PDA

View Full Version : Ann Coulter and the 911 widows minus the most famous one...


memyselfI
06-12-2006, 08:19 PM
Ann Coulter is being discussed on Larry King Live. Will anyone dare bring up the hypocrisy of her outcry against some of the 9/11 widows while not mentioning the first 9/11 widow to make a buck off of her dead husband. Or the first widower, Theodore Olson. Prolly not, they are DUHbya supporters. :hmmm:

Some folks are finally noticing the discrepancy...

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/06/09/publiceye/entry1698354.shtml

Crazy Talk, Take Two

I didn’t want to talk about it again, really I didn’t. I don’t want to give her any more publicity, don’t want to help her sell one more book. That’s Ann Coulter’s whole purpose, you see, to say things that will get her attention, have people talk about her, sell more copies and charge more speaking fees. I didn’t want to, but I just had to go through this one more time because I’m afraid there really are those who still aren’t in on the joke.

Check out this post if you need a refresher on the whole Coulter flap this week, but here’s a brief synopsis of what she said in her new book: That a group of 9/11 widows who have been critical of the Bush administration are “self obsessed women” who “believe the entire country was required to marinate in their exquisite personal agony.” These widows, in Coulter’s view, “are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis.” And Coulter says she has “never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much.” There’s more, including her assertion that you never know if their husbands were ready to divorce them.

I know we live in a culture that requires a certain amount of “shock value” to gain attention. How else do you explain Paris Hilton? But is there no line left at all? Apparently not. While Coulter’s remarks drew rebukes, there were supporters as well – of her sentiments if not her choice of verbiage. Longtime GOP strategist Mary Matalin told radio host Don Imus this morning that she agreed with Coulter’s “larger point” that Democrats and liberals like to present “messengers that it's politically incorrect to argue with.” Republican strategist Jack Burkman appeared on MSNBC’s “Scarborough Report” where he supported Coulter’s comments as the “truth.”

Some of the commenters right here on PE supported Coulter. One commenter, going by the name “centralcal” had this to say:

I think the media's response to Ms. Coulter is a hoot! Nothing like proving her premise (left wing media/left wing Jersey Girls) exactly right!

They have certainly been "enjoying" their celebrity. Where are the other widows of 9/11 in comparison to the lovely ladies of Jersey? They want the celebrity -- and, as all celebrities everywhere will tell you, celebrity has its price.

Another, “mailpro56” weighed in with a response to me, stating:

Being asked for autographs, being named Ms. Magazine Women of the Year ... making commercials for Kerry ... getting your face on TV every 2 seconds ... would they trade it in for getting their husbands back ... most likely. Did they get a kick out of all that attention ... most likely.
Not all on the right were supportive of Coulter. Here’s what Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly had to say about it on his show:

Now many conservatives have joined liberals in condemning Coulter's words, but not all. On "The Radio Factor," some callers supported Ann. Talking Points believes most Americans reject that kind of vitriol because it is mean and counterproductive.

You think? Bill O'Reilly stars as The Voice Of Reason, good on him. Now, for all those who find some merit with Coulter’s “larger point” about the use of victims for political gain, let’s review a smidgen of recent history, shall we?

For example, we know the phrase “let’s roll” as the final words attributed to Todd Beamer, one of the heroic passengers on the United flight 93 that hurtled into a Pennsylvania field rather than the White House or Congress on 9/11. We know his widow, Lisa Beamer. She has written an inspirational book titled, “Let’s Roll.” She was one of the invited guests at President Bush’s address to a joint session of Congress just days after 9/11, where she was singled out and received a standing ovation.

We remember Ashley Faulkner, the young girl who lost her mother in the 9/11 attacks. We remember that poignant moment at an Ohio campaign rally when the president, seeking re-election, embraced Ashley and comforted her. And we remember the ad in which Ashley said of the president, “he’s the most powerful man in the world, and all he wants to do is make sure I’m safe.” We remember that ad because a conservative group supporting the Bush campaign ran it almost 30,000 times during the 2004 election.

And, we recall Debra Burlingame, an outspoken supporter of President Bush and defender of his decision to invade Iraq who lost a brother on 9/11. She was also one of three women – alongside 9/11 widows Deena Burnett and Tara Stackpole – to speak at the Republican National Convention in 2004.

I wonder if Coulter considers Lisa Beamer to be a “self-obsessed” woman seeking to cash in on tragedy? Was Ashley Faulkner “lionized” for political purposes? Are any of them “enjoying” the deaths of their loved ones? Of course not, but these women are immune from Coulter’s acid pen for the simple reason they’re on her side of the issues. Or perhaps more accurately, they have been leveraged by her side. Wouldn’t it be just as “politically incorrect” to criticize these individuals? It would certainly be just as repugnant to personally attack them.

banyon
06-12-2006, 08:28 PM
or...she's actually on Fox right now If you want to see the carnage up close.

OldTownChief
06-12-2006, 09:07 PM
Funny how all the "nutbags" only defense against her is..."She's only trying th sell books, whhhhaaaaaaaaaaaa"

ROFL ROFL

Go get her nut cases.

Adept Havelock
06-12-2006, 09:28 PM
As I've said before, why get worked up over the Right Wing's version of Michael Moore?

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-12-2006, 11:52 PM
As I've said before, why get worked up over the Right Wing's version of Michael Moore?

Michael Moore is a dispassionate and reasonable arbiter compared to Ann Coulter.

banyon
06-13-2006, 08:52 AM
Funny how all the "nutbags" only defense against her is..."She's only trying th sell books, whhhhaaaaaaaaaaaa"

ROFL ROFL

Go get her nut cases.

Their only defense? :spock:

Baby Lee
06-13-2006, 08:59 AM
For example, we know the phrase “let’s roll” as the final words attributed to Todd Beamer, one of the heroic passengers on the United flight 93 that hurtled into a Pennsylvania field rather than the White House or Congress on 9/11. We know his widow, Lisa Beamer. She has written an inspirational book titled, “Let’s Roll.” She was one of the invited guests at President Bush’s address to a joint session of Congress just days after 9/11, where she was singled out and received a standing ovation.

