Plea bargain includes resurrection

Published on April 1st, 2009

A Maryland woman involved with a group described as a religious cult pleaded guilty in the starvation death of her son, but insisted that the charges be dropped when he is resurrected.

The condition was made a part of Ria Ramkissoon’s plea agreement, officials said. She entered the plea Monday in Baltimore, Maryland, to a first-degree felony count of child abuse resulting in death, her attorney, Steven Silverman, said Tuesday.

Ramkissoon, a member of a group called One Mind Ministries, believes Javon Thompson, her year-old son, will rise again, and as part of her plea agreement, authorities agreed to the clause….

Ramkissoon and the others are accused of denying Javon food after the group’s leader, a 40-year-old woman who goes by the name Queen Antoinette, decreed the boy was a demon since he refused to say “amen” after meals, Silverman said.

“Ria would cling to him every day and try to get him to say ‘amen,’ ” Silverman said. Eventually, Queen Antoinette ordered that Ramkissoon be separated from the child, he said.

Javon is believed to have died in December 2006, court documents allege. Following his death, the group members put the boy’s body in a back room, and “everyone was directed to come in and pray,” according to the documents. “The Queen told everyone that ‘God was going to raise Javon from the dead.’ Javon remained in the room for an extended period of time (in excess of one week). The resurrection never took place.”

There’s truly no end to the downward spiral once you decide to separate your intellect from your search for the truth.

Thanks, K B

65 users responded in " Plea bargain includes resurrection "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 bobbo said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:20 am

“Well thats silly, I must say.” Whether resurrected or not, she still killed her kiddie. The law in its majesty should not lower itself to the delusions of the flock. How many cult followers are now similarly motivated?

# 2 Mr. Fusion said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:33 am

#1, Bobbo,

Gee, I was about to say almost the exact same thing.

I just hope they also try “Queen Antoinette” too.

# 3 bobbo said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:39 am

Fusion==were you thinking at all about that great scene in “Princess Bride” where Billy Crystal diagnoses the hero as only “mostly dead?” I’m thinking American Law should similarly be: Murdered for now. Close enough.

# 4 Ah_Yea said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:45 am

I can just imagine the Judge chuckling “Ok, I’ll let you go free when he resurrects”.

# 5 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:45 am

There’s truly no end to the downward spiral once you decide to separate your intellect from your search for the truth.

That reveals great ignorance about cults…how they gain control over people. They do appeal to the intellect, with unsound arguments which would be easily refuted by the deceived cultists, had our school system taught critical thinking…syllogistic logic…how to recognize fallacy and see through deception…

Carlin attributed our schools refusal to do this…to “THEM”…I would identify “THEM” as fascist liberals…who for our own good, will tyrannize and dictate to us everything we do or think…”to save the planet…etc”

# 6 stopher2475 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:47 am

“A Maryland woman involved with a group described as a religious cult pleaded guilty in the starvation death of her son, but insisted that the charges be dropped when he is resurrected.”
Sounds fair to me.

# 7 Shawn said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:48 am

And I thought Easter was a pretty good joke…

# 8 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:53 am

AFTER the cultist has been introduced to a “new way” of looking at things…which certainly elementary truths are mixed in with fallacy that seems true…and the “cult” begins to be trusted…that intellect is slowly diminished…and experiences (electro-chemical) misinterpreted as divinely inspired, become the foundation for a cultist to believe anything…

Remember the “Heaven’s Gate Cult” who thought they would ascend to Haley’s comet…otherwise intelligent people in the IT community…driven to accept all sorts of lunacy as true…because they depended upon mystical experiences to “teach them.”

AND contrary to the slander, Christianity is NOT built upon such fallacious devices…Critical Thinking leads to belief in Christ’s resurrection…and Christian truth is known through study of Scripture, an objective reality.

# 9 bobbo said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:58 am

Sillygism, lets see:

If only idiots attribute any evil to “fascist liberals, and

Alfie says that lack of critical thinking skills is a plot by the fascist liberals, then

Alfie is an idiot.

