapid City
>  Salt Lake   City
>  Denver
>  Albuquerque
>  El Paso
>  -7   *
>  5:11am   (05:11)
>  Mountain   Daylight Time
>  Central America
>  -6
>  5:11am   (05:11)
>  Central America Standard Time
>  Central Time (CDT)
>eg. Minneapolis
>Omaha
>Des Moines
>Chicago
>Dodge City
>Kansas City
>Nashville
>Dallas
>Houston
>New Orleans
>  -6   *
>  6:11am   (06:11)
>  Central   Daylight Time
>  Indiana (West)
>eg: Evansville
>  Valparaiso
>  -6   *
>  6:11am   (06:11)
>  Central   Daylight Time
>  Guadalajara
>  Mexico City
>  Monterrey
>  -6   *
>  6:11am   (06:11)
>  Mexico Daylight Time
>  Saskatchewan
>  -6
>  5:11am   (05:11)
>  Canada Central Standard Time
>  Bogota
>  Lima
>  Quito
>  -5
>  6:11am   (06:11)
>  SA   Pacific Standard Time
>  Eastern   Time (EDT)
>eg: Montreal
>Quebec City
>Ottawa
>Toronto
>Boston
>New York
>Detroit
>Indianapolis
>Louisville
>Philadelphia
>Raleigh
>Atlanta
>Tampa
>Miami
>  -5   *
>  7:11am   (07:11)
>  Eastern   Daylight Time
>  Atlantic   Time
>eg: Halifax
>  -4   *
>  8:11am   (08:11)
>  Atlantic   Daylight Time
>  Caracas
>  La Paz
>  -4
>  7:11am   (07:11)
>  SA   Western Standard Time
>  Santiago
>  -4
>  7:11am   (07:11)
>  Pacific   SA Standard Time
>  Georgetown
>  -4
>  7:11am   (07:11)
>  Guyana   Time
>  Newfoundland
>  -3:30   *
>  8:41am   (08:41)
>  Newfoundland   Daylight Time
>  Brasilia
>  -3
>  8:11am   (08:11)
>  Brazil   Standard Time
>  Buenos   Aires
>  -3
>  8:11am   (08:11)
>  SA   Eastern Standard Time
>  Greenland
>  -3   *
>  9:11am   (09:11)
>  Greenland   Daylight Time
>  Mid-Atlantic
>  -2   *
>  10:11am   (10:11)
>  Mid-Atlantic   Daylight Time
>  Azores
>  -1   *
>  11:11am   (11:11)
>  Azores   Daylight Time
>  Cape   Verde Is.
>  -1
>  10:11am   (10:11)
>  Cape   Verde Standard Time
>  Casablanca
>Monrovia
>  0
>  11:11am   (11:11)
>  Greenwich   Standard Time
>  Dublin
>Edinburgh
>Lisbon
>London
>  0   *
>  12:11pm   (12:11)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread Rory Goff
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And I know this sounds strange to "fish who know only water", but we
> live in a body-centric, sensory-centric culture and world. Its all
> about making the body happy. Some other frameworks have prevailed
> through history, where amongst others, the body is seen as something
> to be endured, but to be liberated from. Pain and bodily
> disintegration are seen in a whole different light.

Yes, a really good point; it's all about our framing. As I said to the 
doctor, who was wondering why I was so happy as he was scrubbing the 
wound, "It's just another *thing*; it's really all only the radiant 
self, which we put different labels on and react accordingly.if we 
don't like our labels, why not change them?" He closed his eyes, went 
into stillness and said, "Done!" A very cool dude :-)




[FairfieldLife] Maharishi's submersion and Guru Dev (was Re: An example of love as attachment)

2007-07-13 Thread jim_flanegin
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"  
wrote:
> > >
> > A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. :-)
> 
> 
> What should we do then? Lock you up? Or just constrain you when you
> get wild?
>
"When did you stop beating your wife?":-)



[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread new . morning
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno"  
> wrote:
> >
> > ---I don't get it.  How about that young girl in Iraq who got her 
> legs 
> > blown off?
> 
> What do you want me to say? I am well aware there are many on Earth who 
> are suffering, and suffering intensely. On the physical plane, I signed 
> petitions, did my best to wake people up to the manipulations around 
> 9/11, and demonstrated against the war in Iraq, as I'm sure you did 
> too. On the spiritual plane, it is all bliss. I just got my finger 
> nearly bitten off by our dog. The wound was a gift for which I am 
> immensely grateful, it is all very very good, and was a great joy 
> connecting with the people in the emergency room, doctors, etc.. Not in 
> the same ballpark as losing one's legs, of course, but you get my 
> drift. It will be even nicer when more people are consciously aware of 
> this utter bliss in every "thing" ... I am glad you're doing your part.
> 
> :-)

And I know this sounds strange to "fish who know only water", but we
live in a body-centric, sensory-centric culture and world. Its all
about making the body happy. Some other frameworks have prevailed
through history, where amongst others, the body is seen as something
to be endured, but to be liberated from. Pain and bodily
disintegration are seen in a whole different light.





[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread Rory Goff
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> ---I don't get it.  How about that young girl in Iraq who got her 
legs 
> blown off?

What do you want me to say? I am well aware there are many on Earth who 
are suffering, and suffering intensely. On the physical plane, I signed 
petitions, did my best to wake people up to the manipulations around 
9/11, and demonstrated against the war in Iraq, as I'm sure you did 
too. On the spiritual plane, it is all bliss. I just got my finger 
nearly bitten off by our dog. The wound was a gift for which I am 
immensely grateful, it is all very very good, and was a great joy 
connecting with the people in the emergency room, doctors, etc.. Not in 
the same ballpark as losing one's legs, of course, but you get my 
drift. It will be even nicer when more people are consciously aware of 
this utter bliss in every "thing" ... I am glad you're doing your part.

:-)



[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread Rory Goff
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> ---I don't get it.  How about that young girl in Iraq who got her 
legs 
> blown off?

What do you want me to say? I am well aware there are many on Earth who 
are suffering, and suffering intensely. On the physical plane, I signed 
petitions, did my best to wake people up to the manipulations around 
9/11, and demonstrated against the war in Iraq, as I'm sure you did 
too. On the spiritual plane, it is all bliss. I just got my finger 
nearly bitten off by our dog. The wound was a gift for which I am 
immensely grateful, it is all very very good, and was a great joy 
connecting with the people in the emergency room, doctors, etc.. Not in 
the same ballpark as losing one's legs, of course, but you get my 
drift. It will be even nicer when more people are consciously aware of 
this utter bliss in every "thing" ... I am glad you're doing your part.

:-)



[FairfieldLife] Maharishi's submersion and Guru Dev (was Re: An example of love as attachment)

2007-07-13 Thread new . morning
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. :-)


What should we do then? Lock you up? Or just constrain you when you
get wild?






[FairfieldLife] OM

2007-07-13 Thread Ron
My Guru said in Realization, everything is heard as OM.

The dead Guru's can tell you this in their books, channelers can channel a Guru 
that will tell 
you this, but a living Guru telling one this reaches beyond the intellect.



[FairfieldLife] "Which is it, is man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's?"

2007-07-13 Thread new . morning
"Which is it, is man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's?"
Friedrich Nietzsche



[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread Rory Goff
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

> Agreed-- Yeah, when I focused over there after re-reading what I 
had 
> written I got the same "hit"- concentrated sweetener. Ka-ching!
> 
> Glad to hear so many of the flock have turned to the shepherd. LOL! 
> Seriously, its awesome! Its like,"Hey lets do something radical and 
> join the rest of the Universe, shall we?". 

YES! Really nicely put :-D

Kind of makes the 
> previous state seem very strange and isolated indeed. The 
> expression "poor bastards" becomes a definition vs an epithet...ok 
> I'll be quiet now. 

*lol*
 
> Interesting too what empty bill was saying about once having set 
the 
> foundation with TM, it just takes a small nudge to pop us into the 
> Reality of Brahman. How this nudge occurs is fascinating to me; 
> Maharishi mentions bus exhaust as a possible catalyst, empty bill 
> mentions the teachings of Tibetan monks, Byron Katie was just lying 
> around on the floor, and personally I just ran into someone at the 
> right time who said the things I could finally hear. Seems to be as 
> varied as the experience of Brahman itself. Pretty funny, eh? 

Yes! *Lol*

Aaaah, 
> us meditators are just a bunch of pushovers. :-)

Indeed :-) 

Oh, in the interests of accuracy, my previous post should have 
read, "...on our travels lately all over the midwest and eastern 
U.S., as well as in Canada and in the U.K. we have been finding 
exactly the same thing" Glad to see *L*L*L* shining out your way, 
in the West as well! :-)





[FairfieldLife] Where does karma go- was Maharishi's submersion and Guru Dev

2007-07-13 Thread Ron


Post: While liberation from earthly, astral and casual bodies / planes is
a function of getting beyond the BINDING influence of ones vast
karma,it does not eliminate that karma. A brahma-vid still has tons of
karma, its just that that karma does not necessitate rebirth on
corresponding planes. But where does that karma go

Comment: I stated to my Guru that the Karma plays itself out, it is just that 
when vairagya ( 
non attachment) is in place, then no attachment to that Karma. My Guru said 
Gurus dont care 
if they have a body or not.

Looks to me that Karma is of the transcient relative because nothing can touch 
the absolute- 
so the karma plays out on the body and whatever else.





Re: [FairfieldLife] Maharishi's submersion and Guru Dev (was Re: An example of love as attachment)

2007-07-13 Thread billy jim
According to Patanjali -
   
  YS 1.27: The sound which expresses (Ishvara) is the pranava (OM). (tasya 
vacaka pranava).
   
  YS 1.28: Meditative repetition of it realizes its referent. (tajjapas 
tad-artha pranava). 
   
  According to my friend L., the Samkhya-Yoga scholar -
   
  "The unfolding sound/silence structure of OM parallels the structure of the 
mind and the universe itself." 
   
  "Though OM has been associated with the divine in all Hindu religious sects, 
it is obiously more than just a convenient tag for a personal Lord. Names for 
divinity in Hinduism are innumerable; OM is unique.
   
  "Om is speech par excellence. By linking the mind with the nonlinguistic 
realities beyond it, OM, as speech, acts as a bridge, a means of passing over 
from the word to the referent. In the case of a referent that is spiritual - 
that is entirely immaterial - OM also functions paradoxically to disjoin what 
in speech is erroneously linked - the material intellect and consciousness 
itself. Here language does not function constuctively to shape and mold 
experience; it functions to deconstruct itself, to remove itself from 
consciousness. The ultimate purpose of ritual murmuring of the OM sound is 
conscious silence. This involves knowledge of a range of progressively more 
attenuated levels of speech and mental fuctioning as a whole."
   
  These are only partial quotes taken from one of his essays published in book 
form. Perhaps this will help answer your question.
   
  empty
   
  

tertonzeno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  ---What's the Name of Ishvara?

In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> New morn,
> 
> Thanks for your reply and encouragement.
> 
> There seems to be much support among later advaita teachers (ie. 
> after Shankara) for the idea of the sheer freedom of the fully 
> liberated being from any constrainsts whatsoever. They call this 
> state "videha mukti" or bodiless liberation. However there are also 
> historically major advaita teachers who followed the "Yogavasishta" 
> and another text called "Jivanmukti-viveka" in asserting that 
freedom 
> means not only transcendence of individuality but also freedom of 
> sheer universality. According to them, a liberated being can live 
> anywhere in the universe at will. From this POV karmic results 
simply 
> cease or dissolve away when there is no individual doer to create, 
> experience or receive them. Like the actions of Krishna, Shiva or 
> Deva Mata, such a universalized being plays at will throughout the 
> multiverses yet is never the doer - all is done by Ishvara, the 
> cosmic ruler. 
> 
> Having said this, I think we would be hard pressed to figure this 
one 
> out on our own. Better yet - maybe we should be among those 
> who "have" to ponder whether to retire or keep playing lila games 
> with the other surfers of divine grace.
> 
> empty
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  
> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Empty, I have been catching up on your posts. I like them. 
> > 
> > This topic is intersting. Some cosideration: 
> > 
> > 1) Yogananda wrote of his teacher returning to earth plane, from 
his
> > new role as teacher on causal planes helping other to gain 
> liberation
> > from casual rebirth.
> > 
> > 2) liberation from the cycle of birth and death, and not going
> > anywhere -- that is, being omnipresent -- could be on level of 
(near
> > around) akasha -- and still subject to rebirth in astral and 
casual
> > planes (which is another part of yoganandas story)
> > 
> > 3) Some traditions -- including now TM, hold there are a number of
> > states beyond BC (= Brahma-vid in your cosmo9logy?). This would 
> imply
> > a brahma vid could go on to some omni-present subtle body 
somewhere
> > and continue to "work it out". 
> > 
> > 4) Indra and other gods are said to be titles, and various 
entities
> > attain that title for some time, then relinquish it. And I know 
the
> > dogma that even the gods are not fully realized, yada yada. But if
> > Saraswati is a title, and some entity is currently holding that 
> title,
> > its seems odd that that entity would be less evolved than Brama-
> vids,
> > and a whole order of swamis, who are devoted to and worship the 
> Goddess.
> > 
> > 5) While liberation from earthly, astral and casual bodies / 
planes 
> is
> > a function of getting beyond the BINDING influence of ones vast
> > karma,it does not eliminate that karma. A brahma-vid still has 
tons 
> of
> > karma, its just that that karma does not necessitate rebirth on
> > corresponding planes. But where does that karma go. It doesn't
> > dissappear. There is no loss or creation of energy in the cosmos -
-
> > all is just transformed from one thing to another. 
> > 
> > And I can't deliver the "punchline" to this argument -- because it
> > doesn't add up -- that is, I am not sure what appropriate 
conclu

[FairfieldLife] Dalai Lama on suffering

2007-07-13 Thread quantum packet


Note: forwarded message attached.
 
