|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
| Re: * Christ and the Resurrection of the Flesh * |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: SuzanneSuzanne Date: Mar 20, 2008 13:08
"Linda Lee" juno.com> wrote in message
news:3e717be3-3bfc-4877-93f4-5c24734aa9d3@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 16, 8:22 pm, "Suzanne" flash.net> wrote:>> On Mar 16, 1:35 am, "Suzanne" flash.net> wrote:>>> "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" getnet.net> wrote in
>>> messagenews:vvtda5-99s1.ln1@dhcpdns2.ddsoho.com...>
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>
>>>> Linda Lee wrote:
>>>> | On Mar 9, 3:41 pm, Darrell Stec webpagesorcery.com>
>>>> | wrote:
>>>> |> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>> |>> On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 05:55:45 -0500, Darrell Stec
>>>> |>> webpagesorcery.com> wrote:
>>>> |>>> Suzanne wrote:
>>>> |>>>> "Frank Mayhar" exit.com> wrote in message
>>>> |>>>>news:lle6a5-oop2.ln1@tinker.exit.com...
>>>> |>>>>> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:35:54 -0600, Suzanne wrote:
>>>> |>>>>>> "Frank Mayhar" exit.com> wrote in message
>>>> |>>>>>>news:rpv3a5-79v1.ln1@tinker.exit.com...
>>>> |>>>>>>> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 02:14:24 +0000, Suzanne wrote:
>>>> |>>>>>>>> "Frank Mayhar" exit.com> wrote in message
>>>> |>>>>>>>>news:uehl95-8tt.ln1@tinker.exit.com...
>>>> |>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 04:30:58 +0000, Suzanne wrote:
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>> "Mike Painter" sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>>> message
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>>news:LbJxj.7790$Mw.6092@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>>> Suzanne wrote:
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>>>> So what you are saying I believe is that you want
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>>>> to be treated with respect. People apply different
>>>> definitions
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>>>> to what respect is, though. So what is respect? Is it
>>>> letting
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>>>> someone alone, or is it telling them they are in danger
>>>> if
>>>> they
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>>>> don't know it?
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>>> Neither of your comments defines respect in any way.
>>>> |>>>>>>>>>> You are exhibiting how not to act with respect, Mike.
>>>> |>>>>>>>>> When you show that you _deserve_ respect, you'll _get_
>>>> respect.
>>>> |>>>>>>>>> So far, though, you've only shown that you deserve to be
>>>> treated
>>>> |>>>>>>>>> with either contempt or pity.
>>>> |>>>>>>>> No, I haven't.
>>>> |>>>>>>> *snort* _That's_ your argument? "No, I haven't." That's
>>>> _it_?
>>>> |>>>>>>> Yep, either contempt or pity. Nothing more.
>>>> |>>>>>> Frank, you are making statements that are bogus about me.
>>>> |>>>>> Because you say so? Wrong. I'm making statements about you
>>>> that
>>>> are
>>>> |>>>>> supported by the evidence you are so helpfully providing with
>>>> every
>>>> |>>>>> post
>>>> |>>>>> you make. You show no respect for any of us, you show no sign
>>>> of
>>>> |>>>>> thoughtfulness or insight and yet you demand that we respect
>>>> you.
>>>> |>>>>>> I am not
>>>> |>>>>>> speaking with contempt. and I am not speaking with pity.
>>>> |>>>>> You're not speaking with intelligence, either. I said that you
>>>> |>>>>> _deserve_
>>>> |>>>>> either contempt or pity and nothing more. Learn to read. Get a
>>>> |>>>>> dictionary for the hard words.
>>>> |>>>>>> And no, my
>>>> |>>>>>> saying that I have not treated you as you claim is not an
>>>> argument.
>>>> |>>>>>> It's just a statement of fact.
>>>> |>>>>> You have shown disrespect for me and for most (if not all)
>>>> atheists to
>>>> |>>>>> whom you have replied. You have shown contempt in your
>>>> disregard
>>>> for
>>>> |>>>>> our repeated requests that if you hate hearing from us, you
>>>> remove
>>>> |>>>>> "alt.atheism" from your Newsgroups: line. You have shown
>>>> contempt for
>>>> |>>>>> us individually when you refuse to accept our lack of belief
>>>> in
>>>> your
>>>> |>>>>> bullshit religion. You have shown deep ignorance of your own
>>>> religion,
>>>> |>>>>> of the world in general and of atheists in particular. I
>>>> could,
>>>> were I
>>>> |>>>>> so inclined, produce quotes to support each of these
>>>> contentions.
>>>> All
>>>> |>>>>> you have in response is "No, I haven't." That's not a
>>>> "statement
>>>> of
>>>> |>>>>> fact," that's just a bare assertion.