Gee, that works even if the premise is wrong. Amazing.

# 10 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:07 am

# 9 bobbo said, on April 1st, 2009 at 6:58 am
Sillygism, lets see:
If only idiots attribute any evil to “fascist liberals, and
Alfie says that lack of critical thinking skills is a plot by the fascist liberals, then
Alfie is an idiot.
Gee, that works even if the premise is wrong. Amazing.

Invalid, undistributed middle and “only idiots” does not necessarily include “Alfie”…

But we can deduce Bobbo is an idiot thrice proved, from the misspellings above and the invalidity and unsoundness of his thinking.

Next time you are dancing limp wristed in the moonlight with your circle jerk friends…think of me…I’m sure it’ll go limp…like your head..dick head.

# 11 mrmigu said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:09 am

#8
I dont understand how you can call scripture objective, when many of the texts were written, translated, rewritten and collected by many people with their own agendas

Your posts seem to be either dripping with sarcasm or ignorance. I cant really tell which.

# 12 bobbo said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:19 am

#10–Alfie==I forgive you.

# 13 Li said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:19 am

Humility, non-judgementalism, and the ability to withstand criticism are the three hallmarks of any useful spiritual community in my experience. This group seems like it was 0 for 3.

# 14 Benjamin said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:25 am

Sounds fair to me. No chance of this getting her out of jail though. Prove of resurrection will probably call for the testimony of her son at her parole hearing. Not going to happen.

# 15 Somebody_Else said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:25 am

The things people will do for an invisible man in the sky. What a waste.

#8
Critical Thinking leads to belief in Christ’s resurrection…and Christian truth is known through study of Scripture, an objective reality.”

Having faith that the bible is a true account of history is critical thinking? What a joke.

# 16 bobbo said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:29 am

#13–Li==useful in what way?

# 17 Li said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:47 am

Useful for the furthering of self awareness, personal power and enlightenment. Useful for the organizing of charitable purpose and the building of sound communities, united by love and compassion. Useful for the cool relief of fellowship and companionship in a world gone mad.

Can we not see, even in this age of excess and collapse, that the only real currency is love? You can take your million (soon to be worthless) bucks, and I’ll take the love of my neighbors, and we’ll see who is fed and clothed when the hills turn brown.

# 18 bobbo said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:51 am

#17–Li==again well said. I could quibble as I’m sure you could as well. Those attributes seemed to be doled out more individually than communally.

# 19 db said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:10 am

quick quiz:
Religion is to man as ___________ was to dinosaurs

# 20 bobbo said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:12 am

#19–”a ready food supply that turns out to be poisoned?”

# 21 mrmigu said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:28 am

19
bicycles

# 22 lividd said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:28 am

#19 db, I believe the answer is extinction. Oh and bobbo, your wasting your time, most here are highly critical free thinkers, which is why i bothered to click on this site in the first place.

# 23 Cephus said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:29 am

This is yet another example of how religion poisons people’s lives. It’s not like we need any more examples, there are thousands of them everywhere, but we seem to find more tragedies brought about by religious stupidity every day.

I hope they throw the book at her and at Queen Antionette, both deserve to rot in prison for the rest of their lives.

# 24 Mr. Fusion said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:39 am

#5, Alphie, the Quaalude Queen,

Uummm, he was referring to the “religious” elite. Including all those idiot holy roller pastors, preachers, and priests.

#8, Alphie,

Wanna bet? Christianity is built upon the superstitious fears garnered from thousands of years of ignorance. Critical thinking will only open one’s eyes to the fallacy of all religion.

#10, Alphie,

Next time you are dancing limp wristed in the moonlight with your circle jerk friends…think of me…I’m sure it’ll go limp…like your head..dick head.

I’m shouldn’t be speaking for Bobbo, BUT, I’m sure he is secure enough in his own masculinity that your suggestion speaks more about you than him.

# 25 Mr. Fusion said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:44 am

#17, Li,

While you make good points and I seriously respect your opinion, I disagree. Your post comment seems hinged on that only religious behavior is capable of LOVE.

