FC Community
Discussion Boards => Off-Topic => Debate & Discuss => Topic started by: tuscarorarain on October 06, 2012, 12:38:53 pm
-
Please mind Fusan Cash rules. Also, I relaise people can be hard to deal with, but be careful so they don't try to turn their own poor behavior around on you.
-
Remember not to try lying to FC moderators; they can read threads too.
Please mind Fusan Cash rules. Also, I relaise people can be hard to deal with, but be careful so they don't try to turn their own poor behavior around on you.
-
Not sure what this is all about but whatever.
-
Not sure what this is all about but whatever.
It's a randomly-posted reference to other threads in which the OP has been flailing about irrationally. Not important.
-
It's important to her, even if not to you.
-
Not sure what this is all about but whatever.
It's important to her, even if not to you.
Her usage of the nominally-dismissive, "whatever" indicated unimportance. Your diminished comprehension ability is mainly of importance to you; for anyone else, it's merely ignorance at best.
-
Not sure what this is all about but whatever.
It's important to her, even if not to you.
Her usage of the nominally-dismissive, "whatever" indicated unimportance. Your diminished comprehension ability is mainly of importance to you; for anyone else, it's merely ignorance at best.
Feel better now? ;D
-
Nothing is important to Falcon9 but his own ranting, not even other peolpes feelings.
-
Nothing is important to Falcon9 but his own ranting, not even other peolpes feelings.
[sarcasm]Exactly! We need less dissent on this forum and more love! Heck, lets just throw disagreement out the window and everyone get a long. If anyone where to disagree with us, its because they hate us and its only because they want to hurt our feelings. Dissent and disagreement only leads to hatred, fighting, and emotional distress. Instead, everyone should be happy and just go along with what anyone else says without debating or even thinking about our own opinions. After all, if we express ourselves and our opinions we just might offend somebody.[/sarcasm]
-
Nothing is important to Falcon9 but his own ranting, not even other peolpes feelings.
[sarcasm]Exactly! We need less dissent on this forum and more love! Heck, lets just throw disagreement out the window and everyone get a long. If anyone where to disagree with us, its because they hate us and its only because they want to hurt our feelings. Dissent and disagreement only leads to hatred, fighting, and emotional distress. Instead, everyone should be happy and just go along with what anyone else says without debating or even thinking about our own opinions. After all, if we express ourselves and our opinions we just might offend somebody.[/sarcasm]
Now that's sarcasm.
-
The old saying (whats good for the goose is good for the gander) Or if you can't take it don't dish it out.
-
Oh, please. All you whiny xtians have been doing is trying to dish it out while being unable to take it. Hypocrites.
The old saying (whats good for the goose is good for the gander) Or if you can't take it don't dish it out.
-
What I think some folks need to be reminded is that we're talking about Falcon(from planet)9 harrassing people from thread to thread.In a Bible verse thread,there is no excuse for his coming in simply to cause disruption and call people of faith "superstitious" and other condecending language.
The D&D is here for a reason.You want to argue?Use the D&D area.
-
What I think some folks need to be reminded is that we're talking about Falcon(from planet)9 harrassing people from thread to thread.
Replying to posts in forums isn't "harrassing people from thread to thread", especially when not every thread is replied to.
In a Bible verse thread,there is no excuse for his coming in simply to cause disruption and call people of faith "superstitious" and other condecending language.
Those threads appear in both the Off Topic forum and Debate + Discuss subforum and any FC member may reply to any post here within the TOS. Since xtians have the option to spam multiple threads with religious proselytizations, others have an equal option to post dissenting/opposing viewpoints. It works both ways, despite continued failed attempts by religious fanatics to censor non-xtians dissenting points of view.
The D&D is here for a reason.You want to argue?Use the D&D area.
This thread IS in the d+d subforum, you mind-blinded fundie. If stupidity were bricks, you'd demonstrably be your own Projects.
-
And just by reading your subject re-write,thank you for making my point.
-
Your point wasn't made by my response, my point was. Only a cowardly xtian, whose limited ability to reason was blinded by faith, would conclude something so overtly irrational.
And just by reading your subject re-write,thank you for making my point.
-
Just a question I'm gonna throw out there:If someone posted "Cowards,Jews,same thing" or "Cowards,Blacks,same thing" (as falcon has posted "Cowards,xains,same thing") Would that be grounds for banning?Just curious.
-
Such does not violate the FC TOS so, quit trying to get a non-xtian banned for dissenting with your faith-blinded attempts at censorship. Such attempts are cowardly because they seek to restrict opposition, rather than face it honorably.
Just a question I'm gonna throw out there:If someone posted "Cowards,Jews,same thing" or "Cowards,Blacks,same thing" (as falcon has posted "Cowards,xains,same thing") Would that be grounds for banning?Just curious.
Just curious ... what's a "xain", (an insane xtian or what)? I'd written "xtian", (since in many cases, "xain" would be an oxymoron. Literally).
-
Wait....you're saying such does not violate TOS? I'm confused here. What?
-
This is the debate + dicuss subforum of FC's Off Topic forum. It's "enter at your own risk". If such confuses you, read the Terms Of Service, (TOS).
Wait....you're saying such does not violate TOS? I'm confused here. What?
-
Many of Gods people lost their lives before they saluted Hitler.
Of course there are many other examples too in the bible.
I am not sure where the word coward correlates with one who serves and loves his creator?
I think the real coward here is the one who cant accept he has a maker.
Just on another note...Jesus gave the best demonstration to Vindicate his father as the only TRUE God and should receive exacting devotion and he allowed satans world to test him to the max till he died for it unblemished.
-
No, not arguing the Christian side of this thread...been there enough. I was replying to the question thrown out there by JediJohnny. Would it not be wrong for me to get on here and say something like "Oh, I don't get surveys because I'm a white girl." Just an example. I would not get on here and say I would get more surveys if I fit into a minority category or something. In response to his saying would that kind of comment not violate TOS. Would a black man who has the same on again/off again luck with surveys not have the same argument but be able to be offended at a comment like that? Just thought that JediJohnny had a great question.
-
I am not sure where the word coward correlates with one who serves and loves his creator?
One way it correlates is in declining to defend the "right" to hold such blind faith-based superstitious beliefs.