We remember Ashley Faulkner, the young girl who lost her mother in the 9/11 attacks. We remember that poignant moment at an Ohio campaign rally when the president, seeking re-election, embraced Ashley and comforted her. And we remember the ad in which Ashley said of the president, “he’s the most powerful man in the world, and all he wants to do is make sure I’m safe.” We remember that ad because a conservative group supporting the Bush campaign ran it almost 30,000 times during the 2004 election.

And, we recall Debra Burlingame, an outspoken supporter of President Bush and defender of his decision to invade Iraq who lost a brother on 9/11. She was also one of three women – alongside 9/11 widows Deena Burnett and Tara Stackpole – to speak at the Republican National Convention in 2004.

I wonder if Coulter considers Lisa Beamer to be a “self-obsessed” woman seeking to cash in on tragedy? Was Ashley Faulkner “lionized” for political purposes? Are any of them “enjoying” the deaths of their loved ones? Of course not, but these women are immune from Coulter’s acid pen for the simple reason they’re on her side of the issues. Or perhaps more accurately, they have been leveraged by her side. Wouldn’t it be just as “politically incorrect” to criticize these individuals? It would certainly be just as repugnant to personally attack them.
I'd be interested if any of these listed as 'doing the same, except on Ann's side of the issues' engaged in snark.
I rather imagine if Lisa Beamer had called Kerry a 'brie eating surrender monkey' on Good Morning America, the dynamic might be a little different.

Baby Lee
06-14-2006, 09:54 AM
I'd be interested if any of these listed as 'doing the same, except on Ann's side of the issues' engaged in snark.
I rather imagine if Lisa Beamer had called Kerry a 'brie eating surrender monkey' on Good Morning America, the dynamic might be a little different.
I'll take that as a negatory?

HC_Chief
06-14-2006, 09:58 AM
As I've said before, why get worked up over the Right Wing's version of Michael Moore?

More like the right wing's Al Frankin, IMO. Both try to use sarcasm and biting satire to get their political point across. Both come off as complete assholes.

Moore's just a fat socialist surrender monkey who makes propaganda films :p

patteeu
06-14-2006, 11:00 AM
I'll take that as a negatory?

I think that's a reasonable interpretation.

Taco John
06-14-2006, 12:42 PM
There's no one on the left that I could reasonably compare to Ann Coulter. James Carville comes the closest, but he actually has some real political influence, so it's not a great comparison.

penchief
06-14-2006, 07:30 PM
There's no one on the left that I could reasonably compare to Ann Coulter. James Carville comes the closest, but he actually has some real political influence, so it's not a great comparison.

IMO, Carville frames traditional democrat principles better than anyone else. It's refreshing to have someone that knows how to stand up to the conservative attack machine and still get out a good message.


If anyone could whoop Karl Rove's behind it would be James Carville, IMO. He's alright with me for that reason alone.

mlyonsd
06-14-2006, 08:21 PM
The best comparison I can think of to Coulter is Moore, they both do a disservice to their own cause.

Baby Lee
06-16-2006, 01:56 PM
Me and my analogies.
I finally struck upon the one I think most apt.
Coulter is the 'conservative' iteration of Piss Christ.
That, or some other 'in your face' modern art that makes a statement in a shocking and distressing manner.
For her it is about stating her position in a manner that commands attention. She often starts with a kernal of a valid observation, and once she has centered on the correctness of her observation, she erects around it imagery that puts the debate on her terms and flusters those with another view with their reaction to the imagery.
In this case, the kernal was that the widows were being used to make partisan points because their loss insulated them, and by extension the points, from full and open criticism.
Then, just like a modern artist feels unfufilled simply making the observation, and then crafts a piece that shouts the observation in a controverial manner, Ann decides, because they are willingly being used, and in reaction to the supposition of insulation, that ALL insulation should be stripped bare. Question EVERYTHING about their motivations. Question EVERYTHING about their experiences. Make it clear that our suppositions about what it must be like to be a WTC widow might not be what we think. Grieving? No, grinning. Happy prior to 9/11? No, probably on the verge of divorce. Forthright? No, pawns to an agenda.
Just like Jesus on the Cross isn't a vision of reverence, but something to be dipped in piss, or the Virgin Mary, isn't a vision of maternal love, but some African heifer with manure smeared all over her.
I think it's the same drive to shock the sensibilities that fuels an 'artist' to create controversial pieces that fuels Ann.

This isn't offered as a defense, more an admonition;
for those who applaud her, think about the disgust you've felt in the past about 'in your face art'
and for those who demonize her, think about how those who are offended by 'in your face art' felt.

RP_McMurphy
06-16-2006, 02:01 PM
Ann Coulter has set up housekeeping in the Liberals minds these days. She is definately messing with them. As they say......You Go Girl.

banyon
06-16-2006, 02:10 PM
Me and my analogies.
I finally struck upon the one I think most apt.
Coulter is the 'conservative' iteration of Piss Christ.
That, or some other 'in your face' modern art that makes a statement in a shocking and distressing manner.

This is about as apt an analogy as I've heard for her.

I feel about the same way about both.

NewChief
06-16-2006, 02:29 PM
Evidently her latest was to say that people like John Murtha are "the reason soldiers inventend fragging."

patteeu
06-16-2006, 02:43 PM
Me and my analogies.
I finally struck upon the one I think most apt.
Coulter is the 'conservative' iteration of Piss Christ.
That, or some other 'in your face' modern art that makes a statement in a shocking and distressing manner.
For her it is about stating her position in a manner that commands attention. She often starts with a kernal of a valid observation, and once she has centered on the correctness of her observation, she erects around it imagery that puts the debate on her terms and flusters those with another view with their reaction to the imagery.
In this case, the kernal was that the widows were being used to make partisan points because their loss insulated them, and by extension the points, from full and open criticism.
Then, just like a modern artist feels unfufilled simply making the observation, and then crafts a piece that shouts the observation in a controverial manner, Ann decides, because they are willingly being used, and in reaction to the supposition of insulation, that ALL insulation should be stripped bare. Question EVERYTHING about their motivations. Question EVERYTHING about their experiences. Make it clear that our suppositions about what it must be like to be a WTC widow might not be what we think. Grieving? No, grinning. Happy prior to 9/11? No, probably on the verge of divorce. Forthright? No, pawns to an agenda.
Just like Jesus on the Cross isn't a vision of reverence, but something to be dipped in piss, or the Virgin Mary, isn't a vision of maternal love, but some African heifer with manure smeared all over her.
I think it's the same drive to shock the sensibilities that fuels an 'artist' to create controversial pieces that fuels Ann.

