Really? There's a difference?

[Czernobog]

I have not. never once have I said they should be silenced. I have only maintained, and continue to maintain that Christianity should not be allowed to use government resources to proselytise, and should not be allowed to codify their r3eligious code of conduct in our secular laws. As to your "gone to hell" bullshit; that's just that. Bullshit. I have never made any such claims. Making such a claim would be absurd as I don't believe in Hell. Why would I condemn Christians to somewhere I don't believe exists. I might just as well condemn them to Neverland. That place is just about as real.

Correct, you have not directly said it but for all intent and purposes you've made it plain that's what you mean in your constant, strident (and ignorant) railing against Christians. You generalize and stereotype. As for my "gone to Hell" quip obviously you're too uneducated to recognize an allegory when you see one. Which laws currently in force are religious codifications built in to the secular? Are you being forced to go to church every Sunday? Are you required to pray towards Mecca so many times a day?
I don't care what you believe, it's a free country, something you've either never learned or simply chose to forget.

Like I said, contrary to what you have claimed, you don't know what extremism is. Further you don't know the difference between opposing a belief, and calling for that belief to be criminalised. Your ignorance is noted.

Yet your every post belies that claim.

Demonstrate that. Address my post. Demonstrate how it is inaccurate, or incorrect. We'll wait...

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

 

[Ringel05]

Correct, you have not directly said it but for all intent and purposes you've made it plain that's what you mean in your constant, strident (and ignorant) railing against Christians. You generalize and stereotype. As for my "gone to Hell" quip obviously you're too uneducated to recognize an allegory when you see one. Which laws currently in force are religious codifications built in to the secular? Are you being forced to go to church every Sunday? Are you required to pray towards Mecca so many times a day?
I don't care what you believe, it's a free country, something you've either never learned or simply chose to forget.

Are you being forced to abandon your beliefs? No? Then maybe you should take your own advice

What the fuck are you rambling on about? Czernobog is similar to the Westboroans in that he's hateful are demeaning, always has been. I just give him what he gives to everyone who disagrees with him. Wake up and smell the horseshit you're shoveling.

Nothing I have said is "hateful". You presume that opposition is from hate. It's not. Now, demeaning? Maybe. I'll admit have have been snarky on occasion.

Demeaning is basically the same as hateful, why do you think I give you so much crap? I would strongly suspect it's because you're simply being an ass most of the time. Now there's a huge clue for ya......

No it's not. English really isn't your strong suit, it is. Demeaning is condescending, mocking. You can mock without hatred. For example, I'm mocking you. I don't hate you. I just find you unoriginal, and mildly amusing.

Funny, the feeling is mutual.

 

[Ringel05]

Correct, you have not directly said it but for all intent and purposes you've made it plain that's what you mean in your constant, strident (and ignorant) railing against Christians. You generalize and stereotype. As for my "gone to Hell" quip obviously you're too uneducated to recognize an allegory when you see one. Which laws currently in force are religious codifications built in to the secular? Are you being forced to go to church every Sunday? Are you required to pray towards Mecca so many times a day?
I don't care what you believe, it's a free country, something you've either never learned or simply chose to forget.

Like I said, contrary to what you have claimed, you don't know what extremism is. Further you don't know the difference between opposing a belief, and calling for that belief to be criminalised. Your ignorance is noted.

Yet your every post belies that claim.

Demonstrate that. Address my post. Demonstrate how it is inaccurate, or incorrect. We'll wait...

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Like I said, contrary to what you have claimed, you don't know what extremism is. Further you don't know the difference between opposing a belief, and calling for that belief to be criminalised. Your ignorance is noted.

Yet your every post belies that claim.

Demonstrate that. Address my post. Demonstrate how it is inaccurate, or incorrect. We'll wait...

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

 

[Czernobog]

Yet your every post belies that claim.

Demonstrate that. Address my post. Demonstrate how it is inaccurate, or incorrect. We'll wait...

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Demonstrate that. Address my post. Demonstrate how it is inaccurate, or incorrect. We'll wait...

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

 

[ding]

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

Actually it is neither. We are born with the ability. It is an innate ability.

Go ask Dawkins.

 

[Czernobog]

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

The thing is, I'm not convinced it has been - reformed, I mean. They haven't changed their views of homosexuality. They just don't like groups like Westboro behaving in ways that shine a spotlight on the reality that they all believe the same as Westboro.

 

[Ringel05]

Demonstrate that. Address my post. Demonstrate how it is inaccurate, or incorrect. We'll wait...

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

Yet your every post belies that claim.

Demonstrate that. Address my post. Demonstrate how it is inaccurate, or incorrect. We'll wait...

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

You keep sticking you nose in and getting it punched. Masochist?

 

[Ringel05]

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

The thing is, I'm not convinced it has been - reformed, I mean. They haven't changed their views of homosexuality. They just don't like groups like Westboro behaving in ways that shine a spotlight on the reality that they all believe the same as Westboro.

