In article <1993Apr7.004528.21646@ultb.isc.rit.edu> snm6394@ultb.isc.rit.edu
(S.N. Mozumder ) writes:
>
>Don't deceive yourself.  You know that people kill only because of the
>lack of religion.  You know that Islam, christianity, and hinduism are
>all peaceful.  It is only lack of religion, with the association of the
>religion of the people to identify it as a "religous war", that causes
>war.

Liar. You know that he doesn't "know that people kill only because of the
lack of religion". So that makes you a liar, even if you yourself believe
that "people kill only because of the lack of religion".

People kill for a lot of reasons. The most common reason is because their
leaders can't agree and go to war, in which case there is a campaign to
dehumanise the enemy sand encourage people to join/support the army to
go and kill other people who have been encouraged to join/support their
army in order to kill you. Any means is used to do this. In a religious
country, religion is used. In a non-religious country, the mass media
are used. NOTE THAT ATHEISM CANNOT BE USED BECAUSE IT IS _A_B_S_E_N_C_E_
OF BELIEF. In many cases, the atheist's skeptical nature makes him
question the reasons given to go to war and makes him a target for verbal
and sometimes physical attacks for being 'unpatriotic'.

Military chaplins tell the soldiers that "God" is on their side, and pray
for victory. George Bush declared national days of prayer after bombing a
third world country into the stone age. The Ayatollah Khomeini (have you
heard of him Bobby? Allah's mouthpiece on Earth) marched children onto
minefields after telling them they would be blessed in heaven. None of

these are atheists. During Indian independance in 1947 when Moslems,
Hindus and Sikhs were all killing each other because of their religions,
were any of these atheists?

Mind you, Salman Rushdie is an atheist, and I haven't heard of any
atheists wanting to kill him.

Mozumder's definition of an atheist: Anybody who isn't Mozumder.

Mozumder's definition of a 'real' moslem: Mozumder.

>
>Peace,
>
>Bobby Mozumder

Chris
------------------------------------------------------------------
In article  pharvey@quack.kfu.com (Paul Harvey) writes:
>
>You shall not murder.
>

It always used to be 'not kill'. Newspeak and doublethink in action, or
is it that the ten commandments are evolving, just like everything else?
Ever since the first English language translation used 'kill' groups like
the Quakers and the Amish have refused to kill people. Now killing is OK
so long as it's not murder.

We are told that all this time, the wrong word was used in translation.
It's very convenient isn't it? It totally changes the meaning of the
commandment. George Orwell would be proud.

Hey, I'm not a biblical scholar or a linguist and I've no idea what the
right word is. I'm not even a Christian and give as much credence to the
bible as I do to the koran and the bhagavad-gita.

But when the fanatics change the words in the book that they claim has
been the unchanged and inviolate word of "God" for ever and ever amen,
and use this book to justify everything they want to force on the rest
of us, I get very worried indeed.

Chris Lee