This isn't offered as a defense, more an admonition;
for those who applaud her, think about the disgust you've felt in the past about 'in your face art'
and for those who demonize her, think about how those who are offended by 'in your face art' felt.


I think that is an apt analogy. I can understand why Ann rubs liberals (and others with certain sensibilities) the wrong way in the same way I can understand how shock artists rub religious folk the wrong way. Neither one bothers me, but I guess that's because I'm not a liberal and I'm not religious.

Baby Lee
06-16-2006, 02:51 PM
Evidently her latest was to say that people like John Murtha are "the reason soldiers inventend fragging."
Case in point.
Nugget: Murtha's speeches are probably not well received by a lot of servicemen.
Presentation: servicemen would like a chance to shoot him.

Back when A Few Good Men was more fresh in people's minds, she probably would have referenced a 'Code Red.'

Pitt Gorilla
06-16-2006, 03:44 PM
Me and my analogies.
I finally struck upon the one I think most apt.
Coulter is the 'conservative' iteration of Piss Christ.
That, or some other 'in your face' modern art that makes a statement in a shocking and distressing manner.
For her it is about stating her position in a manner that commands attention. She often starts with a kernal of a valid observation, and once she has centered on the correctness of her observation, she erects around it imagery that puts the debate on her terms and flusters those with another view with their reaction to the imagery.
In this case, the kernal was that the widows were being used to make partisan points because their loss insulated them, and by extension the points, from full and open criticism.
Then, just like a modern artist feels unfufilled simply making the observation, and then crafts a piece that shouts the observation in a controverial manner, Ann decides, because they are willingly being used, and in reaction to the supposition of insulation, that ALL insulation should be stripped bare. Question EVERYTHING about their motivations. Question EVERYTHING about their experiences. Make it clear that our suppositions about what it must be like to be a WTC widow might not be what we think. Grieving? No, grinning. Happy prior to 9/11? No, probably on the verge of divorce. Forthright? No, pawns to an agenda.
Just like Jesus on the Cross isn't a vision of reverence, but something to be dipped in piss, or the Virgin Mary, isn't a vision of maternal love, but some African heifer with manure smeared all over her.
I think it's the same drive to shock the sensibilities that fuels an 'artist' to create controversial pieces that fuels Ann.

This isn't offered as a defense, more an admonition;
for those who applaud her, think about the disgust you've felt in the past about 'in your face art'
and for those who demonize her, think about how those who are offended by 'in your face art' felt.Outstanding analogy. Of course, I wasn't a big fan of Maplethorpe or whoever, either.

The one difference is that idiots are lining up to buy her book in droves and I don't recall THAT many people wanting to support Robert (at least, I don't recall that many people liking his "work"). Both people are complete douches, yet one seems to be getting a lot more love. Go figure.

RedNFeisty
06-16-2006, 04:57 PM
I believe everyone has a right to their thoughts and opinions, but I am starting to think this bitch needs to have the life beaten out of her.

Mr. Laz
06-16-2006, 05:06 PM
I believe everyone has a right to their thoughts and opinions, but I am starting to think this bitch needs to have the life beaten out of her.

kick her ass!!!



that woman is a real piece of work

Baby Lee
06-16-2006, 05:13 PM
Outstanding analogy. Of course, I wasn't a big fan of Maplethorpe or whoever, either.

The one difference is that idiots are lining up to buy her book in droves and I don't recall THAT many people wanting to support Robert (at least, I don't recall that many people liking his "work"). Both people are complete douches, yet one seems to be getting a lot more love. Go figure.
There was that tiny matter of Maplethorpe getting government grants to take his naughty pictures.

Adept Havelock
06-16-2006, 06:04 PM
Me and my analogies.
I finally struck upon the one I think most apt.
Coulter is the 'conservative' iteration of Piss Christ.
That, or some other 'in your face' modern art that makes a statement in a shocking and distressing manner.
For her it is about stating her position in a manner that commands attention. She often starts with a kernal of a valid observation, and once she has centered on the correctness of her observation, she erects around it imagery that puts the debate on her terms and flusters those with another view with their reaction to the imagery.
In this case, the kernal was that the widows were being used to make partisan points because their loss insulated them, and by extension the points, from full and open criticism.
Then, just like a modern artist feels unfufilled simply making the observation, and then crafts a piece that shouts the observation in a controverial manner, Ann decides, because they are willingly being used, and in reaction to the supposition of insulation, that ALL insulation should be stripped bare. Question EVERYTHING about their motivations. Question EVERYTHING about their experiences. Make it clear that our suppositions about what it must be like to be a WTC widow might not be what we think. Grieving? No, grinning. Happy prior to 9/11? No, probably on the verge of divorce. Forthright? No, pawns to an agenda.
Just like Jesus on the Cross isn't a vision of reverence, but something to be dipped in piss, or the Virgin Mary, isn't a vision of maternal love, but some African heifer with manure smeared all over her.
I think it's the same drive to shock the sensibilities that fuels an 'artist' to create controversial pieces that fuels Ann.

This isn't offered as a defense, more an admonition;
for those who applaud her, think about the disgust you've felt in the past about 'in your face art'
and for those who demonize her, think about how those who are offended by 'in your face art' felt.Very well said. Please accept this rep on behalf of the church of religious consciousness. Would you like to make a donation?Ann Coulter has set up housekeeping in the Liberals minds these days. She is definately messing with them. As they say......You Go Girl.Let me guess, you think Ann the Man is great, but hate Michael Moore for doing the same pathetic schtick in the other direction? ROFL ROFL ROFL

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-16-2006, 07:09 PM
Me and my analogies.
I finally struck upon the one I think most apt.
Coulter is the 'conservative' iteration of Piss Christ.
That, or some other 'in your face' modern art that makes a statement in a shocking and distressing manner.
For her it is about stating her position in a manner that commands attention. She often starts with a kernal of a valid observation, and once she has centered on the correctness of her observation, she erects around it imagery that puts the debate on her terms and flusters those with another view with their reaction to the imagery.
In this case, the kernal was that the widows were being used to make partisan points because their loss insulated them, and by extension the points, from full and open criticism.
Then, just like a modern artist feels unfufilled simply making the observation, and then crafts a piece that shouts the observation in a controverial manner, Ann decides, because they are willingly being used, and in reaction to the supposition of insulation, that ALL insulation should be stripped bare. Question EVERYTHING about their motivations. Question EVERYTHING about their experiences. Make it clear that our suppositions about what it must be like to be a WTC widow might not be what we think. Grieving? No, grinning. Happy prior to 9/11? No, probably on the verge of divorce. Forthright? No, pawns to an agenda.
Just like Jesus on the Cross isn't a vision of reverence, but something to be dipped in piss, or the Virgin Mary, isn't a vision of maternal love, but some African heifer with manure smeared all over her.
I think it's the same drive to shock the sensibilities that fuels an 'artist' to create controversial pieces that fuels Ann.