I think the real coward here is the one who cant accept he has a maker.
That is an irrational assertion as it relies upon a faith-based religious superstition which has no basis in evidence. On the contrary, a fervent religious adherent appears to cling to irrational blind faith out of abject fear, (cowardice). One who holds no such religious fears is not a coward.
-
The thing is, other members have posted such complaints about survey providers as perceived discriminations through vetted demographics. These complaints generally have no provable basis since providers often seek a representative sample across demographic parameters.
No, not arguing the Christian side of this thread...been there enough. I was replying to the question thrown out there by JediJohnny. Would it not be wrong for me to get on here and say something like "Oh, I don't get surveys because I'm a white girl." Just an example. I would not get on here and say I would get more surveys if I fit into a minority category or something. In response to his saying would that kind of comment not violate TOS. Would a black man who has the same on again/off again luck with surveys not have the same argument but be able to be offended at a comment like that?
-
God is a superstious belief as far as YOU are concerned.
For many the evidence is there HE exists.
If you wanna keep making up your fictious rules be my guest.....its obvious you are happy to have your own independence and live to be 70/80 years and become dust.
-
God is a superstious belief as far as YOU are concerned.
Since you don't attribute who you're replying to, (as well as falsely attributing things to hypothetical 'deities' when that's convenient), I'll mention that I'm not the only one who views that which has no supporting evidence as a superstitious belief, (dictionary entries confirm this; e.g. "belief").
For many the evidence is there HE exists.
What evidence? A book of superstitious beliefs does not constitute evidence; that's hearsay based upon blind religious faith. False attributions are not evidence, those are unsupported opinions, (e.g., claiming that an 'invisible pink unicorn' created everything is exactly the same as claiming that an invisible xtian 'g-d' did it).
If you wanna keep making up your fictious rules be my guest.....
While it's somewhat flattering of you to attribute logical reasoning to me, that's a false attribution. I didn't 'make up rules' of reasoning and your inability to use reasoning methods is exemplified by they're omission in your irrational rantings.
-
Millions obeyed Jesus command what he told his disciples on Nisan 14 this past year and every year to "keep doing this in rememberance of me"
The scripture "Broad and spacious is the road to destruction and narrow the road to life and few finding it"might be a moral victory to you knowing many will not inherit Gods kingdom.
BUT YOU CANT STOP IT FROM HAPPENING
SO KEEP FOOLING YOURSELF
YOU CANT STOP IT!!!
-
Are you suggesting that one can't stop cowardice from happening or, merely posting some religious proselytizing rant again?
BUT YOU CANT STOP IT FROM HAPPENING
Wait and see.
YOU CANT STOP IT!!!
Many fanatics have claimed such before. Where are they now?
-
Cowardice????LOL!!!
I would rather have died to VINDICATE GODS name then die in a stupid jungle for a reason why i didnt know why i was there.
And many did die for both reasons
-
No death "vindicates" a religious superstitious belief. That's a meaningless as irrational soteriology beliefs.
I would rather have died to VINDICATE GODS name ...
-
Fanatics????
LOL!!!
The ones that heeded Jesus words when they saw Romans encamp Jerusalem in 66 ce were saved.......those that didnt perished in 70 ce or were taken captive.So i guess the so-called fanatics then were smart.
Thats only 1 example.I dont have the time to go thru em all with you.Remember this post isnt to convince you....but as i tell you you help me give a thorough witness whether you wanna believe that or not...so if i were you i wouldnt reply to my posts cos indirectly you make it easier to witness.
-
Once again, these forums are not platforms for religious proselytizing however, should some choose to abuse the posting privilege granted by FC, they are being made aware that opposing posts can and will ensue.
....but as i tell you you help me give a thorough witness whether you wanna believe that or not...so if i were you i wouldnt reply to my posts cos indirectly you make it easier to witness.
I may owe you an apology of sorts since I characterized your or your proselytizing campaign as 'stupid'. You'd have a long and arduous upward battle just to reach a plataeu of stupidity and I wouldn't want to insult those who have made it there while you're still struggling to attain that goal.
-
When you clean your ears does concrete come out instead of wax?
-
If that's what happens to you, check with a physician, (or a mental health provider).
When you clean your ears does concrete come out instead of wax?
-
I notice Falcon has modified his recent subject embellishments.
Falcon continues to broad brush an entire segment of people with his insults.
There is no excuse for this.
If it were done to any other minority it would not have been tolerated this long.
Falcon should get the 14 day minimum ban,if the "rules" are to hold any weight in the future.
-
I notice Falcon has modified his recent subject embellishments.
Then you failed to notice the obvious.
Falcon continues to broad brush an entire segment of people with his insults.
There is no excuse for this.
If it were done to any other minority it would not have been tolerated this long.
Xtians are not a "minority". You haven't been banned for continually lying, why push it?
Falcon should get the 14 day minimum ban,if the "rules" are to hold any weight in the future.
Fortunately, you are not an FC moderator and recommending a banning when no FC rules have been broken is a fascist attempt at censorship.
-
Somebody ought to pack their bags.A little vacation is in order.
-
I'm convinced the mods would never ban Falcon,for his own safety.If he couldn't post his nonsense every ten minutes he'd have delirium tremens.
-
Your lying 'flames' an the inane product of an immature fundie who 'illegally' crosses the border of cognitive dissonance and carries no Visa for rationality.
I'm convinced the mods would never ban Falcon,for his own safety.If he couldn't post his nonsense every ten minutes he'd have delirium tremens.
-
If so, have a nice 'trip', since you're already hallucinating in advance.
Somebody ought to pack their bags.A little vacation is in order.
-
Wow! So much for what the "Golden Rule" really means...
-
The "golden rule" expressly advises one to treat others in the same way they treat others therefore, if others are initially "rude and offensive", (as in posting rude and offensive religious proselytizing first), then they are to implicitly expect such treatment in return under the auspices of the same "golden rule". It isn't a one-way application but, is apparently open to interpretation insofar as determining what's "rude and offensive".
Wow! So much for what the "Golden Rule" really means...
-
The "golden rule" expressly advises one to treat others in the same way they treat others therefore, if others are initially "rude and offensive", (as in posting rude and offensive religious proselytizing first), then they are to implicitly expect such treatment in return under the auspices of the same "golden rule". It isn't a one-way application but, is apparently open to interpretation insofar as determining what's "rude and offensive".