-
Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and 
always stay connected to friends.--- Begin Message ---
Title: Snow Lion Publications Newsletter




	
		
		
	
	
		
	
	
		
		
	
	

		



	
		

	



	
		
		
 Dalai Lama Quote of the Week 
		I always believe that each individual human being has some kind of responsibility for humanity as a whole

Through my own profession, I try my best to contribute as much as I can. This proceeds without my being concerned whether another person agrees with my philosophy or not. Some people may be very much against my belief, my philosophy, but I feel all right. So long as I see that a human being suffers or has needs, I shall contribute as much as I can to contribute to their benefit.
--from Consciousness at the Crossroads edited by Zara Houshmand, Robert B. Livingston, and B. Alan Wallace, published by Snow Lion Publications

* * * * * *

Please join all our staff in remembering His Holiness the Dalai Lama on the auspicious occasion of his 72nd birthday (73rd, according to Tibetan rendering), and join us in wishing happiness and well-being to the Tibetan people and all beings in the world. May His Holiness remain until samsara ends.

To help support the building of his new teaching institution in North America, please visit www.namgyal.org/about.





 


  
  
	
	SNOW LION PUBLICATIONS is dedicated 
  to the preservation of Tibetan Buddhism and culture by 
  publishing books about this great tradition. Tibetan culture is seriously endangered in its homeland and is striving to continue outside of Tibet. To support this effort, in addition to publishing and distributing books, Snow Lion offers a wide range of dharma items, purchased primarily from Tibetans in exile. These include visual art and ritual objects, 
  statues and thangkas, videos, traditional music, and many gift 
  items offered through our webstore and "Snow Lion Buddhist News & Catalog" (Newsletter)--over 2000 
  items--the largest selection anywhere. To browse the complete 
  list go to www.snowlionpub.com and select any of the 
  categories in left-hand margin.
  When you choose to purchase from Snow Lion you 
  are directly supporting the large effort to publish more 
  Buddhist texts and help the Tibetan people. THANK YOU FOR YOUR 
  SUPPORT.
   

	

   
		
	You are receiving this announcement from Snow Lion Publications because you have previously subscribed on our website. To continue receiving messages, we recommend that you add [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] to your address book. If you'd like to change or cancel your subscription, please visit our subscription pages at www.snowlionpub.com/pages/lists.php,    www.snowlionpub.com/pages/unsubscribe.php,   or email us at [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Please note that these announcements are also available in plain text, if you are having trouble receiving them.	


			

	

	
  
	
		
CONSCIOUSNESS AT THE CROSSROADS:Conversations with The Dalai Lamaon Brain Science and Buddhismedited by Zara Houshmand,Robert B. Livingstonand B. Alan Wallacemore...


			

 
	
	Contact Us:

  
  N. America:  (800) 950-0313
  
  Worldwide:  (607) 273-8519 
  
  By Mail:  PO Box 6483,  Ithaca, NY  14851 USA
  
	  By Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
	 
	   
	  On the Web:  www.snowlionpub.com
	 
	  
	

New Items Available 
Online:

  
  
New Books
  
  New Dharma Items
	  
	   
  
On Sale!
	   
  
Gifts
	   
  
2007 Calendars

 General Catalog: www.snowlionpub.com
	  
	
	  

	Sign Up:
	Receive Snow Lion's Weekly Quotes, Announcements, or Quarterly
	"Snow Lion Buddhist News & Catalog" at the 
List Management Center.
Snow Lion Publications is happy to send you a weekly
	quote from various Tibetan Buddhist teachers.
Visit our website for these related items:
	

  20% OFF all Snow Lion Titles in our Library of
	  Tibetan Buddhism & Culture
  
	  Read the Latest Edition ofthe "Snow Lion Buddhist News & Catalog" (Newsletter)
	  
  Sign Up for Other Weekly Quotes and
	  Updates
  
  Search the World Buddhist Events Database
  
	  Check Your

[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread shempmcgurk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> >
> >  
> > In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> > do.rflex@ writes:
> > 
> > As I've  already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical  laws.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > You were wrong and so were your sources. 
> 
> 
> LOL! What a smug asshole.



He's only "smug" and an "asshole" if he's wrong.

If he's right, it's YOU that is the "smug asshole".  Actually you'd 
then be a WRONG smug asshole...considerably worse.

So, who's right?





> 
> 
> > Also realize I'm not saying every  
> > law we have is found in the Bible.
>




[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's submersion and Guru Dev ...

2007-07-13 Thread matrixmonitor
---Thanks for the reference!...but just what I suspected: several 
Personalities' Names are offered: Vishnu, Shiva, a form of the Divine 
Mother; even Yahweh. So, it seems there's much contention as to exactly 
WHO is the Ishvara.  Reminds me of that 50's show, "What's My Line?".
 But the real questions start even IF there's One of them who's in 
charge.  What the fis He doing, sitting on His butt?

 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno"  
wrote:
> >
> > ---What's the Name of Ishvara?
> > 
> 
> Check it out here: 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishvara
>




[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread Robert Gimbel
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ---I don't get it.  How about that young girl in Iraq who got her legs 
> blown off?
 
This is very sad, indeed...
And this place has been abused, the land, the people, for centuries.
Probably will take many centuries to purify this area again.
Pray for this little girl, and do anything which you feel inspired to
do, to bring the insanity to an end.
 



[FairfieldLife] Maharishi's submersion and Guru Dev ...

2007-07-13 Thread Robert Gimbel
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ---What's the Name of Ishvara?
> 

Check it out here: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishvara




[FairfieldLife] Maharishi's submersion and Guru Dev (was Re: An example of love as attachment)

2007-07-13 Thread tertonzeno
---What's the Name of Ishvara?


 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> New morn,
> 
> Thanks for your reply and encouragement.
> 
> There seems to be much support among later advaita teachers (ie. 
> after Shankara) for the idea of the sheer freedom of the fully 
> liberated being from any constrainsts whatsoever. They call this 
> state "videha mukti" or bodiless liberation. However there are also 
> historically major advaita teachers who followed the "Yogavasishta" 
> and another text called "Jivanmukti-viveka" in asserting that 
freedom 
> means not only transcendence of individuality but also freedom of 
> sheer universality. According to them, a liberated being can live 
> anywhere in the universe at will. From this POV karmic results 
simply 
> cease or dissolve away when there is no individual doer to create, 
> experience or receive them. Like the actions of Krishna, Shiva or 
> Deva Mata, such a universalized being plays at will throughout the 
> multiverses yet is never the doer - all is done by Ishvara, the 
> cosmic ruler. 
> 
> Having said this, I think we would be hard pressed to figure this 
one 
> out on our own. Better yet - maybe we should be among those 
> who "have" to ponder whether to retire or keep playing lila games 
> with the other surfers of divine grace.
> 
> empty
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  
> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Empty, I have been catching up on your posts. I like them. 
> > 
> > This topic is intersting. Some cosideration: 
> > 
> > 1) Yogananda wrote of his teacher returning to earth plane, from 
his
> > new role as teacher on causal planes helping other to gain 
> liberation
> > from casual rebirth.
> > 
> > 2) liberation from the cycle of birth and death, and not going
> > anywhere -- that is, being omnipresent -- could be on level of 
(near
> > around) akasha -- and still subject to rebirth in astral and 
casual
> > planes (which is another part of yoganandas story)
> > 
> > 3) Some traditions -- including now TM, hold there are a number of
> > states beyond BC (= Brahma-vid in your cosmo9logy?). This would 
> imply
> > a brahma vid could go on to some omni-present subtle body 
somewhere
> > and continue to "work it out". 
> > 
> > 4) Indra and other gods are said to be titles, and various 
entities
> > attain that title for some time, then relinquish it. And I know 
the
> > dogma that even the gods are not fully realized, yada yada. But if
> > Saraswati is a title, and some entity is currently holding that 
> title,
> > its seems odd that that entity would be less evolved than Brama-
> vids,
> > and a whole order of swamis, who are devoted to and worship the 
> Goddess.
> > 
> > 5) While liberation from earthly, astral and casual bodies / 
planes 
> is
> > a function of getting beyond the BINDING influence of ones vast
> > karma,it does not eliminate that karma. A brahma-vid still has 
tons 
> of
> > karma, its just that that karma  does not necessitate rebirth on
> > corresponding planes. But where does that karma go. It doesn't
> > dissappear. There is no loss or creation of energy in the cosmos -
-
> > all is just transformed from one thing to another. 
> > 
> > And I can't deliver the "punchline" to this argument -- because it
> > doesn't add up -- that is, I am not sure what appropriate 
conclusion
> > follows. Other than the compelling point that it doesn't all add 
up.
> > That karma goes some where, effects something. Could there still 
be 
> an
> > "entity" -- as omni-present and unstructured as can be --  
> associated
> > with, but not bound by that karma? Like a jivan mukti letting the
> > "last push of the cart" unfold?
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > > Have you ever read Adi-Shankara's Brahma Sutra Bhasya? He 
concurs 
> > > that a brahma-vid doesn't go anywhere at death. This also means 
> that 
> > > he/she does not stay anywhere. A brahma-vid is like space 
whether 
> > > inside or outside of a pot. Space as such is the same, only the 
> > > features of the pot give us a reason to distinguish space as 
> inside 
> > > or outside. to are not findable after death. Not going, not 
> staying – 
> > > what is the alternative? It is not returning either. When 
> questions 
> > > about this, I heard MMY definitively deny what he called 
> > > the "bodhisattva idea". He said that the wave merging into the 
> ocean 
> > > and the wave emerging from of the ocean could not be defined as 
> the 
> > > same wave. This is very old point in MMY's knowledge base, 
older 
> than 
> > > the guru devotion story you are now repeating. 
> > > 
> > > And by the way, Maharishi's comment, could actually be a good 
> example 
> > > of a Buddhist explanation of the karmic continuity of 
personhood 
> > > across multiple lifetimes. 
> > > 
> > > Adi-Shankara did state that Ishvara could grant adhikara 
> > > (authorization) to select jivas to return to

[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread tertonzeno
---I don't get it.  How about that young girl in Iraq who got her legs 
blown off?

 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"  
> wrote:
> >> Just a gentle reminder that I find exactly the same thing out here 
> > in the "real world"- no stress, no negativity, all light and 
> > cooperation and love, just as evident here as it is anywhere else!
> > Help! I'm turning into a real "Bliss Ninny"<-- Love that term! 
LOL :-
> > )
> *lol* Yes, good point; on our travels lately all over the U.S., 
Canada, 
> and the U.K. we have been finding exactly the same thing. The 
> difference seems to be that I'm finding the qualities are 
considerably 
> more "concentrated" or "alive" in Fairfield; more people seem to be 
> more consciously participating in more intensities of the love and 
> joy :-)
>




[FairfieldLife] Maharishi's submersion and Guru Dev (was Re: An example of love as attachment)

2007-07-13 Thread emptybill
New morn,

Thanks for your reply and encouragement.

There seems to be much support among later advaita teachers (ie. 
after Shankara) for the idea of the sheer freedom of the fully 
liberated being from any constrainsts whatsoever. They call this 
state "videha mukti" or bodiless liberation. However there are also 
historically major advaita teachers who followed the "Yogavasishta" 
and another text called "Jivanmukti-viveka" in asserting that freedom 
means not only transcendence of individuality but also freedom of 
sheer universality. According to them, a liberated being can live 
anywhere in the universe at will. From this POV karmic results simply 
cease or dissolve away when there is no individual doer to create, 
experience or receive them. Like the actions of Krishna, Shiva or 
Deva Mata, such a universalized being plays at will throughout the 
multiverses yet is never the doer - all is done by Ishvara, the 
cosmic ruler. 

Having said this, I think we would be hard pressed to figure this one 
out on our own. Better yet - maybe we should be among those 
who "have" to ponder whether to retire or keep playing lila games 
with the other surfers of divine grace.

empty


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  
wrote:
> 
> 
> Empty, I have been catching up on your posts. I like them. 
> 
> This topic is intersting. Some cosideration: 
> 
> 1) Yogananda wrote of his teacher returning to earth plane, from his
> new role as teacher on causal planes helping other to gain 
liberation
> from casual rebirth.
> 
> 2) liberation from the cycle of birth and death, and not going
> anywhere -- that is, being omnipresent -- could be on level of (near
> around) akasha -- and still subject to rebirth in astral and casual
> planes (which is another part of yoganandas story)
> 
> 3) Some traditions -- including now TM, hold there are a number of
> states beyond BC (= Brahma-vid in your cosmo9logy?). This would 
imply
> a brahma vid could go on to some omni-present subtle body somewhere
> and continue to "work it out". 
> 
> 4) Indra and other gods are said to be titles, and various entities
> attain that title for some time, then relinquish it. And I know the
> dogma that even the gods are not fully realized, yada yada. But if
> Saraswati is a title, and some entity is currently holding that 
title,
> its seems odd that that entity would be less evolved than Brama-
vids,
> and a whole order of swamis, who are devoted to and worship the 
Goddess.
> 
> 5) While liberation from earthly, astral and casual bodies / planes 
is
> a function of getting beyond the BINDING influence of ones vast
> karma,it does not eliminate that karma. A brahma-vid still has tons 
of
> karma, its just that that karma  does not necessitate rebirth on
> corresponding planes. But where does that karma go. It doesn't
> dissappear. There is no loss or creation of energy in the cosmos --
> all is just transformed from one thing to another. 
> 
> And I can't deliver the "punchline" to this argument -- because it
> doesn't add up -- that is, I am not sure what appropriate conclusion
> follows. Other than the compelling point that it doesn't all add up.
> That karma goes some where, effects something. Could there still be 
an
> "entity" -- as omni-present and unstructured as can be --  
associated
> with, but not bound by that karma? Like a jivan mukti letting the
> "last push of the cart" unfold?
> 
> 
>  
> > Have you ever read Adi-Shankara's Brahma Sutra Bhasya? He concurs 
> > that a brahma-vid doesn't go anywhere at death. This also means 
that 
> > he/she does not stay anywhere. A brahma-vid is like space whether 
> > inside or outside of a pot. Space as such is the same, only the 
> > features of the pot give us a reason to distinguish space as 
inside 
> > or outside. to are not findable after death. Not going, not 
staying – 
> > what is the alternative? It is not returning either. When 
questions 
> > about this, I heard MMY definitively deny what he called 
> > the "bodhisattva idea". He said that the wave merging into the 
ocean 
> > and the wave emerging from of the ocean could not be defined as 
the 
> > same wave. This is very old point in MMY's knowledge base, older 
than 
> > the guru devotion story you are now repeating. 
> > 
> > And by the way, Maharishi's comment, could actually be a good 
example 
> > of a Buddhist explanation of the karmic continuity of personhood 
> > across multiple lifetimes. 
> > 
> > Adi-Shankara did state that Ishvara could grant adhikara 
> > (authorization) to select jivas to return to manifestation even 
after 
> > cosmic pralaya – with the caveat that it was Ishvara who 
recollected 
> > them (their sanskaras) thus recalling them into being just as 
they 
> > were at the end of the previous mahakalpa. His point was that 
these 
> > previous adhikara-jivas (like the four kumaras) were those very 
deva-
> > rishis

[FairfieldLife] Quiet Zone Update

2007-07-13 Thread Rick Archer
Dear Quiet Zonies (as we will forever be known),

The big news is that things seem to be going very well.  I want to thank all
of you because it is your support that has brought us to the brink of
success.  Even though there is a lot more to do we are rapidly moving
towards getting a quiet zone!