This isn't offered as a defense, more an admonition;
for those who applaud her, think about the disgust you've felt in the past about 'in your face art'
and for those who demonize her, think about how those who are offended by 'in your face art' felt.

I must disagree. In your face art, like Serrano's piece are meant to purposely shock the system, but it's not done so out of malice. Ann Coulter is completely filled with hate, and that hate is what I believe drives the schlock that comes from her writings. The two could not be farther apart in my opinion.

go bowe
06-16-2006, 09:24 PM
I must disagree. In your face art, like Serrano's piece are meant to purposely shock the system, but it's not done so out of malice. Ann Coulter is completely filled with hate, and that hate is what I believe drives the schlock that comes from her writings. The two could not be farther apart in my opinion.well i'll be damned...

i actually agree with hamas about something...

Baby Lee
06-16-2006, 09:41 PM
I must disagree.
Oh must you? Color me shocked.

Baby Lee
06-16-2006, 09:43 PM
well i'll be damned...

i actually agree with hamas about something...
WTF?
They're both driven by commerce.
And you don't think any shock artist had a chip on their shoulder, just like Ann's?
Excuse me if I don't take Hamas, hater of any whiff of religiosity, assessment of the malice behind Piss Christ at face value.

go bowe
06-16-2006, 10:01 PM
WTF?
They're both driven by commerce.
And you don't think any shock artist had a chip on their shoulder, just like Ann's?
Excuse me if I don't take Hamas, hater of any whiff of religiosity, assessment of the malice behind Piss Christ at face value.i'm not suggesting that you should take hamas and do anything other than subdue him with your formidable arsenal...

but while i see your point with regard to commerce, not all art is driven by the hope of riches...

shock art is just another form of expression, like singing or playing the cello with higher voltage (much higher voltage)...

while i'm sure some may choose particular subjects out of some degree of malice, and piss christ (with whom i'm not familiar) would seem to be one with regard to christians...

but i seriously think some artists use shock art as a new form of perception/expression for purely artistic reasons, albeit strange reasons...

in parting, i'll note that ann's chip is singular, possibly even unmatched in the world of chips...

even piss christ, whoever he may be, couldn't begin to compete with that woman when it comes to vitriol...

of course she's pretty good at what she does, but i think even ann is not doing her thing solely for the money, but for the notoriety and for political purposes...

commerce doesn't drive everything all the time...

(see? liberal tendencies... i was young and they filled me with those left wing notions, what can i say? of course i'm older now...)

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 01:36 AM
WTF?
They're both driven by commerce.
And you don't think any shock artist had a chip on their shoulder, just like Ann's?
Excuse me if I don't take Hamas, hater of any whiff of religiosity, assessment of the malice behind Piss Christ at face value.

And I should believe the ramblings of a professed Mormon, since you are no doubt to be offended by Serrano's work by the very nature of your own religious choice?? You are hardly a disinterested party in the above matter, stop trying to portary yourself as above the fray.

Baby Lee
06-17-2006, 11:14 AM
And I should believe the ramblings of a professed Mormon, since you are no doubt to be offended by Serrano's work by the very nature of your own religious choice?? You are hardly a disinterested party in the above matter, stop trying to portary yourself as above the fray.
God you're a worthless bigot. Worthless because you can't even correctly identify what your hate is directed at.
I'm neither a Mormon nor offended by piss Christ.

Adept Havelock
06-17-2006, 02:34 PM
God you're a worthless bigot. Worthless because you can't even correctly identify what your hate is directed at.
I'm neither a Mormon nor offended by piss Christ.

ROFL
Maybe you should give the guy a break BL. He's obviously got some issues. After all, he implied yesterday that knife control would have averted the Rwanda genocide. If that's not a sign of a disturbed mind...:shrug:

Then again, it's always fun to watch you go to work on folks like this. It's fine to see a master at his craft. Enjoy.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 02:37 PM
God you're a worthless bigot. Worthless because you can't even correctly identify what your hate is directed at.
I'm neither a Mormon nor offended by piss Christ.

So you are LDS, what a massive difference!!! Jesus Christ.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 02:40 PM
WTF?
They're both driven by commerce.
And you don't think any shock artist had a chip on their shoulder, just like Ann's?
Excuse me if I don't take Hamas, hater of any whiff of religiosity, assessment of the malice behind Piss Christ at face value.

I'm the one driven by hate when you are the one who must exclaim WTF when someone agrees with me instead of you :). I realize that you have a lot invested in this little clique of people who bow down to you, but come on...

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 02:41 PM
ROFL
Maybe you should give the guy a break BL. He's obviously got some issues. After all, he implied yesterday that knife control would have averted the Rwanda genocide. If that's not a sign of a disturbed mind...:shrug:

Then again, it's always fun to watch you go to work on folks like this. It's fine to see a master at his craft. Enjoy.

I was completely serious when I said that of course...it was a joke, and it may have been in poor taste, but then again, if the Hutu's wouldn't have had machetes, it would have made a lot of their mass killings more difficult to execute, so it's not as though there isn't a kernel of truth in that statement.

Adept Havelock
06-17-2006, 02:49 PM
I was completely serious when I said that of course...it was a joke, and it may have been in poor taste, but then again, if the Hutu's wouldn't have had machetes, it would have made a lot of their mass killings more difficult to execute, so it's not as though there isn't a kernel of truth in that statement.

ROFLROFL

Aha! We obviously need machete control! Someone page Michael Moore to do a documentary on this, immediately!