I believe all of us are capable and, religious or not, we all will accept that which is good to the society as a whole. Having just seen one recently, in my opinion, both Ice Age movies summed that sentiment quite well. Good movies too.

# 26 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:48 am

# 11 mrmigu said, on April 1st, 2009 at 7:09 am

#8
I dont understand how you can call scripture objective, when many of the texts were written, translated, rewritten and collected by many people with their own agendas

Your posts seem to be either dripping with sarcasm or ignorance. I cant really tell which.

That’s because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God. Scripture was written in three different languages, on three different continents, over 1,500 years, by about 40 different people, from all walks of life, priests, poets, soldiers, prisoners etc…

They report God acted in history…and invited all to see his actions in history, to learn who He is…

On that data some elementary conclusions are then drawn.

Scripture is the very essence of objective history…and if it isn’t, then every historical report isn’t either.

As for my sarcasm…I reply to sarcasm against religious folks like myself…as instructed by Scripture:

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. (Pro 26:5 KJV)

# 27 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:59 am

# 24 Mr. Fusion said, on April 1st, 2009 at 8:39 am

#5, Alphie, the Quaalude Queen,

Carlin attributed our schools refusal to do this…to “THEM”…I would identify “THEM” as fascist liberals…who for our own good, will tyrannize and dictate to us everything we do or think…”to save the planet…etc”

Uummm, he was referring to the “religious” elite. Including all those idiot holy roller pastors, preachers, and priests.

I’ll forgive your stupidity…I know you are just being yourself.

In context Calin is clear…re “saving the planet”…”holy roller pastors” aren’t curbing YOUR liberty,telling you what you can drive etc, or wear, or eat…for that irrational cause…

Its liberal loon facists like you who insist we comply with your ideas of what is good for the planet.

# 28 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 9:11 am

#10, Alphie,

Next time you are dancing limp wristed in the moonlight with your circle jerk friends…think of me…I’m sure it’ll go limp…like your head..dick head.

I’m shouldn’t be speaking for Bobbo, BUT, I’m sure he is secure enough in his own masculinity that your suggestion speaks more about you than him.

I knew it…you two are like peas in a pod, but Bobbo’s on top.

You both are the flower of manhood…blooming idiots.

The next time you’re playing grab your ankles in the bathhouse with Bobbo, wipe your nose…your brains are leaking.

# 29 Mr. Fusion said, on April 1st, 2009 at 9:12 am

#26, Alphie, the Quaalude Queen

Scripture is the very essence of objective history…and if it isn’t, then every historical report isn’t either.

Quite to the opposite, any historical document that relied upon scriptures is suspect.

As for my sarcasm…I reply to sarcasm against religious folks like myself…as instructed by Scripture:

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. (Pro 26:5 KJV)

Know an idiot when you see one.

Mr. Fusion, April 01, 2009

Hey QQ, when are you going to post that evidence that Obama sold drugs. I wouldn’t want you to be bearing “false witness” against someone.

# 30 Benjamin said, on April 1st, 2009 at 9:23 am

Of course the whole discussion breaks down into bashing Christianity and even all religion based on the actions of a few crazy moonbats. How could it be different than the Virgin Mary on a stain stories with comments from Mr. Fusion and the other anti-religious zealots.

# 31 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 9:24 am

#26, Alphie, the Quaalude Queen

Scripture is the very essence of objective history…and if it isn’t, then every historical report isn’t either.

Quite to the opposite, any historical document that relied upon scriptures is suspect.

The conservative view takes quite another approach based on historical facts, logic and common sense. It maintains that, on the basis of accepted bibliographic, internal, and external criteria, the New Testament text can be established to be reliable history in spite of the novel and sometimes ingenious speculations of critics who, while often familiar with the facts, refuse to accept them due to a preexisting bias. Textually, we have restored more than 99 percent of the autographs, and there is simply no legitimate basis upon which to doubt the credibility and accuracy of the New Testament writers. Further, the methods used by the critics (rationalistic higher critical methods) which claim “assured results” proving the Scrpture unreliable have been weighed in the balance of secular scholarship and been found wanting. Their use in biblical analysis is therefore unjustified. Even in a positive sense, the fruit they have born is minuscule while, negatively, they are responsible for a tremendous weight of destruction relative to people’s confusion over biblical authority and their confidence in the Bible.