   1) There was a meeting on June 26th that involved the engineers
for the City, the railroad, the special committee of the City Council that
is working on the quiet zone, and the Iowa DOT.  It seems from this initial
crossing by crossing review that every street can meet the requirements for
adding raised medians.  These medians are necessary to make the crossings
safer so the trains do not need to honk their horns.

2) French Reneker (the company that does street engineering for
Fairfield) is updating some earlier estimates they made which will then be
further refined by the special committee for presentation to City Council.
We hope to see this happen in August.  

3) Our goal is to then see the City Council vote to approve the project
subject to finalizing costs and sources of funding.  

4) What we need to do is have the money ready to deliver to the city for
the necessary improvements.

5) Current estimates indicate the the total cost will be around
$180,000.  This is a bit more than we expected but is still eminently
doable. This increase was due to the need to widen some streets and to make
the improvements permanent and maintenance free.  

6) We believe that the special quiet zone committee will recommend that
the City use the $30,000 to $60,000 it will receive from the railroad for
closing two crossings to help pay for the quiet zone.

7) So for now the goal is the same as we have been projecting--we need
to raise about $120,000 as we initially estimated we would need.

8) We have already raised the first bench mark of around $60,000 which
was the impetus for the city to take this issue seriously.

 

Now we need to ask everyone to turn in your pledges and all of you who
haven’t yet given to please donate. If everyone on our list now of almost
500 people would just give $100 and also ask friends and neighbors to help
and contribute, we can have a quiet zone. Now is the time to finalize the
funding before the August City Council meeting so there can be no excuse not
to do this simple thing to make our town a much better place to live (and
sleep!).  Send your tax deductible contributions to A.L.F. Fairfield Train
Safety and Quiet Zone, Box 2302, Fairfield, IA 52556.

 

We'll send an email to let you know when we need everyone to turn out and
show their support for the quiet zone. Thank you all for your financial and
personal support and all your ideas and suggestions.  We are close, so let's
make it happen.  

Regards, Bill Blackmore 

 


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.4/898 - Release Date: 7/12/2007
4:08 PM
 


[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 2:20:14 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Apparently Moses was a real law-abiding guy. Here's how Moses  followed
> God's law:
> 
> Under God's direction, Moses' army defeats the  Midianites. They kill
> all the adult males, but take the women and children  captive. When
> Moses learns that they left some live, he angrily says: "Have  you
> saved all the women alive? Kill every male among the little ones,  and
> kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all  the
> women children, that have not known a man by lying with him,  keep
> alive for yourselves." So they went back and did as Moses  (and
> presumably God) instructed, killing everyone except for the  virgins.
> In this way they got 32,000 virgins.
> 
> Numbers 31:1-54  (summarized)
> 
> The abhorrent killing of women who've 'known' men and  saving the
> virgins for themselves, and killing male children prisoners  is
> something current sociopathic Christian Right freaks might like to  do
> to Muslims, but it certainly isn't US law. You're wy out in  left
> field, bwana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you have something against the will of God? How about all those
that  died 
> by the will of God in the Mahabharata, or is that different? Have
you ever  
> read the Book of Esther? It deals with what could happen to a people
when the  
> will of God is not followed to the letter. God gave an order to Saul
through 
> the  prophet Samuel to kill an entire tribe of people because they
had become 
> totally  despicable. Saul allowed one pregnant woman to escape who just 
> happened to be  the queen. She gave birth to a child who started a
lineage ending in 
> Hayman who  wanted to  and almost succeeded in killing all the Jews
in the 
> Persian  empire.


Fortunately the kind of savagery you further described from the Bible
is not US law. For you to suggest that it might be tells a lot about
you, bwana.


< Well,we finally get down to the name calling,Sociopathic 
> Christian  Right Freaks. I don't know of anybody that wants to kill
all the Muslims 
> and  your suggestion there is makes you the one in left field. 


Then you're missing some of the rhetoric common on right wing websites
like the freerepublic.






[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 1:00:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> There  are countless sources for laws. Deuteronomy is not one of them
> for US  law.
> 
> 
> 
> the blue Laws, Sodomy, Adultery and many of our restitution laws are  
> Biblically based.


Those kinds of laws are not exclusive to Christianity.




[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 1:05:10 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> No  specific laws were created by the founding fathers that were
> specifically  based only on Christian laws.
> 
> 
> 
> "only" is the only thing you have going here. Thou shalt not Steal,
thou  
> shalt not Murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not
bare False  
> witness. I'm sure these values exist within other cultures, but I
guarantee you  
> they are taught as Divine Law given to Moses by God for all men to
follow and  
> that is how our for fathers learned them. Our country also had laws
observing  
> the Sabbath,and making sodomy illegal. Many of our civil codes
regarding  
> Financial restitution are also Biblically based.


Again, those types of laws are not exclusive to Christianity.





[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> As I've  already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical  laws.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You were wrong and so were your sources. 


LOL! What a smug asshole.


> Also realize I'm not saying every  
> law we have is found in the Bible.




[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 12:56:24 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Moore  lost his case based on a false assumption of a separation of
> church  
> > and state which was perpetuated since the late 1940's by the  then
> Supreme Court.
> 
> Wrong. In effect, the US Constitution  essentially upheld the idea of
> the separation of church and state from the  outset.
> 
> Nowhere in the Constitution does it contradict the  following
> statements by Jefferson and Madison. In fact, later Supreme  Court
> decisions, except for the Pledge of Allegience case, also upheld  those
> ideas.
> 
> "Believing with you that religion is a matter which  lies solely
> between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for  his
> faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government  reach
> actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign  reverence
> that act of the whole American people which declared that  their
> legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment  of
> religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building  a
> wall of separation between church and State."
> 
> ~~ Thomas  Jefferson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution does contradict the separation of Church and state
as it  is 
> currently applied. Try reading the first amendment. The congress
shall make  
> no law establishing nor prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
Clearly 
> this  means the Government can not establish by law an official
state Church or  
> religion as was the custom in Europe. However the government can not
pass a 
> law  prohibiting the elected from expressing the religious values of
the people  
> they represent through legislation. Laws regarding the Sabbath, Sodomy, 
> Adultery  as well as laws regarding financial restitution are or
were very common 
> in state  governments since their inception.


Those kinds of laws are not exclusive to Christianity. 


 to is  not in any government document. It is a personal letter to
the Baptists 
> of  Danbury Connecticut who feared the Government might establish a
State 
> Church  such as Anglican or Presbyterian and the Federal government
would be 
> controlled  by that denomination. Jefferson's letter was meant to
reassure him 
> that was not  the intent. 


Here's what you snipped:

"If "all men by nature are equally free and independent," they are to
be considered as retaining an "equal right to free exercise of
religion, according to dictates of conscience." While we assert for
ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess, and to observe, the
religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an
equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the
evidence which has convinced us...

Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of
maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had contrary
operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment
of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or
less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and
servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution...

What influences, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on
civil society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a
spiritual tyranny on the ruins of civil authority; in many instances
they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no
instance have they been seen the guardians of liberties of the people.
Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an
established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government
instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.

~~ James Madison







Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread Vaj


On Jul 13, 2007, at 3:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message dated 7/13/07 1:54:21 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

No, but the Declaration of Independence does and various state
constitutions
> did refer to a Deity. This also refers to the ratification of the
> Constitution, not its writing which was partially written by John
Jay, first Supreme
> Court Head Justice who said: " Providence has given our people the
choice of
> their rulers and it is their duty as well as privilege and interest
of our
> Christian nation to select and prefer Christian rulers." Who of
course would
> reflect Christian values in their decisions and laws. Of course
other law was
> considered and adopted considering the times. We don't stone people
nor cast
> them out based upon disease. And how would they determine whether
any delegate
> ever used the term Ten Commandments or laws of Moses or any other
such terms?
> Were they there? But we do know the values they lived by, 29 were
Anglicans,
> 16 to 18 were Calvinist , 2 were Methodist, 2 Lutherans 2
Catholics, 1
> Quaker/Anglican and 1 known Deist who was Benjamin Franklin who by
the attended
> various Churches. There were only 55 writers and signers of the
Constitution. .

That's a far cry from your whacky claim that US law is based on
Deuteronomy.

I have one question for you. When was the last time you read the  
Book of Deuteronomy


Let's keep in mind that there is more to Halakha, Jewish Law, than  
just the Torah. People like Selden were capitalizing on the English  
reformation and the newfound information they had access to, in this  
case: British interest on universal law (read: what a sea-faring,  
world dominating country needs to know). And they had early access to  
the first European ghetto--and it's hordes of Kabbalists and  
Tzaddiks--in Venetia. Thus arose a much broader interpretation of  
universal, Noachide ideas and policies. We've inherited quite a few.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread Vaj


On Jul 13, 2007, at 3:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message dated 7/13/07 1:00:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

There are countless sources for laws. Deuteronomy is not one of them
for US law.
the blue Laws, Sodomy, Adultery and many of our restitution laws  
are Biblically based.


Many of the protocols in various US courts and in congress, etc.  
follow (or used to follow) rules and ritual of Masonic jurisprudence.


Can you name the position, in congress, that was recently retired  
(i.e. eliminated) that had a Masonic forebear?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 2:56:54 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Isn't it  correct that the original constitution which declared slaves 
3/5th (or  something like that) men was based upon the  Bible?




Not to my knowledge. That was a political move based on representation in  
the Congress. I think Northerners didn't  want slaves counted in the  census 
which would give Southern States more seats in the House of  Representatives.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 2:20:14 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Apparently Moses was a real law-abiding guy. Here's how Moses  followed
God's law:

Under God's direction, Moses' army defeats the  Midianites. They kill
all the adult males, but take the women and children  captive. When
Moses learns that they left some live, he angrily says: "Have  you
saved all the women alive? Kill every male among the little ones,  and
kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all  the
women children, that have not known a man by lying with him,  keep
alive for yourselves." So they went back and did as Moses  (and
presumably God) instructed, killing everyone except for the  virgins.
In this way they got 32,000 virgins.

Numbers 31:1-54  (summarized)

The abhorrent killing of women who've 'known' men and  saving the
virgins for themselves, and killing male children prisoners  is
something current sociopathic Christian Right freaks might like to  do
to Muslims, but it certainly isn't US law. You're wy out in  left
field, bwana.




So you have something against the will of God? How about all those that  died 
by the will of God in the Mahabharata, or is that different? Have you ever  
read the Book of Esther? It deals with what could happen to a people when the  
will of God is not followed to the letter. God gave an order to Saul through 
the  prophet Samuel to kill an entire tribe of people because they had become 
totally  despicable. Saul allowed one pregnant woman to escape who just 
happened to be  the queen. She gave birth to a child who started a lineage 
ending in 
Hayman who  wanted to  and almost succeeded in killing all the Jews in the 
Persian  empire.< Well,we finally get down to the name calling,Sociopathic 
Christian  Right Freaks. I don't know of anybody that wants to kill all the 
Muslims 
and  your suggestion there is makes you the one in left field. 



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 2:54:17 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The  Constitution does contradict the separation of Church and state 
as it is  
> currently applied. Try reading the first amendment. The congress  
shall make 
> no law establishing nor prohibiting the free exercise  of religion. 

[snip]

...just to change the subject a  bit:

I've always wondered: the first amendment refers to "The Congress"  
that shall make no law etc. The prohibition is applied to the U.S.  
Congress, no? If so, what about the STATE governments.Congress, no? I
that they are NOT prohibited from making laws regarding religion  
according to this text.

So why can't state governments make such  laws regarding religion just 
as long as Congress  doesn't?



Nice point, but I think Federal law trumps state law. So if the federal  
government can't do it neither can the State government. Freedom of religion is 
 
taken as a guaranteed right.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 3:09:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

"only"  is the only thing you have going here. Thou shalt not 
> Steal, thou  shalt not Murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, 
> Thou shalt not bare  False witness. 

