From: tony cooper on
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 00:43:51 +0100, Chris H <chris(a)> wrote:

>In message <1pvpr5tvdm6k4b5buh5kq2ig7epibmb7ik(a)>, tony cooper
><tony_cooper213(a)> writes
>>>What would happen to a president who did not profess being a Christian?
>>If he or she was President, nothing. He or she would continue in
>>office. If he or she was a candidate for office, it would severely
>>diminish his or her electability.
>Yet in the UK with the head of state also the head of the church it
>would not make any difference. In fact the faith (or not) of a prime
>minister has not been of any import for years.

So what?

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: mmyvusenet on
"Chris H" <chris(a)> escribi� en el mensaje de
> In message <8242klF5f2U1(a)>, mmyvusenet
> <mmyvusenet(a)invalid.invalid> writes
>>That may sound very nice, but that is not according to the Bible:
> Which Bible?
> There are several. Also there were several councils of Bishops who horse
> traded what was in and what was out. The Eastern Orthodox Church lost
> and quite a few books were missing. I have seen churches that are over
> 1000 years old. That have freezes and carvings of "Bible stores" that
> are from Books of the Bible that are no longer in the modern Bible.

The verse is in any version of the Bible.


From: James Nagler on
On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 13:13:31 -0400, tony cooper
<tony_cooper213(a)> wrote:

>BTW, the word "Catholic", in this context is capitalized as a proper
>noun. To write "catholic" is a sign of ignorance of the language and
>not an indication of approval or disapproval of the religion.

When catholics and all other christians learn to respect and honor the
belief systems, Gods, and Goddesses of all other cultures by also
capitalizing their Gods and Goddesses, perhaps they'll eventually earn the
respect to have their title capitalized again some day. They have zero
respect for anyone else on the planet so they deserve zero respect in

Perhaps we should cut off one of your wife's breast with a rusty knife
while she is still alive and play a game of stick-ball with it so we can be
more "christian".

From: James Nagler on
On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 15:58:42 -0400, tony cooper
<tony_cooper213(a)> wrote:

>On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 18:50:24 +0100, Chris H <chris(a)> wrote:
>>In message <fodpr55fbd76cisisqsj8sch1cuoqho185(a)>, tony cooper
>><tony_cooper213(a)> writes
>>>It's almost impossible, though, to accurately estimate the number of
>>>people involved in abuse. In the parish we* have belonged to for
>>>almost 30 years, there has been one known case of a priest involved in
>>>pedophilia. He was transferred in from another parish, and
>>>transferred back out in less than a year.
>>That is ONE to many.. Notice that he was " He was transferred in from
>>another parish, and transferred back out in less than a year."
>>Notice he was NOT Defrocked and handed over to the authorities. The
>>Catholic Church protecting Pedophiles again.
>What did you think my point was? Are you so dense that you didn't
>understand that this was exactly my point in determining who might be
>>Tony did you assist the Police in bringing a prosecution or help the
>>Pedophile go somewhere else to abuse other children? As you say:-
>>>In my book, if you have knowledge - or even well-founded suspicion -
>>>of illicit acts and don't take action, you are just as involved as the
>>>person who commits the acts.
>I had no knowledge whatsoever. I don't attend church. My children
>attended the parish grade school, but the priest was not connected
>with the school. No priests were on the school's staff. My son was
>not an altar boy, and - knowing my son's interest in religion - he
>probably didn't even know the names of any of the priests.
>I learned about the priest's behavior years after he left the parish.
>From the newspaper. During the investigation of charges brought
>against him in another parish it was brought out that he was attached
>to this parish at one time. I don't even know if any members of this
>parish were abused.
>>I agree. This is where the 25% comes from. The actual number of abusers
>>(prior to the revelations of the last two years) was around 10% or three
>>times the general population.
>The 25% figure was pulled from thin air.
>>>*I was a lapsed Catholic when we moved to Florida, but my wife isn't
>>>lapsed. If it was my choice, we wouldn't have joined any parish.
>>So why did you join? Faith is individual You and your wife do not have
>>ot be the same religion.
>Your ignorance is stunning. Joining the parish isn't like the
>mumbo-jumbo secret rites of becoming a Mason. There's no secret
>handshake, lapel pins, gaudy rings, or funny hats to wear. You don't
>make vows or promises. You simply fill out a form with name, address,
>and telephone number. That's it. That puts you on the church rolls
>and they send you a batch of envelopes each month so you can put money
>in them and drop them in the collection plate. You can be on the
>parish roll without ever attending mass.
>If you want to be married in the church, you must be a member of the
>parish. At the time we moved here, my daughter was 8 years-old. With
>some thought that she might want to get married a few years down the
>road, we joined the parish. Also, we wanted the children to attend
>the Catholic grade school. Again, you have to be a member of the
>parish to send children to the school. (Actually, you don't *have*
>to, but openings go first to parishioners.)

As long as you attend any catholic church for any reason you are supporting
their policies. Those who refuse to walk through their doors are not in
support of their doctrine. You are no less of a pedophile than he who
committed those acts by supporting the foundation that allows it to

>All of the teachers in the grade school except one nun from Malta who
>taught math were lay persons. The principal was a nun, but the
>current principal is a lay person. The school's academic program was,
>at the time, superior to the local public school. ("Public" in the US
>sense: government).
>>Most of the Catholics I know are lapsed or semi lapsed or sort of
>>practising... It seems a religion of hypocrites.
>I'd have to research this further, but aren't all British subjects
>automatically members of the Anglican Church? The official religion
>of England is the Church of England (Anglican). There is no official
>religion of the US. The British Monarch is the Supreme Governor of
>the Church of England. The American president has no automatic
>position in any denomination.
>"Lapsed" simply means "non-practicing but baptized in the faith".
>There's no hypocrisy involved. You just don't practice a faith in
>which you were baptized before you were old enough to make your own
From: John McWilliams on
James Nagler wrote:

> Perhaps we should cut off one of .....

"James" Your diatribes are way off topic and simply hateful.
There's not a country existing, nor a religion, nor a non-religion, that
doesn't have some stench in its past.