If they didn't have machetes, they would have found some other simple tool just as effective. Perhaps using Rocks to bash in heads, as the Khmer Rouge did. Maybe we need rock control to make it more difficult to carry out genocides. There's a "kernel of truth" in that as well. :drool:

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 02:54 PM
ROFLROFL

Aha! We obviously need machete control! Someone page Michael Moore to do a documentary on this, immediately!

If they didn't have machetes, they would have found some other simple tool just as effective. Perhaps using Rocks to bash in heads, as the Khmer Rouge did. Maybe we need rock control to make it more difficult to carry out genocides. There's a "kernel of truth" in that as well. :drool:

Most of the deaths in the Year Zero were as a result of starvation. Yeah some people were bashed with rocks, but it is a lot more time consuming to bash someone's skull in with a rock then it is to hack them with a machete. There still would have been a lot of people killed, but not nearly as many. Imagine how many would have died if all the Hutu's had access to AK's.

Baby Lee
06-17-2006, 02:55 PM
So you are LDS, what a massive difference!!! Jesus Christ.
Steee-rike Two!!!

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 03:03 PM
Steee-rike Two!!!

You are one lying sack of shit, you know that??

[QUOTE=Adept Havelock]BL is hardly a "closet Mormon". He and I have had a couple of interesting discussions on his faith as a member of the (sincere apologies if my memory is mistaken, BL) RLDS, now known as the "Community of Christ".
QUOTE]

Now, what is RLDS, you may say??

Basically an offshoot sect of the Mormon movement after the Death of Joseph Smith. The theological differences are slight.

But yet, you have no problem calling yourself a "Jack-Mormon" in jest.

go bowe
06-17-2006, 03:33 PM
So you are LDS, what a massive difference!!! Jesus Christ.so you don't know everything after all... :p :p :p

lds = mormon

go bowe
06-17-2006, 03:38 PM
You are one lying sack of shit, you know that??[QUOTE=Adept Havelock]BL is hardly a "closet Mormon". He and I have had a couple of interesting discussions on his faith as a member of the (sincere apologies if my memory is mistaken, BL) RLDS, now known as the "Community of Christ".
QUOTE]

Now, what is RLDS, you may say??

Basically an offshoot sect of the Mormon movement after the Death of Joseph Smith. The theological differences are slight.

But yet, you have no problem calling yourself a "Jack-Mormon" in jest.i could be mistaken here, but i don't think bl was jesting when he said that...

Baby Lee
06-17-2006, 04:13 PM
You are one lying sack of shit, you know that??

[QUOTE=Adept Havelock]BL is hardly a "closet Mormon". He and I have had a couple of interesting discussions on his faith as a member of the (sincere apologies if my memory is mistaken, BL) RLDS, now known as the "Community of Christ".
QUOTE]

Now, what is RLDS, you may say??

Basically an offshoot sect of the Mormon movement after the Death of Joseph Smith. The theological differences are slight.

But yet, you have no problem calling yourself a "Jack-Mormon" in jest.
1. The RLDS was not an offshoot of Mormonism. And the theological differences are vast. A vast amount of what is now Mormonism was formulated after Joseph Smith's lynching, as Brigham Young et al, headed west and settled in Utah. RLDS reorganized under original principles [no polygamy, no eternal marriage, no Temples, no baptism of the dead, no individuals being awarded planets, no Pearl of Great Price, no holy underwear, no Donnie and Marie, etc., etc., etc. All formulated by Brigham Young et al later] when JS's son was old enough to lead.
2. The Community of Christ has pretty much rejected . . . well, everything, . . . except 'God is great, God is good, let him thank him for our food,' over the past 30 years.
3. My referring to myself as a 'Jack Mormon' in jest was in direct reply to your dumbassery to date. I was jokingly accepting all the bigotry you've expressed towards me as true.
4. That ends all discussion of personal theology with you, because I don't like you, I don't respect you, and I have no impulse to discuss serious matters with you.

Baby Lee
06-17-2006, 04:16 PM
i could be mistaken here, but i don't think bl was jesting when he said that...
Yes I was. As I said above, I was aping Hamas' dumbassery. If I could have found a more derisive characterization [like Kike, except for Mormons], I'd have used that.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 04:31 PM
1. The RLDS was not an offshoot of Mormonism. A

You are one dumb sonofabitch:

Per Wiki:

The early history of Community of Christ is shared with other denominations in the Latter Day Saint movement, which originated in upstate New York under the leadership of Joseph Smith, Jr. With the assistance of Oliver Cowdery and John Whitmer, Smith dictated and published works of scripture believed by followers to be inspired, and formed a new Church of Christ. This church grew rapidly, especially after the conversion of Sidney Rigdon and many of the Campbellites in the Kirtland area. Their strong beliefs, including a revealing God and their close community often seemed peculiar or even threatening to outsiders. Regularly meeting opposition from their neighbors, the early Latter Day Saints established and were driven from several gathering places including Kirtland, Ohio, Independence, Missouri, Far West, Missouri and finally Nauvoo, Illinois. See History of the Latter Day Saint movement.

Considering that Mormonism is by far the more vast religion, your cultish sect would in fact be considered an offshoot religion just as Lutheranism is an offshoot of the Catholic church.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 04:32 PM
Yes I was. As I said above, I was aping Hamas' dumbassery. If I could have found a more derisive characterization [like Kike, except for Mormons], I'd have used that.

The fact that you are a part of a 250,000 person cult says quite a lot about your own expansive idiocy. Remember to buy the white Nikes :D

Baby Lee
06-17-2006, 04:42 PM
The fact that you are a part of a 250,000 person cult says quite a lot about your own expansive idiocy. Remember to buy the white Nikes :D
God you are a worthless c u n t.
Die, have a f ucking heart attack, get ran over by a passing train, drink antifreeze, I don't care how.
You've never made a rational point, but you think you can save face by making fun of my personal life.
F uck you. F uck your mother. Piss on your father.

BucEyedPea
06-17-2006, 04:44 PM
The fact that you are a part of a 250,000 person cult says quite a lot about your own expansive idiocy. Remember to buy the white Nikes :D

You know I don't usually like to get involved in such discussions about individuals on a personal basis but I can make an exception.