>>>> |>>>>> You're pathetic.
>>>> |>>>> You just happen to be on an Internet that is loaded with people
>>>> who
>>>> do
>>>> |>>>> believe in God. You are a very minor part of that society so
>>>> its
>>>> not
>>>> |>>>> surprising that you are so frustrated with people that do
>>>> believe
>>>> in
>>>> |>>>> God.
>>>> |>>>> Suzanne
>>>> |>>> Suzanne, those who believe in the Christian god are a minority
>>>> worldwide.
>>>> |>>> With all the various Christian sects put together (and you need
>>>> to
>>>> ad
>>>> |>>> Latter Day Saints to this list) Christians barely make one third
>>>> of
>>>> the
>>>> |>>> world population. Now consider that Roman Catholism is fully
>>>> more
>>>> than
>>>> |>>> one half of the total Christian population and they do not share
>>>> your
>>>> |>>> beliefs,
>>>> |>>> that minority YOU are in is getting smaller and smaller. In fact
>>>> |>>> Fundamentalism which you embrace is only about 10%% of
>>>> Christianity.
>>>> That
>>>> |>>> mean your belief system is only embraced by 3%% of the world's
>>>> population.
>>>> |>>> Now what do have to say about a minority position?
>>>> |>> Non argumentun ad populum?
>>>> |> That would show too novel of an approach for her.
>>>> |>
>>>> |> --
>>>> |> Later,
>>>> |> Darrell Stec dars...@neo.rr.com
>>>> |>
>>>> |> Webpage Sorceryhttp://webpagesorcery.com
>>>> |> We Put the Magic in Your Webpages- Hide quoted text -
>>>> |>
>>>> |> - Show quoted text -
>>>> |
>>>> |
>>>> | You'll notice that Suzanne never responded in kind to all you
>>>> asses'
>>>> | insults. She has tremendous patience with you. I don't - you're all
>>>> | rude ignoramuses.
>>>> |
>>>> Very true. She also stopped responding to the nice people when the
>>>> questions became too hard for her to answer. She stopped responding
>>>> to
>>>> people when her faith started to tremble and doubt started to creep
>>>> into
>>>> her mind.>
>>>> When Suzanne's house of cards was threatened, she ran.
>
>>>> Typical.
>
>>> Hello Karl, no I didn't have faith that was trembling at
>>> your "hard" questions. I had my second eye's cataract surgery
>>> and I am currently recovering from it. But I will say that
>>> you were nice, so don't blow it by making insults. : )
>
>>> The surgery was on Tuesday and I did answer some
>>> posts, but then took a few days off since my eye got
>>> really sore after that. It takes a few weeks of adjustment
>>> after that kind of surgery. Regards to your very, very best
>>> friend.
>
>>> Suzanne
>
>> Hope your surgery heals well. I saw Michelle's post to you concerning
>> that and thought I would add that my mother took three weeks to
>> recover from the same surgery and my stepfather healed in a day or
>> two. It varies a lot.
>
> Thank you very much, Linda, that is encouraging.
> In my case the prognosis for this kind of lens
> implant is usually a few weeks, and it is a longer
> process than a regular lens prosthesis. This one
> has little curved arms that go to the muscle wall
> ring behind the iris, and if you want to look far
> or near, the muscle wall has to strengthen again
> like it once was before. The natural lens that they
> took out had grown less flexible, so the muscle
> ring that flexes the lens was weaker by then, but
> in a few weeks it's back to normal.
>
> Suzanne- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's sounds like what my mother had, a ring was mentioned, and I
thought it was installed behind one eye. She said it took two and a
half to three weeks to heal and for her vision to stabilize.
>
From S.
Your comment makes me realize why the doctor told me
to come back in 3 weeks instead of in 2 like the others
who had the regular kind of lens implant. Must take
that long in some cases. The other one took just about 3
weeks. I could see fine during that time, but it just was not
that crisp, sharp focus that it is at now. It is so worth it,
though. The vision in that eye - due to an eye injury - was
not very good for about the last 6 years, yet I could not get
the surgery until it healed a certain way...and it did heal
eventually. If you get laser surgery to save your vision
from having had a retinal tear, the surgery itself, which is
necessary to save your vision, causes a "macular pucker"
and it takes a few years for that to settle down and lie
down flatter. After that, and only then, glasses do help
some. But the depth perception may be gone. Now it's all
restored because of the multi-focal lens. My formerly
injured eye had to be corrected by these really thick
glasses lens on that eye. So this is really amazing to
not have to wear glasses. Anyway, thank you so much
for the encouragement.
>
Suzanne
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