Wow! So much for what the "Golden Rule" really means...
You are perceiving that rule incorrectly and you know it. You are using that as an excuse to try and keep getting away with your bashing of believers. They are not deliberately posting threads just to try and force falcon9 or anyone else to believe. You have the ability to ignore, skip, go into threads you like, and even start your own. You choose to come in and bash believers, when they didn't personally bash you, as an atheist, personally. You choose to take it personal.
You really seem as a petulant and pouty little old man who has to be the class "clown" and "troublemaker" so no one will have the right to enjoy their own topics of things. You should cast that seemingly appearing action aside and be the adult and mature man you are meant to be.
-
You are perceiving that rule incorrectly and you know it.
Incorrect.
"The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim, ethical code, or morality that essentially states either of the following:
(Positive form of Golden Rule): One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.
(Negative form of Golden Rule): One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated.
This concept describes a "reciprocal", or "two-way", relationship between one's self and others that involves both sides equally, and in a mutual fashion." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Rule
Implicitly, if others are initially rude/offensive, the "golden rule's positive maxim" suggests they be treated in kind.
You really seem as a petulant and pouty little old man who has to be the class "clown" and "troublemaker" ...
Contextually, you've inadvertently provided an example of hucking-up an initial insult and, under the auspices of the "golden rule", I'd be permitted to chuck one back. Or, I could choose not to.
... so no one will have the right to enjoy their own topics of things.
You're still trying those failed attempts as coersive censorship, are you? So, if some hypothetical member of FC "enjoyed" a topic that some hypothetical fundie objected to, they'd be able to post about it or not?
-
You are perceiving that rule incorrectly and you know it.
Incorrect.
"The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim, ethical code, or morality that essentially states either of the following:
(Positive form of Golden Rule): One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.
(Negative form of Golden Rule): One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated.
This concept describes a "reciprocal", or "two-way", relationship between one's self and others that involves both sides equally, and in a mutual fashion." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Rule
Implicitly, if others are initially rude/offensive, the "golden rule's positive maxim" suggests they be treated in kind.
You really seem as a petulant and pouty little old man who has to be the class "clown" and "troublemaker" ...
Contextually, you've inadvertently provided an example of hucking-up an initial insult and, under the auspices of the "golden rule", I'd be permitted to chuck one back. Or, I could choose not to.
... so no one will have the right to enjoy their own topics of things.
You're still trying those failed attempts as coersive censorship, are you? So, if some hypothetical member of FC "enjoyed" a topic that some hypothetical fundie objected to, they'd be able to post about it or not?
In other words, twisting it to your way, you want everyone to be sarcastic, snide, mocking, bashing, etc., to you, since you are that way to Christians. That is wrong - you are the one exhibiting those attitudes just because you think certain posts are hostile. That's your problem, buddy, and you need to learn to deal with the fact that not everyone will dis-believe like you do, and that respect for other choices is in order.
I cannot believe you have been able to get this far with some of your non-golden rule behavior. It's never been allowed to get like this in the past and it's never been allowed to get away with trolling Christian threads like this either. You may like the attention and crave it - but this is going way too overboard. People are getting weary of your pouting rages against believers, causing dissension in Bible verse threads, and even to the point of posters/friends leaving the forum because they are tired of the hateful stuff going on.
This is ridiculous.
-
"The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim, ethical code, or morality that essentially states either of the following:
(Positive form of Golden Rule): One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.
(Negative form of Golden Rule): One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated.
This concept describes a "reciprocal", or "two-way", relationship between one's self and others that involves both sides equally, and in a mutual fashion." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Rule
Implicitly, if others are initially rude/offensive, the "golden rule's positive maxim" suggests they be treated in kind.
You really seem as a petulant and pouty little old man who has to be the class "clown" and "troublemaker" ...
Contextually, you've inadvertently provided an example of hucking-up an initial insult and, under the auspices of the "golden rule", I'd be permitted to chuck one back. Or, I could choose not to.
... so no one will have the right to enjoy their own topics of things.
You're still trying those failed attempts as coersive censorship, are you? So, if some hypothetical member of FC "enjoyed" a topic that some hypothetical fundie objected to, they'd be able to post about it or not?
[/quote]
In other words ...
No, not in other words - the "golden rule's" versions were quoted.
This is ridiculous.
That's due to your irrationality which you apparently have no conscious control over.
-
You are wrong in that Bible verse threads are insulting anyone personally and deliberately. It's your choice to take it that way. Stay out of them if you hate them so much. You have taken the joy out of the verses and quotes threads that used to be here - that is wrong and pushing the golden rule's limits. Just skip them - you are nothing but an agitator and a troll to bash Christians.
Many atheists I know, in my personal life, and in this forum, are a lot more tolerant of believers and very rarely say much in the verse threads, unless there is some debate that comes out of it, or they feel they need to say something. They sure don't come in like you do, bashing daily, just because you blame the believers for "initially" starting something that is not "initially" starting anything but commonalities for those who choose to take part in them. You are offensive to me and to the others when you can choose to skip over threads that have nothing to do with you. I'm sick of it and cannot believe it gets to continue on like it does.
Enjoy your evening. I'm going to spend some joyful and meaningful time with my family.
-
You are wrong in that Bible verse threads are insulting anyone personally and deliberately.
It's somewhat immaterial whether such offensive material is being posted deliberately or not.
It's your choice to take it that way.
Fortunately, you don't get to decide what's offensive to others any more than others get to decide what's offensive to you.
Stay out of them if you hate them so much.
Keep issuing ineffective 'orders'; no one is compelled to obey the 'suggestions' of the faith-blinded. I'll continue to reject such.
You are offensive to me and to the others when you can choose to skip over threads that have nothing to do with you. I'm sick of it and cannot believe it gets to continue on like it does.
Your constant spewing of religious propaganda is extraordinarily offensive, (not just to me), as it promotes a offensive religious belief. The option to hold an irrational religious belief is not equivalent to any 'right' to propagandize it unopposed. I oppose it and you'd prefer for it to be unopposed.
