[Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!

Paf Dvorak notmyname at thatswaytoomuch.info
Mon Jun 17 23:03:01 MDT 2013


At 10:00 PM 6/17/2013 -0400, John A. Quayle wrote:
>At 08:23 PM 6/17/2013, Stephen A. Frye wrote:
>>Content-type: multipart/alternative;
>>  boundary="Boundary_(ID_07JLkNxCSP3jS1o6tVn0Yw)"
>>Content-language: en-us
>>
>>Maybe the origin was different, maybe it 
>>wasn’t. But that does not justify what it 
>>eventually grew into. And the totality is my 
>>point. We cannot excuse evil just because some people thought it was OK.
>
>         NOBODY caught the mistake! Those were 
> the "CRUSADES" I was talking about. I wanted to 
> see if Carl was awake, but apparently, nobody 
> else was either. Meantime, life goes on and 
> I'll just sit here and be a moron, as always.......sucking my thumb. Carry on!

Nobody expected the crusades!


>>
>>From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [ 
>>mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of John A. Quayle
>>Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 4:54 PM
>>To: Rushtalk Discussion List; 'Rushtalk Discussion List'
>>Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!
>>
>>At 07:21 PM 6/17/2013, Stephen A. Frye wrote:
>>
>>Content-type: multipart/alternative;
>>  boundary="Boundary_(ID_E6M/9qA2NvcIFuMwHE5smw)"
>>Content-language: en-us
>>
>>I agree John, burning people at the stake and 
>>threatening them with horrific torture because 
>>they had evidence that the earth moved around 
>>the sun is definitely OK. AS a matter of fact, 
>>I think we should start that again today: agree 
>>with the church or be tortured – maybe to death.
>>
>>But I am so darned confused: if the Inquisition 
>>was so OK, why did the Holy Father apologize 
>>for it and claim that it was a gross mistake and miscarriage?
>>
>>         It goes a lot deeper than 
>> that.......Muslims were trying to bankrupt the 
>> Church because the Church was the center of 
>> charity back then, not the government. You had 
>> to join a parish to qualify. Muslims were 
>> claiming to be Catholics. There were seven 
>> total. SOME were over the top - yes and the 
>> Pope was right to decry them. However, the 
>> origin was a lot different than most people were taught.
>>
>>
>>No. The Inquisition was NOT OK. It is not right 
>>to punish, torture, and murder people simply 
>>because they disagree – even if you are Holy 
>>Mother Church. Check out Jon Hus (maybe it’s 
>>Jan Hus), burned at the stake by the ecumenical 
>>council because he believed mass should be 
>>offered in the local language. Definitely a 
>>killing offense if there ever was one.
>>
>>From: 
>><mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com>rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com 
>>[ mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of John A. Quayle
>>Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 4:07 PM
>>To: Rushtalk Discussion List; 'Rushtalk Discussion List'
>>Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!
>>
>>At 06:28 PM 6/17/2013, Stephen A. Frye wrote:
>>
>>Content-type: multipart/alternative;
>>  boundary="Boundary_(ID_QMJVGZBdxRjREHH7maAjOQ)"
>>Content-language: en-us
>>
>>No. That is the logic you’re trying to force on 
>>me, and it ain’t so. If I were to follow 
>>through with your logic, then the Nazi’s 
>>killing of millions is OK because they thought 
>>it was. Stalin’s murdering of thousands or 
>>millions was Ok because he and his cronies 
>>thought it was. The inquisition was OK because they thought it was.
>>
>>         The "Inquisition" WAS okay. The 
>> Inquisition was a group of institutions within 
>> the judicial system of the 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church?qsrc=3044>Roman 
>> Catholic Church whose aim was to combat 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Christian_heresy?qsrc=3044>heresy. 
>> It started in 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Christianity_in_the_12th_century?qsrc=3044>12th-century 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/France?qsrc=3044>Franc 
>> e to combat the spread of religious 
>> sectarianism, in particular the 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Cathars?qsrc=3044>Cathars 
>> and the 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Waldensians?qsrc=3044>Waldensians. 
>> This 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition?qsrc=3044>Medieval 
>> Inquisition persisted into the 14th century, 
>> from the 1250s associated with the 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Dominican_Order?qsrc=3044>Dominican 
>> Order. In the early 14th century, two other 
>> movements attracted the attention of the 
>> Inquisition, the 
>> <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Knights_Templar?qsrc=3044>Knights 
>> Templar and the <http://www.ask.com/wiki/Beguines?qsrc=3044>Beguines.
>>
>>
>>Etc. etc.
>>
>>From: 
>><mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com>rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com 