Thou shalt not get so out of control  defending
Christians that thou postest 52  times.




I know , but somebody had to do it and since I was the only one, I took the  
Liberty. I apologies for going over my quota, whatever it  is.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread TurquoiseB
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> "only" is the only thing you have going here. Thou shalt not 
> Steal, thou shalt not Murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, 
> Thou shalt not bare False witness. 

Thou shalt not get so out of control defending
Christians that thou postest 52 times.






[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread shempmcgurk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>

[snip]
  
> 
> 
> Apparently Moses was a real law-abiding guy. Here's how Moses 
followed
> God's law:
> 
> Under God's direction, Moses' army defeats the Midianites. They kill
> all the adult males, but take the women and children captive. When
> Moses learns that they left some live, he angrily says: "Have you
> saved all the women alive? Kill every male among the little ones, 
and
> kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the
> women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep
> alive for yourselves." So they went back and did as Moses (and
> presumably God) instructed, killing everyone except for the virgins.
> In this way they got 32,000 virgins.
> 
> Numbers 31:1-54 (summarized)
> 
> The abhorrent killing of women who've 'known' men and saving the
> virgins for themselves, and killing male children prisoners is
> something current sociopathic Christian Right freaks might like to 
do
> to Muslims, but it certainly isn't US law. You're wy out in left
> field, bwana.



...and if Curtis keeps playing with himself? What have God and Moses 
got in store for him?




[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread shempmcgurk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 1:00:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> There  are countless sources for laws. Deuteronomy is not one of 
them
> for US  law.
> 
> 
> 
> the blue Laws, Sodomy, Adultery and many of our restitution laws 
are  
> Biblically based.
> 
> 
> 
> ** Get a sneak peak of the all-
new AOL at 
> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour




Isn't it correct that the original constitution which declared slaves 
3/5th (or something like that) men was based upon the Bible?




[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread shempmcgurk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


[snip]

> 
> The Constitution does contradict the separation of Church and state 
as it  is 
> currently applied. Try reading the first amendment. The congress 
shall make  
> no law establishing nor prohibiting the free exercise of religion. 

[snip]

...just to change the subject a bit:

I've always wondered: the first amendment refers to "The Congress" 
that shall make no law etc.  The prohibition is applied to the U.S. 
Congress, no?  If so, what about the STATE governments...it seems 
that they are NOT prohibited from making laws regarding religion 
according to this text.

So why can't state governments make such laws regarding religion just 
as long as Congress doesn't?



Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 1:05:10 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

No  specific laws were created by the founding fathers that were
specifically  based only on Christian laws.



"only" is the only thing you have going here. Thou shalt not Steal, thou  
shalt not Murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not bare False  
witness. I'm sure these values exist within other cultures, but I guarantee you 
 
they are taught as Divine Law given to Moses by God for all men to follow and  
that is how our for fathers learned them. Our country also had laws observing  
the Sabbath,and making sodomy illegal. Many of our civil codes regarding  
Financial restitution are also Biblically based.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 1:54:21 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

No, but  the Declaration of Independence does and various state 
constitutions  
> did refer to a Deity. This also refers to the ratification of the  
> Constitution, not its writing which was partially written by  John
Jay, first Supreme 
> Court Head Justice who said: " Providence  has given our people the 
choice of 
> their rulers and it is their  duty as well as privilege and interest
of our 
> Christian nation to  select and prefer Christian rulers." Who of
course would 
> reflect  Christian values in their decisions and laws. Of course
other law was  
> considered and adopted considering the times. We don't stone  people
nor cast 
> them out based upon disease. And how would they  determine whether
any delegate 
> ever used the term Ten Commandments  or laws of Moses or any other
such terms? 
> Were they there? But we  do know the values they lived by, 29 were
Anglicans, 
> 16 to 18 were  Calvinist , 2 were Methodist, 2 Lutherans 2
Catholics, 1 
>  Quaker/Anglican and 1 known Deist who was Benjamin Franklin who by
the  attended 
> various Churches. There were only 55 writers and signers of  the 
Constitution. .

That's a far cry from your whacky claim that US  law is based on
Deuteronomy.




I have one question for you. When was the last time you read the Book of  
Deuteronomy?



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 1:00:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

There  are countless sources for laws. Deuteronomy is not one of them
for US  law.



the blue Laws, Sodomy, Adultery and many of our restitution laws are  
Biblically based.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

As I've  already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical  laws.




You were wrong and so were your sources. Also realize I'm not saying every  
law we have is found in the Bible.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 12:51:01 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
>  
> Deuteronomy also describes the  laws which people were to live by. They 
> included criminal and  civil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would suggest that while you are correct  in general, the real
basis for 
> our gov't is the 16th century fascination with  universal laws of
nature. These 
> were best exemplified by John Selden, in  De Jure Naturali et
Gentium juxta 
> Disciplinam Ebraerum (Natural Law and Civil Law  of the Hebrews),
where he tried 
> to establish such a universal law  based on (at that time) the only
known 
> universal laws, Noachide Law. Selden's  rendition and expansion of
Noachide Law 
> became one of the basis for  a universalized Freemasonry, which
later found 
> it's way into the thinking of  the founding fathers.
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, I have no problem with that either. Universal truths are
referred  to in 
> our Declaration of Independence. 'We hold these truths to be self
evident  
> that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their
Creator with  
> certain inalienable rights, that are among these the right to life
liberty and  
> the pursuit of happiness- That to secure these rights governments
are secured  
> among men'. The Civil Law of the Hebrews you mention is what I have
been 
> saying  here all day which is found in the Book of Deuteronomy. Of
course you know 
> the  free masons built the temple of Solomon which is built based on
the  
> design of the Tabernacle which was revealed to Moses by God.   


Apparently Moses was a real law-abiding guy. Here's how Moses followed
God's law:

Under God's direction, Moses' army defeats the Midianites. They kill
all the adult males, but take the women and children captive. When
Moses learns that they left some live, he angrily says: "Have you
saved all the women alive? Kill every male among the little ones, and
kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the
women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep
alive for yourselves." So they went back and did as Moses (and
presumably God) instructed, killing everyone except for the virgins.
In this way they got 32,000 virgins.

Numbers 31:1-54 (summarized)

The abhorrent killing of women who've 'known' men and saving the
virgins for themselves, and killing male children prisoners is
something current sociopathic Christian Right freaks might like to do
to Muslims, but it certainly isn't US law. You're wy out in left
field, bwana.










Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:56:24 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

If "all  men by nature are equally free and independent,If "all  m
be  considered as retaining an "equal right to free exercise of
religion,  according to dictates of conscience." While we assert for
ourselves a  freedom to embrace, to profess, and to observe, the
religion which we  believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an
equal freedom to those  whose minds have not yet yielded to the
evidence which has convinced  us...

Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead  of
maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had  contrary
operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal  establishment
of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits?  More or
less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance  and
servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and  persecution.se

What influences, in fact, have ecclesiastical  establishments had on
civil society? In some instances they have been seen  to erect a
spiritual tyranny on the ruins of civil authority; in many  instances
they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny;  in no
instance have they been seen the guardians of liberties of the  people.
Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found  an
established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just  government
instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them  not.

~~ James Madison




They key to this entire quote is in the second to the last sentence.  "Rulers 
who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established  clergy 
convenient axillaries." Exactly what Jefferson was describing to the  Baptists 
of Danbury. No state established religion or denomination but freedom  for 
all to practice any religion they choose. Which means the people can elect  
representatives to reflect their values and if they are Biblically based or  
based 
on the Koran or Gita or on secularism so be it. This is Democracy and it  
reflects the will of the people.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:56:24 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Moore  lost his case based on a false assumption of a separation of
church  
> and state which was perpetuated since the late 1940's by the  then
Supreme Court.

Wrong. In effect, the US Constitution  essentially upheld the idea of
the separation of church and state from the  outset.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it contradict the  following
statements by Jefferson and Madison. In fact, later Supreme  Court
decisions, except for the Pledge of Allegience case, also upheld  those
ideas.

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which  lies solely
between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for  his
faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government  reach
actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign  reverence
that act of the whole American people which declared that  their
legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment  of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building  a
wall of separation between church and State."

~~ Thomas  Jefferson




The Constitution does contradict the separation of Church and state as it  is 
currently applied. Try reading the first amendment. The congress shall make  
no law establishing nor prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Clearly 
this  means the Government can not establish by law an official state Church or 
 
religion as was the custom in Europe. However the government can not pass a 
law  prohibiting the elected from expressing the religious values of the people 
 
they represent through legislation. Laws regarding the Sabbath, Sodomy, 
Adultery  as well as laws regarding financial restitution are or were very 
common 
in state  governments since their inceptionhttp://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Fear disguised as wisdom (was Re: Levitation on youtube)

2007-07-13 Thread shempmcgurk
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


[snip]

> 
> Just a clarification for those of us who have "missed the boat
> forever", is the boat wanking-free?  And this is considered progress
> and fulfillment?  Why is wanking always the fall guy?  Most 
undeserved
> bad rap in history.  Just thought I would put in a few kind words 
for
> a lifelong good friend.



Curtis, every drop of golden semen = 108 years of rounding.

As with all things in life, Curtis, I advise you to take counsel from 
The One True Knowledge found in the the treasure trove known as 
Seinfeld reruns.  

The following is the transcript of a most appropriate scene for you 
from Episode 66 in Season Five known as "The Puffy Shirt":

[Setting: A photographer's studio]

(George is holding out his hands while a man and woman marvel at 
them. A photographer is fooling around with a camera towards the 
right wall)

MAN: I've never seen hands like these before..

WOMAN: They're so soft and milky white.

PHOTOGRAPHER: You know who's hands they remind me of? (Pauses for 
effect) Ray McKigney.

(The woman nods as the man looks off into space)

MAN: Ugh.. Ray.

PHOTOGRAPHER: He was it.

GEORGE: Who was he?

PHOTOGRAPHER: The most exquisite hands you've ever seen.. Oh, he had 
it all.

GEORGE: (Hands still out, even though they've stopped looking at 
them) What happened to him?

(Obviously a touchy subject, the woman coyly walks over to the 
photographer, and they both occupy themselves. The man is left to 
tell George the answer to his

question)

MAN: (Clears throat) Tragic story, I'm afraid. He could've had any 
woman in the world.. but none could match the beauty of his own 
hand.. and that became his

one true love..

(Long pause)

GEORGE: You mean, uh..?

MAN: Yes. he was not.. master of his domain.

GEORGE: (Makes a gesture saying he understands. The man nods) But 
how.. uh..?

MAN: (Quick, to the point) The muscles.. became so strained with.. 
overuse, that eventually the hand locked into a deformed position, 
and he was left with nothing

but a claw. (Holds hand up, displaying a claw-like shape) He traveled 
the world seeking a cure.. acupuncturists.. herbalists.. swamis.. 
nothing helped. Towards the

end, his hands became so frozen the was unable to manipulate 
utensils, (Visibly disgusted by this last part) and was dependent on 
Cub Scouts to feed him. I hadn't

seen another pair of hands like Ray McKigney's.. until today. You are 
his successor. (George looks down at his hands) I.. only hope you 
have a little more

self-control.

GEORGE: (Smiling to himself) You don't have to worry about me. 
(Nodding, gloating) I won a contest.





[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread jim_flanegin
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"  
> wrote:
> >> Just a gentle reminder that I find exactly the same thing out 
here 
> > in the "real world"- no stress, no negativity, all light and 
> > cooperation and love, just as evident here as it is anywhere 
else!
> > Help! I'm turning into a real "Bliss Ninny"<-- Love that term! 
LOL :-
> > )
> *lol* Yes, good point; on our travels lately all over the U.S., 
Canada, 
> and the U.K. we have been finding exactly the same thing. The 
> difference seems to be that I'm finding the qualities are 
considerably 
> more "concentrated" or "alive" in Fairfield; more people seem to 
be 
> more consciously participating in more intensities of the love and 
> joy :-)
>
Agreed-- Yeah, when I focused over there after re-reading what I had 
written I got the same "hit"- concentrated sweetener. Ka-ching!

Glad to hear so many of the flock have turned to the shepherd. LOL! 
Seriously, its awesome! Its like,"Hey lets do something radical and 
join the rest of the Universe, shall we?". Kind of makes the 
previous state seem very strange and isolated indeed. The 
expression "poor bastards" becomes a definition vs an epithet...ok 
I'll be quiet now. 

Interesting too what empty bill was saying about once having set the 
foundation with TM, it just takes a small nudge to pop us into the 
Reality of Brahman. How this nudge occurs is fascinating to me; 
Maharishi mentions bus exhaust as a possible catalyst, empty bill 
mentions the teachings of Tibetan monks, Byron Katie was just lying 
around on the floor, and personally I just ran into someone at the 
right time who said the things I could finally hear. Seems to be as 
varied as the experience of Brahman itself. Pretty funny, eh? Aaaah, 
us meditators are just a bunch of pushovers. :-)



[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 12:31:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> The  brief notes that the U.S. Constitution lacks even "a perfunctory
> or  formalistic reference to God" and says during the debate over
> ratification  of that document, delegates discussed Roman law, British
> law and the laws  of other European nations but "as can best be
> determined, no delegate ever  mentioned the Ten Commandments or the
> Bible."  [...]
> 
> 
> 
> No, but the Declaration of Independence does and various state 
constitutions 
> did refer to a Deity. This also refers to the ratification of the  
> Constitution, not its writing which was partially written by John
Jay, first  Supreme 
> Court Head Justice who said: " Providence has given our people the 
choice of 
> their rulers and it is their duty as well as privilege and interest
of  our 
> Christian nation to select and prefer Christian rulers." Who of
course would  
> reflect Christian values in their decisions and laws. Of course
other law  was 
> considered and adopted considering the times. We don't stone people
nor cast  
> them out based upon disease. And how would they determine whether
any delegate  
> ever used the term Ten Commandments or laws of Moses or any other
such terms?  
> Were they there? But we do know the values they lived by, 29 were
Anglicans, 
> 16  to 18 were Calvinist , 2 were Methodist, 2 Lutherans 2
Catholics, 1  
> Quaker/Anglican and 1 known Deist who was Benjamin Franklin who by
the attended  
> various Churches. There were only 55 writers and signers of the 
Constitution.   .


