I had thought about writing her.  Her case is so high profile that I doubt I could get an answer.  I also doubt that she has changed much in her religious views since people like her get a ton of mail, and much of it is from people who “pray” for her and ask “jesus to help her”, etc.

She was brought up Catholic.  Not even her mother knew how she got off on this path with the evangelical pastor.  Right before she drown the children, he had told her that “no one could be saved without the immersion of water”.  This isn’t how you should talk to someone whose been in a psyche ward for schizophrenia three times and is taking four medications.  Woronieki blamed Rusty.  Frankly, he was jealous of Rusty’s material posessions while claiming that he shouldn’t have them.

He did the same thing when he graduated college.  He was arrested for disturbing the peace, etc.  He would hold up signs that said “You Are a Sinner and You Are Going to Hell”...he would use a bullhorn in his bullshit speeches.  And you know what?  He was getting a following until he started telling everyone to give up their jobs.  A lady finally said, “we can’t all give up our jobs, Mike!  If we did, how would we pay YOU?” One sane human.

Anyway, he conveyed the same kind of crap to Andrea Yates, and the whole 666 thing.  She dug holes in her head trying to get the numbers off.

Mike Woronieki was so quick after the incidents to start writing and talking to people about Rusty, that I know he knew he was guilty of putting the bullet in the gun--so to speak.

Who knows what a psychotic will do when they think they’re the devil?  It’s a common complex just as the Christ fixation is common.  But she’s the only one I’ve heard of who drowned all her children in order to “save” them.  I think the foolish banterings of Michael Woroniecki played a huge role.

No question that religion had an influence in what she did...because she did it to save the kids. The same kind of senseless reasoning Glenno put forth for your loss.

But she was also terribly sick with manic depression, and once you’re in either cycle...up or down, you are just not you. The illness is to blame. Her religion I’m sure had something to do with the number of kids she had, how soon she got pregnant after each one was born, the unanswered prayers of her husband to think she could get better and on and on and on.

Why she didn’t take her own life is another question. Because almost all these senseless school shootings have ended with the killer committing suicide.

The difference is the killers are doing it out of hate for others, while she killed the kids because she loved them. Others kill their kids out of desperation. But little doubt that Yates religious influences set the path for her.

GIven all that I wonder what she feels when she’s in a normal state? Have her religious views changed? I would suggest that you write her.

Just some musings here:
If we can conceive of multiple universes, why not multiple afterlifes?  What if we create our own afterlife during our lives?  That way Israelites can go to their heaven and say: “Hey, we were right, there’s nobody here but Israelites!” Muslims can go to their heaven and find all their fat, ugly virgins and say: “Hey, we were right, there’s nobody here but Muslims!” Egyptions, Greeks, Romans, Vikings, Celts, Bhuddists, etc. might all make the same sort of discovery.  Of course the xians will probably find themselves in hell, but maybe afterlife is what you make it!!

Below is a link to some pix of galaxies colliding. Imagine-a galaxy with over 100 billion stars colliding with another one with over 100 billion stars…

Yet somehow our “souls” (whatever that is) will break every physical law known to mankind and will be wisked away at the speed of light to a distant place where will will rollick?

http://space.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn137 66/dn13766-1_600.jpg

And today it was reported that some suicides are caused by the suns activity
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13769-does-the-e arths-magnetic-field-cause-suicides.html

Wasn’t Peter supposed to be Mark’s main source according to the eyewitness view of the Gospels?  Can anyone honestly believe that Peter would portray himself and his fellow disciples as the dim light bulbs that they are in the Gospel of Mark?  And, if “Mark” didn’t get that view from Peter, then just where did it come from?  If Peter was Mark’s source, then obviously Mark has twisted things to suit his own agenda.  At best, he is hardly the honest, reliable reporter of history as believers would have us believe.

For many reasons scholars have dismissed the idea that the Gospel writers are relating historical data, that the Gospels are historical narratives.  Funny, how Matthew, Luke, and John know nothing about the secretive nature of Jesus’ mission that is so prevalent in Mark.  Yet, Matthew and Luke copy extensively from Mark.  Obviously, they are not reporters of historical facts but, rather, writers with their own religious agendas. 