Here you call BL part of a "cult" yet you claim to be an "anarcho-socialist" which is really just a euphemism for communist. I don't care what you wanna call it...but no gov't coupled with socialism...whatever. If the state withers away after a phase of socialism it's the same "cult."

Now who is really a member of a "cult?" Not all "cults" are religious. But it certainly takes one to see it in others. I do know one thing, it is usually members of your cult that is so full of hatred of anyone or anything religious, overgeneralized or exaggerated and not based on fact but really just carping criticism. I also know that such hate and intolerance leads to same mass murder you allege for religions.

I happen to know a good therapist who treats both Tourette's Syndrome along with Anger Management for anti-social personalities.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 04:44 PM
God you are a worthless c u n t.
Die, have a f ucking heart attack, get ran over by a passing train, drink antifreeze, I don't care how.
You've never made a rational point, but you think you can save face by making fun of my personal life.
F uck you. F uck your mother. Piss on your father.
I'm just following your track record clearly established in this thread. Furthermore, keep ignoring the elephant in the room, post 44. Until then, think about how much better the world would have been had your mother swallowed you.

stevieray
06-17-2006, 04:46 PM
I'm just following your track record clearly established in this thread. Furthermore, keep ignoring the elephant in the room, post 44. Until then, think about how much better the world would have been had your mother swallowed you.

I think how much worse the world will be knowing your warped view will pass through your teaching.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 04:50 PM
I think how much worse the world will be knowing your warped view will pass through your teaching.

Unfortunately for you, my evaluations say otherwise.

stevieray
06-17-2006, 04:52 PM
Unfortunately for you, my evaluations say otherwise.

Unfortunate for your students..I'm sure your evaluators would be doubly impressed with you inability to post without vulgarity and faith bashing. I'd bet you are just masking pain, and using this board to deal with it.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 04:56 PM
Unfortunate for your students..I'm sure your evaluators would be doubly impressed with you inability to post without vulgarity and faith bashing. I'd bet you are just masking pain, and using this board to deal with it.

I can feel the hate flow through me. Feel it make me STRONGAH!!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/58/Sith_lightning.jpg

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 04:56 PM
Unfortunate for your students..I'm sure your evaluators would be doubly impressed with you inability to post without vulgarity and faith bashing. I'd bet you are just masking pain, and using this board to deal with it.

My students are my evaluators, ass.

Baby Lee
06-17-2006, 04:59 PM
My students are my idiots too, ass.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 05:03 PM
I love it, the standard Baby Lee acknowledgement of defeat. I have nothing left to say, so I'll just rewrite the words of my sparring partner. You are one sad and pathetic sonofabitch. You have so much invested in thinking that you are the dispassionate arbiter of this board that when someone comes along and calls you out for the hypocrite and ideologue that you are, you melt down and wish them an imminent death.

The remedy is but an elephant gun of Thorazine away.

Baby Lee
06-17-2006, 05:12 PM
I love it, the standard Baby Lee acknowledgement of defeat. I have nothing left to say, so I'll just rewrite the words of my sparring partner. You are one sad and pathetic sonofabitch. You have so much invested in thinking that you are the dispassionate arbiter of this board that when someone comes along and calls you out for the hypocrite and ideologue that you are, you melt down and wish them an imminent death.

The remedy is but an elephant gun of Thorazine away.
What defeat?
What rhetorical point did you make.
The 'ideologue' made an analogy about Ann Coulter that was critical, analytical, and apt. Tons of people who dislike Ann praised it, on this thread and elsewhere. But Hamas chimes in with "no, no, no, Ann isn't just a charletain, SHE's DEH DEBBIL!! And shock artists aren't charletains, they're widdle sweetie pies."
At that point, the true ideologue was pretty much identified.
Since then, it's just been needles at your continued misapprension of my personal life.
So tell me, what did you win, oh loser at life?

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-17-2006, 05:17 PM
What defeat?
What rhetorical point did you make.
The 'ideologue' made an analogy about Ann Coulter that was critical, analytical, and apt. Tons of people who dislike Ann praised it, on this thread and elsewhere. But Hamas chimes in with "no, no, no, Ann isn't just a charletain, SHE's DEH DEBBIL!! And shock artists aren't charletains, they're widdle sweetie pies."
At that point, the true ideologue was pretty much identified.
Since then, it's just been needles at your continued misapprension of my personal life.
So tell me, what did you win, oh loser at life?

Tons of people praised it. Your good enough, smart enough, and doggone it, people like you.

Why then, this reaction when someone doesn't agree with you:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by go bo
well i'll be damned...

i actually agree with hamas about something...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WTF?
They're both driven by commerce.
And you don't think any shock artist had a chip on their shoulder, just like Ann's?
Excuse me if I don't take Hamas, hater of any whiff of religiosity, assessment of the malice behind Piss Christ at face value.


If you tire of me so much, and seem have no desire to 'educate' me, why do you keep bantering back and forth with me, if I'm "soooo crazy"??? If I am in deed as crazy as you seem, then your dogged refusal to stop when you are, in your opinion, so far ahead, reveals the true nature of your status: floundering.

go bowe
06-17-2006, 09:11 PM
You are one dumb sonofabitch:

Per Wiki:

The early history of Community of Christ is shared with other denominations in the Latter Day Saint movement, which originated in upstate New York under the leadership of Joseph Smith, Jr. With the assistance of Oliver Cowdery and John Whitmer, Smith dictated and published works of scripture believed by followers to be inspired, and formed a new Church of Christ. This church grew rapidly, especially after the conversion of Sidney Rigdon and many of the Campbellites in the Kirtland area. Their strong beliefs, including a revealing God and their close community often seemed peculiar or even threatening to outsiders. Regularly meeting opposition from their neighbors, the early Latter Day Saints established and were driven from several gathering places including Kirtland, Ohio, Independence, Missouri, Far West, Missouri and finally Nauvoo, Illinois. See History of the Latter Day Saint movement.