In this sense, the critics, who continue to advance discredited theories, conform to the warnings of Chauncey Sanders, associate professor of military history at The Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, Alabama. In his An Introduction to Research in English Literary History, he warns literary critics to be certain they are also careful to examine the evidence against their case:

He must be as careful to collect evidence against his theory as for it. It may go against the grain to be very assiduous in searching for ammunition to destroy one’s own case; but it must be remembered that the overlooking of a single detail may be fatal to one’s whole argument. Moreover, it is the business of the scholar to seek the truth, and the satisfaction of having found it should be ample recompense for having to give up a cherished but untenable theory.3

What allows us to resolve this issue and logically demonstrate the credibility of the conservative view is the following ten facts:

¨ Fact One: The existence of thousands of Greek and Latin manuscripts, with the papyri and early uncials dating much closer to the originals than for any other ancient literature;

¨ Fact Two: The lack of proven fraud or error on the part of any New Testament author;

¨ Fact Three: The writings of reliable Christian resources outside the New Testament;

¨ Fact Four: The existence of a number of Jewish and secular accounts about Jesus;

¨ Fact Five: Detailed archaeological data concerning the New Testament;

¨ Fact Six: The existence of many powerful enemies of Jesus and the apostolic church who would have proven fraud or pointed out other problems if they could;

¨ Fact Seven: The presence of living eyewitnesses to the events recorded;

¨ Fact Eight: The positive appraisals by conservative and even some liberal authorities bearing on the issue of the genuineness of traditional authorship and the early date of the New Testament books;

¨ Fact Nine: The consistent scholarly, factual reversals of the conclusions of higher criticism that undermine its own foundations and credibility; and

¨ Fact Ten: Legal and other testimony as to New Testament reliability.

To begin, the historical accuracy of the New Testament can be proven by subjecting it to three generally accepted tests for determining historical reliability. Such tests are utilized in literary criticism and the study of historical documents in general. (These are discussed by military historian Chauncey Sanders in his An Introduction to Research in English Literary History.4) These involve the 1) bibliographical, 2) internal, and 3) external tests of historical evidence.

http://ankerberg.com/Articles/editors-choice/EC1205W1.htm

# 32 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 9:27 am

# 29 Mr. Fusion said, on April 1st, 2009 at 9:12 am

#26, Alphie

You never never answered why Bobbo doesn’t call you “Fusie”…is it because he is the “man” in our relationship?

# 33 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 9:29 am

# 29 Mr. Fusion said, on April 1st, 2009 at 9:12 am

#26, Alphie

You never never answered why Bobbo doesn’t call you “Fusie”…is it because he is the “man” in our relationship?

Your…not “our” relationship…

Don’t get your hopes up…I got guns.

# 34 cgmadden said, on April 1st, 2009 at 10:06 am

Why not execute the perps and exonerate them when they are reincarnated.

# 35 mrmigu said, on April 1st, 2009 at 10:25 am

33
“Your…not “our” relationship…
Don’t get your hopes up…I got guns.”

Do you actually get the message behind the mythos that you are defending, or does your interpretation of “objective” reality allow you to own weapons and make threats?

# 36 meetsy said, on April 1st, 2009 at 10:41 am

now, WHY wasn’t the “queen” also convicted?

# 37 fpp2002 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 11:26 am

Wow, Alfred1, your misguided belief that the Bible is historically accurate is really quite sad. It is an ancient work of myth, legend, superstition, fairy tales, inconsistencies, contradictions, edits, re-edits, translations, re-translations, more edits, and even more translations. Nothing more.

# 38 JimR said, on April 1st, 2009 at 12:16 pm

Re: #31, Alfred1 “What allows us to resolve this issue and logically demonstrate the credibility of the conservative view is the following ten facts:”

fact: a thing that is indisputably the case.