Also interesting is how Jesus’ need for baptism becomes increasingly troublesome in post-Markian Christianity.  Mark simply has Jesus baptized, at which time God’s power descends on him (dove).  Matthew and Luke, who copy from Mark, find that rather embarrassing and try to mitigate it in various ways.  And, John will have nothing to do with it.  He retains some of the material originally attached to that scenario but gives it a different twist.  These guys aren’t reporting history, eyewitness or otherwise.  They are writing their own “history.”

Another point, of many that could be explored, a point already mentioned in a previous post by me, is the remarkable divergence (to put it politely) in the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke.  As long as they have Mark to copy from, Matthew and Luke are on the same wavelength.  But Mark has no account of Jesus’ birth, and (surprise!) Matthew and Luke wander off in radically different directions!  Eyewitness reporters my ass!

The religious fanatic, however, runs on dogma, doctrine and wishful thinking.  As our own glenno has amply demonstrated, they are immune to reason for the same reason that an obstinate child is, only that they have more resources to justify (to themselves) their adult fantasies.  A mountain of evidence means nothing to them.  They either don’t understand it, don’t want to understand it, or cling to ridiculous loopholes.  That is, they are in deep denial.  They already “know” the truth so why bother to do research beyond cherry-picking for the cause?  They become irritated with those who challenge their views.  Faced with competent skepticism, they eventually run away.  One tactic is to continually jump from argument to argument.  At least glenno’s last approach to running away is a straightforward one; he simply says “Enough already.” and splits!  Others will employ more disgusting excuses, even claiming that we are doing the devil’s work.  And, of course, they will have nothing to do with it--after their patented arguments have been debunked.  Still others run away from the truth by never engaging it in the first place.  Some Christians never read mainstream newspapers and live in closed communes.

Even though reasoning sinks into religious fanatics about as well as water on a duck’s back, there are still good reasons to engage those who fancy that their religion is invincible: (1) It improves your own reasoning and writing skills; (2) Many minds are not slammed shut and rusted solid; (3) Voices of reason need to be heard.  Why stand by while fanatics paint reality (and us) in their own extreme colors?; (4) There is sport in it.  Cornering a know-it-all, arrogant fanatic can be fun, even if it never dawns on them that their house has collapsed!  Of course, don’t waste any time with those who would treat a debate as a joke.

I see in today’s news that Florida is thinking of producing a xian license plate that says “I believe”.  I wonder how that fits the idea of taxing religion.  Will the believers have to pay extra to get that plate?  That would at least be a way of getting some money from the religious.  Or will the religious claim that religion should not be taxed and demand the plates for free?  Seems like a sticky wicket to me!!

what you missed and FYI

Simpleman, Annie, Greensnake and I have come to the conclusion that Glenno is either a sociopath, or a misfit of sorts whose posts no longer deserve reading or response.

But go at him if you will.

Annie, I enjoyed your latest YouTube recommendation.  However, I suspect that Catholic apologists would most likely take the position that the Bible ought not be taken literally.  That would be in line with the idea that the Pope is God’s representative on earth, who is supposed to tell us what God really wants.  That position does leave a few loose ends.  It leaves open the question as to what we can trust in the Bible.  Can a book that is so wrong in its science and history be trusted with moral concepts?  If Noah’s ark is a myth then just maybe hell is another myth, and perhaps Jesus’ resurrection as well.  On the bright side, though self-serving, the Catholic position does leave some wiggle room for serious Bible scholarship.  Catholic scholars are no longer required to defend an “inerrant” Bible.

I also viewed a YouTube presentation that claimed that the Bible is the inspired word of God, a work so full of misrepresentations, so ignorant of the other side, that it could only be labled gross propaganda.  Fortunately, another fellow had a YouTube presentation that effectively debunked that nonsense! It was kind of pathetic to watch this young fellow rattle through the propaganda that he had absorbed, fully convinced that he had an airtight case for the Bible.  If you misrepresent enough facts, and ignore enough difficulties, you can “convincingly” defend a flat earth!