Thanks for proving my generalizing and stereotyping point.

 

[Ringel05]

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

This is one reason there can never be a rational argument with the likes of you, you start out dismissive and demeaning. Never took debate in school, didja.......... You did go to school? Right?
Or maybe you did take debate but not analytics.......... or philosophy......

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

Demonstrate that. Address my post. Demonstrate how it is inaccurate, or incorrect. We'll wait...

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

You keep sticking you nose in and getting it punched. Masochist?

What kind of delusional fool thinks his words on a screen are like a punch in the face? You're just an attack poodle...dime a dozen...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

This is one reason there can never be a rational argument with the likes of you, you start out dismissive and demeaning. Never took debate in school, didja.......... You did go to school? Right?
Or maybe you did take debate but not analytics.......... or philosophy......

That's not appropriate. For one, to cherry pick an assertion halfway throughba discussion and call it my "starting point" shows a shallowness and feebleness of mind. That assertion is a conclusion I came to, and one which I can argue.

Second, you're full of shit anyway. Anytime someone attempts no arguments and blames everyone else for their own impotence and incompetence, you can be certain it's because that person has no good arguments and can't come up with any.

 

[Ringel05]

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

Hold your breath, I love watching some people turn blue then purple. I stopped trying to have a discussion with you a long time ago, it wasn't worth the aggravation. Besides, it's more fun to simply make fun of extremists regardless of what their position/beliefs are.

Point made. Ringel has no skill at rational debate, so he has to resort to attacking posters with whom he disagrees. Now, you're just boring. Buh bye. Gotta love ignore.

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

You keep sticking you nose in and getting it punched. Masochist?

What kind of delusional fool thinks his words on a screen are like a punch in the face? You're just an attack poodle...dime a dozen...

You keep tellin' yourself that rockemsockem........

 

[Ringel05]

Ahhhh, Triggered? Need a tissue?

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

This is one reason there can never be a rational argument with the likes of you, you start out dismissive and demeaning. Never took debate in school, didja.......... You did go to school? Right?
Or maybe you did take debate but not analytics.......... or philosophy......

That's not appropriate. For one, to cherry pick an assertion halfway throughba discussion and call it my "starting point" shows a shallowness and feebleness of mind. That assertion is a conclusion I came to, and one which I can argue.

Second, you're full of shit anyway. Anytime someone attempts no arguments and blames everyone else for their own impotence and incompetence, you can be certain it's because that person has no good arguments and can't come up with any.

You sure are big on self justification and self glorification. You want to have a rational and reasonable academic discussion then act academic not judgmental, you want to be treated as you deserve then continue to be judgmental and dismissive of others beliefs. Now do you get the point or will it take a figurative 2 x 4 to pound it in?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You saw the thread title and proceeded to open the thread to go after another poster personally, and for no other reason. Clearly it is you who was "triggered".

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

This is one reason there can never be a rational argument with the likes of you, you start out dismissive and demeaning. Never took debate in school, didja.......... You did go to school? Right?
Or maybe you did take debate but not analytics.......... or philosophy......

That's not appropriate. For one, to cherry pick an assertion halfway throughba discussion and call it my "starting point" shows a shallowness and feebleness of mind. That assertion is a conclusion I came to, and one which I can argue.

Second, you're full of shit anyway. Anytime someone attempts no arguments and blames everyone else for their own impotence and incompetence, you can be certain it's because that person has no good arguments and can't come up with any.

You sure are big on self justification and self glorification. You want to have a rational and reasonable academic discussion then act academic not judgmental, you want to be treated as you deserve then continue to be judgmental and dismissive of others beliefs. Now do you get the point or will it take a figurative 2 x 4 to pound it in?

Academics don't back off their conclusions and sugar coat them for sensitive sissies. That would be anti-intellectual. If you are too sensitive for big boy words and arguments, that's a YOU problem.

 

[Ringel05]

Interestingly enough, the only arguments I have heard is that my point of moderates are judged by their extremists because they do nothing to stop it may be a logical fallacy. I would be willing to drop that point. That leaves the question of them using the same texts, and them having frighteningly similar goals as still unaddressed. Flopper seems to suggest that moderates have different goals, and ideals. However, I noticed he, nor anyone else, attempted to answer my question on what point of doctrine, specifically, Westboro Baptist are incorrect in, by Christian standards.

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

This is one reason there can never be a rational argument with the likes of you, you start out dismissive and demeaning. Never took debate in school, didja.......... You did go to school? Right?
Or maybe you did take debate but not analytics.......... or philosophy......

That's not appropriate. For one, to cherry pick an assertion halfway throughba discussion and call it my "starting point" shows a shallowness and feebleness of mind. That assertion is a conclusion I came to, and one which I can argue.

Second, you're full of shit anyway. Anytime someone attempts no arguments and blames everyone else for their own impotence and incompetence, you can be certain it's because that person has no good arguments and can't come up with any.

