Please learn about me at http://www.angeloftruth.  I am 67 years ahead of you on the subject of this site and a hard core skeptic of all things because of the discovery of the sea of lies that we are engulfed in 24/7.  I am also a skeptic of myself and cordially invite critiques and analysis of all that I say.  So far as my views into the future that I have been afforded throughout my life, I was warned two months ago that I was in grave danger of dying, and am writing this with great difficulty wearing a neck brace after breaking my neck, back, ribs. teeth, right arm and hand one month ago where I came within a millimeter of dying in  a fall.  Read my site, be amused, be angered, be informed, ...whatever... I am all about truth, facts, and reality and immune to insults.

 The Shanghai Cooperation Organization says that capitalism is over,we need a new "supranational"currency. informationclearinghouse.info/article22843.htm

Here is an article attacking Hitchens, using the "well, some bad things may have been done in the name of religion, but nothing compairs to the godless dictators of the 20th century"  CRAP!

http://mormontimes.com/studies_doctrine/research_discoveries/?id=9181

Here is his e-mail. [email protected]

Be polite, but firm and truthfull about the role of religion on politics. I myself and going to give him a history lesson.

Hello RRS, 

Thankyou v much for hosting this site. I have just joined the forum. I am an agnostic. At the moment, I must say that I do not have sufficient knowledge to be certain whether a deity (that created the universe, the Earth, etc) exists.

I have a question that I would like to humbly ask my learned friends here at this forum :

What is the possibility that there exists some deity with the following attributes :

1. This deity is personal. It has thoughts and feelings.

2. It is indeed omnipotent.

3. This deity is not entirely holy.

4. This deity may even habour malicious intensions for Mankind.

Thankyou,

Okamura.

I came across an interesting idea and though I would share it with the group:

"I’ve just found out about this great story from The Feethinker (thanks Joe!). Apparently, in just the last week alone, 1500 people in Britain paid for Certificates of Debaptism from the National Secular Society! Indeed, this has prompted Religious Intelligence to run a poll asking if Anglicanism should provide a service for people to annul their baptism (as Rome already does, apparently) - be sure to cast your vote! The atheist movement really is starting to gather strength across the world, isn’t it?"

I believe, and could be wrong that baptismal records can sometimes be used as proof of citizenship, so if you were to have all records of your baptism destroyed, that might be the only downside.  That aside, whether you get a certificate of debaptism or not, if you do have all records of your baptism removed, I think it would send a strong message.

Rush is much like the squashed insect whose flailing legs twitch.

I respect the turn away in the Republican party in the RNC chair Steel, Colon Powel and even McCain's daughter, and even Cheney's daughter realize the tide ahead.

To cling to antiquated debunked social issues which when the wallet is pinched get put on the back burner every time, should say to both parties, stop trying to legislate morality, and start providing economic playing feilds that benifit all classes.

"Answers in Gene Simmons" is a staunch Republican and an atheist. But he couldn't get ellected. Not because he might have good ideas. He cant get ellected because the party he supports sees him as merely a token and not a potential leader.

If a gay atheist could balance the budget and create ONE tax, eliminate the convoluted tax code, and create jobs here in the US for the working class. Retards like LIMPBONE would reject it merely on the issue that a fan of Jesus didn't present it.

Limpdick fans think all social liberals are against wealth.

NO DIPSHIT! BTW the video of you jumping up and down resembles more of a monkey than any cartoon!

I AM NOT AGAINST WEALTH, I am against the attitude that one size fits all and that people of wealth are moral merely because of that.

We live in a 3 class system and just because someone says, "value the poor" is not a demand that all people be poor. It merely means that we should not pit ourselves against each other and let government divide us.

Now, strictly from a sense that there might be situational problems with other family members, or if you have kids, disagreements on how to raise them. It is an issue you need to be sure of before marrying ANYONE.

BUT, when you read this article, he says that "atheists" will lead Christians to
serve the devil.

http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/video-pat-robertson-says-christians-and-atheists-can-t-marry

This is the same bigoted crap that allowed Christians to pass laws saying blacks and whites couldn't marry.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/30/religion.torture/index.html

Survey: Support for terror suspect torture differs among the faithful

• Story Highlights
• 742 American adults surveyed on use of torture against suspected terrorists
   
• 54 percent of those who go to services at least weekly say it's often or sometimes OK
   
• In survey, people unaffiliated with any religious group were least likely to back torture
   
• President of National Association of Evangelicals yet to comment on survey
   

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new survey.

More than half of people who attend services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is "often" or "sometimes" justified. Only 42 percent of people who "seldom or never" go to services agreed, according to the analysis released Wednesday by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.

White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified -- more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.

Face, meet Palm...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-04-28-swine-flu-jews-muslims_N.htm

Deputy Health Minister Yakov Litzman said the reference to pigs is offensive to both religions and "we should call this Mexican flu and not swine flu," he told a news conference at a hospital in central Israel.

Scientists are unsure where the new swine flu virus originally emerged, though it was identifed first in the United States. They say there is nothing about the virus that makes it "Mexican" and worry such a label would be stigmatizing.