Many of your 10 “facts” are not facts at all and the rest are irrelevant to your argument. In fact, calling them facts with known evidence to the contrary is the definition of a lie. The underlying “elephant in the room” is the fact that the stories of the Bible are extremely close in characters and plot to myths dating back thousands of years before the first scroll of the bible was (cough) “authored”, putting a highly significant suspicion on their originality, that is, to anyone who is being honest with himself.

# 39 amodedoma said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:04 pm

Once again the pseudo intellectual elite criticizing religion. Don’t you guys ever get bored? Do you think you’re superior and feel the need to demonstrate your supposed freedom from ignorance? Superstition, oh yes by all means, as long as it gives structure to the values necessary to survive as a species.
OTH, I think the womans nuts, but there are plenty of those and many are atheists.

# 40 deowll said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:19 pm

“There’s truly no end to the downward spiral once you decide to separate your intellect from your search for the truth.”

Was that what happened to the Hitler, Mao, and Stalin? They sure weren’t religious.

# 41 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:20 pm

# 35 mrmigu said, on April 1st, 2009 at 10:25 am

33
“Your…not “our” relationship…
Don’t get your hopes up…I got guns.”

Do you actually get the message behind the mythos that you are defending, or does your interpretation of “objective” reality allow you to own weapons and make threats?

“Mythos that you are defending…” bobbo and fusie frolicking limp wristed in the moolight, is not a myth…and I don’t defend it…

AND said events are ONE reason I got guns…

# 42 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:26 pm

# 37 fpp2002 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 11:26 am

If you are a critical thinker, consistent in your beliefs, you must then disavow any belief in the philosophers existed…copies of their writings can be counted on the hands…and the testimony Plato, Socrates, or even Shakespeare existed, pales in comparison to scripture…

So are these ancients and their writings also mythical, or not?

# 43 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:32 pm

# 38 JimR said, on April 1st, 2009 at 12:16 pm

Re: #31, Alfred1 “What allows us to resolve this issue and logically demonstrate the credibility of the conservative view is the following ten facts:”

fact: a thing that is indisputably the case.

You confuse an “argument” with “stating your opinion.”

You begged the question. You have every right to disagree with the 10 facts, but stating YOUR BELIEF is not the same as proving you are right…

An analogy:

NAU 1 Kings 20:11 Then the king of Israel replied, “Tell him, ‘Let not him who girds on his armor boast like him who takes it off.’”
(1Ki 20:11 NAU)

Stating your opinion is not defeating an argument with facts.

# 44 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:35 pm

# 41 Alfred1 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:20 pm

# 35 mrmigu said, on April 1st, 2009 at 10:25 am

33
“Your…not “our” relationship…
Don’t get your hopes up…I got guns.”

Do you actually get the message behind the mythos that you are defending, or does your interpretation of “objective” reality allow you to own weapons and make threats?

“Mythos that you are defending…” bobbo and fusie frolicking limp wristed in the moolight, is not a myth…and I don’t defend it…

AND said events are ONE reason I got guns…

Perhaps I wasn’t clear, picture…

two limp wristed fairies tip toeing through the tulips…and me on the grassy knoll, taking aim…

# 45 fpp2002 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:41 pm

#42 – “If you are a critical thinker, consistent in your beliefs, you must then disavow any belief in the philosophers existed…copies of their writings can be counted on the hands…and the testimony Plato, Socrates, or even Shakespeare existed, pales in comparison to scripture…”

I don’t disavow their existence, but I do doubt their writings, yes. But even if what they wrote is complete bunk, or if they didn’t exist at all, that doesn’t make the Bible any more true.

# 46 JimR said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:47 pm

re: #39 “Superstition, oh yes by all means, as long as it gives structure to the values necessary to survive as a species.”

Another perpetuated lie. Superstition, religious or otherwise, has been shown NOT to be the source of moral values. Moral values and judgement have been observed in many social animals, including other primates and cetaceans, and has been clearly indicated as an evolutionary strategy for survival in a particular social setting.