You sure are big on self justification and self glorification. You want to have a rational and reasonable academic discussion then act academic not judgmental, you want to be treated as you deserve then continue to be judgmental and dismissive of others beliefs. Now do you get the point or will it take a figurative 2 x 4 to pound it in?

Academics don't back off their conclusions and sugar coat them for sensitive sissies. That would be anti-intellectual. If you are too sensitive for big boy words and arguments, that's a YOU problem.

Again you self justify and attempt to place yourself on a pedestal, a very shaky one. Real academics don't self justify their bias in a honest exchange of ideas, thanks for confirming your non academic status.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And you will never get a good rssponse to that request, as they use literal meaning of Bible quotes as their justification. (The Westboro freaks) Good luck getting any religious person to admit, explicitly or otherwise, that his morality derives more from our secular enlightenment than from his bronze age text of fables. Their religion was reformed by this secular enlightenment, and it will be a cold day in hell before any of them admit it.

This is one reason there can never be a rational argument with the likes of you, you start out dismissive and demeaning. Never took debate in school, didja.......... You did go to school? Right?
Or maybe you did take debate but not analytics.......... or philosophy......

That's not appropriate. For one, to cherry pick an assertion halfway throughba discussion and call it my "starting point" shows a shallowness and feebleness of mind. That assertion is a conclusion I came to, and one which I can argue.

Second, you're full of shit anyway. Anytime someone attempts no arguments and blames everyone else for their own impotence and incompetence, you can be certain it's because that person has no good arguments and can't come up with any.

You sure are big on self justification and self glorification. You want to have a rational and reasonable academic discussion then act academic not judgmental, you want to be treated as you deserve then continue to be judgmental and dismissive of others beliefs. Now do you get the point or will it take a figurative 2 x 4 to pound it in?

Academics don't back off their conclusions and sugar coat them for sensitive sissies. That would be anti-intellectual. If you are too sensitive for big boy words and arguments, that's a YOU problem.

Again you self justify and attempt to place yourself on a pedestal, a very shaky one. Real academics don't self justify their bias in a honest exchange of ideas, thanks for confirming your non academic status.

Nobody knows what the hell you are talking about. Are you done soothing yourself? Good.

 

[Ringel05]

This is one reason there can never be a rational argument with the likes of you, you start out dismissive and demeaning. Never took debate in school, didja.......... You did go to school? Right?
Or maybe you did take debate but not analytics.......... or philosophy......

That's not appropriate. For one, to cherry pick an assertion halfway throughba discussion and call it my "starting point" shows a shallowness and feebleness of mind. That assertion is a conclusion I came to, and one which I can argue.

Second, you're full of shit anyway. Anytime someone attempts no arguments and blames everyone else for their own impotence and incompetence, you can be certain it's because that person has no good arguments and can't come up with any.

You sure are big on self justification and self glorification. You want to have a rational and reasonable academic discussion then act academic not judgmental, you want to be treated as you deserve then continue to be judgmental and dismissive of others beliefs. Now do you get the point or will it take a figurative 2 x 4 to pound it in?

Academics don't back off their conclusions and sugar coat them for sensitive sissies. That would be anti-intellectual. If you are too sensitive for big boy words and arguments, that's a YOU problem.

Again you self justify and attempt to place yourself on a pedestal, a very shaky one. Real academics don't self justify their bias in a honest exchange of ideas, thanks for confirming your non academic status.

Nobody knows what the hell you are talking about. Are you done soothing yourself? Good.

Crap! You have a PhD in projection!! Now that's impressive.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That's not appropriate. For one, to cherry pick an assertion halfway throughba discussion and call it my "starting point" shows a shallowness and feebleness of mind. That assertion is a conclusion I came to, and one which I can argue.

Second, you're full of shit anyway. Anytime someone attempts no arguments and blames everyone else for their own impotence and incompetence, you can be certain it's because that person has no good arguments and can't come up with any.

You sure are big on self justification and self glorification. You want to have a rational and reasonable academic discussion then act academic not judgmental, you want to be treated as you deserve then continue to be judgmental and dismissive of others beliefs. Now do you get the point or will it take a figurative 2 x 4 to pound it in?

Academics don't back off their conclusions and sugar coat them for sensitive sissies. That would be anti-intellectual. If you are too sensitive for big boy words and arguments, that's a YOU problem.

Again you self justify and attempt to place yourself on a pedestal, a very shaky one. Real academics don't self justify their bias in a honest exchange of ideas, thanks for confirming your non academic status.

Nobody knows what the hell you are talking about. Are you done soothing yourself? Good.

Crap! You have a PhD in projection!! Now that's impressive.

Done masturbating? Good. Now, since you are such a smart person armed with so many good arguments (you just don't feel like stating them, of course), then feel free to meet my argument with argument.

I will argue that the Bible is a bronze age book of fables, and you take the contrary position and argue that it is not.

who goes first? Please, professor, take it easy on me...