FC Community
Discussion Boards => Off-Topic => Debate & Discuss => Topic started by: hensleyll on September 07, 2011, 08:43:36 pm
-
Wow! My cousin posted on her facebook no more pledge over intercom at her grandkids school in Roanoke VA ,What is the big deal,If the children are given option to not have to say it? Why Ban It All Together?
-
Wow! My cousin posted on her facebook no more pledge over intercom at her grandkids school in Roanoke VA ,What is the big deal,If the children are given option to not have to say it? Why Ban It All Together?
The pledge has always been optional in my lifetime. People who don't pledge allegiance usually do it for religious reasons. I think it's important to know and explain what it means to kids (which I can't remember getting an education on) so they understand all aspects of it.
-
Wow! My cousin posted on her facebook no more pledge over intercom at her grandkids school in Roanoke VA ,What is the big deal,If the children are given option to not have to say it? Why Ban It All Together?
Agreed! It should be optional. After all a lot of people have died to give us this right. Should we as a nation disregard them as well?
-
Why should children be made to pledge allegiance when they really have no idea or care what they are saying? They're not soldiers in the military. I remember saying it in school and it was really meaningless. We just said it because they told us to. It was just a bunch of words.
-
Agreed! It should be optional. After all a lot of people have died to give us this right. Should we as a nation disregard them as well?
I'm sure those who sacrificed themselves wouldn't consider it respectable for teachers to tell their students to do it just because they should. If they don't understand it and are just forced to do it (causing them to think it's boring and pointless), that's not freedom. Education is key here.
-
(http://togetherenglish.com/flag-rs.jpg)
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all.
-
I also read where a group is trying to BAN it in Boston, Mass. schools! What in the world is the problem with saying it? If these so called "peace groups" don't like what it stands for then they should all "LEAVE" this country!
-
Stop coming to black and white conclusions, people. It's really annoying. Tammy and Hensley-- if you're going to say such a claim, POST AN ARTICLE ON IT SO WE CAN READ WHAT'S ACTUALLY GOING ON.
-
Stop coming to black and white conclusions, people. It's really annoying. Tammy and Hensley-- if you're going to say such a claim, POST AN ARTICLE ON IT SO WE CAN READ WHAT'S ACTUALLY GOING ON.
I agree with you as far as making black and white blanket statements, very irritating. Here is a link to the Massachusetts story and just to add to both our already irritated brains, I took it from one of our very favorite news sources, Falc.....FOX, lol! ;D
http://tinyurl.com/3hrbd22 (http://tinyurl.com/3hrbd22)
The dude saying it "makes my skin crawl" really needs to get out into the real world if he finds the P. of A. that upsetting! I can think of a thousand things far more harmful that are happening in schools and the country et al than this. >:(
-
I don't think people should be forced to do anything they don't want to.. So needless to say I don't think it's right to make it mandatory to say it in school... But have some pride, people! :)
I think it's rude when people refuse to stand up and say the pledge, but it's their choice in the end.
-
Well personally i neither thought black nor white! So I Don`t Know Where You Got That! I`m Merely Saying What Is The Big Deal! It Is Not Hurting Anyone IS IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
The pledge of allegiance has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It is to show patriotism to our country and respect for it. Those that are so against religion and that want to come up with their own beliefs have lost sense of what should or should not be so as long as they can stand up and only believe as they believe. Under God is in the pledge because that was what our country was built upon. Where do you think that our judicial system came from? Honestly think, where would we have gotten understanding of or basic rights and wrongs if it were not from the ten commandments? But, off my rant, as far as he pledge of allegiance goes, I believe that there should be an option that if people do not believe in the USA then don't restate the pledge if you do then say it proudly!
-
I feel that when people don't say the Pledge of Allegiance, it is extremely disrespectful. People should be happy that they get to live in a free country like this instead of somewhere else where they have no freedoms. If you don't respect the country, maybe you should go to another country for a few months, then you might see how lucky you are to be able to live here.
-
When I was a kid in school, I didn't understand the pledge of allegiance, but it was mandatory for me too. If I was sitting during the pledge of allegiance, my teacher told me to stand up, and would also tell me to place my right hand over my heart if I wasn't doing it.
-
Under God is in the pledge because that was what our country was built upon. Where do you think that our judicial system came from? Honestly think, where would we have gotten understanding of or basic rights and wrongs if it were not from the ten commandments?
The original pledge of allegiance never had the "Under God" part in it. That was added by President Eisenhower, along with the "In god we trust" printed on the bills. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance
Our country was founded on freedom of religion. One of the hugest reasons why we had 13 colonies was because people branched out all over the new world because they were being KILLED in certain places for wanting to practice a different religion. We were not founded on Christianity and in fact, that annoys me greatly because it seems that nobody knows history anymore. If you look into it almost all of the founding fathers were DIESTS or ATHEISTS. The man who wrote the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson himself, made many a quotes about atheism and how he didn't like religion.
And also, people were around before Jesus and where do you think they got their ideas of right and wrong then? As society grows, it becomes common sense to do certain things and we don't need 10 commandments on stones to tell us. As we evolved we would have learned killing our own people was detrimental, that stealing from ourselves was detrimental, that fighting with ourselves was detrimental. All these things that we supposedly learned from religion, are just things our brains learned for themselves as they involved. In fact, even most lion prides, and other animal species, don't harm one another (unless it's for self defense) because they know that killing their own is not good for their species. And I don't think that they have a religion or a God that they talk to. It's called natural instinct.