As for Glenno, he has proven two or three things beyond a reasonable doubt.  He has proven that he is manipulative, dishonest and incapable of serious, sustained reasoning.  Indeed, he may have a mental or social problem even as you have argued.

That’s excellent news as I was just at Border’s today and ordered a copy of Stenger’s “God, the Failed Hypothesis”.  I wanted to order another book but wasn’t interested in anything else on the shelf.  David Mills (who I actually know, believe it or not) has “Atheist Universe” out--but I thought it might be too much at one sitting.  I could get really biased on that last one.

But there was a Tanakh in Hebrew and English there for 65 bucks that looked pretty enticing--except for the price tag.

Thanks for the heads up! Meanwhile, for entertainment and a lesson in common sense, here’s a video --not very long at all.  But it’s good!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6b_vVNP4nM

Earl Doherty (2001) has written what appears to be an excellent book challenging Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Christ.” Strobel is a reporter, suposedly an atheist who found religion, who interviews various noted apologists for conservative Christianity in order to make a “courtroom” case for Jesus (as understood by conservatives). I think Strobel’s book was a best-seller.

Doherty’s book, “Challenging the Verdict,” reopens that “court case” to show that Strobel does not really have a case at all, that he has mistrepresented the facts and committed various errors of reasoning.  I have just started reading his book and it appears to be a good one, a book that will answer many of the defenses often raised by conservative apologists.

I never thought that one definition would be so fitting as a diagnosis.

Read it yourself Glenno.

It’s like a biography of your time here.

Profile of the Sociopath
This website summarizes some of the common features of descriptions of the behavior of sociopaths. http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

Glibness and Superficial Charm

Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may attempt to, or dominate and humiliate their victims.

Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as “their right.”

Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.

Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.

Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.

Incapacity for Love

Need for Stimulation
Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.

Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others’ feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.

Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.

Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet “gets by” by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.

Irresponsibility/Unreliability
Not concerned about wrecking others’ lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.

Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all sorts.

Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.

Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.

It would appear that FOG has a very shallow, immature mind.  I have often suspected that all his responses are not his own, i.e. he has a mentor (not a very good one) who feeds him questions to ask and religiously correct responses to give.  He truly has nothing to offer on this forum and is best ignored.  Greensnake has provided the ultimate truth.  He was very patient and very explicit in his postings.  He did not allow any openings for inane one liners.  FOG realized that he had nothing to offer and wimped out.

Yes I did thank you.
Right now I’m under a large mass of paperwork that has been ignored for two years and I only scanned the catalog.

I’ll be in touch directly.

I guess Annie has seen enough of Glenno’s type in her work to have recognized his problems long before the rest of us.

It would be interesting to have someone nail it...meaning what is it specifically, what’s the benefit of his actions....etc etc.

Sned, did you get my catalog okay?  I have also come to the conclusion that Glenno’s behavior is abnormal.

Glenno:  “Actually I didn’t wimp out. I clearly stated that it was going nowhere. He had no proof and neither did I, so why continue?”

GreenSnake:  How convenient!  Is that your excuse for eating your bold words about giving me 30 days?  And, where do you get this idea that I had no proof?  You never addressed my arguments let alone refuted them!  I’m afraid that Sned is right.  You totally WIMPED OUT.  Moreover, your odd behavior suggests that you are not leveling with us or, else, that you have some kind of mental aberration.  In any case, there does not seem to be any point in addressing your questions since sustained, logical discussion with you is impossible.  Please excuse me, then, for not doing so.

Not speaking fior Annie

You promised Greensnake you’d give him 30 days.

You wimpled out in two.

No one here needs to dignify any question you ask...ever.

Go find a corner and abuse yourself.

The more I read your posts the more I am convinced you are some kind of sociopath.

All you have to do Glenno is lie once to people and you lose all trust.

But for some reason YOU DON"T GET IT.

Why don’t you get it?

Why don’t you understand that our values here are on a different plane, and your actions not only don’t fit, they are a disgrace to your own professed religion.

Right you are, simpleman!

If you look back through history, evey Bible and ever re-interpretation of it was inspired by war!

And we wonder why xians are so angry at us.  It’s in their blood to fight for their god.  They are not any different than Islam in that department, they are just held a bit more “sway”.