# 47 fpp2002 said, on April 1st, 2009 at 1:52 pm

#43 – “You begged the question. You have every right to disagree with the 10 facts, but stating YOUR BELIEF is not the same as proving you are right…”

Your so-called “facts” are just as much an opinion, written by a Christan to justify his beliefs. You cannot claim your source is fact and then claim all facts given by the other side are just opinion. Then you magically win every argument.

# 48 Li said, on April 1st, 2009 at 2:06 pm

# 25 (After a long interlude)

Might I note, in a very time appropriate manner given what has come between, that I never said a word about “religious” communities, but rather spiritual ones. While I think that there is a great deal of wisdom in religious texts, the codification and exclusion necessary to create a religious brand more often than not creates the very excesses that destroy any real spiritual (defined as an awareness of consciousness outside oneself) experience. Some of the best spiritual communities I have found are in strange places; people gathered to chat over coffee, amiable parties, people gathered around the campfire. The joy and love of fellowship makes anything spiritual and wholesome, not just meetings that are made in specific places of worship. And that love itself is great and good no matter how it is inspired, be it from children’s cartoons or the Koran. Religions try to make a monopoly on love, of course, and I can see how you might have mistaken me for making this argument, having heard it so many times before. But love springs from such a place of unequivocal affection that it could never discriminate, or be segregated in this way. The mere suggestion that such a thing could be so is a sign of the greatest hubris. It is literally saying “My love is real and yours is not, and so I don’t love you.” In the end such people are rewarded by loosing even the love amongst themselves, for their stinginess in giving it to others.

# 49 Li said, on April 1st, 2009 at 2:07 pm

Last one was for Mr. Fusion, BTW.

# 50 Dallas said, on April 1st, 2009 at 2:07 pm

Having an debate with Alfred is circular. All roads will eventually lead to “God says so”.

Still, it’s great to have him join this group. He validates the argument that our future cannot be placed in the hands of irrational people.

# 51 JimR said, on April 1st, 2009 at 2:30 pm

#48, Li… nicely said, and I agree under those circumstances.

If only those same institutions didn’t tend to organize into larger, more powerful singularities, expressing condemnation (outside their loving groups) to differing ethos, promote themselves by preying on inherent fears, or spreading the opinion and belief under the guise of the ultimate truth….

# 52 JimR said, on April 1st, 2009 at 2:38 pm

Re:51… “If only those same institutions…” I meant to say “same gatherings”.

# 53 Floyd said, on April 1st, 2009 at 2:52 pm

Alfred1: Religious stories (any religion) are just that–stories. That’s the way it is….

# 54 Li said, on April 1st, 2009 at 3:11 pm

#51 Amen to that. But it seems that men are attracted to power over each other, and such corruption always seeps in. I prefer small gatherings over large, for that reason. Less time for the corruption to take hold, and less power to tempt the weak with.

Just my 2 cents.

# 55 Li said, on April 1st, 2009 at 3:13 pm

#53 I’ve found truth in even wholly fictitious tales, why exclude stories about things that merely may have occurred from your consideration just because they are stories?

# 56 Ron Larson said, on April 1st, 2009 at 3:14 pm

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!

If I rob a bank, and then give them all the money back, does that mean I am immune from prosecution? No.

She murdered her kid. Resurrection or not, she still did the crime.

That’s a very slippery slope the DA just stepped on.

# 57 Li said, on April 1st, 2009 at 4:35 pm

If she manages a resurrection, it would be hard to prove murder on the retrial anyhow, habeas corpus and all.

# 58 spaced ghost said, on April 1st, 2009 at 4:42 pm

Don’t we have a legal precedent now that officially recognizes resurrection?

# 59 Alfred1 said, on April 2nd, 2009 at 3:13 am

How could anyone expect a year old child to say words on cue?

I hope the “40-year-old woman who goes by the name Queen Antoinette,” can be charged, clearly she was the cause of this tragedy.

# 60 Mr. Fusion said, on April 2nd, 2009 at 5:37 am

#48, Li,

A good post.