-
My children had the right to attend public scholl just as my grand children do now however, we are Tsalagi first and that is where my allegiance lay. Forcing a member of a sovereign Indian Nation to make a false pledge is not only morally wrong it is very emotionally damaging to the child, much less totally confusing.
@the love it or leave it poster...where should we go? we were kinda here first......
-
WoW! Guess I stirred the pot! My Belief is you should be allowed to make your own decisions but when your that young wouldnt you rather your children taught respect for their country ,when they are old enough you can explain what it means .Most of my family was and is in military i sure stand proud and say it!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I know in my old school they taught us what the pledge meant and I said it everyday afterwards. But it should be optional because it is a right in America to say what you want or to not say what you don't want to say. To ban it altogether is completely un-American and is just wrong.
-
I remember learning the Pledge of Allegiance in first grade. As a kid, you seem to recite things without focusing on the importance of what you're saying. Now, I wish I had paid more attention before all of the debate on it started. No, I do not think people should be forced to say it, but I do think a teacher or other kind of school administrator should lead the Pledge for those students who do want to partake. I don't see anything wrong in allowing it to be said without forcing participation.
-
Thats all i was trying to say ,it should be optional!
-
The pledge of allegiance has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It is to show patriotism to our country and respect for it. Those that are so against religion and that want to come up with their own beliefs have lost sense of what should or should not be so as long as they can stand up and only believe as they believe. Under God is in the pledge because that was what our country was built upon. Where do you think that our judicial system came from? Honestly think, where would we have gotten understanding of or basic rights and wrongs if it were not from the ten commandments? But, off my rant, as far as he pledge of allegiance goes, I believe that there should be an option that if people do not believe in the USA then don't restate the pledge if you do then say it proudly!
I love you pic! Go Cats!!!!
-
How sad this society and country have become when people don't have enough pride to pledge allegiance to our nation any more. Back before the declining of morals and ethics, Americans had no problem with this. Even with all of our sorrows, woes and faults, the United States of America is still the greatest nation to live in on this Earth and though most Americans won't admit it, it is by the grace of God and His blessings that we have become such a great nation.
-
I remember going to school and ever day we stood up, put our hands over our hearts, said the pledge of alliegance, and sang the National Anthem.
-
(http://togetherenglish.com/flag-rs.jpg)
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all.
I believe this should be optional to pledge but schools should still do this over the intercom for students and teachers that want to
-
Thats what i believe!
-
The pledge of allegiance has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It is to show patriotism to our country and respect for it. Those that are so against religion and that want to come up with their own beliefs have lost sense of what should or should not be so as long as they can stand up and only believe as they believe. Under God is in the pledge because that was what our country was built upon. Where do you think that our judicial system came from? Honestly think, where would we have gotten understanding of or basic rights and wrongs if it were not from the ten commandments? But, off my rant, as far as he pledge of allegiance goes, I believe that there should be an option that if people do not believe in the USA then don't restate the pledge if you do then say it proudly!
:thumbsup:
-
Simply listening to the pledge is not going to hurt anyone. The problem with so many people is that they cannot tolerate anyone who thinks differently than they do. What would it hurt to be respectfully quiet during the pledge of allegiance while the people who want to recite it do so? It would not hurt anything. To assert that a teacher leading the pledge of allegiance is offensive seems ridiculous to me. Everyone should have the right to show respect and thanks to our country and those who fight for it. I do agree that children should not be forced to say it, however they can sit quietly for a few seconds while a teacher leads it. What would that hurt? If the pledge is lead over the intercom by a teacher in the classroom, the children who want to participate can do so and the other children can simply NOT participate.
-
The Pledge of Allegiance would not be boring or meaningless if the teacher explained it. And why should it be optional to pledge allegiance to your country? Isn't that basic patriotism? How can our country survive if the future citizens are not even taught loyalty to her? If individual students want to skip out the words under God, than they are only hurting themselves, but the rest of it should be mandatory.
-
I think that it should be required to say it. We are a nation, under god, we are indivisible, and we have liberty and justice to all.
-
YES AND ITS STILL FAMOUS IN SCHOOLS AND ALL AROUND THE WORLD.
-
The pledge of allegiance has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It is to show patriotism to our country and respect for it. Those that are so against religion and that want to come up with their own beliefs have lost sense of what should or should not be so as long as they can stand up and only believe as they believe. Under God is in the pledge because that was what our country was built upon. Where do you think that our judicial system came from? Honestly think, where would we have gotten understanding of or basic rights and wrongs if it were not from the ten commandments? But, off my rant, as far as he pledge of allegiance goes, I believe that there should be an option that if people do not believe in the USA then don't restate the pledge if you do then say it proudly!
Patriotism is considered a religion by many learnt people(Falc's clique ;D) but don't take my word for it research yourself!!
-
Patriotism is considered a religion by many learnt people(Falc's clique ) but don't take my word for it research yourself!!
If that's true, then by living in this country, taking in education from this country, taking a job in this country, paying taxes, watching/listening to our entertainment and news, adopting american values, being christian, etc. you technically belong to 2 religions. Congrats.
-
I always considered it an honor to my country to say the pledge of allegiance. In fact, it made and still makes me feel darn proud!!!!! We also were taught to say it in school and if children don't learn the respect for our country and our flag when young, what is to happen when they get older?
-
Thats How I Feel!We Can Teach Our Children ,Then Hope It Sticks!
-
Patriotism is considered a religion by many learnt people(Falc's clique ) but don't take my word for it research yourself!!
