Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] npgcablecom> wrote:
> Natural is what is observed to be natural, not what the Babble insists
> must be.

Like Hussein's natural instincts?

This reminds me of a great quote from Douglas Adams second book in the
"Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy", where Gag Halfrunt, Zaphod's psychiatrist,
was discussing with Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz, who has just exterminated half of
his crew in a disciplinary exercise:  "Well, I believe this is a perfectly
normal behaviour for a vogon, right?  This natural and healthy way of focusing
agressive instincts in acts of senseless violence." :)

What would the world be without any rules?

> But why am I bothering to argue with you about it. As a general rule,
> those who can't see where they "may" be wrong are invariably impervious
> to all arguments, facts, evidence, or even, in some cases, their own
> religions "general" acceptance of something.

I'm not impervious to arguments, facts or evidence and, being a geek with a
passion for science and all nerdy stuff, I have obviously questioned my faith
quite a few times.  But then I think to myself, "WTH, I don't want to be as
lame, weeny and cranky as all those atheists fellows seem to be." ;)

Post a reply to this message