Considering that Mormonism is by far the more vast religion, your cultish sect would in fact be considered an offshoot religion just as Lutheranism is an offshoot of the Catholic church.wikipedia?

buceyedpea doesn't regard wikipedia as a credible site...

go bowe
06-17-2006, 09:14 PM
God you are a worthless c u n t.
Die, have a f ucking heart attack, get ran over by a passing train, drink antifreeze, I don't care how.
You've never made a rational point, but you think you can save face by making fun of my personal life.
F uck you. F uck your mother. Piss on your father.and your dog too...

oh wait...

this post is not supposed to be directed at ham sandwich man...

i am speaking to bl, not hammy: don't hold back, tell us how you really feel... ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

Logical
06-17-2006, 10:07 PM
I think I like Hamas Jenkins, he is making me seem extremely reasonable. :D

BucEyedPea
06-18-2006, 06:51 AM
wikipedia?

buceyedpea doesn't regard wikipedia as a credible site...


It's a good place to start but it can have missing info, opinion and errors at times. I never used the word "credible" exactly. I do think it has some use.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-18-2006, 08:08 AM
It's a good place to start but it can have missing info, opinion and errors at times. I never used the word "credible" exactly. I do think it has some use.

It has fewer errrors on average than the encyclopedia brittanica.

patteeu
06-18-2006, 08:52 AM
I think I like Hamas Jenkins, he is making me seem extremely reasonable. :D

Very true. Although if we track your trajectory from right to left and extrapolate, I see you reaching 'Hamas'-levels of insanity by early 2006. :p ROFL

Baby Lee
06-18-2006, 08:57 AM
Very true. Although if we track your trajectory from right to left and extrapolate, I see you reaching 'Hamas'-levels of insanity by early 2006. :p ROFL
The balance of your posts suggests that you think that date is somewhere in the future.
patty???
Are you some BBS form of that Keanu/Sandra chickflick about the mailbox?
Are you stuck somewhere in the past??

Aye!! Talk to us Patty!!!

patteeu
06-18-2006, 09:08 AM
The balance of your posts suggests that you think that date is somewhere in the future.
patty???
Are you some BBS form of that Keanu/Sandra chickflick about the mailbox?
Are you stuck somewhere in the past??

Aye!! Talk to us Patty!!!

Argh!! I guess I meant 2007, LOL.

BucEyedPea
06-18-2006, 12:25 PM
It has fewer errrors on average than the encyclopedia brittanica.

I think you need to peruse it more carefully then. That's just not true. I've seen sections claimed to be under dispute by their own admission asking for challenges to it due to disagreement from users on a submission. I've even seen arguments between whoever runs it disagree in an all out flame war between him and a contributer with a banning. It has some bias.

Example: It had missing information on Zarqawi....that I got from another source ( better imo) that changed some claims about him. So not everyone who is credible agrees he was allied with alQaeda before we got there. he was a wannabe. That little bit of info can work in or against someone's argument.

BTW some so called reference material in general can contain inadequate info or an error/opinion that can be disagreed with on occassion. Even a dictionary. Sometimes a more detailed dictionary can supply more information about a word for more understanding whereas others don't.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-18-2006, 12:50 PM
I
BTW some so called reference material in general can contain inadequate info or an error/opinion that can be disagreed with on occassion. Even a dictionary. Sometimes a more detailed dictionary can supply more information about a word for more understanding whereas others don't.

No shit?? You mean that the OED unabridged might have a more complete etymology of various words than a pocket dictionary?? :rolleyes:

BucEyedPea
06-18-2006, 01:01 PM
No shit?? You mean that the OED unabridged might have a more complete etymology of various words than a pocket dictionary?? :rolleyes:
:rolleyes: No not just a more complete etymology compared to a pocket dictionary. That was just giving a very basic idea. Even Hirsch's Dictionary of Cultural Literacy has some bias/error/misunderstandings/opinion in it.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-18-2006, 01:10 PM
[/sarcasm]

go bowe
06-18-2006, 01:13 PM
there's a pic around here somewhere of a joke sailing over the head of a poster...

it's pretty funny when you see it...

banyon
06-18-2006, 03:53 PM
I think how much worse the world will be knowing your warped view will pass through your teaching.

Well, it's a stupid pissing contest with no substantive arguments, so it's time for stevieray to jump in with his patented one-line personal insult. Yhey! http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/memphis/phpbb/images/smiles/03-muttering.gif

CHIEF4EVER
06-18-2006, 04:18 PM
Lutheranism is an offshoot of the Catholic church.

ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL

Martin Luther was declared a heretic by the Catholic Church. He was one of the fathers of the Reformation. Ever heard of the 95 theses?

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-18-2006, 04:28 PM
ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL

Martin Luther was declared a heretic by the Catholic Church. He was one of the fathers of the Reformation. Ever heard of the 95 theses?

Theses for reforming the........Catholic Church?? Jesus you are one dumb f*ck. He was declared a heretic and then formed his own denomination which was an...offshoot of Catholicism.

CHIEF4EVER
06-18-2006, 04:34 PM
Theses for reforming the........Catholic Church?? Jesus you are one dumb f*ck. He was declared a heretic and then formed his own denomination which was an...offshoot of Catholicism.

Yes, he was excommunicated so he went and formed an offshoot of Catholicism. ROFLROFLROFLROFL

Of course since you are an atheist and known religiophobe and I am a Lutheran you must be right and know it all better than I do. ROFLROFLROFLROFL

For your reading pleasure..........

In 1517, he issued his ninety-five treatises and was referring to the papacy as corrupt. He eventually adopted the Bible as his only authority, thus rejecting the additional authority of tradition, the popes, and councils. Luther's excommunication came in 1521. Some moderates within the church tried to effect a reconciliation that failed, so the schism began.

BucEyedPea
06-18-2006, 04:36 PM
Theses for reforming the........Catholic Church?? Jesus you are one dumb f*ck. He was declared a heretic and then formed his own denomination which was an...offshoot of Catholicism.

At that point, however, it is no longer Catholicism. Catholicism is based on accepting their doctrine's unconditionally as dogma...it is not cafeteria-style christianity. That includes being subject to the Roman Pontiff.

I'd say Lutheranism is an offshoot of Christianity. A lot of branches broke off from the RCC, being the first christian church.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-18-2006, 04:44 PM
Yes, he was excommunicated so he went and formed an offshoot of Catholicism. ROFLROFLROFLROFL

Of course since you are an atheist and known religiophobe and I am a Lutheran you must be right and know it all better than I do. ROFLROFLROFLROFL

For your reading pleasure..........