The reason opposition to such religious proselytizing continues is because the religious propaganda continues. It's not rocket science, fundie otherwise your religion would've opposed it as it previous did. The reasons for such opposition have been delineated before and include the xtian crusades, the xtian inquisitions, the despicable 'assimulations' of pre-existing pagan cultural beliefs, the xtian Westboro baptists and the xtian Jonestown debacle, (to name a few of xtianity's 'shining moments in history').
-
Falcon9 you are rude to christians and non-christians equally. I for one am sad for you and will no longer stoop to your level. There must be a sad story behind all of the problems you cause and I hope that some day you can come to terms with those. God bless you Flacon9.
-
Falcon9 you are rude to christians and non-christians equally.
That's a false asseertion. While most xtians conversed with will perceive rudeness and few will discern politeness, the ratio hasn't been equal or proportionate to non-xtians.
I for one am sad for you and will no longer stoop to your level.
You would have to climb not stoop, hypocrite.
God bless you Flacon9.
No thanks; may 'cthulu' take notice of you.
-
Falcon9 you are rude to christians and non-christians equally.
That's a false asseertion. While most xtians conversed with will perceive rudeness and few will discern politeness, the ratio hasn't been equal or proportionate to non-xtians.
I for one am sad for you and will no longer stoop to your level.
You would have to climb not stoop, hypocrite.
God bless you Flacon9.
No thanks; may 'cthulu' take notice of you.
So pitiful, so sad, so buried deep inside is that wicked bitterness taking over and overflowing out towards others, especially believers - quite judgmental and critical - when all it does is to keep the bitterness burrowing deeper and deeper until it affects the person. You really should take it easy on yourself - you are seeming, as of late, to get more unhinged towards others, and more emotional sounding in your retorts to others, with many of the words and calling of names being used. Paul suffered through a lot with that --- what a great turn-around for his personal life when he stopped fighting against the pricks of hate, and experienced the joy of God, and turned from his evil treatment of Christians. But, you will already have read and learned about Paul, so that's all on that.
-
So pitiful, so sad, so buried deep inside is that wicked bitterness taking over and overflowing out towards others ...
Is that why you blind-faithers are self-deluded cowards who cling to specious superstitions and eschew rationality? Thanks for the information.
-
I think the problem is people don't read your post's w/o a biased approach to them. I constantly see a pattern that looks like this-
"Christianity has always been the one true religion and a religion of peace."
"Actually no, there's millions of religions and yours is responsible for horrific atrocities in the past and present. *EXAMPLES HERE SOMETIMES*"
"That's quite rude to diss my faith in a thread about faith and stuff!"
"However you take it, it's the truth. To say otherwise is pure ignorance."
"NAME CALLING!? YOU'RE A MEANIE! STAY OUT OF MY THREAD THAT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC!"
..and then escalation.
-
I think the problem is people don't read your post's w/o a biased approach to them. I constantly see a pattern that looks like this-
"Christianity has always been the one true religion and a religion of peace."
"Actually no, there's millions of religions and yours is responsible for horrific atrocities in the past and present. *EXAMPLES HERE SOMETIMES*"
"That's quite rude to diss my faith in a thread about faith and stuff!"
"However you take it, it's the truth. To say otherwise is pure ignorance."
"NAME CALLING!? YOU'RE A MEANIE! STAY OUT OF MY THREAD!"
..and then escalation.
Yes, that's the general pattern of exchanges however, opponents to reason not only fail to respond to logical challenges, (except with diversions), they attempt the illogical 'prove it isn't so' tact. Lastly, I've always maintained that religious adherents have the private option to believe whatever superstitious "stuff" they want to however, they do no have the public option to propagandize it unopposed. That last part is the one they like the least and multiple attempts at censoring dissenting viewpoints have been made to no avail.
-
I'm pretty sure FC has moderators that can do their jobs. Seems a ironic that you'd post the thread with the word cowards and then act anonymous when mentioning who these cowards are by name. =-P
-
Maybe we should have an Insult thread,where we could simply throw names around at each other.
I understand it goes on regardless,but if we all agree to meet up in that thread every day,maybe the other threads would get some peace.
Of course,it's all wishful thinking,I suppose. ;D
-
Maybe we should have an Insult thread,where we could simply throw names around at each other.
I understand it goes on regardless,but if we all agree to meet up in that thread every day,maybe the other threads would get some peace.
Of course,it's all wishful thinking,I suppose. ;D
LOL, JediJohnnie! That's a GREAT idea! It's pretty apparent threads like these get very heated. I enjoy reading them but, otherwise I ignore them. You know what they say - Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.
-
I dont see posting bible verses as propaganda unless it is stated in those terms. What I have seen on here is mostly people posting bc they are starting a discussion and wish to attract like minded individuals, not sell religion to others.
-
I dont understand? ???
-
I dont see posting bible verses as propaganda unless it is stated in those terms. What I have seen on here is mostly people posting bc they are starting a discussion and wish to attract like minded individuals, not sell religion to others.
I agree. Thank you. :)
-
What are you talking about?
-
Maybe we should have an Insult thread,where we could simply throw names around at each other.
I understand it goes on regardless,but if we all agree to meet up in that thread every day,maybe the other threads would get some peace.
Of course,it's all wishful thinking,I suppose. ;D
LOL, JediJohnnie! That's a GREAT idea! It's pretty apparent threads like these get very heated. I enjoy reading them but, otherwise I ignore them. You know what they say - Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.
Same could be said for people who still use that stupid, overused quote. Arguing doesn't make you stupid, it makes you a better human being. The fact that I even bother to argue at all means I am open to learning new things and I take thinking about other people's ideas seriously. I may disagree with them, and argue against them, but I never take it personal. I enjoy the process, and have fun with it. Why should arguing be such a bad thing?
-
Maybe we should have an Insult thread,where we could simply throw names around at each other.
I understand it goes on regardless,but if we all agree to meet up in that thread every day,maybe the other threads would get some peace.
Of course,it's all wishful thinking,I suppose. ;D
LOL, JediJohnnie! That's a GREAT idea! It's pretty apparent threads like these get very heated. I enjoy reading them but, otherwise I ignore them. You know what they say - Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.
Same could be said for people who still use that stupid, overused quote. Arguing doesn't make you stupid, it makes you a better human being. The fact that I even bother to argue at all means I am open to learning new things and I take thinking about other people's ideas seriously. I may disagree with them, and argue against them, but I never take it personal. I enjoy the process, and have fun with it. Why should arguing be such a bad thing?
