[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Imagine~ Tomorrow/Saturday - Fire the Grid- 6:11 AM CST'
--- 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...'
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'
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
--- 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)
--- 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
--- 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
--- 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
--- 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)
--- 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
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?"
"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
--- 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
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)
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
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
--- 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 ...
---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
--- 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 ...
--- 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)
---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
---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)
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
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...
--- 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...
--- 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
--- 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
--- 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
--- 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...
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...
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...
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...
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
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
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
--- 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...
--- 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...
--- 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
--- 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
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...
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...
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
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...
--- 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
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
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)
--- 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
--- 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...
--- 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...
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
--- 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...
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...
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
--- 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...
--- 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
--- 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
--- 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
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...
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...
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
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...
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
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...
--- 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
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...
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
--- 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...
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
--- 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
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
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...
--- 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
--- 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...
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
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
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
--- 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...
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...
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
--- 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...
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
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...
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...
--- 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...
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...
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...
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
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)
--- 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
--- 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)
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...
--- 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
--- 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)
> > --- 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...
--- 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'
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
--- 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
--- 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
--- 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...
--- 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
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