If that's true, then by living in this country, taking in education from this country, taking a job in this country, paying taxes, watching/listening to our entertainment and news, adopting american values, being christian, etc. you technically belong to 2 religions. Congrats.
I don't sing songs about my country, carry a flag of my country, pray for the well being of my country, preach about my country and exclude my country from others as being the one true county or best. If your argument was applied everyone has followed 2 religions.
-
I don't sing songs about my country, carry a flag of my country, pray for the well being of my country, preach about my country and exclude my country from others as being the one true county or best.
I don't do much of those either. Hell, I just hung out with 2 germans for an entire week and we talked about the pros and cons of both countries the majority of the time. It was fantastic! But we both live in this country. I appreciate it immensily and would fight for others to live the same way if need be. You, on the other hand, speak down upon it because it's not up to your religion's "Disney" standards.
If your argument was applied everyone has followed 2 religions
That was my point.
-
I Have One True Religion and even though im not a church going person im not going to commit blasphemy either(sorry if i spelled it wrong) i love my country but do not worship it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Under God is in the pledge because that was what our country was built upon. Where do you think that our judicial system came from? Honestly think, where would we have gotten understanding of or basic rights and wrongs if it were not from the ten commandments?
The original pledge of allegiance never had the "Under God" part in it. That was added by President Eisenhower, along with the "In god we trust" printed on the bills. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance
Our country was founded on freedom of religion. One of the hugest reasons why we had 13 colonies was because people branched out all over the new world because they were being KILLED in certain places for wanting to practice a different religion. We were not founded on Christianity and in fact, that annoys me greatly because it seems that nobody knows history anymore. If you look into it almost all of the founding fathers were DIESTS or ATHEISTS. The man who wrote the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson himself, made many a quotes about atheism and how he didn't like religion.
And also, people were around before Jesus and where do you think they got their ideas of right and wrong then? As society grows, it becomes common sense to do certain things and we don't need 10 commandments on stones to tell us. As we evolved we would have learned killing our own people was detrimental, that stealing from ourselves was detrimental, that fighting with ourselves was detrimental. All these things that we supposedly learned from religion, are just things our brains learned for themselves as they involved. In fact, even most lion prides, and other animal species, don't harm one another (unless it's for self defense) because they know that killing their own is not good for their species. And I don't think that they have a religion or a God that they talk to. It's called natural instinct.
Well said.
-
People believe the "under god" part is no longer appropriate but yet money still says "in god we trust". I dont believe in god but I think the pledge should still be said or at least changed. We need patriotism!
-
People believe the "under god" part is no longer appropriate but yet money still says "in god we trust". I dont believe in god but I think the pledge should still be said or at least changed. We need patriotism!
There are some who hold that there is circumstantial evidence of the "in god we trust" imprint on money being an insider Freemasonry jest. Others point to the phrase being conceived by Salmon P. Chase, the U.S. Treasury Secretary under President Abraham Lincoln, under a mistaken belief that no "nation can be strong unless it is a Christian nation." Since the Act of 1837 proscribed any mottoes other than those enacted, Pollock, (who became Director of the Mint), and his pals slipped in a seemingly innocuous amendment to the Act in the form of "An Act in Amendment of an Act entitled, 'An Act Relating to Foreign Coins and the Coinage of Cents at the Mint of the United States,' approved February twenty-one, eighteen hundred and fifty-seven," was passed by Congress on April 22, 1864.
That said, there remain many more Freemason symbols on U.S. currency than the ambiguous one-liner, (after all, it doesn't specify which "god" trust is placed in and only xtian hubris assumes it intends the xtian one).
-
Sorry You Feel I Speak Down On My Country,Not My Intention At All!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I LOVE MY COUNTRY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I Was Only Saying I`m Not Going To Worship It ! Or Anything Else! WOW! Talk About Putting Words In Ones Mouth! This Will Be My Last Post On This Subject!
-
Why not go back to the right one? Then maybe everyone could be happy. Probally not though.
Agreed! It should be optional. After all a lot of people have died to give us this right. Should we as a nation disregard them as well?
-
Little by little lets take everything away from this country that elicits pride, bravery, love, etc., for our country. Lets be like the nations that spit, march, burn, and dirty the American flag. Lets defame everything that made this country great and join those with a voice who want to destroy her. Destroying a country from within is so much more effective than waiting for someone to destroy from outside. Lets take away her citizens rights one by one.
Lets let other nationalities take over our cities and towns one by one and sit back and claim their right to do so. Lets hate all those who love this country and love God, because after all they are the enemy right? How dare they pray for God to heal America and make her fruitful, how dare they pray for the peace and wisdom for her leadership to lead with wisdom. Lets make sure that those same Christians are verbally assaulted when we get every chance and opportunity. Lets blaspheme the very God they serve, and poke fun at their faith. How dare they have something called "Faith" that they can't explain because it's supernatural and personal between them and their Creator. Lets make sure they are ridiculed for their belief in God and His Word, knowing that they will not ridicule back, but only stand up for the love they have for their Savior. How dare they!
Lets make sure that we throw our Nations morals out the window and adopt an "anything goes" attitude. Lets kill our unborn, take from the poor, give to the rich, call right wrong, and wrong right, lets oppress the innocent and pure in heart, Lets take prayer out of the schools, no Bibles either, lets take everything we can about God off our money, our Pledge, and anything else we can think of. In fact, lets start a movement that God does not even exist, and the Bible is nonsense. Lets argue every point of life, and explain away every miracle or call it a lie.