Flackle, my post wasn't meant to insult you or anyone else but, you gotta admit it's true. Isn't there enough garbage in the world to put up with? Why make it worse by arguing (especially over the internet) when you've got the control to just walk away? That's all I meant by it. However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting. It certainly keeps the posts going, doesn't it?
-
Maybe we should have an Insult thread,where we could simply throw names around at each other.
I understand it goes on regardless,but if we all agree to meet up in that thread every day,maybe the other threads would get some peace.
Of course,it's all wishful thinking,I suppose. ;D
LOL, JediJohnnie! That's a GREAT idea! It's pretty apparent threads like these get very heated. I enjoy reading them but, otherwise I ignore them. You know what they say - Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.
Same could be said for people who still use that stupid, overused quote. Arguing doesn't make you stupid, it makes you a better human being. The fact that I even bother to argue at all means I am open to learning new things and I take thinking about other people's ideas seriously. I may disagree with them, and argue against them, but I never take it personal. I enjoy the process, and have fun with it. Why should arguing be such a bad thing?
Flackle, my post wasn't meant to insult you or anyone else but, you gotta admit it's true. Isn't there enough garbage in the world to put up with? Why make it worse by arguing (especially over the internet) when you've got the control to just walk away? That's all I meant by it. However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting. It certainly keeps the posts going, doesn't it?
Well said!
-
Arguing doesn't make you stupid, it makes you a better human being. The fact that I even bother to argue at all means I am open to learning new things and I take thinking about other people's ideas seriously. I may disagree with them, and argue against them, but I never take it personal. I enjoy the process, and have fun with it. Why should arguing be such a bad thing?
Well-reasoned.
However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting.
Well said!
It's unsurprising that someone who cannot reason would agree with poorly unreasoned assumptions, (especially those which would restrict or constrain counter-arguments to such unreasoning to allow them to go unopposed).
-
Arguing doesn't make you stupid, it makes you a better human being. The fact that I even bother to argue at all means I am open to learning new things and I take thinking about other people's ideas seriously. I may disagree with them, and argue against them, but I never take it personal. I enjoy the process, and have fun with it. Why should arguing be such a bad thing?
Well-reasoned.
However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting.
Well said!
It's unsurprising that someone who cannot reason would agree with poorly unreasoned assumptions, (especially those which would restrict or constrain counter-arguments to such unreasoning to allow them to go unopposed).
Haha! That's cool, Falcon9, but it's got nothing to do with "reasoning" and EVERYTHING to do with "control." I see you TRY to "control" plenty of the conversations, and that's OK! Like I said, it sure does keep those posts comin'! :P
-
Arguing doesn't make you stupid, it makes you a better human being. The fact that I even bother to argue at all means I am open to learning new things and I take thinking about other people's ideas seriously. I may disagree with them, and argue against them, but I never take it personal. I enjoy the process, and have fun with it. Why should arguing be such a bad thing?
Well-reasoned.
However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting.
Well said!
It's unsurprising that someone who cannot reason would agree with poorly unreasoned assumptions, (especially those which would restrict or constrain counter-arguments to such unreasoning to allow them to go unopposed).
Haha! That's cool, Falcon9, but it's got nothing to do with "reasoning" and EVERYTHING to do with "control." I see you TRY to "control" plenty of the conversations, and that's OK! Like I said, it sure does keep those posts comin'! :P
Then you aren't especially observant since the one I replied to, ("jcribb16"), has been trying to control dissenting responses to religious contentions for years now, (archived evidence of attempted censorship, restricting content of replies and other respressive methods of "control" are attributed to so many of her posts that it has become an observable pattern).
-
Arguing doesn't make you stupid, it makes you a better human being. The fact that I even bother to argue at all means I am open to learning new things and I take thinking about other people's ideas seriously. I may disagree with them, and argue against them, but I never take it personal. I enjoy the process, and have fun with it. Why should arguing be such a bad thing?
Well-reasoned.
However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting.
Well said!
It's unsurprising that someone who cannot reason would agree with poorly unreasoned assumptions, (especially those which would restrict or constrain counter-arguments to such unreasoning to allow them to go unopposed).
Haha! That's cool, Falcon9, but it's got nothing to do with "reasoning" and EVERYTHING to do with "control." I see you TRY to "control" plenty of the conversations, and that's OK! Like I said, it sure does keep those posts comin'! :P
Then you aren't especially observant since the one I replied to, ("jcribb16"), has been trying to control dissenting responses to religious contentions for years now, (archived evidence of attempted censorship, restricting content of replies and other respressive methods of "control" are attributed to so many of her posts that it has become an observable pattern).
But that's the whole point, Falcon9. No matter what the opinion may be, whether we like it or not, we're all entitled to it. Isn't Freedom of Speech GRAND!? I sure think so!
-
However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting.
Well said!
It's unsurprising that someone who cannot reason would agree with poorly unreasoned assumptions, (especially those which would restrict or constrain counter-arguments to such unreasoning to allow them to go unopposed).
Haha! That's cool, Falcon9, but it's got nothing to do with "reasoning" and EVERYTHING to do with "control." I see you TRY to "control" plenty of the conversations, and that's OK! Like I said, it sure does keep those posts comin'! :P
Then you aren't especially observant since the one I replied to, ("jcribb16"), has been trying to control dissenting responses to religious contentions for years now, (archived evidence of attempted censorship, restricting content of replies and other respressive methods of "control" are attributed to so many of her posts that it has become an observable pattern).
But that's the whole point, Falcon9. No matter what the opinion may be, whether we like it or not, we're all entitled to it. Isn't Freedom of Speech GRAND!? I sure think so!
In that case, you are still missing the point; those attempts at censoring/restricting/oppressing dissenting viewpoints to religious claims are attempts to suppress such "freedom of speech", not encourage it. The difference is nominally obvious; opposing empty religious opinion in not the same as attempting to suppress dissenting viewpoints.
-
However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting.
Well said!
It's unsurprising that someone who cannot reason would agree with poorly unreasoned assumptions, (especially those which would restrict or constrain counter-arguments to such unreasoning to allow them to go unopposed).