I hope this is a diiferent angle on something that has already been discussed; the bible as the inspired word of god.  My focus is on the word “inspired”. 

Exactly how does inspiration work?  Are the words projected into the writer’s mind, or does the writer hold his writing instrument loosely while his hand is moved much like a ouijia board?

Apologists tell us that the words in the language of the original script are true, but not always translated properly.  How can this be?  Wouldn’t god want to inspire the translators to keep his words true?  If he is omnipresent, he would surely know about the translations.  If he is omnicsient, surely he would know how the translations would affect the truth of his original instructions.  If he is omnipotent, surely he can guide the thoughts or hands of the translators to hold to the truth.

If the religious authorities who chose which writings should be canonized were inspired to pick and choose properly, there should be no contradictions or errors in the final cut.

All in all, the bible is such a mess of contradictions and errors that we can only conclude that it not the inspired word of god or that god does not have all the properties that are assigned to him.

Nelson!  Hello!

Why do you feel that being an atheist is hopeless?  There is no fear in death and our hope is here and now...the thing we KNOW about.  When I die, I fall asleep to blackness and silence.  You, on the other hand, are bound to fear a made up god who may or may not let you into the pearly gates.  That is what is sad, my friend. If he is so great, and the hereafter so enticing, why don’t you just go there?  End it now.  It’s no sin.  God told Samson to kill himself.  Jesus, killed himself with apathy, did he not?

Science is not my religion, love.  BUT, it does answer a hell of a lot more than religion.  Religion creates the questions that science can answer.  For example, Jesus supposedly lived and healed people.  He also stated that we would be able to heal people even better than he, just by the power of his name. 

However, no one, except those in the medical science world, has ever cured or healed anyone.

Science, my love.  It will always give more answers than religion.

Good to see you again.

Here’s a video I received from the Sam Harris fan page.  It is a bit off the beaten path of GreenSnake’s ID discussion--but not really.  I mean, this is all about the phoniness of gods and religions.

Enjoy! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3YOIImOoYM

Apparently all plants an animals have the same internal time clock manned by a relatively small amount of cells.

Now I know why some of us a couch potatoes.

Here’s one for the ID enthusiast.  It seems that the Intelligent Designer was somewhat limited in that he (she, it, them?) learned by doing, as in “practice makes perfect.” Consider the design of plants.  The fossil record indicates that, contrary to Genesis, the Great Designer first came up with simple stuff like liverworts and primitive mosses.  Unfortunately, their internal plumbing was all screwed up, so they never got much taller than a few inches. 

By the Mid-Silurian period the Great Designer had redesigned the plumbing system of plant stems and came up with early vascular plants such as the rhyniophytes, zosterophyllophytes and trimerophytes.  Some of these could stand up a yard or more, but their design was still indicative of inexperience.  They had no leaves or roots, for example.  They were little more than simply branched, green stems with spore pods.  They were anchored by an underground stem and gathered nutrients with the aid of certain types of fungi that acted like fine roots.  (That partnership between fungus and plant would persist to the present day, despite the fact that serious roots have arrived.)

By the Late Devonian period, the Great Designer had figured out some major improvements for the plumbing system of his plants.  His discovery of lignin, coupled with cellulose, allowed for a beefed-up, woody trunk.  Lycophytes, cordaites and giant horsetails could reach tree size, and some plants topped 100 feet!  The Great Designer spun out designs along those lines throughout the Carboniferous period.

Although the Great Designer had played around with seed ferns, he didn’t fully appreciate the usefulness of seeds at first.  However, he soon realized their advantages.  By the time the Permian period of the Paleozoic era had arrived, and throughout most of the Mesozoic era, he was deep into designing seed plants.  The larger ones were often similar to today’s redwoods, cedars, and other trees whose seeds are packed into cones.  However, the Great Designer sensed that something was missing.  He had overlooked color on a grand scale, because flowers had never occurred to him.  Nor were there grasslands to feed cattle or civilization.  It was back to the drawing board to fix that failure.