Then......when God turns His back on this Nation, lets blame everybody but ourselves when America falls.
-
Little by little lets take everything away from this country that elicits pride, bravery, love, etc., for our country.
Or, we could just omit the inaccurate "under god" part of the pledge and retain any pride, bravery or love for our country.
Lets take away her citizens rights one by one.
What rights are being taken away by separating church and state? The "right" to believe any superstitious nonsense one desires remains.
Lets let other nationalities take over our cities and towns one by one and sit back and claim their right to do so.
Is this passive-aggressive racism rearing it's superficial head?
Lets hate all those who love this country and love God, because after all they are the enemy right?
The two are not synonymous; its entirely possible to love this country without including superstitious beliefs.
Lets make sure that those same Christians are verbally assaulted when we get every chance and opportunity.
While we're at that sort of thing, let's make sure envangelical fundies spew lies, hatred and false claims while whining when these are challenged.
Lets blaspheme the very God they serve, and poke fun at their faith. How dare they have something called "Faith" that they can't explain because it's supernatural and personal between them and their Creator. Lets make sure they are ridiculed for their belief in God and His Word, knowing that they will not ridicule back, but only stand up for the love they have for their Savior.
What a load of disengenuous bunk that is. If someone doesn't have the courage of their convictions to back them up with something other than "supernatural" "faith" and take a cowardly passive-aggressive stance in a public forum, consequences should be expected. If not, they can always bury their heads in the metaphorical sand and keep posting to a public forum, (or, keep it to themselves).
Lets take prayer out of the schools, no Bibles either, lets take everything we can about God off our money, our Pledge, and anything else we can think of.
Those are excellent ideas; even if offered sarcastically. The constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Both the free exercise clause and the establishment clause place restrictions on the government concerning laws they pass or interfering with religion. No restrictions are placed on religions except perhaps that a religious denomination cannot become the state religion.
In fact, lets start a movement that God does not even exist ...
Alternatively, how about any movement from those who claim "god" does exist, sans evidence, to provide some directly-attributible evidence?
and the Bible is nonsense. Lets argue every point of life, and explain away every miracle or call it a lie.
Several people have been doing that for years, despite the lack of reasoning abilities in 'true believers'.
-
Little by little lets take everything away from this country that elicits pride, bravery, love, etc., for our country. Lets be like the nations that spit, march, burn, and dirty the American flag. Lets defame everything that made this country great and join those with a voice who want to destroy her. Destroying a country from within is so much more effective than waiting for someone to destroy from outside. Lets take away her citizens rights one by one.
Pride, bravery, and love should never be forced into an individuals mindset as it interferes highly with liberty. Education should be strongly encouraged as to why one should have love and respect for ones country, and arguably the PoA makes this education seem dull and mandatory. Not to mention the PoA can also be argued to be interfering with citizens rights, so your statement is sort of hypocritical.
Lets let other nationalities take over our cities and towns one by one and sit back and claim their right to do so.
What are you? A white supremacist? This sounds extremely racist...and now I recall that you have been known to sport extreme racially-charged claims. What I quoted here has been happening since the founding of our country and yet here we are retaining pretty much the same rights (though far more technical than originally). Btw if you're an ounce Irish or Polish, you're being laughably hypocritical.
Lets hate all those who love this country and love God, because after all they are the enemy right?
Uhhh...no? You have every right to believe what you want to believe. But if you're going to parade it and preach it as truth when you really have no foundation of proving it, expect flak.
How dare they pray for God to heal America and make her fruitful, how dare they pray for the peace and wisdom for her leadership to lead with wisdom. Lets make sure that those same Christians are verbally assaulted when we get every chance and opportunity. Lets blaspheme the very God they serve, and poke fun at their faith. How dare they have something called "Faith" that they can't explain because it's supernatural and personal between them and their Creator. Lets make sure they are ridiculed for their belief in God and His Word, knowing that they will not ridicule back, but only stand up for the love they have for their Savior. How dare they!
Nice try trying to say the problem is with the people who aren't of your religion, when the very problem of why people disrespect your religion is because of snakes like you boasting and trying to slither your way into the government. What a fallacy. Here you are pushing your religion and crying afoul, but yet you do not respect others beliefs and instead make them look like what's ruining the country. How obtuse and contradictory.
Lets make sure that we throw our Nations morals out the window and adopt an "anything goes" attitude. Lets kill our unborn, take from the poor, give to the rich, call right wrong, and wrong right, lets oppress the innocent and pure in heart, Lets take prayer out of the schools, no Bibles either, lets take everything we can about God off our money, our Pledge, and anything else we can think of. In fact, lets start a movement that God does not even exist, and the Bible is nonsense. Lets argue every point of life, and explain away every miracle or call it a lie.
::)
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
Then......when God turns His back on this Nation, lets blame everybody but ourselves when America falls.
It will be a great day in history when the ignorant and narrow voices are forgotten and civilization can proceed uninterrupted by uneducated contradictory fanatics like you.
-
I rest my case..............
-
I rest my case..............
No legitimate "case" was presented; merely a lopsided wish for freedom of speech "rights" to apply only to xtian fundies and not to reasoned opposition to mythological nonsense.
-
I rest my case..............
No legitimate "case" was presented; merely a lopsided wish for freedom of speech "rights" to apply only to xtian fundies and not to reasoned opposition to mythological nonsense.