>>[ mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
>>Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 5:27 AM
>>To: <mailto:rushtalk at csdco.com>rushtalk at csdco.com
>>Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!
>>
>>It is only wrong because you are looking at 
>>through 20th century glasses. If you were 
>>brought up to believe it was OK, you would obviously not think it was wrong.
>>
>>On 6/16/2013 5:52 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:
>>Some things are just plain wrong. Abortion and 
>>slavery come to mind. Whether it is now, back 
>>then, or looked back upon 100 years from now. 
>>Legal doesn’t make it right – then or now.
>>
>>From: 
>><mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com>rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com 
>>[mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
>>Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:31 AM
>>To: <mailto:rushtalk at csdco.com>rushtalk at csdco.com
>>Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!
>>
>>Be realistic. How can one who grew up in the 
>>20th century possibly understand the mores of 
>>those that grew up in the 18th century?
>>On 6/14/2013 6:31 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>Semantics. The Constitutional crisis was about 
>>state rights. Namely property. That the 
>>property was human beings is really irrelevant. 
>>The northern states also refused to return 
>>livestock that accompanied the slaves. Surely 
>>you would agree that much is indeed theft. You 
>>cannot hold 19th century morals to 21st century standards.
>>
>>Yes we can – and should. Are we going to be 
>>satisfied 100 years from now looking back and 
>>saying – well, abortion was legal, so it was 
>>OK? I don’t think so. Slavery is wrong. Period. 
>>Always was, is, and always will be. Legal doesn’t make it right or moral.
>>
>>On 6/14/2013 11:31 AM, Tom Matiska wrote:
>>Add that to my point. The whole of the "State's 
>>rights'" debate was centered on the wrongs of slavery.
>>Tom
>>--- On Fri, 6/14/13, Dennis Putnam 
>><mailto:dap1 at bellsouth.net><dap1 at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>From: Dennis Putnam <mailto:dap1 at bellsouth.net><dap1 at bellsouth.net>
>>Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Happy Death-by-Government Day!
>>To: <mailto:rushtalk at csdco.com>rushtalk at csdco.com
>>Date: Friday, June 14, 2013, 8:25 AM
>>Not quite. Slaves were considered property. 
>>When slaves escaped to the north the owners 
>>demanded return of their property and some 
>>refused. That was the trigger point at which 
>>time the southern states demanded their rights 
>>as states. There was nothing in the 
>>Constitution that granted the federal 
>>government the power to regulate private 
>>property between states, nor does such exist 
>>today. The federal authorities refused to 
>>facilitate the return of property so the south 
>>decided to secede. If the war was strictly 
>>about slavery, why did it takes 2 years of war 
>>before Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation?
>>On 6/14/2013 5:55 AM, Tom Matiska wrote:
>>
>>--- On Thu, 6/13/13, John A. Quayle <blueoval57 at verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>        Actually, Tom......it was about State's Rights, not slavery!
>>The right of states to allow slavery, the right 
>>to expand slavery westward to new states, , and 
>>the right of states to secede over slavery 
>>pretty much covers all the state's rights discussions of the era.
>>Tom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>Rushtalk
>>mailing
>>
>>
>>list
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>>
>>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>_______________________________________________
>>Rushtalk mailing list
>>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>Rushtalk
>>mailing
>>
>>
>>list
>>
>>
>><mailto:Rushtalk at csdco.com>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>Rushtalk
>>mailing
>>
>>
>>list
>>
>>
>><mailto:Rushtalk at csdco.com>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>Rushtalk
>>mailing
>>
>>
>>list
>>
>>
>><mailto:Rushtalk at csdco.com>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Rushtalk mailing list
>><mailto:Rushtalk at csdco.com>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>>_______________________________________________
>>Rushtalk mailing list
>><mailto:Rushtalk at csdco.com>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>>_______________________________________________
>>Rushtalk mailing list
>>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>_______________________________________________
>Rushtalk mailing list
>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

Paf Dvorak

<http://thatswaytoomuch.info/>notmyname at thatswaytoomuch.info  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20130618/2712f193/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list