By the end of the Mesozoic era, the Great Designer was warming up to flowering plants.  After some early tinkering, he was deep into designing flowering plants of all types, and he liked them so much that he made them in unprecedented abundance and variety.  In time, he even added flowering plants with apples, plums and pears, and all manner of good fruit.  Most of the Great Designer’s flowering inspirations were figured out after an accident wiped out much of his earlier work, including the dinosaurs. 

Finally, in the Tertiary period of the Cenozoic era, the Eocene epoch to be sure, the Great Designer started to take a serious interest in grass.  By the Miocene epoch, he had perfected the great grasslands, complete with large, grazing animals.  Grass, in the form of wheat, barley, oats, rice, rye, and maize, would later power the rise of human civilization. Humanity likely occurred to the Great Designer as a final afterthought--probably during a moment of acute boredom.  However, corn, as in “corn on the cob,” had never occurred to the Great Designer at all.  That was a human invention.

Thanks..that pretty much confirms what I read and or heard. It implies that the silly laws of the old testament that the Christians pick and choose what to believe (especially in homophobic area), have evolved in Judaism into a more sane interpretation today based on what we know and what makes sense. Christians just pick out what allows them to hate someone.

Interestingly enough there was a piece on NPR within the last two weeks discussing the Ultra Conservative in Israel who are being forced by economics out of their enclaves and into the towns and cities of moderate Jews.

And what are they doing? Stoning local women who are dressed in Western clothing, believing that the Jews who have lived there for decades must now bend to their (pardon me) idiotic religious beliefs. Stoning women, stoning homes in which TV’s are showing through the windows...and lord knows what else. The world of religion can’t get any more whackier.

Case inpoint:  One such believer on this board recently used the term “gang up on”.  This is typical for the xian and the Muslim--to bully, threaten and treat poorly anyone who doesn’t believe as they do.  When was the last time you saw a Jewish person in the states behaving this way?

That was my point.  They are much less of a problem to me.  Of course, in Israel there are many problems.  I am speaking of the religious craziness of the states that needs to stop.  Judaism wouldn’t be my pick for this.  I wouldn’t care if they carried on their traditions if the other two died off.

“By the way I wish we could get a willing Rabbi on board here to explain their view of the old testament versus the Christian viewpoint...or maybe one of you can help.  It’s my understanding that they see it as an evolution. That silly laws evolved into more practical laws etc. Annie? “

Well, it looks like no Rabbis are going to come, so I will give it a shot.  Traditional Jews have their religion in Judaism as a means to their G-d and traditions.  They don’t adhere to heavens or hells, although I have heard Jewish friends talk about their loved ones being in heaven.  I never asked, but I am guessing that it is an American thing to say more than a Jewish thing to say.  Heaven and the hereafter is sold here in the states in almost every venue you can think of.

As for the Hacidm, they believe ALL of it.  Hot excremental hell where all gentiles boil for eternity, mikvahs for the women for 7 days (I believe that’s the correct amount of days) during and after her period, etc.  They wear the most formal dress and believe fully that G-d loves them and not you nor I nearly as much. We are stepping stones to get to their land that G-d promised them.  So, yea, there are those smaller “amish” types who believe it all.  The most I can say for them is, at least they keep to themselves. 

Interestingly enough, Israel, a country who fights for the rights to the land that “G-d” promised them, boasts of 65 percent or MORE who don’t even believe in god.  In other words, most of Israel is atheist.  haha

Go figure.  I see some greed.  Most American Jews are harmless to me. Most are very liberal and lead very secular lives.  I just don’t see them as a problem the way Muslims and Christians are.

It is incredible how they’ve gotten away with stacking the deck for so many centuries!

It is also incredible how they’ve gotten away with circular logic for so many centuries !  You know:

Why do you believe in God?

Because the Bible tells me about him.

How do you know the Bible is true?

It’s writing was inspired by God.

Why can’t they see that if the Bible is false, then God is false by the exact same reasoning?

God has his reasons for the team he picks to win, simpleman.  Or didn’t you know that God had a favourite football team, etc?

That’s what xians are taught.  Trust me. Xians are taught that with human measurement (which is all we have) we could call “God” good.  But with that same measurement, who are we to call him evil?

So, you see, God has all the right answers and can do no wrong--if you take the xian view that you’re allowed to measure good but not evil.