If your verbal bully tactics are reasoned opposition, then you have been lying to yourself. You are entitled to your opinion, but when that opinion comes with putdowns, high horse superiority, and verbally shredding another person just because they believe in God, then something is very miserable and dark in your life.
-
Don't bother, Falcon. I know say that a lot, but with this ignoramus internet troll I highly suggest you don't even try reasoning. She has said enough to show her racism and lopsided backwards dribble-- why argue with such a disgraceful nutjerb? She's now trying to rouse you and waste your time. Might as well argue with a rock.
You are entitled to your opinion, but when that opinion comes with putdowns, high horse superiority, and verbally shredding another person just because they believe in God, then something is very miserable and dark in your life.
N00B ALERT! We can see right through your childish tactics, Annella! ;)
(http://i.imgur.com/ZtHBO.jpg)
-
Don't bother, Falcon. I know say that a lot, but with this ignoramus troll I highly suggest you don't even try to reason. She has said enough to show her racism and lopsided backwards dribble-- why argue with such a disgraceful nutjerb? She's now trying to rouse you and waste your time. Might as well argue with a rock.
Again.....I rest my case. Falconer02 you have nothing to say about what I post, where I post, and who I post it to. Too bad your self appointed playground monitor badge must be taken away.
-
Again.....I rest my case.
Whatever helps you sleep at night, honey! ;)
Too bad your self appointed playground monitor badge must be taken away.
I'm more of a warning system to hazardous materials. Zing!
-
Again.....I rest my case.
Whatever helps you sleep at night, honey! ;)
Back at ya dear!
-
If your verbal bully tactics are reasoned opposition
Falsely characterizing reasoned opposition and challenges to unreasoned pronouncements as "verbal bully tactics" has two significant flaws. The first is that this is a text-based medium and not a verbal one. The second is that reasoned dissent is not equivalent to "bully tactics" just because you have no cognizant response to them. Your biased, (unsupported opinion), is empty.
then you have been lying to yourself.
The irony there is sublime a a couple of levels. So, are you tacitly implying that _any_ dissenting response to your unsupported claims and empty opinions constitutes "bully tactics"?
You are entitled to your opinion, but when that opinion comes with putdowns
First, it's a reasoned "opinion", (as opposed to one without substantiation). Secondly, which alleged "putdowns" would those be again?
... high horse superiority ...
Ironically, I'm not putting myself on any "high horse", you are doing so with such characterizations. I have no need for a stirrup but, thanks anyway.
... and verbally shredding another person just because they believe in God ...
To be more accurate, it isn't "just because they believe in god"; I've mentioned a few other reasons, (which means reasoning was used in lieu of your usual pronouncement style argumentation).
... then something is very miserable and dark in your life.
Well, she's not really in my life; she just posts evangelical nonsense now and again in a public forum which I frequent and reply to on occasion.
-
Don't bother, Falcon. I know say that a lot, but with this ignoramus internet troll I highly suggest you don't even try reasoning. She has said enough to show her racism and lopsided backwards dribble-- why argue with such a disgraceful nutjerb? She's now trying to rouse you and waste your time. Might as well argue with a rock.
You are entitled to your opinion, but when that opinion comes with putdowns, high horse superiority, and verbally shredding another person just because they believe in God, then something is very miserable and dark in your life.
N00B ALERT! We can see right through your childish tactics, Annella! ;)
(http://i.imgur.com/ZtHBO.jpg)
Yes, I've seen the tactic used unsucessfully many times before however, the reason they're unsucessful is due to the opoosing voice of reason reaching out to those who might be subjected to her nonsensical harangues.
-
Falconer02 you have nothing to say about what I post, where I post, and who I post it to. Too bad your self appointed playground monitor badge must be taken away.
Pot, kettle called and left you a message: 'you're black'.
-
An awful lot of useless words to try and confuse the issue. Thing is, it actually bears my point out. You are smoke and mirrors. I don't say this to be mean or call you names, but you are a bunch of hot air and don't really say anything.
-
Trolls be trollin'...
-
Trolls be trollin'...
Now wait a minute, you post to me, not the other way around. In fact Falconer you have always answered me with some abrasive, sarcastic, reply when I wasn't even talking to you, so who's trolling?
-
An awful lot of useless words to try and confuse the issue. Thing is, it actually bears my point out. You are smoke and mirrors. I don't say this to be mean or call you names, but you are a bunch of hot air and don't really say anything.
Apparently then, your reading comprehension skills are speculative at best and minimal at worst. If the English words used confuse you, look them up, (or ask someone who is more literate). All of the words used to refute your blatant nonsense have meanings attached to them and falsely characterizing them as "hot air" is merely an attempted empty insult.
-
Trolls be trollin'...
Now wait a minute, you post to me, not the other way around. In fact Falconer you have always answered me with some abrasive, sarcastic, reply when I wasn't even talking to you, so who's trolling?
Rationally, since he's answering your 'trolling posts', that would be you doing the trolling. Now, it's entirely possible to 'troll a troll' however, yours was the initiating trolling and now you're complaining because your line snapped off?
-
An awful lot of useless words to try and confuse the issue. Thing is, it actually bears my point out. You are smoke and mirrors. I don't say this to be mean or call you names, but you are a bunch of hot air and don't really say anything.
Apparently then, your reading comprehension skills are speculative at best and minimal at worst. If the English words used confuse you, look them up, (or ask someone who is more literate). All of the words used to refute your blatant nonsense have meanings attached to them and falsely characterizing them as "hot air" is merely an attempted empty insult.