That's a far cry from your whacky claim that US law is based on
Deuteronomy.







Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:51:01 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 
Deuteronomy also describes the  laws which people were to live by. They 
included criminal and  civil.





I would suggest that while you are correct  in general, the real basis for 
our gov't is the 16th century fascination with  universal laws of nature. These 
were best exemplified by John Selden, in  De Jure Naturali et Gentium juxta 
Disciplinam Ebraerum (Natural Law and Civil Law  of the Hebrews), where he 
tried 
to establish such a universal law  based on (at that time) the only known 
universal laws, Noachide Law. Selden's  rendition and expansion of Noachide Law 
became one of the basis for  a universalized Freemasonry, which later found 
it's way into the thinking of  the founding fathers.



Hey, I have no problem with that either. Universal truths are referred  to in 
our Declaration of Independence. 'We hold these truths to be self evident  
that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with  
certain inalienable rights, that are among these the right to life liberty and  
the pursuit of happiness- That to secure these rights governments are secured  
among men'. The Civil Law of the Hebrews you mention is what I have been 
saying  here all day which is found in the Book of Deuteronomy. Of course you 
know 
the  free masons built the temple of Solomon which is built based on the  
design of the Tabernacle which was revealed to Moses by God.   



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread Rory Goff
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>> Just a gentle reminder that I find exactly the same thing out here 
> in the "real world"- no stress, no negativity, all light and 
> cooperation and love, just as evident here as it is anywhere else!
> Help! I'm turning into a real "Bliss Ninny"<-- Love that term! LOL :-
> )
*lol* Yes, good point; on our travels lately all over the U.S., Canada, 
and the U.K. we have been finding exactly the same thing. The 
difference seems to be that I'm finding the qualities are considerably 
more "concentrated" or "alive" in Fairfield; more people seem to be 
more consciously participating in more intensities of the love and 
joy :-)




Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:49:14 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 
Bingo!  Kill all the infidels and then you have peace. Oh but wait, you have  
Sunni/Shiite conflicts to settle with the  sword. 





Are you doubting the word of Allah?! :-)



Hey when they finish, Allah is alla that's left.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:31:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The  brief notes that the U.S. Constitution lacks even "a perfunctory
or  formalistic reference to God" and says during the debate over
ratification  of that document, delegates discussed Roman law, British
law and the laws  of other European nations but "as can best be
determined, no delegate ever  mentioned the Ten Commandments or the
Bible."  [...]



No, but the Declaration of Independence does and various state  constitutions 
did refer to a Deity. This also refers to the ratification of the  
Constitution, not its writing which was partially written by John Jay, first  
Supreme 
Court Head Justice who said: " Providence has given our people the  choice of 
their rulers and it is their duty as well as privilege and interest of  our 
Christian nation to select and prefer Christian rulers." Who of course would  
reflect Christian values in their decisions and laws. Of course other law  was 
considered and adopted considering the times. We don't stone people nor cast  
them out based upon disease. And how would they determine whether any delegate  
ever used the term Ten Commandments or laws of Moses or any other such terms?  
Were they there? But we do know the values they lived by, 29 were Anglicans, 
16  to 18 were Calvinist , 2 were Methodist, 2 Lutherans 2 Catholics, 1  
Quaker/Anglican and 1 known Deist who was Benjamin Franklin who by the attended 
 
various Churches. There were only 55 writers and signers of the  Constitution.  
 .



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 12:19:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Whether  the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not
> > relevant. You  don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the
> > founding  fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the
> > constitution and  bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that
> > they intended this  country to be a haven for freedom of religious
> > practice.
> 
> Yes,  but not limited to 'Christian' religious practice.
> 
> > But it does me  no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods
> > or no god. It  neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
> > -- Thomas  Jefferson
> 
> 
> 
> I have never said the founding fathers ever intended to prevent the
 practice 
> of any other religion in the United States. But neither did they 
establish a 
> secular government devoid of religious ideals and values. The 
overwhelming 
> majority just happened to be Christian which influenced their 
values and the 
> laws created.


No specific laws were created by the founding fathers that were
specifically based only on Christian laws.






[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 12:02:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Deuteronomy clearly describes a theocracy. The USA is clearly not  a
> theocracy and the founding fathers made certain that it  wasn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Deuteronomy also describes the laws which people were to live by. They  
> included criminal and civil.


There are countless sources for laws. Deuteronomy is not one of them
for US law.



[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 11:59:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Deuteronomy describes a theocracy. The USA is not a theocracy  or
> anything like the system in Deuteronomy - by any stretch of  the
> imagination.
> 
> 
> 
> Try reading the laws of Moses and see if our laws, both civil and
criminal  
> are not very similar. I'll grant you we have evolved above stoning,
casting  
> out people based on skin disease etc . We now have prisons,
hospitals and  other 
> ways of dealing with certain social  problems. 


As I've already cited, US laws are not based on Biblical laws.






[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 11:42:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> It  was
> founded on 
> > Christian principles which are common to the  Christian/Judaic
> culture. I see 
> > very little, if any, Islamic,  Hindu,Buddhist influence in our laws
> and 
> > government. Yet our laws  and morays are saturated with Biblical
values.
> 
> No. They are  not.
> 
> ---Forty-one law professors and legal historians weighed in on  a
> lawsuit challenging Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy  Moore's
> display of the Ten Commandments in the state Judicial Building  in
> Montgomery. The scholars were brought together by Steven K.  Green,
> former legal director at Americans United and now law professor  at
> Willamette University College of Law in Salem,  Oregon.
> 
> 
> 
> Moore lost his case based on a false assumption of a separation of
church  
> and state which was perpetuated since the late 1940's by the then
Supreme  Court.


Wrong. In effect, the US Constitution essentially upheld the idea of
the separation of church and state from the outset.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it contradict the following
statements by Jefferson and Madison. In fact, later Supreme Court
decisions, except for the Pledge of Allegience case, also upheld those
ideas.

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely
between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his
faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach
actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence
that act of the whole American people which declared that their
legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a
wall of separation between church and State."

~~ Thomas Jefferson

AND,

"If "all men by nature are equally free and independent," they are to
be considered as retaining an "equal right to free exercise of
religion, according to dictates of conscience." While we assert for
ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess, and to observe, the
religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an
equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the
evidence which has convinced us...

Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of
maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had contrary
operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment
of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or
less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and
servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution...

What influences, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on
civil society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a
spiritual tyranny on the ruins of civil authority; in many instances
they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no
instance have they been seen the guardians of liberties of the people.
Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an
established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government
instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.

~~ James Madison






Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:09:57 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Whether  the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not
relevant. You don't  look at the walls of buildings to determine the
founding fathers' views of  gov't and religion, you read the
constitution and bill of rights which  makes it perfectly clear that
they intended this country to be a haven for  freedom of religious
practice.

But it does me no injury for my  neighbor to say there are twenty gods
or no god. It neither picks my pocket  nor breaks my leg.
-- Thomas Jefferson



I have no argument against this. I agree. But it is not a government  founded 
on secularism and freedom from religion. Had the population of the  colonies 
been from the middle east and Islamic we would all probably be living  under 
Shirria Law. But they weren't. Our founding fathers were overwhelmingly  
Christians of various denominations and our laws and culture reflected  that.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread Vaj


On Jul 13, 2007, at 1:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message dated 7/13/07 12:02:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Deuteronomy clearly describes a theocracy. The USA is clearly not a
theocracy and the founding fathers made certain that it wasn't.
Deuteronomy also describes the laws which people were to live by.  
They included criminal and civil.



I would suggest that while you are correct in general, the real basis  
for our gov't is the 16th century fascination with universal laws of  
nature. These were best exemplified by John Selden, in De Jure  
Naturali et Gentium juxta Disciplinam Ebraerum (Natural Law and Civil  
Law of the Hebrews), where he tried to establish such a universal law  
based on (at that time) the only known universal laws, Noachide Law.  
Selden's rendition and expansion of Noachide Law became one of the  
basis for a universalized Freemasonry, which later found it's way  
into the thinking of the founding fathers.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread Vaj


On Jul 13, 2007, at 1:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message dated 7/13/07 11:37:05 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
n a message dated 7/13/07 9:10:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

What we need is a "religion of peace".

Anyone know of such a religion?
Oh, for sure, they call it Islam.


Yes, but according to the scholars in the movie Islam: What the  
West Needs to Know,  "a religion of peace" refers to the imagined  
time when Islam rules the entire earth. That's what the "religion  
of peace" is alluding to, this imagined future time.
Bingo! Kill all the infidels and then you have peace. Oh but wait,  
you have Sunni/Shiite conflicts to settle with the sword.



Are you doubting the word of Allah?! :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:19:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Whether  the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not
> relevant. You  don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the
> founding  fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the
> constitution and  bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that
> they intended this  country to be a haven for freedom of religious
> practice.

Yes,  but not limited to 'Christian' religious practice.

> But it does me  no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods
> or no god. It  neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
> -- Thomas  Jefferson



I have never said the founding fathers ever intended to prevent the  practice 
of any other religion in the United States. But neither did they  establish a 
secular government devoid of religious ideals and values. The  overwhelming 
majority just happened to be Christian which influenced their  values and the 
laws created.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 12:02:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Deuteronomy clearly describes a theocracy. The USA is clearly not  a
theocracy and the founding fathers made certain that it  wasn't.



Deuteronomy also describes the laws which people were to live by. They  
included criminal and civil.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 11:59:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Deuteronomy describes a theocracy. The USA is not a theocracy  or
anything like the system in Deuteronomy - by any stretch of  the
imagination.



Try reading the laws of Moses and see if our laws, both civil and criminal  
are not very similar. I'll grant you we have evolved above stoning, casting  
out people based on skin disease etc . We now have prisons, hospitals and  
other 
ways of dealing with certain social  problems. 



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 11:04:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Nope.  Deuteronomy describes a theocracy, not a democracy. The founding
> fathers  wanted nothing to do with a theocracy.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry our laws, both criminal and civil are modeled "based" on much
of what  
> is in Deuteronomy. 


No. They are not, as is illustrated in the following brief in the
Judge Moore case:

---Forty-one law professors and legal historians weighed in on a
lawsuit challenging Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore's
display of the Ten Commandments in the state Judicial Building in
Montgomery. The scholars were brought together by Steven K. Green,
former legal director at Americans United and now law professor at
Willamette University College of Law in Salem, Oregon. [...]

The brief notes that the U.S. Constitution lacks even "a perfunctory
or formalistic reference to God" and says during the debate over
ratification of that document, delegates discussed Roman law, British
law and the laws of other European nations but "as can best be
determined, no delegate ever mentioned the Ten Commandments or the
Bible." [...]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3944/is_200306/ai_n9283024






> No where have I said our government is a duplicate of what 
> is  in Deuteronomy. Have you read it?  
> 
> 
> 
> ** Get a sneak peak of the
all-new AOL at 
> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
>




Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 11:42:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

It  was
founded on 
> Christian principles which are common to the  Christian/Judaic
culture. I see 
> very little, if any, Islamic,  Hindu,Buddhist influence in our laws
and 
> government. Yet our laws  and morays are saturated with Biblical values.

No. They are  not.

---Forty-one law professors and legal historians weighed in on  a
lawsuit challenging Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy  Moore's
display of the Ten Commandments in the state Judicial Building  in
Montgomery. The scholars were brought together by Steven K.  Green,
former legal director at Americans United and now law professor  at
Willamette University College of Law in Salem,  Oregon.



Moore lost his case based on a false assumption of a separation of church  
and state which was perpetuated since the late 1940's by the then Supreme  
Court.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 11:04:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Nope.  Deuteronomy describes a theocracy, not a democracy. The founding
fathers  wanted nothing to do with a theocracy.



Sorry our laws, both criminal and civil are modeled "based" on much of what  
is in Deuteronomy. No where have I said our government is a duplicate of what 
is  in Deuteronomy. Have you read it?  



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > >
> > >  
> > > In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> > > do.rflex@ writes:
> > > 
> > > They are  right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our 
> > > > legal/moral  system. 
> > > 
> > > Horseshit.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have?  Try reading it, then
> > read  this 
> > > link _RE-TAKING  AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United
> States_ 
> > > (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html)   The
> > Supreme  Court 
> > > as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and
> >  carvings 
> > > of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or  
> > Mohammed and 
> > > the Koran.
> > 
> > 
> > Well, let's see:
> > 
> > You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in
> > history to debunk the claim — you just need to look at the
> > Commandments themselves. If the "basis" of our laws "originated" from
> > the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious — we could look at the Ten
> > Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions.
> > 
> > The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens.
> > 
> > * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws
> > against this? Strike one.
> > 
> > * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws
> > against this? Strike two.
> > 
> > * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in
> > vain. Any laws against this? Strike three.
> > 
> > * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws
> > mandating this? Strike four.
> > 
> > * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws
> > mandating this? Strike five.
> 
> Whether the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not
> relevant.  You don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the
> founding fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the
> constitution and bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that
> they intended this country to be a haven for freedom of religious
> practice.


Yes, but not limited to 'Christian' religious practice.


> But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods
> or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
> -- Thomas Jefferson









Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 11:37:05 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 
 
n a message dated 7/13/07  9:10:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:  
What we need is a "religion of  peace".