Haha! That's cool, Falcon9, but it's got nothing to do with "reasoning" and EVERYTHING to do with "control." I see you TRY to "control" plenty of the conversations, and that's OK! Like I said, it sure does keep those posts comin'! :P
Then you aren't especially observant since the one I replied to, ("jcribb16"), has been trying to control dissenting responses to religious contentions for years now, (archived evidence of attempted censorship, restricting content of replies and other respressive methods of "control" are attributed to so many of her posts that it has become an observable pattern).
But that's the whole point, Falcon9. No matter what the opinion may be, whether we like it or not, we're all entitled to it. Isn't Freedom of Speech GRAND!? I sure think so!
In that case, you are still missing the point; those attempts at censoring/restricting/oppressing dissenting viewpoints to religious claims are attempts to suppress such "freedom of speech", not encourage it. The difference is nominally obvious; opposing empty religious opinion in not the same as attempting to suppress dissenting viewpoints.
Actually, it's worse than that, because opposing "empty" religious opinion is biased and judgmental, in that you lack tolerance and respect of others who have the right to choose and live their life under the leading of God. You don't have to choose it for yourself, but calling believers' choices the names and words you do, is intolerance and disrespect for their beliefs.
-
Arguing doesn't make you stupid, it makes you a better human being. The fact that I even bother to argue at all means I am open to learning new things and I take thinking about other people's ideas seriously. I may disagree with them, and argue against them, but I never take it personal. I enjoy the process, and have fun with it. Why should arguing be such a bad thing?
Well-reasoned.
However, I understand that there are people who LIVE for it. I guess it makes their lives more interesting.
Well said!
It's unsurprising that someone who cannot reason would agree with poorly unreasoned assumptions, (especially those which would restrict or constrain counter-arguments to such unreasoning to allow them to go unopposed).
Haha! That's cool, Falcon9, but it's got nothing to do with "reasoning" and EVERYTHING to do with "control." I see you TRY to "control" plenty of the conversations, and that's OK! Like I said, it sure does keep those posts comin'! :P
Then you aren't especially observant since the one I replied to, ("jcribb16"), has been trying to control dissenting responses to religious contentions for years now, (archived evidence of attempted censorship, restricting content of replies and other respressive methods of "control" are attributed to so many of her posts that it has become an observable pattern).
Aww... how nice of you to be so concerned with my "dissenting" responses for "years now." Wow, it's that important to you, aye? I am giving my opinions and views, actually, on the hate-filled responses you place on believers, since you choose not to actually debate and discuss the topic. You are trying to restrict my content of replies in disagreeing/opposing your bashing of believers.
You never let up on believers, always think you are right and factual with your hateful attitude/words you aim to believers, and refuse to actually debate and discuss. I have the right to my thoughts and views, as well, and do not have to sit back and do nothing when you act like you do towards believers, including myself. So yes, when you consistently try and make believers look foolish, irrational, or mentally off with their way of thinking, I, or anyone else who chooses, will come back with thoughts, views, and opinions, challenging your disrespectful words.
Speaking of "an observable pattern," you are at the top of the list for that. But you already knew that, since you work so hard for that trophy. You can have it and enjoy it, as you already do.
-
Actually, it's worse than that, because opposing "empty" religious opinion is biased and judgmental ...
That's accurate as far as opposing irrational empty religious opinion and judging blind faith to be "biased" against rationality.
...in that you lack tolerance and respect of others who have the right to choose and live their life under the leading of God. You don't have to choose it for yourself, but calling believers' choices the names and words you do, is intolerance and disrespect for their beliefs.
There are no mandated requirements to "respect" a publically-posted irrational opinion, (religious or otherwise). The holders of blind religious faiths are able to do so within the privacy of their own deluded minds without interference. However, as soon as thoswe self-delusions leave the confines of the minds of religious adherents and offensively attempt to infect other minds with the same irrationalities, opposition can and does occur. Just as such religious adherents have the option to phrase their proselytizations of blind faith in any way which doesn't violate FC TOS, so too do those who oppose such self-delusions have the same option. That means that neither religious adherents nor any non-religious opposition gets to dictate content to the other, (despite your continued ineefective efforts to suppress opposing viewpoints in that manner).
-
Actually, it's worse than that, because opposing "empty" religious opinion is biased and judgmental ...
That's accurate as far as opposing irrational empty religious opinion and judging blind faith to be "biased" against rationality.
...in that you lack tolerance and respect of others who have the right to choose and live their life under the leading of God. You don't have to choose it for yourself, but calling believers' choices the names and words you do, is intolerance and disrespect for their beliefs.
There are no mandated requirements to "respect" a publically-posted irrational opinion, (religious or otherwise). The holders of blind religious faiths are able to do so within the privacy of their own deluded minds without interference. However, as soon as thoswe self-delusions leave the confines of the minds of religious adherents and offensively attempt to infect other minds with the same irrationalities, opposition can and does occur. Just as such religious adherents have the option to phrase their proselytizations of blind faith in any way which doesn't violate FC TOS, so too do those who oppose such self-delusions have the same option. That means that neither religious adherents nor any non-religious opposition gets to dictate content to the other, (despite your continued ineefective efforts to suppress opposing viewpoints in that manner).
It's called COMMON COURTESY, sir. No one is infecting other minds - knock it off. If it was, the thread would be locked. You don't like them - fine. But stop spreading untruths about what many of the Bible verse threads are for.
I enjoy conversing, inspiring, encouraging, praying for others, just as I enjoy receiving the same from other believers. It doesn't mean I'm trying to force or ram anything down throats - because, remember? YOU don't HAVE to ENTER the thread in the first place. COMMON COURTESY OF RESPECT FROM/FOR DECENT HUMAN BEINGS.
You, essentially, are trying to make the effort of suppressing believers from sharing with each other, just because you don't like the thread in the first place. Your efforts are ineffective, to say the least. I will also add that the Bible verse threads ARE NOT TRYING TO BE EXCLUSIVE BELIEVER'S CLUBS. They are posted as any other subject or topic would be. If there is a Bible verse thread, it is COMMON SENSE to expect those who enjoy Bible verses, to come in and share them with each other, and DOES NOT MEAN they are exclusive. COMMON SENSE, sir.