Oh, and I guess your pointed reply to my intelligence is not an attempted insult? You are so full of yourself! Everything you write is blatant nonsense and I'm not the only one who has commented on your ability to fill a page full of big words but not say anything worth saying, but confusion.
-
Trolls be trollin'...
Now wait a minute, you post to me, not the other way around. In fact Falconer you have always answered me with some abrasive, sarcastic, reply when I wasn't even talking to you, so who's trolling?
Rationally, since he's answering your 'trolling posts', that would be you doing the trolling. Now, it's entirely possible to 'troll a troll' however, yours was the initiating trolling and now you're complaining because your line snapped off?
Your comprehension skills need sharpening. He answered me, so he had to have trolled the thread in order to answer me. Thing is, he always does without my addressing him. I wasn't the OP either in this thread.
So what you are saying is that he can answer posts in a thread, but when I do, it's trolling? LOL That's rich! Is that the best you can do? LOLOLOLOL
Thing is, falconer02 has called other people trolls when he doesn't like their answers in the past also.
-
Now wait a minute, you post to me, not the other way around. In fact Falconer you have always answered me with some abrasive, sarcastic, reply when I wasn't even talking to you, so who's trolling?
I love trolling trolls! Especially the racist ones who believe in witchcraft!
(http://27.media.tumblr.com/avatar_6feb8634e3d0_128.png)
Thing is that falconer02 calls other people trolls when he doesn't like their answers in the past also.
That would be one other person who was equally --if not more-- bonkers.
-
Now wait a minute, you post to me, not the other way around. In fact Falconer you have always answered me with some abrasive, sarcastic, reply when I wasn't even talking to you, so who's trolling?
I love trolling trolls! Especially the racist ones who believe in witchcraft!
(http://27.media.tumblr.com/avatar_6feb8634e3d0_128.png)
Sticks and stones luv......sticks and stones..........lol
-
An awful lot of useless words to try and confuse the issue. Thing is, it actually bears my point out. You are smoke and mirrors. I don't say this to be mean or call you names, but you are a bunch of hot air and don't really say anything.
Apparently then, your reading comprehension skills are speculative at best and minimal at worst. If the English words used confuse you, look them up, (or ask someone who is more literate). All of the words used to refute your blatant nonsense have meanings attached to them and falsely characterizing them as "hot air" is merely an attempted empty insult.
Oh, and I guess your pointed reply to my intelligence is not an attempted insult?
You just posted that the reply was useless and confusing to your understanding, (see, it's quoted right up at the top of this posted response). Any lack of comprehension of English on your part is your responsibility, whether you characterize such a lack as insulting or not.
You are so full of yourself!
Another empty, baseless opinion, huh? And coming from someone who appears to be overflowing with those too!
Everything you write is blatant nonsense ...
That's your 'rebuttal'; an assertion without substantiation? Another unimpressively unsupported 'opinion', as empty as your prior ones.
and I'm not the only one who has commented on your ability to fill a page full of big words but not say anything worth saying, but confusion.
I've read the few who have expressed their opinion about being unable to understand reasoned dissent. Are you suggested that, because there's more than one who possesses your apparently diminished comprehension skills, it makes the language incomprehensible to others?
-
I've read the few who have expressed their opinion about being unable to understand reasoned dissent. Are you suggested that, because there's more than one who possesses your apparently diminished comprehension skills, it makes the language incomprehensible to others?
Well......obviously you don't know how to separate your comments from others on this forum so your comprehension is a bit impaired in that area.
In response to your reply: Are you actually that self absorbed with yourself? Take assessment quick before you start kissing yourself in the mirror. Your one of those people who are totally unteachable as they think they know it all. Get a grip man!
-
Trolls be trollin'...
Now wait a minute, you post to me, not the other way around. In fact Falconer you have always answered me with some abrasive, sarcastic, reply when I wasn't even talking to you, so who's trolling?
Rationally, since he's answering your 'trolling posts', that would be you doing the trolling. Now, it's entirely possible to 'troll a troll' however, yours was the initiating trolling and now you're complaining because your line snapped off?
Your comprehension skills need sharpening.
You do realize that little kids have been doing that 'I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I?' troll tactic for years or, don't you? My comprehension skills are intact, (yours seem to be M.I.A., given your continued demonstrations of their lack in your responses).
He answered me ...
Yes, and here's the significant bit; in order to answer you, you would have to _first_ post a trolling post, (which you did and which he answered).
See, it's a matter of the sequence of events here; first you trolled and then he replied.
... so he had to have trolled the thread in order to answer me.
That's not how trolling works, (as you are undoubtedly aware, having engaged in it repeatedly). Responding to a troll isn't trolling unless one is trolling the troll, (which he could be doing or, poking one with a stick).
Thing is, he always does without my addressing him. I wasn't the OP either in this thread.
He does that reply-without-attribution response to many others, (including me). I don't take it personally however, you do seem to be able to figure out when he's replying to one of your trollings so, you do have at least a vestigal comprehension, (or maybe 'selective' is the more apropos term).
So what you are saying is that he can answer posts in a thread, but when I do, it's trolling? LOL
Nope, I can write what I mean without your assistance. What I did write was to the effect that "trolling" is nominally an initiating post which is intended, (or an unintended), 'lure' which stirs the pot with some debatable pronouncement. Answering such posts isn't necessarily trolling, (although one can troll a troll, as it were). Your responses to the replies constitutes an exchange after the initial trolling post. Whether or not these subsequent exchanges constitute trolling in and of themselves depends on any reiteration of the initial trolling or, tangential trolling which occurs during the course of such exchanges.