I think we are pretty close in attitude. What you call spirituality I would call community. And, you are correct, I do associate the word spirituality with religion.

Humans need a sense of community to survive. We are are after all, a herding species. Those that can not find a sense of community miss their inclusion in society.

Thank you for correcting me and expanding your reasoning.

# 61 Mr. Fusion said, on April 2nd, 2009 at 5:44 am

#56, Ron,

WHOA !!!

That is one heck of a persuasive argument. I would like to hear a counter to it. Not because I disagree, but because anything countering that point would have to be a pretty powerful, logical reason.

# 62 Mr. Fusion said, on April 2nd, 2009 at 5:56 am

#41, Alphie, the Quaalude Queen,

RE: #33
Do you actually get the message behind the mythos that you are defending, or does your interpretation of “objective” reality allow you to own weapons and make threats?

“Mythos that you are defending…” bobbo and fusie frolicking limp wristed in the moolight, is not a myth…and I don’t defend it…
AND said events are ONE reason I got guns…

#44
Perhaps I wasn’t clear, picture…
two limp wristed fairies tip toeing through the tulips…and me on the grassy knoll, taking aim…

So now your delusional mind is fantasizing killing two people because you disagree with them. Where YOUR bible said “Thou shall not kill” and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” now clearly puts you into the hypocrisy camp.

You have merely confirmed the worse fears about America lax gun laws.

# 63 orangetiki said, on April 2nd, 2009 at 7:52 am

I can’t get over the cult / occult’s was named one mind ministries. hilarious!

# 64 Alex said, on April 2nd, 2009 at 11:03 am

#61 (and by inclusion, #56):

While it’s certainly true that she would have committed the act of murder, from a purely practical perspective it’d be impossible to prove. (And, actually, #56 is actually wrong on the robbery analogy, but for entirely different reasons which I’ll get to in a second).

The simple fact of the matter is no one has thus far seen Resurrection happen (outside of Battlestar Galactica, har har. Or I suppose the Bible, but no one has actually *seen* is happen in the Bible either, since them folks are 1,950 years dead and all.) So if you attempt to take this to trial, the defendant’s first witness would be the boy, whole and hale. The state would then have to *prove* resurrection beyond a reasonable doubt… and if 10,000 years of philosophy and theocracy hasn’t done it, a prosecutor with 6 months worth of trial prep won’t be able to do it. (Though I admit, I *am* professionally curious about it.)

As to #56’s bank robbery analogy – you’re kinda wrong. One of the elements of larceny/theft is intent to permanently deprive the victim of the object stolen. If you return the cash after you took it – because you never intended to keep it in the first place – the state would have to prove that you only brought the cash back for another reason. That being said, would a jury really believe that you took money from a bank you weren’t intending to keep? Tough sell, methinks.

# 65 Alfred1 said, on April 2nd, 2009 at 12:46 pm

# 62 Mr. Fusion said, on April 2nd, 2009 at 5:56 am
#41, Alphie, the Quaalude Queen,
RE: #33
Do you actually get the message behind the mythos that you are defending, or does your interpretation of “objective” reality allow you to own weapons and make threats?
“Mythos that you are defending…” bobbo and fusie frolicking limp wristed in the moolight, is not a myth…and I don’t defend it…
AND said events are ONE reason I got guns…
#44
Perhaps I wasn’t clear, picture…
two limp wristed fairies tip toeing through the tulips…and me on the grassy knoll, taking aim…
So now your delusional mind is fantasizing killing two people because you disagree with them. Where YOUR bible said “Thou shall not kill” and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” now clearly puts you into the hypocrisy camp.
You have merely confirmed the worse fears about America lax gun laws.
You must have a large brain to hold so much ignorance…That was obvious allegory…dickhead…and THAT is metonymy…a figure of speech standing vividly for your character…
AND this is an illustration:
If we put your brain on the edge of a razor, it would look like a pea rolling down a four lane highway.

Does bobbo have the common courtesy to offer you a reach around when he is done, “fusie”…

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!