In 1517, he issued his ninety-five treatises and was referring to the papacy as corrupt. He eventually adopted the Bible as his only authority, thus rejecting the additional authority of tradition, the popes, and councils. Luther's excommunication came in 1521. Some moderates within the church tried to effect a reconciliation that failed, so the schism began.

and yet strangely, Lutheranism is considered to be among the most faithful to the Catholic tradition of all Protestant denominations :hmmm:

CHIEF4EVER
06-18-2006, 04:56 PM
and yet strangely, Lutheranism is considered to be among the most faithful to the Catholic tradition of all Protestant denominations :hmmm:

Dude, give it up. You don't know anything about the subject and I have proven that....And without the use of adjectives such as 'dumb f*ck' to describe you. If you are truly interested in what we believe I would be happy to explain it to you anytime you want. Think it over, what could it hurt?

Braincase
06-18-2006, 04:59 PM
I really hope an embarrassing video of her comes out soon... "Ann Coulter's Torrid Affair with Marv Albert!"

:toast:

stevieray
06-18-2006, 05:18 PM
Well, it's a stupid pissing contest with no substantive arguments, so it's time for stevieray to jump in with his patented one-line personal insult. Yhey! http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/memphis/phpbb/images/smiles/03-muttering.gif

funny, just like your reply.

I've already stated why I feel the way I do, others have said the same thing to Kotter, yet I bet that doesn't bother you.

banyon
06-18-2006, 05:24 PM
funny, just like your reply.

I've already stated why I feel the way I do, others have said the same thing to Kotter, yet I bet that doesn't bother you.

I don't know what you're talking about. Kotter actually makes points and tries to back them up.

BucEyedPea
06-18-2006, 07:28 PM
and yet strangely, Lutheranism is considered to be among the most faithful to the Catholic tradition of all Protestant denominations :hmmm:

The Episcoplian Church is the closest. Even the church set up.

Adept Havelock
06-18-2006, 08:03 PM
The Episcoplian Church is the closest. Even the church set up.

Very true. The COE/Anglican/Episcopal church is the most similar I've found to Catholicism. I attended one in my youth, it seemed like "Catholic Lite"- All The ritual, half the guilt.

BucEyedPea
06-18-2006, 08:06 PM
I attended one in my youth, it seemed like "Catholic Lite"- All The ritual, half the guilt.
ROFL For some reason I thought you might have been Jewish.
They have even more guilt, or so my Jewish friends tell me.
Too bad they didn't have confession to relieve themselves.

Adept Havelock
06-18-2006, 09:44 PM
ROFL For some reason I thought you might have been Jewish.
They have even more guilt, or so my Jewish friends tell me.
Too bad they didn't have confession to relieve themselves.

I've had a lot of people think that about me. Can't imagine why, Nu?

Yehudah? Not really, but many of my friends and family consider me a mensch, even if I'm more than a bit meshuggah. As for the guilt, oy, the stories I could tell you. Mother wielded guilt as an olympic fencer does a foil, or a barbarian a war club, depending.

As much as I'm anything, I've been told by a Rabbi or two I could be considered what's known as an Apikiros (yes, it's from "Epicurius"). That, and a serious pain in the tuchus. :D

I kid, I kid. Seriously, if I subscribed to a particular religious tradition, that one probably comes a little closer to what I believe than many of them. I have great respect for that faith's view of knowledge and scholarship, much as I esteem the Jesuit's for the same reason. This, though I do have numerous issues with both. I was exposed to many faiths growing up, and I've spent much time studying religions over the years, but that's a very long story.

However, Jews do have confession for relief. They just keep it between themselves and G-d. ;)

BucEyedPea
06-18-2006, 10:00 PM
I've had a lot of people think that about me. Can't imagine why, Nu?

Yehudah? Not really, but many of my friends and family consider me a mensch, even if I'm more than a bit meshuggah. As for the guilt, oy, the stories I could tell you. Mother wielded guilt as an olympic fencer does a foil, or a barbarian a war club, depending.

As much as I'm anything, I've been told by a Rabbi or two I could be considered what's known as an Apikiros (yes, it's from "Epicurius"). That, and a serious pain in the tuchus. :D

I kid, I kid. Seriously, if I subscribed to a particular religious tradition, that one probably comes a little closer to what I believe than many of them. I have great respect for that faith's view of knowledge and scholarship, much as I esteem the Jesuit's for the same reason. This, though I do have numerous issues with both. I was exposed to many faiths growing up, and I've spent much time studying religions over the years, but that's a very long story.

However, Jews do have confession for relief. They just keep it between themselves and G-d. ;)

Interesting.

I was raised in a religious household but not overly so, not anything like a gf or mine I grew up with. My mother father liked to have fun and were amateur Shakespearean actors. Met in drama on stage with Dad in his underwear...guess it was love at first sight. Anyhow, I don't even remotely recall having any kind of guilt run on me...guess she put us in parochial school for that. However,I feel that being able to tell someone confidentially what one has done wrong, actually helps to unburden one even more and clean the slate.

I did entertain conversion to Judaism at one point and they do have their own cleansing of the conscience ritual too. Yom Kippur! It was actually kinda fun except for the massive headache due to fasting.

Today I categorize myself as just spiritual.
Epicureanism, I think of as more philosophy but a creed no less.

Adept Havelock
06-18-2006, 10:37 PM
Interesting.

I was raised in a religious household but not overly so, not anything like a gf or mine I grew up with. My mother father liked to have fun and were amateur Shakespearean actors. Met in drama on stage with Dad in his underwear...guess it was love at first sight. Anyhow, I don't even remotely recall having any kind of guilt run on me...guess she put us in parochial school for that. However,I feel that being able to tell someone confidentially what one has done wrong, actually helps to unburden one even more and clean the slate.

I did entertain conversion to Judaism at one point and they do have their own cleansing of the conscience ritual too. Yom Kippur! It was actually kinda fun except for the massive headache due to fasting.

Today I categorize myself as just spiritual.
Epicureanism, I think of as more philosophy but a creed no less.

Nice story about the parents. Part of me feels the need to make an "Is this a dagger I see before me, or are you just happy to see me" joke, so I just did. :p

The term "Apikiros" as I understand it, derives from the name Epicurus, but isn't exactly Epicureanism (though I certainly believe and practice some of it's ideals). It's more of a belief that everything can ultimately be explained by science and reason. Though it is my opinion that the current definition of both terms is insufficent, but will grow as our understanding does.