Anyone know of such a  religion?


Oh, for  sure, they call it Islam.



Yes, but according to the scholars in the  movie Islam: What the West Needs 
to Know,  "a religion of  peace" refers to the imagined time when Islam rules 
the entire earth. That's  what the "religion of peace" is alluding to, this 
imagined future  time.

 


Bingo! Kill all the infidels and then you have peace. Oh but wait, you have  
Sunni/Shiite conflicts to settle with the  sword. 



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread boo_lives
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> >
> >  
> > In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> > do.rflex@ writes:
> > 
> > They are  right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our 
> > > legal/moral  system. 
> > 
> > Horseshit.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have?  Try reading it, then
> read  this 
> > link _RE-TAKING  AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United
States_ 
> > (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html)   The
> Supreme  Court 
> > as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and
>  carvings 
> > of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or  
> Mohammed and 
> > the Koran.
> 
> 
> Well, let's see:
> 
> You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in
> history to debunk the claim — you just need to look at the
> Commandments themselves. If the "basis" of our laws "originated" from
> the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious — we could look at the Ten
> Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions.
> 
> The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens.
> 
> * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws
> against this? Strike one.
> 
> * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws
> against this? Strike two.
> 
> * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in
> vain. Any laws against this? Strike three.
> 
> * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws
> mandating this? Strike four.
> 
> * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws
> mandating this? Strike five.

Whether the founding fathers were christians or hindus is not
relevant.  You don't look at the walls of buildings to determine the
founding fathers' views of gov't and religion, you read the
constitution and bill of rights which makes it perfectly clear that
they intended this country to be a haven for freedom of religious
practice.

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods
or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-- Thomas Jefferson



Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 10:02:08 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I don't  know much about christian fundamentalists


At least we can agree on something.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 10:02:08 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

And this  whole line of argument is pretty funny. This worship of 250
year old  "authority figures" seems so odd -- given that the founding
fathers main  message seemed to be: 



"seems" is the key word here.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 9:46:06 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> The  notion that our laws "originated" from the Ten Commandments is
> very  popular. And very wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> No not just the Ten Commandments, but the Laws of Moses, some 613 in
all.  
> Nor did I say they originated . I said they were based for these
laws. See  
> Deuteronomy, both Criminal and Civil laws, as well as elected
leaders officials  
> and judges. 


Deuteronomy clearly describes a theocracy. The USA is clearly not a
theocracy and the founding fathers made certain that it wasn't.








[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 9:39:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Supreme  Court 
> > as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures  and
> carvings 
> > of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the  Gita or 
> Mohammed and 
> > the Koran.
> 
> Well, let's  see:
> 
> You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate  in
> history to debunk the claim â€" you just need to look at  the
> Commandments themselves. If the "basis" of our laws "originated"  from
> the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious â€" we could look at the  Ten
> Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal  traditions.
> 
> The reality, of course, is that the opposite  happens.
> 
> * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods.  Any laws
> against this? Strike one.
> 
> * The Commandments say people  shall not make graven images. Any laws
> against this? Strike two.
> 
> *  The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in
> vain.  Any laws against this? Strike three.
> 
> * The Commandments say people must  honor a Sabbath day. Any laws
> mandating this? Strike four.
> 
> * The  Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws
> mandating this?  Strike five. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you missed the point. Over your head I guess. Our legal
system is  
> *Based* on Biblical laws and teachings and there really are more
than just the  
> Ten Commandments.The Laws of Moses had 613 commandments That is why
I have  
> challenged you to try reading the book of Deuteronomy. 


Deuteronomy describes a theocracy. The USA is not a theocracy or
anything like the system in Deuteronomy - by any stretch of the
imagination.



> The Constitution does  
> allow for the free exercise of religion and that included any
religion. Federal  
> law was supposed to be limited and allow the states to create the
laws they  
> wanted to live by since in the beginning most states held majorities
of  
> different denominations and would reflect their values accordingly.
Blue laws,  laws 
> observing the Sabbath, were very common in the states up until the 
'70s.  
> You conveniently left out murder, stealing, adultery, false 
witness, and 
> coveting,( see conspiring). 


Those are common laws in just about any legal system. They did not
necessarily originate from the Bible.






Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:53:20 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Portraits and carvings in the 
> Capital, Supreme Court and  National Achieves depict religious
services, and 
> events as well as  Moses and the Ten Commandments, repeatedly. 

I thought the purpose of  these was to remind us of how far we have
come. Sort of like a museum piece  -- showing old model Ts and then the
Apollo capsules. Showing Moses and the  tablets, says to me: 

"Hey, we used to be so dogmatic and  superstitious, and prone to wild
tales told by priests and "leaders" as to  believe god wrote laws on
stone tablets with lightening while some guy  named moses held on to
them (I hope he had rubber gloves on). And  curiously, the tablets
disappeared, but the "beleivers" KNOW what was on  them -- and tell US
what god REALLY said. Whew -- we HAVE come a long ways  from those dark
days. While the current system is not perfect, people use  their
natural talents (god given?) to think for themselves, and  rationally
carve out an ethical system of laws and  justice."




And the purpose of opening the day with prayer in Congress is  to.?



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:50:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Are we  off the hook for getting stoned for adultery yet? I am
inquiring for  a...um...a friend. I mean if she's totally eyeballing
you, I mean him, my  friend, and she is crazy hot. (MILF)



Not totally. It is grounds for divorce, which could include the payment of  
alimony and child support and dividing your property with your ex- spouse. You  
might wished you could have been stoned.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:39:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Supreme  Court 
> as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures  and
carvings 
> of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the  Gita or 
Mohammed and 
> the Koran.

Well, let's  see:

You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate  in
history to debunk the claim — you just need to look at  the
Commandments themselves. If the "basis" of our laws "originated"  from
the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious — we could look at the  Ten
Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal  traditions.

The reality, of course, is that the opposite  happens.

* The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods.  Any laws
against this? Strike one.

* The Commandments say people  shall not make graven images. Any laws
against this? Strike two.

*  The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in
vain.  Any laws against this? Strike three.

* The Commandments say people must  honor a Sabbath day. Any laws
mandating this? Strike four.

* The  Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws
mandating this?  Strike five. 




Sorry, you missed the point. Over your head I guess. Our legal system is  
*Based* on Biblical laws and teachings and there really are more than just the  
Ten Commandments.The Laws of Moses had 613 commandments That is why I have  
challenged you to try reading the book of Deuteronomy. The Constitution does  
allow for the free exercise of religion and that included any religion. Federal 
 
law was supposed to be limited and allow the states to create the laws they  
wanted to live by since in the beginning most states held majorities of  
different denominations and would reflect their values accordingly. Blue laws,  
laws 
observing the Sabbath, were very common in the states up until the  '70s.  
You conveniently left out murder, stealing, adultery, false  witness, and 
coveting,( see conspiring). 



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras

2007-07-13 Thread jim_flanegin
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim  
wrote:
> > 
> > >   As a side note here, my interest in this forum is simply to 
> assay 
> > the state of mind of some of fairfield's own meditators. I don't 
> know 
> > if this forum is representative or not, since I only know a few 
> > people now living in fairfield. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff"  
> wrote:
>  
> > Greetings, Billy Jim! No, not particularly representative, as to 
> the 
> > bickering and so on -- there is so much Heart now in FF, which 
has 
> > really flowered into overflowing Love & Laughter over these past 
> few 
> > years -- a true Siddhapura. I feel *incredibly* blessed to be 
here 
> > among so many wise and wonderful radiant beings at this point in 
> time.
> 
> (The opinions given above are only my perceptions of the people I 
> have met here, and are not meant to represent their perceptions, 
let 
> alone the perceptions of those I haven't met here. Still, there 
> appears to be a general consensus that FF has warmed up into much 
> more love and tolerance over this last decade, between "townies" 
> and "rus" as well as among the various factions of "rus". I and 
> others are noticing much more respect for each each others' paths, 
> much more warmth -- many attribute this to the visits of the 
Mother 
> Saints. I have no opinion on the probable cause(s)...)
>
Just a gentle reminder that I find exactly the same thing out here 
in the "real world"- no stress, no negativity, all light and 
cooperation and love, just as evident here as it is anywhere else!
Help! I'm turning into a real "Bliss Ninny"<-- Love that term! LOL :-
)



Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:46:06 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The  notion that our laws "originated" from the Ten Commandments is
very  popular. And very wrong.



No not just the Ten Commandments, but the Laws of Moses, some 613 in all.  
Nor did I say they originated . I said they were based for these laws. See  
Deuteronomy, both Criminal and Civil laws, as well as elected leaders officials 
 
and judges. 



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread Vaj


On Jul 13, 2007, at 12:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Ahem, Free Masons can believe in any Divine Being they wish as long  
as they believe in one. Most of my male relatives were Free Masons  
as well as Baptists, Methodists, Church of Christ or Presbyterian.  
Being a Free Mason doesn't mean you aren't a Christian but you  
don't have to be a Christian to be a Free Mason.



That actually depends on the country. There are one or two countries  
(IIRC the Swedes and Danes) where Christianity is a condition for  
membership. Also there are also some orders which do, by there very  
nature, require a belief in Jesus Christ as a world-saviour.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 9:32:56 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> "The  government of the United States is not in any sense founded on
> the  Christian religion."
> 
> 
> 
> I never said it was founded on the Christian religion. It was
founded  on 
> Christian principles which are common to the Christian/Judaic
culture. I see  
> very little, if any,  Islamic, Hindu,Buddhist influence in our laws
 and 
> government. Yet our laws and morays are saturated with Biblical  values.


No. They are not.

---Forty-one law professors and legal historians weighed in on a
lawsuit challenging Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore's
display of the Ten Commandments in the state Judicial Building in
Montgomery. The scholars were brought together by Steven K. Green,
former legal director at Americans United and now law professor at
Willamette University College of Law in Salem, Oregon.

The friend-of-the-court brief, filed April 28, musters ample
historical evidence to debunk claims by Moore's attorneys that the
judge has the right to display the Ten Commandments because they are
the foundation of American law.

Nothing in the nation's legal history supports Moore's view, the legal
scholars and historians say.

"Aside from a failed attempt in the seventeenth century to establish a
biblically based legal system in the Puritan colonies, American law is
generally viewed as having secular origins," asserts the brief.

The brief notes that "various documents and texts" figured in the
development of American law, among them English common and statutory
law, Roman law, the civil law of continental Europe and private
international law.

American law, they point out, was also influenced by the writings of
William Blackstone, John Locke, Adam Smith and others as well as the
Magna Carta, the Federalist Papers and other sources.

"Each of these documents had a far greater influence on America's laws
than the Ten Commandments," asserts the brief. "Indeed, the legal and
historical record does not include significant and meaningful
references to the Ten Commandments, the Pentateuch or to biblical law
generally."

The brief notes that the U.S. Constitution lacks even "a perfunctory
or formalistic reference to God" and says during the debate over
ratification of that document, delegates discussed Roman law, British
law and the laws of other European nations but "as can best be
determined, no delegate ever mentioned the Ten Commandments or the
Bible." [...]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3944/is_200306/ai_n9283024








Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread Vaj


On Jul 13, 2007, at 11:59 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

n a message dated 7/13/07 9:10:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

What we need is a "religion of peace".

Anyone know of such a religion?
Oh, for sure, they call it Islam.


Yes, but according to the scholars in the movie Islam: What the West  
Needs to Know,  "a religion of peace" refers to the imagined time  
when Islam rules the entire earth. That's what the "religion of  
peace" is alluding to, this imagined future time.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:32:56 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

"The  government of the United States is not in any sense founded on
the  Christian religion."



I never said it was founded on the Christian religion. It was founded  on 
Christian principles which are common to the Christian/Judaic culture. I see  
very little, if any,  Islamic, Hindu,Buddhist influence in our laws  and 
government. Yet our laws and morays are saturated with Biblical  values.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:18:57 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Well,  your figures are wrong (Or maybe mine are) but below there were
39 signers  of Constitution and 56 of DvI. Many of whom were NOT the
same. The  firebrand revolutionaries moved on before the constitution
was  ratified.

Category Total Number Involved Number & Percent Who Were  Freemasons
Signers of the Declaration of Independence 56 9 --  16%
Signers of the U.S. Constitution 39 13 -- 33%
Generals in the  Continental Army 74 33 -- 46%

And while I am not a freemason groupie /  advocate / conspiratoral
therist type, freemasons certainly are not, as a  group, orthodox
christians. More than 1 or 6 were freemasons. And that does  NOT imply
the REST were fundie Christians.




Ahem, Free Masons can believe in any Divine Being they wish as long as they  
believe in one. Most of my male relatives were Free Masons as well as 
Baptists,  Methodists, Church of Christ or Presbyterian. Being a Free Mason 
doesn't 
mean  you aren't a Christian but you don't have to be a Christian to be a Free  
Mason.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/13/07 9:06:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Yes, As  I said, the attempt now days is to redefine "Founding
> Father" to a 
> >  few people, quite literally, usually less than a half a dozen.
> >  
> 
> Ah, in just an hour or two you have gone from 1 to 6. I see a  trend
> here. We should hit 55 by um, about noon tomorrow -- as the  thick
> walls of encrusted dogma come a tumbling down -- shaken to their  roots
> by the all truth knowing vibes of the trumpet of Jericho (and  blues
> guitar of Curtis of course).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice try, but I said "Less than six". I'm giving you the possibility
that  
> Ben Franklin was not the only true Deist founding father, who BTW
did  attend 
> Christian church services of various denominations. How about some
more  quotes. 
> John Adams:"The general principles on which the fathers achieved  
> Independence were...the general principles of Christianity.. I will
avow that I  then 
> believed, and now believe, that the general  principles of 
Christianity are as 
> eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of  God."