Thing is, falconer02 has called other people trolls when he doesn't like their answers in the past also.
Has he? Then surely you can quote two or three message IDs as examples of this, right?
-
I've read the few who have expressed their opinion about being unable to understand reasoned dissent. Are you suggesting that, because there's more than one who possesses your apparently diminished comprehension skills, it makes the language incomprehensible to others?
Well......obviously you don't know how to separate your comments from others on this forum so your comprehension is a bit impaired in that area.
That isn't a matter of "comprehension" of content, it's a function of the forum. Sometimes I manage to get the comments separated and other times, the same method doesn't seem to work however, I do at least correctly attribute those comments to the people that make them. Your thinly veiled attempt at a distractive insult has fallen short of the mark.
In response to your reply: Are you actually that self absorbed with yourself?
Do you often engage in such sophistry or, is that question rhetorical? What aspect of my reply was misunderstood and mangled into self-absorbtion?
Your one of those people who are totally unteachable as they think they know it all. Get a grip man!
Since you mention unteachability; it has been mentioned several times that it is "you're", (as in 'you are'), and not "your", (as in a possessive sense). Further, I've never claimed to "know it all" so you're, (not "your"), making another one of those false characterizations you seem to favor.
-
Has he? Then surely you can quote two or three message IDs as examples of this, right?
Actually I will vouch for her (she was right! Call the press! What a rarity to see such a thing!)-- there is one other I had called a troll on several occasions due to many reasons. For instance the user was threatening and wishing me death just for being skeptical of their claims. She was also hanging by a thread since many other users were constantly reporting her for abuse. This person was also admittedly a bit unstable mentally as they had told this part of the forum many times. Their beliefs were constantly changing too-- one day it was evangelical, next pagan, next a freethinker, etc. etc. It was quite obvious that it was a rather odd and unintentional trolling (I think...). They've been gone for a while now though.
-
-- there is one other I had called a troll on several occasions due to many reasons. For instance the user was threatening and wishing me death just for being skeptical of their claims. She was also hanging by a thread since many other users were constantly reporting her for abuse. This person was also admittedly a bit unstable mentally as they had told this part of the forum many times. Their beliefs were constantly changing too-- one day it was evangelical, next pagan, next a freethinker, etc. etc. It was quite obvious that it was a rather odd and unintentional trolling (I think...). They've been gone for a while now though.
Understood however, the direct assertion made was that you 'call people trolls who disagree with you', (which seemed suspicious to me due to her unintentional and hypocritical self-reference there). If the other person you referred to did post ever-shifting and contradictory stances, she most likely was trolling and characterizing her as a troll would be accurate. The accuracy of "Annela's" more general assertion is dubious because it appears to be supported by nothing more than her biased opinion.
-
Your one of those people who are totally unteachable as they think they know it all. Get a grip man!
Since you mention unteachability; it has been mentioned several times that it is "you're", (as in 'you are'), and not "your", (as in a possessive sense). Further, I've never claimed to "know it all" so you're, (not "your"), making another one of those false characterizations you seem to favor.
Again you have accused me of insult when you are clearly throwing stones and making assumptions of which you have no knowledge. Bringing that up (again) shows you have nothing more intelligent to add in response, except petty retaliation. Thing is, I have a dyslexia of sorts. This was explained in another thread. I do it with certain numbers also. Woman and women are other words I transpose among others. This however, has nothing to do with how teachable I am or how much of a grip I have on the English language. Nice try though.
As much as I have enjoyed our banter, my bed awaits and deep sleep beckons. Adieu......... Please respond however you feel, tomorrow is another day.
-
The accuracy of "Annela's" more general assertion is dubious because it appears to be supported by nothing more than her biased opinion.
The correct spelling is Annella (two L's).
-
Your one of those people who are totally unteachable as they think they know it all. Get a grip man!
Since you mention unteachability; it has been mentioned several times that it is "you're", (as in 'you are'), and not "your", (as in a possessive sense). Further, I've never claimed to "know it all" so you're, (not "your"), making another one of those false characterizations you seem to favor.
Again you have accused me of insult when you are clearly throwing stones and making assumptions of which you have no knowledge.
Your "know it all" comment is construed as an attempted insult and not merely an accusation. The reason being that the presumed intention in throwing it is to imply both superiority and condenscension. That means that it was intended as an insult and not as "throwing stones" by pointing this out.
Bringing that up (again) shows you have nothing more intelligent to add in response, except petty retaliation.
Oh, you meant the "you're/your" grammarical note. That wasn't specifically retalitory since I was previously unaware of your dyslexia. I also have a mild form of dyslexia, (you'll see a few "teh" for "the" strewn throughout some of my posts).
Thing is, I have a dyslexia of sorts. This was explained in another thread.
Shocking as the news may be to you, I haven't read every thread in this forum, (nor, every thread you posted in). As a side benefit, that pretty much puts paid to any false accusations of 'following around' your commentaries.
As much as I have enjoyed our banter, my bed awaits and deep sleep beckons. Adieu......... Please respond however you feel, tomorrow is another day.
One small point; this reply you've posted omitted attribution, (used "
" without author mentioned, rather than ""). That would cause some unattributed mixture of who said what in your replies.
-
The accuracy of "Annela's" more general assertion is dubious because it appears to be supported by nothing more than her biased opinion.
The correct spelling is Annella (two L's).
