Subj : Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article To : alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy From : Pat Stevens Date : Sat Oct 01 2005 01:28:26 From Newsgroup: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf "Tom Donaly" wrote in message news:84g%e.3872$KQ5.520@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... > kashe@sonic.net wrote: >> On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 02:54:34 GMT, "Tom Donaly" >> wrote: >> >> >>>kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>> >>>>>Tom Donaly wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Faith and works are, like voltage and current, inextricably >>>>>>intertwined. >>>> >>>> >>>> They are not. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>The proof of faith is the good work. Those who do no good have no >>>>>>faith. >>>> >>>> >>>> Your logic book get lost in the hurricane? Come back when you >>>>can name the logical fallacy you just committed. >>> >>>Some of the lower forms of American Christianity try to separate faith >>>and works. That allows them salvation without substance, the lazy man's >>>path to life without end. >> >> >> in your narrow view. >> >> >>> My last two sentences are statements of truth >> >> >> "I fear the man who has all the answers." -- Father James >> Marien, S.J. -- 1961 -- in my presence. >> >> >>>, not a logical progression. >> >> >> As written, they beg to be read as an incomplete syllogism. > > In other words, you made the connection up in your head. Typical. > > >> >> >> >>>Each has to be taken alone, by itself. (A religious >>>fundamentalist insisting on logical consistency constitutes a >>>pretty good joke.) Let me repeat: Those who do no good have no >>>faith. >> >> >> Repitition does not include leaving off the first half of the >> line you wrote. In a humorous logic treatise, your statement would be >> named "The Proof from Blatant Assertion". >> >> >>>Next time you and your friends are sitting around speaking >>>in tongues, you should discuss this. Maybe, if you all think real >>>hard, together, you can puzzle out what it means. >> >> >> >>>73, >>>Tom Donaly, KA6RUH >> > > Unable to address the truth of what I wrote, you fantasize an argument > out of your sophomoric command of medieval logic. That, too, is typical, > if somewhat pathetic, since your religion is based on unquestioning > belief, superstition, and a fundamental opposition to science and > inquiring thought. Give it up. No brain can justify the brainless. > 73, > Tom Donaly, KA6RUH > .