> George Washington in his farewell address:"Of
all the 
> dispositions and habits  which lead to political prosperity,
religion and 
> morality are indispensable  supports. In  vain would that man claim
the tribute of 
> patriotism, who  would labor to subvert these great pillars". How
About John 
> Jay, first Chief  Justice of the Supreme Court and one of three men
most 
> responsible for writing  the Constitution." Providence has given to
our people the 
> choice of their rulers  and it is their duty as well as privilege
and interest of 
> our Christian  Nation to select and prefer Christians for their
rulers." And 
> the United  States Supreme Court 1892: "Our laws and institutions must 
> necessarily be based  upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer
of mankind. It is 
> impossible that  it should be otherwise; and in this extent our
civilization 
> and our institutions  are emphatically Christian . This is a
Christian 
> Nation." < So, to  say that Hinduism is not the kind of religion our
founding 
> fathers had in mind  is quite accurate. It is extremely clear to all
those not in 
> denial, that the  overwhelming majority of the founding fathers were 
> Christians and  founded the United States upon Christian principles.
I again challenge 
>  anybody that takes issue with this to read the Book of Deuteronomy.
You will 
>  find elected officials, a court and legal system and laws very
similar to  
> our legal system complete with God given rights. 


Nope. Deuteronomy describes a theocracy, not a democracy. The founding
fathers wanted nothing to do with a theocracy.


[snip to end]



Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:10:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

What we  need is a "religion of peace".

Anyone know of such a  religion?



Oh, for sure, they call it Islam.



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:10:34 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Lets  see, you have quotes from Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
James  
> Madison and John Adams, all of which can be contradicted by other  
quotes. 

Just how ambiguous do you think the following quotes  are!!??

"I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming  feature."
Thomas Jefferson 

"This would be the best of all possible  worlds, if there were no
religion in it."
john  Adams




There is Orthodox Christianity and then there is non denominational  
Christianity. the Orthodox put a great deal of emphasis on dogma and doctrine,  
just 
as the Pharisees placed great importance on the Laws of Moses, where as non  
denominational emphasizes a personal relationship with the Almighty and  
observing the heart of the Law. I know Christians that can't stand religion  
but love 
their relationship with Christ. Christ Himself was the same. He  constantly 
violated the "Law" in service to his Father in Heaven which really  pissed off 
the Pharisees.  He was constantly hounded for healing  people on the Sabbath 
when no work was to be done.< So to say that either  quote proves that neither 
were Christians is foolish.  



** Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers...

2007-07-13 Thread MDixon6569
 
In a message dated 7/13/07 9:06:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Yes, As  I said, the attempt now days is to redefine "Founding
Father" to a 
>  few people, quite literally, usually less than a half a dozen.
>  

Ah, in just an hour or two you have gone from 1 to 6. I see a  trend
here. We should hit 55 by um, about noon tomorrow -- as the  thick
walls of encrusted dogma come a tumbling down -- shaken to their  roots
by the all truth knowing vibes of the trumpet of Jericho (and  blues
guitar of Curtis of course).




Nice try, but I said "Less than six". I'm giving you the possibility that  
Ben Franklin was not the only true Deist founding father, who BTW did  attend 
Christian church services of various denominations. How about some more  
quotes. 
John Adams:"The general principles on which the fathers achieved  
Independence were...the general principles of Christianity.. I will avow that I 
 then 
believed, and now believe, that the general  principles of  Christianity are as 
eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of  God." 
George Washington in his farewell address:"Of all the 
dispositions and habits  which lead to political prosperity, religion and 
morality are indispensable  supports. In  vain would that man claim the tribute 
of 
patriotism, who  would labor to subvert these great pillars". How About John 
Jay, first Chief  Justice of the Supreme Court and one of three men most 
responsible for writing  the Constitution." Providence has given to our people 
the 
choice of their rulers  and it is their duty as well as privilege and interest 
of 
our Christian  Nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." And 
the United  States Supreme Court 1892: "Our laws and institutions must 
necessarily be based  upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. 
It is 
impossible that  it should be otherwise; and in this extent our civilization 
and our institutions  are emphatically Christian . This is a Christian 
Nation." < So, to  say that Hinduism is not the kind of religion our founding 
fathers had in mind  is quite accurate. It is extremely clear to all those not 
in 
denial, that the  overwhelming majority of the founding fathers were 
Christians and  founded the United States upon Christian principles. I again 
challenge 
 anybody that takes issue with this to read the Book of Deuteronomy. You will 
 find elected officials, a court and legal system and laws very similar to  
our legal system complete with God given rights. http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[FairfieldLife] Meditation won't help Health according NIH

2007-07-13 Thread sgrayatlarge
Oops!

THURSDAY, July 12 (HealthDay News) -- There's no evidence that 
meditation eases health problems, according to an exhaustive review 
of the accumulated data by Canadian researchers.


 
"There is an enormous amount of interest in using meditation as a 
form of therapy to cope with a variety of modern-day health problems, 
especially hypertension, stress and chronic pain, but the majority of 
evidence that seems to support this notion is anecdotal, or it comes 
from poor quality studies," concluded researchers Maria Ospina and 
Kenneth Bond of the University of Alberta/Capital Health Evidence-
based Practice Centre, in Edmonton.


They analyzed 813 studies focused on the impact of meditation on 
various conditions, including high blood pressure, cardiovascular 
disease and substance abuse.


Released Monday, the report looked at studies on five types of 
meditation practices: mantra meditation; mindfulness meditation; 
yoga, Tai Chi and Qi Gong.


Some of the studies suggested that certain types of meditation could 
help reduce blood pressure and stress and that yoga and other 
practices increased verbal creativity and reduced heart rate, blood 
pressure and cholesterol in healthy people.


However, the report authors said it isn't possible to draw any firm 
conclusions about the effects of meditation on health, because the 
existing studies are characterized by poor methodologies and other 
problems.


"Future research on meditation practices must be more rigorous in the 
design and execution of studies and in the analysis and reporting of 
results," Ospina said in a prepared statement.


Bond added that the new report doesn't prove that meditation has no 
therapeutic value, but it can inform medical practitioners that 
the "evidence is inconclusive regarding its effectiveness."


For the general public, the report "highlights that choosing to 
practice a particular meditation technique continues to rely solely 
on individual experiences and personal preferences, until more 
conclusive scientific evidence is produced," Ospina said.


The study was funded by the U.S. National Center for Complementary 
and Alternative Medicine in Bethesda, Md., part of the National 
Institutes of Health.





[FairfieldLife] Vaj - read it and weep (was Re: Maharishi on Brahman)

2007-07-13 Thread jim_flanegin
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> BTW, I *love* this part below; as far as I can see it is absolutely 
> True -- though I don't see why you call it an "alternative story" -- 
I 
> think it's essentially what I've been saying :-)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> 
> > Of course it would be a hoot if someday you came upon an 
alternative
> > story -- that everything BUT you is Perfect and Integrated, fully
> > radiant of Self, and it was only YOU who was holding up the show 
for
> > the entire creation.
>
Works from my perspective too. If it weren't I wouldn't ceaselessly 
learn new stuff. realizing the radiant perfection of the creation 
never stops-- hence it must be me riding the short bus, so to speak. 
loving it!:-)



[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread new . morning
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/12/07 4:25:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> The  founding fathers were mostly Deists, not  Christians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you are correct if you narrow the founding fathers down to one
or  two 
> persons. The overwhelming majority that signed the Declaration of 
Independence 
> were devout Christians, some even ordained preachers. 

And this whole line of argument is pretty funny. This worship of 250
year old "authority figures" seems so odd -- given that the founding
fathers main message seemed to be: 

"Go think for yourselves. We have provided a reasonable start, but let
every generation adopt laws that synch with the condtions and meet the
needs of that age. We are a bunch of tabacco growing, land-holding,
elitist, slave holding, mysoginist white males. We see our
limitations.  We expect, we hope, we even demand, that future
generations take this foundation and DO BETTER. If you try to be JUST
like us, you will have a society ruled by and for a bunch of tabacco
growing, land-holding, elitist, slave holding, mysoginist white males.
Clearly no one in their right mind wants that for future generations."

I don't know much about christian fundamentalists. But do they have an
abnormal desire to seek approval from past authority figures? "If the
bible says it it must be true." "If the founding fathers said it, it
must be true". I know two data points don't establish a trend, but ...





[FairfieldLife] Vaj - read it and weep (was Re: Maharishi on Brahman)

2007-07-13 Thread Rory Goff
BTW, I *love* this part below; as far as I can see it is absolutely 
True -- though I don't see why you call it an "alternative story" -- I 
think it's essentially what I've been saying :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Of course it would be a hoot if someday you came upon an alternative
> story -- that everything BUT you is Perfect and Integrated, fully
> radiant of Self, and it was only YOU who was holding up the show for
> the entire creation.




[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers-- N...

2007-07-13 Thread new . morning
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
  Capital, Supreme Court and National  Achieves depict religious
services, and 
> events as well as Moses and the Ten  Commandments, repeatedly. 

I thought the purpose of these was to remind us of how far we have
come. Sort of like a museum piece -- showing old model Ts and then the
Apollo capsules. Showing Moses and the tablets, says to me: 

"Hey, we used to be so dogmatic and superstitious, and prone to wild
tales told by priests and "leaders"  as to believe god wrote laws on
stone tablets with lightening   while some guy named moses held on to
them (I hope he had rubber gloves on). And curiously, the tablets
disappeared, but the "beleivers" KNOW what was on them -- and tell US
what god REALLY said. Whew -- we HAVE come a long ways from those dark
days. While the current system is not perfect, people use their
natural talents (god given?) to think for themselves, and rationally
carve out an ethical system of laws and justice."





[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> >
> >  
> > In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> > do.rflex@ writes:
> > 
> > They are  right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our 
> > > legal/moral  system. 
> > 
> > Horseshit.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have?  Try reading it, then
> read  this 
> > link _RE-TAKING  AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United
States_ 
> > (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html)   The
> Supreme  Court 
> > as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and
>  carvings 
> > of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or  
> Mohammed and 
> > the Koran.
> 
> 
> Well, let's see:
> 
> You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in
> history to debunk the claim — you just need to look at the
> Commandments themselves. If the "basis" of our laws "originated" from
> the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious — we could look at the Ten
> Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions.
> 
> The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens.
> 
> * The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws
> against this? Strike one.
> 
> * The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws
> against this? Strike two.
> 
> * The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in
> vain. Any laws against this? Strike three.
> 
> * The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws
> mandating this? Strike four.
> 
> * The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws
> mandating this? Strike five.
>

Are we off the hook for getting stoned for adultery yet?  I am
inquiring for a...um...a friend.  I mean if she's totally eyeballing
you, I mean him, my friend, and she is crazy hot. (MILF)













[FairfieldLife] Vaj - read it and weep (was Re: Maharishi on Brahman)

2007-07-13 Thread Rory Goff

>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff"  wrote:
> >
> > With all love and respect, Barry, I think your last line is 
correct --
> >  it is all "just me" :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
 
> Which is all just part of you, Rory -- (if that is still part of 
your
> current story). So Barry seeing limitations in Judy, is just YOU,
> realizing that parts of you are yet unintegrated and that part of 
you
> can't fathom the perfection of Judy --  which she herself has not
> realized --  which is yet another unintegrated part of you.

No shit, New -- why do you think I said it was all "just me"? :-)
 
> Of course it would be a hoot if someday you came upon an alternative
> story -- that everything BUT you is Perfect and Integrated, fully
> radiant of Self, and it was only YOU who was holding up the show for
> the entire creation.
> 
> And yes, that is part of my (odd to many) sense of humor. Things 
that
> are funny to me (amongst other things) come from looking at things
> from new angles, connections and intersections. So I, and my warped
> humor, are just another part of YOU  that is unintegrated --  along
> with Barry and Judy. So it sounds like your sadhana is way
> inneffficient if YOU still have all these big  lumps of unintegrated
> ignorance that are a part of YOU. 

If that's how it looks to you, then who am I to argue? :-)

> Ah, but that too is perfect.

Ain't it though! :-)





[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers-- N...

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Lets see, you have quotes from Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
James  
> Madison and  John Adams, all of which can be contradicted by other 
quotes. How 
> about the rest of the 55.   sacraments of the church, it is still a belief among many Christians
 today that you 
> don't take them unless you are absolutely sure you are right with 
God and hold 
> no bitterness or grudges with any one or the Sacrament will have a 
negative 
> effect.<  And Still, if you read Deuteronomy you see the  foundation
of our 
> legal and moral system, both criminal and civil.  Capital, Supreme Court and National  Achieves depict religious
services, and 
> events as well as Moses and the Ten  Commandments, repeatedly. Funny
thing, I 
> heard that on tours in the Supreme  Court building that when
tourists ask 
> about the relief carvings of Moses holding  the Ten Commandments,
which frequent 
> the building, the Tour Guides are trained  to respond with "Oh,
those are not 
> the Ten Commandments, they are the Bill of  Rights!" Yeah , Moses
holding two 
> tablets written in Hebrew with the Bill of  Rights written on them,
Palease.<  
> By the way, Benjamin Franklin a true  Deist founding father, attended 
> Christian church services of different  denominations frequently.


The notion that our laws "originated" from the Ten Commandments is
very popular. And very wrong.

You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in
history to debunk the claim — you just need to look at the
Commandments themselves. If the "basis" of our laws "originated" from
the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious — we could look at the Ten
Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions.

The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens.

* The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws
against this? Strike one.

* The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws
against this? Strike two.

* The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in
vain. Any laws against this? Strike three.

* The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws
mandating this? Strike four.

* The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws
mandating this? Strike five. 