-
It's called COMMON COURTESY, sir.
No, it's a continued attempt at suppressing opposing viewpoints under the guise of "courtesy". There are no mandated requirements to "respect" a publically-posted irrational opinion, (religious or otherwise). The holders of blind religious faiths are able to do so within the privacy of their own deluded minds without interference. However, as soon as thoswe self-delusions leave the confines of the minds of religious adherents and offensively attempt to infect other minds with the same irrationalities, opposition can and does occur. Just as such religious adherents have the option to phrase their proselytizations of blind faith in any way which doesn't violate FC TOS, so too do those who oppose such self-delusions have the same option. That means that neither religious adherents nor any non-religious opposition gets to dictate content to the other, (despite your continued ineefective efforts to suppress opposing viewpoints in that manner).
No one is infecting other minds - knock it off. If it was, the thread would be locked. You don't like them - fine. But stop spreading untruths about what many of the Bible verse threads are for.
I'm neither the first, nor the last to accurately characterize religions as mind virii. Such irrational beliefs are spread by proselytizing, (whether in verbal or written form), and they can infect the minds of the fearful/gullible/somewhat slow of wit if unopposed. As stated previously, there are no current FC prohibitions against either religious proselytizing nor, opposing it.
You, essentially, are trying to make the effort of suppressing believers from sharing ...
What, precisely, is being "shared" by reposting requoted material already available to those it's supposedly being "shared" with - repetition? Additionally, I've reiterated enough times that posts opposing such religious blind faith and proselytizing it are not an "effort of suppressing believers from sharing ..." since the religious adherents continue proselytizing unabated.
I will also add that the Bible verse threads ARE NOT TRYING TO BE EXCLUSIVE BELIEVER'S CLUBS.
If that were accurate, why are there numerous archived posts complaining about "atheists", opposing viewpoints, being logically challenged and trying to pose dissent as "rude/disrespectful/impolite" etc. in evidence to the contrary of your empty assertion? <--rhetorical question
-
It's called COMMON COURTESY, sir.
No, it's a continued attempt at suppressing opposing viewpoints under the guise of "courtesy". There are no mandated requirements to "respect" a publically-posted irrational opinion, (religious or otherwise). The holders of blind religious faiths are able to do so within the privacy of their own deluded minds without interference. However, as soon as thoswe self-delusions leave the confines of the minds of religious adherents and offensively attempt to infect other minds with the same irrationalities, opposition can and does occur. Just as such religious adherents have the option to phrase their proselytizations of blind faith in any way which doesn't violate FC TOS, so too do those who oppose such self-delusions have the same option. That means that neither religious adherents nor any non-religious opposition gets to dictate content to the other, (despite your continued ineefective efforts to suppress opposing viewpoints in that manner).
No one is infecting other minds - knock it off. If it was, the thread would be locked. You don't like them - fine. But stop spreading untruths about what many of the Bible verse threads are for.
I'm neither the first, nor the last to accurately characterize religions as mind virii. Such irrational beliefs are spread by proselytizing, (whether in verbal or written form), and they can infect the minds of the fearful/gullible/somewhat slow of wit if unopposed. As stated previously, there are no current FC prohibitions against either religious proselytizing nor, opposing it.
You, essentially, are trying to make the effort of suppressing believers from sharing ...
What, precisely, is being "shared" by reposting requoted material already available to those it's supposedly being "shared" with - repetition? Additionally, I've reiterated enough times that posts opposing such religious blind faith and proselytizing it are not an "effort of suppressing believers from sharing ..." since the religious adherents continue proselytizing unabated.
I will also add that the Bible verse threads ARE NOT TRYING TO BE EXCLUSIVE BELIEVER'S CLUBS.
If that were accurate, why are there numerous archived posts complaining about "atheists", opposing viewpoints, being logically challenged and trying to pose dissent as "rude/disrespectful/impolite" etc. in evidence to the contrary of your empty assertion? <--rhetorical question
Your lack of common courtesy is well noted. As are your unreasonable views and disrespect toward others who choose to believe in God. You are deeply rooted in your intolerance to believers and this is also well noted. However, I will say this - your attitude and comments only strengthen my commitment and loyalty to Jesus Christ. You continue on your tirade - it's obvious you are on an unstoppable commitment to bash believers. I will continue with my choice of serving my Lord.
It's a good thing the moderator isn't you - you apparently are one, if given the opportunity, who would do everything you could (like the Atheist Group currently, in America) to block Christians from even being able to post Bible verse threads, and in the public, would oppose a person trying to live a Christian life; and to help rid America of Christianity.
What a shame there are such hard-hearted individuals who cannot tolerate the idea that others have the right to believe in whom or what they choose; or to not believe in anyone or thing; and to top it off, must continually mock and agitate those believers who even try to speak to each other and others who enjoy the posts, and respond, and instead, try to disrupt a thread just because of intolerance.
You choose to be Atheist, or else dis-believe in anything - that is your right and choice, and you shouldn't have to answer to anyone, nor should you have to explain yourself. It's the same way with those who choose to believe in God - it's their right and choice, and they should not have to answer or explain themselves. Especially in a Bible verse thread, an inspirational thread, or uplifting quotes thread.
On the other hand, people who don't like those threads do NOT have to enter them, can express their views maturely as the adults they are supposed to be, but the constant bashing is unnecessary. The constant bashing is disrespectful, agitating, really pushing the boundary line on the "golden rule," and is being done deliberately just to provoke - in essence - trolling. Then when others say something to that, then suddenly they're trying to "suppress" "dissenting views." Ha! What a lame excuse and cover up of words being used to get away with constant bashing. Where is the adult in that...
-
Your lack of common courtesy is well noted.
You keep repeating your biased opinion as if it were factually-accurate. If that were accurate, why are there numerous archived posts complaining about "atheists", opposing viewpoints, being logically challenged and trying to pose dissent as "rude/disrespectful/impolite" etc. in evidence to the contrary of your empty assertion? <--rhetorical question
Instead, it's a continued attempt at suppressing opposing viewpoints under the guise of "courtesy". There are no mandated requirements to "respect" a publically-posted irrational opinion, (religious or otherwise). The holders of blind religious faiths are able to do so within the privacy of their own deluded minds without interference. However, as soon as thoswe self-delusions leave the confines of the minds of religious adherents and offensively attempt to infect other minds with the same irrationalities, opposition can and does occur.