And, the correct attributions are "" for your comments and "
-
Uh, you have me quoting something I did not:
Could you please break out what you are saying because everything is so muddled with who said what, that I'm being misquoted. Check again. I'll look at it tomorrow.
-
Uh, you have me quoting something I did not
That wasn't you who wrote:
The correct spelling is Annella (two L's).
?
Could you please break out what you are saying because everything is so muddled with who said what, that I'm being misquoted. Check again. I'll look at it tomorrow.
The attributions are delineated by 'begin bracket' "quote author=Annella link=topic=32439.msg446844#msg446844 date=1321339800 'end bracket'. There were no misquotes and any muddling is internal.
-
Understood however, the direct assertion made was that you 'call people trolls who disagree with you', (which seemed suspicious to me due to her unintentional and hypocritical self-reference there). If the other person you referred to did post ever-shifting and contradictory stances, she most likely was trolling and characterizing her as a troll would be accurate. The accuracy of "Annela's" more general assertion is dubious because it appears to be supported by nothing more than her biased opinion.
I find it humorous that we're still arguing with someone who lacks critical thinking skills and never even bothered to defend their original post except with empty and uneducated reasonings. She chews on the fat rather than the meat of our original arguments and now look what we've degraded the thread into-- spelling errors and forum-quoting etiquette. Rather than aim at the argument, she aims with shoddy troll tactics and nothing really gets done (like I said originally "arguing with a rock"). But should we even bother at this point? Simply put, we're arguing with a-
1.) immense liar/exhaggerator
2.) religious zealot
3.) arguably racist individual
4.) witchcraft-promoter
And she's a christian...? She was believing that we're on our high-horses and was attempting to make us look like the bad guys here, but you know what? We are better than this. I imagine most of the people on this forum are too since I don't know any that fill this display. I am (and I'm for certain you are) none of those things I listed, but she is. Why feed the troll any further?
-
I find it humorous that we're still arguing with someone who lacks critical thinking skills and never even bothered to defend their original post except with empty and uneducated reasonings. She chews on the fat rather than the meat of our original arguments and now look what we've degraded the thread into-- spelling errors and forum-quoting etiquette. Rather than aim at the argument, she aims with shoddy troll tactics and nothing really gets done (like I said originally "arguing with a rock"). But should we even bother at this point?
It is humorous if she actually 'believes' that these diversionary troll tactics work to the extent that the original context becomes buried in trivia, in lieu of actual discourse on the context of pledging allegiance to a representative flag and _not_ to an imaginary "god". By dispensing with the diversions, (clay ducks), and returning to the original arguement, it can be seen who is posting on the subject matter and who is attempting to blow smoke-screens up people's skirts.
Simply put, we're arguing with a-
1.) immense liar/exhaggerator
2.) religious zealot
3.) arguably racist individual
4.) witchcraft-promoter
She has presented evidence, (in the form of her own posted words), to support the points 1-3 however, there have been no recent examples of #4 that I'm aware of, (not to say there aren't any; if so, I'd enjoy reading them).
And she's a christian!
Indeed, and specifically a self-defined evangelical pentecostal fundamentalist to boot. That doesn't seem to square much with witchcraft, (the 'faith healing', 'speaking in tongues', playing with snakes bits?).
She was saying that we're on our high-horses and was attempting to make us look like the bad guys here, but you know what? We are better than this.
Isn't it interesting that when some people put others up on "high horses", what they're really trying to tell us is that they resent wallowing down in the mud and road apples?
I imagine most of the people on this forum are too since I don't know any that fill this display. I am (and I'm for certain you are) none of those things I listed, but she is. Why feed the troll any further?
One aspect of trolls and trolling that seems common is that forum trolls don't need to be feed to keep on trolling. A consequence of the first aspect is that when trolls are fed something 'indigestable', they 'starve'. Although I can sympathize with a 'Don't Feed The Trolls' sign, there's something to be said for 'starving' them too. Sometimes, they lose 'weight' that way, ('cause who wants a fat troll?).
Back to the cognizant point, in context; maybe the Treasury of the 1800s intended that 'in god we trust, all others must pay cash'?
-
She has presented evidence, (in the form of her own posted words), to support the points 1-3 however, there have been no recent examples of #4 that I'm aware of, (not to say there aren't any; if so, I'd enjoy reading them).
Tbh I'm not in the mood to search through 2000 posts (can you blame me? lol), but if the other couple of users who were there during that time drop by, I'll bring it up. It was a pretty funny couple of pages for this forum.
Isn't it interesting that when some people put others up on "high horses", what they're really trying to tell us is that they resent wallowing down in the mud and road apples?
Pretty much.
Back to the cognizant point, in context; maybe the Treasury of the 1800s intended that 'in god we trust, all others must pay cash'?
HA!
-
Tbh I'm not in the mood to search through 2000 posts (can you blame me? lol), but if the other couple of users who were there during that time drop by, I'll bring it up. It was a pretty funny couple of pages for this forum.
Nope, can't blame you one bit for that. Seeing as how I haven't encountered an untruth from you as yet, the default position is to take your word for it.
Isn't it interesting that when some people put others up on "high horses", what they're really trying to tell us is that they resent wallowing down in the mud and road apples?
Pretty much.
As you emphasized in that lack-of-proof "proof" thread, the nonreasoning circularity stands out like a turd on an icefield.
Back to the cognizant point, in context; maybe the Treasury of the 1800s intended that 'in god we trust, all others must pay cash'?
HA!
-
All I Know Is I Love My God And My Country!!!!