[FairfieldLife] 'View of Iraq Invasion in China'

2007-07-13 Thread Robert Gimbel
 White House releases mixed assessment report on Iraq   
  
   
   

 

 www.chinaview.cn  2007-07-13 04:33:03  



 

  


  Special report: Tension escalates in  Iraq
  
 ·The Iraqi government has made "satisfactory progress" and  "unsatisfactory 
progress" .
 ·The report  is the first of two reports ordered by U.S. lawmakers. 
·The security  situation in Iraq "remains complex and extremely challenging," 
it  said.
  U.S. 
President Bushspeaks at a press conference in the Brady Press Briefing 
Room at theWhite House, July 12, 2007.  (Xinhua/AFP Photo)

WASHINGTON,  July 12 (Xinhua) -- The Iraqi government has made 
"satisfactory progress" toward  eight targets set by the United States and 
"unsatisfactory progress" toward  eight other targets, and produced mixed 
results in the remaining two benchmarks,  according to an assessment report on 
Iraq released by the White House on  Thursday.  
The report is the first of two reports ordered by  U.S. lawmakers as an 
assessment of President George W. Bush's troop-increase  strategy. The second 
report is due in September.  
"Some of the benchmarks may be leading indicators,  giving some sense of 
future trends; but many are more accurately characterized  as lagging 
indicators, and will only be achieved after the strategy is fully  underway and 
generates improved conditions on the ground," the 25-page report  said.  
On the positive side, the report identified that the  Iraqi government has 
made satisfactory progress toward forming a Constitutional  Review Committee, 
enacting and implementing legislation on procedures to form  semi-autonomous 
regions, and establishing supporting political, media, economic,  and services 
committees in support of the Baghdad Security Plan.  
It also found that the Iraqi government has made  satisfactory progress in 
ensuring the Baghdad Security Plan does not provide a  safe haven for any 
outlaws, and ensuring that the rights of minority political  parties in the 
Iraqi legislature are protected, and in allocating funds to  ministries and 
provinces.  
In addition, the report said satisfactory progress  had been made by the 
Iraqis toward establishing planned joint security stations  in Baghdad, and 
toward providing three trained and ready Iraqi brigades to  support Baghdad 
operations.  
On the negative side, the report said the Iraqi  government has not made 
satisfactory progress toward providing Iraqi commanders  with all authorities 
to execute the security plan and to make tactical and  operational decisions in 
consultation with U.S. Commanders without political  intervention, in ensuring 
that Iraqi security forces are providing even-handed  enforcement of the law, 
and toward enacting and implementing legislation on  de-Ba'athification reform. 
 
The report found that the Iraqi government has made  unsatisfactory 
progress toward increasing the number of Iraqi security forces  units capable 
of operating independently, and in ensuring that Iraq's political  authorities 
are not undermining or making false accusations against members of  the Iraqi 
security forces.  
On sectarian violence, the report said the Iraqi  government has made 
satisfactory progress toward reducing sectarian violence but  has shown 
unsatisfactory progress towards eliminating militia control of local  security. 
 
The security situation in Iraq "remains complex and  extremely 
challenging," it said.  
At a news conference at the White House on Thursday,  Bush said it was not 
surprising that political progress was lagging behind the  security gains in 
Iraq.  
He said the assessment was only a preliminary report  which came less than 
a month after the final reinforcements arrived in Iraq, and  that when the 
second report on a "more comprehensive assessment" was delivered  in September, 
"we'll also have a clearer picture of how the new strategy is  unfolding, and 
be in a better position to judge where we need to make any  adjustments."  
As Congre

[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/12/07 4:52:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> They are  right. Read Deuteronomy and you will see the basis of our 
> > legal/moral  system. 
> 
> Horseshit.
> 
> 
> 
> Bwahahahahahaah! Is that the best you have?  Try reading it, then
read  this 
> link _RE-TAKING  AMERICA - The Christian Founding of The United States_ 
> (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html)   The
Supreme  Court 
> as well as other government buildings are covered with pictures and
 carvings 
> of Moses and the Ten Commandments, not Vyasa and the Gita or  
Mohammed and 
> the Koran.


Well, let's see:

You don't need to be a constitutional scholar or have a doctorate in
history to debunk the claim — you just need to look at the
Commandments themselves. If the "basis" of our laws "originated" from
the Decalogue, it'd be pretty obvious — we could look at the Ten
Commandments and see how similar they are to our legal traditions.

The reality, of course, is that the opposite happens.

* The Commandments say people shall not worship false gods. Any laws
against this? Strike one.

* The Commandments say people shall not make graven images. Any laws
against this? Strike two.

* The Commandments say people shall not take the name of the Lord in
vain. Any laws against this? Strike three.

* The Commandments say people must honor a Sabbath day. Any laws
mandating this? Strike four.

* The Commandments say people must honor their parents. Any laws
mandating this? Strike five. 









[FairfieldLife] Re: Right wing extremists show bigotry against Hindus

2007-07-13 Thread do.rflex
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 7/12/07 4:25:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> The  founding fathers were mostly Deists, not  Christians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you are correct if you narrow the founding fathers down to one
or  two 
> persons. The overwhelming majority that signed the Declaration of 
Independence 
> were devout Christians, some even ordained preachers. _RE-TAKING 
AMERICA - 
> The Christian Founding of The United States_ 
> (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html)  


Your Christian Right website is something I would expect from you,
bwana. Somehow I'm not surprised to see that you appear to have
sympathy for bigotry and nationalistic xenophobia. 

"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on
the Christian religion."

The Treaty of Tripoli, passed by the U.S. Senate in 1797, read in
part: "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded
on the Christian religion." The treaty was written during the
Washington administration, and sent to the Senate during the Adams
administration. It was read aloud to the Senate, and each Senator
received a printed copy. This was the 339th time that a recorded vote
was required by the Senate, but only the third time a vote was
unanimous (the next time was to honor George Washington). There is no
record of any debate or dissension on the treaty. It was reprinted in
full in three newspapers - two in Philadelphia, one in New York City.
There is no record of public outcry or complaint in subsequent
editions of the papers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli







[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers-- Not dogmatic Christi

2007-07-13 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> What we need is a "religion of peace".
> 
> Anyone know of such a religion?

If you change "peace" to "piece of ass" then I can hook you up.




> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Excellent list of quotes, thanks.  I read a book about how far our
> > religious map has shifted now in America with new religious
> > influences. It is kind of amazing that our country's founders set 
> up a
> > system that can even work for a culture they did not live in, a 
> deeply
> > pluralistic religious culture.  Freedom from religion is as 
> important
> > as freedom for religion. 
> > 
> > I don't think we can preserve all of the symbols of our simpler past
> > when a Judao-Christian invocation at a civil functions could foot 
> the
> > bill.  I don't want to see 15 versions of God trotted out at
> > government functions to satisfy everyone's different myth buzz. 
> > Symbols of specific religions have no place in places where all 
> people
> > deserve to be treated equally, even if their God wears a dress and
> > parties with multiple gopis like Elvis before the fried banana and
> > peanut butter sandwiches kicked in.   
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > > In a message dated 7/12/07 4:25:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> > > > do.rflex@ writes:
> > > > 
> > > > The  founding fathers were mostly Deists, not  Christians.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, you are correct if you narrow the founding fathers down to 
> one
> > > or  two 
> > > > persons. The overwhelming majority that signed the Declaration 
> of 
> > > Independence 
> > > > were devout Christians, some even ordained preachers. _RE-
> TAKING 
> > > AMERICA - 
> > > > The Christian Founding of The United States_ 
> > > > (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html)  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ** Get a sneak peak of the
> > > all-new AOL at 
> > > > http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
> > > 
> > > um, er
> > > 
> > > http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
> > > >
> > > The 1796 treaty with Tripoli states that the United States 
> was "in no
> > > sense founded on the Christian religion" (see below). This was 
> not an
> > > idle statement, meant to satisfy muslims-- they believed it and 
> meant
> > > it. This treaty was written under the presidency of George 
> Washington
> > > and signed under the presidency of John Adams.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thomas Jefferson
> > > -
> > > 
> > > "I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature."
> > >   .
> > > 
> > > "It has been fifty and sixty years since I read the Apocalypse, 
> and
> > > then I considered it merely the ravings of a maniac."
> > >. 
> > > "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to
> > > liberty.  He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have
> > > perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery 
> and
> > > jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer 
> engine
> > > for their purpose."
> > > - to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814
> > > .
> > > 
> > > "Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the 
> introduction
> > > of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; 
> yet we
> > > have not advanced an inch towards uniformity.  What has been the
> > > effect of coercion?  To make one half the world fools, and the 
> other
> > > half hypocrites.  To support roguery and error all over the 
> earth."
> > >  - "Notes on Virginia"
> > > .
> > > 
> > > "Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak 
> minds
> > > are servilely crouched.  Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call 
> on
> > > her tribunal for every fact, every opinion.  Question with 
> boldness
> > > even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must 
> more
> > > approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.
> > >  - letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787
> > > .
> > > 
> > > "It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they
> > > believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is
> > > three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not 
> one. 
> > > But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the
> > priests."
> > >   - to John Adams, 1803
> > > .
> > > --
> > > 
> > > 
> > > George Washington
> > > =
> > > 
> > > Historian Barry Schwartz writes: "George Washington's practice of
> > > Christianity was limited and superficial because he was not 
> himself a
> > > Christian.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers-- N...

2007-07-13 Thread new . morning
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Lets see, you have quotes from Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
James  
> Madison and  John Adams, all of which can be contradicted by other 
quotes. How 
> about the rest of the 55. 

Well, your figures are wrong (Or maybe mine are) but below there were
39 signers of Constitution and 56 of DvI. Many of whom were NOT the
same. The firebrand revolutionaries moved on before the constitution
was ratified.


CategoryTotal Number Involved   Number & Percent Who Were Freemasons
Signers of the Declaration of Independence  56  9 -- 16%
Signers of the U.S. Constitution 39 13 -- 33%
Generals in the Continental Army 74 33 -- 46%

And while I am not a freemason groupie / advocate / conspiratoral
therist type, freemasons certainly are not, as a group, orthodox
christians. More than 1 or 6 were freemasons. And that does NOT imply
the REST were fundie Christians.



[FairfieldLife] Re: Founding Fathers were Deists, Skeptics, Free Thinkers-- Not dogmatic Christi

2007-07-13 Thread shempmcgurk
What we need is a "religion of peace".

Anyone know of such a religion?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Excellent list of quotes, thanks.  I read a book about how far our
> religious map has shifted now in America with new religious
> influences. It is kind of amazing that our country's founders set 
up a
> system that can even work for a culture they did not live in, a 
deeply
> pluralistic religious culture.  Freedom from religion is as 
important
> as freedom for religion. 
> 
> I don't think we can preserve all of the symbols of our simpler past
> when a Judao-Christian invocation at a civil functions could foot 
the
> bill.  I don't want to see 15 versions of God trotted out at
> government functions to satisfy everyone's different myth buzz. 
> Symbols of specific religions have no place in places where all 
people
> deserve to be treated equally, even if their God wears a dress and
> parties with multiple gopis like Elvis before the fried banana and
> peanut butter sandwiches kicked in.   
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > >
> > >  
> > > In a message dated 7/12/07 4:25:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> > > do.rflex@ writes:
> > > 
> > > The  founding fathers were mostly Deists, not  Christians.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Yes, you are correct if you narrow the founding fathers down to 
one
> > or  two 
> > > persons. The overwhelming majority that signed the Declaration 
of 
> > Independence 
> > > were devout Christians, some even ordained preachers. _RE-
TAKING 
> > AMERICA - 
> > > The Christian Founding of The United States_ 
> > > (http://www.retakingamerica.com/great_america_nation_001.html)  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ** Get a sneak peak of the
> > all-new AOL at 
> > > http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
> > 
> > um, er
> > 
> > http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
> > >
> > The 1796 treaty with Tripoli states that the United States 
was "in no
> > sense founded on the Christian religion" (see below). This was 
not an
> > idle statement, meant to satisfy muslims-- they believed it and 
meant
> > it. This treaty was written under the presidency of George 
Washington
> > and signed under the presidency of John Adams.
> > 
> > 
> > Thomas Jefferson
> > -
> > 
> > "I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature."
> >   .
> > 
> > "It has been fifty and sixty years since I read the Apocalypse, 
and
> > then I considered it merely the ravings of a maniac."
> >. 
> > "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to
> > liberty.  He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have
> > perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery 
and
> > jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer 
engine
> > for their purpose."
> > - to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814
> > .
> > 
> > "Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the 
introduction
> > of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; 
yet we
> > have not advanced an inch towards uniformity.  What has been the
> > effect of coercion?  To make one half the world fools, and the 
other
> > half hypocrites.  To support roguery and error all over the 
earth."
> >  - "Notes on Virginia"
> > .
> > 
> > "Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak 
minds
> > are servilely crouched.  Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call 
on
> > her tribunal for every fact, every opinion.  Question with 
boldness
> > even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must 
more
> > approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.
> >  - letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787
> > .
> > 
> > "It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they
> > believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is
> > three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not 
one. 
> > But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the
> priests."
> >   - to John Adams, 1803
> > .
> > --
> > 
> > 
> > George Washington
> > =
> > 
> > Historian Barry Schwartz writes: "George Washington's practice of
> > Christianity was limited and superficial because he was not 
himself a
> > Christian...  He repeatedly declined the church's sacraments.  
Never
> > did he take communion, and when his wife, Martha, did, he waited 
for
> > her outside the sanctuary...  Even on his deathbed, Washington 
asked
> > for no ritual, uttered no prayer to Christ, and expressed no wish 
to
> > be attended by His representative." [New York Press, 1987, pp. 
174-175]
> > 
> > Paul F. Boller states in is anthology on Wa

  1   2   >