As are your unreasonable views and disrespect toward others who choose to believe in God.
On the contrary, such opposing views have used reason/logic to support them, which makes your characterization false.
You are deeply rooted in your intolerance to believers and this is also well noted.
That's another one of your unsupported false characterizations, (otherwise known as your unsubstantiated biased opinion). In fact, I do 'tolerate' the expression of blind faith in religious superstitions to the extent that I haven't endeavored to suppress them, (opposition is not suppression), as you have repeatedly tried suppressing opposing viewpoints for months now, (archived evidence of this exists to support that contention).
However, I will say this - your attitude and comments only strengthen my commitment and loyalty to Jesus Christ. I will continue with my choice of serving my Lord.
In other words, you are tacitly declaring that you won't allow reason & logic to penetrate the darkness of your blind religious faith and you intend to cling to it irrationally and illogically.
It's a good thing the moderator isn't you - you apparently are one, if given the opportunity, who would do everything you could (like the Atheist Group currently, in America) to block Christians from even being able to post Bible verse threads, and in the public, would oppose a person trying to live a Christian life; and to help rid America of Christianity.
Moderators moderate within the strictures of specific posting policies and TOS; they don't " ... oppose a person trying to live a Christian life; and to help rid America of Christianity", (as you melodramatically propose). As far as the mind-blindness of xtianity, you're mistaken; I'd support banning all public expression of specious religious superstitions. Privately, the fundies can knock themselves out in that regard.
What a shame there are such hard-hearted individuals who cannot tolerate the idea that others have the right to believe in whom or what they choose; or to not believe in anyone or thing ...
[/quote
Since you're obviously not paying attention to replies to your specious rantings, it becomes necessary to reiterate; privately, believe what you want - publically, if you can proselytize it, others can oppose it. If you don't like that it's a two way street, strive for an oppressive theocracy; I'll oppose that even more strenuously.
-
To many times we have traveled down this road. So many more times will we continue to travel this road. I am a believe in the Lord Savioe Jesus Christ. I always have and i always will. It doesn't matter what anyone tries to throw out there. If you are not a believer than thats your choice as well. We need to be respectful of each other regardless of our beliefs or non-beliefs. Some of us have been harsh, rude and ridiculous with our comments. We may not want to admit it but we have. If someone post about their beliefs and you don't agree, just don't comment. Same if someone post who don't believe, don't comment. Sometimes the best thing you can do for yourself and others is to keep your comments to yourself.
-
Your lack of common courtesy is well noted.
You keep repeating your biased opinion as if it were factually-accurate. If that were accurate, why are there numerous archived posts complaining about "atheists", opposing viewpoints, being logically challenged and trying to pose dissent as "rude/disrespectful/impolite" etc. in evidence to the contrary of your empty assertion? <--rhetorical question
Instead, it's a continued attempt at suppressing opposing viewpoints under the guise of "courtesy". There are no mandated requirements to "respect" a publically-posted irrational opinion, (religious or otherwise). The holders of blind religious faiths are able to do so within the privacy of their own deluded minds without interference. However, as soon as thoswe self-delusions leave the confines of the minds of religious adherents and offensively attempt to infect other minds with the same irrationalities, opposition can and does occur.
As are your unreasonable views and disrespect toward others who choose to believe in God.
On the contrary, such opposing views have used reason/logic to support them, which makes your characterization false.
You are deeply rooted in your intolerance to believers and this is also well noted.
That's another one of your unsupported false characterizations, (otherwise known as your unsubstantiated biased opinion). In fact, I do 'tolerate' the expression of blind faith in religious superstitions to the extent that I haven't endeavored to suppress them, (opposition is not suppression), as you have repeatedly tried suppressing opposing viewpoints for months now, (archived evidence of this exists to support that contention).
However, I will say this - your attitude and comments only strengthen my commitment and loyalty to Jesus Christ. I will continue with my choice of serving my Lord.
In other words, you are tacitly declaring that you won't allow reason & logic to penetrate the darkness of your blind religious faith and you intend to cling to it irrationally and illogically.
It's a good thing the moderator isn't you - you apparently are one, if given the opportunity, who would do everything you could (like the Atheist Group currently, in America) to block Christians from even being able to post Bible verse threads, and in the public, would oppose a person trying to live a Christian life; and to help rid America of Christianity.
Moderators moderate within the strictures of specific posting policies and TOS; they don't " ... oppose a person trying to live a Christian life; and to help rid America of Christianity", (as you melodramatically propose). As far as the mind-blindness of xtianity, you're mistaken; I'd support banning all public expression of specious religious superstitions. Privately, the fundies can knock themselves out in that regard.
What a shame there are such hard-hearted individuals who cannot tolerate the idea that others have the right to believe in whom or what they choose; or to not believe in anyone or thing ...
[/quote
Since you're obviously not paying attention to replies to your specious rantings, it becomes necessary to reiterate; privately, believe what you want - publically, if you can proselytize it, others can oppose it. If you don't like that it's a two way street, strive for an oppressive theocracy; I'll oppose that even more strenuously.
Clarification, since you enjoy twisting my words out of context: The moderator/s in here do not "oppose... " - I said I'm glad YOU are not a moderator, because I personally feel YOU would do what YOU could to OPPOSE anything Christian being allowed on the forum board. I also am saying that you, with your bashing of believers, are acting within the same mindset of the Atheist Group in America, whose goal is to remove Christianity from everything. Please stop twisting my words out of the context which I present, just to make it look like I am saying something I'm not.
-
If someone post about their beliefs and you don't agree, just don't comment. Same if someone post who don't believe, don't comment. Sometimes the best thing you can do for yourself and others is to keep your comments to yourself.
The problem with that is that it's one-sided. You fundies appear to believe in several falsehoods; in this instance, that you're permitted to post about 'private' religious beliefs, (thus making them public), but believe that others shouldn't comment in opposition. That's irrational, suppressive and disregarded as such.
-
Please stop twisting my words out of the context which I present, just to make it look like I am saying something I'm not.
That's unnecessary since your twisted words are archived, unaltered.
-
To many times we have traveled down this road. So many more times will we continue to travel this road. I am a believe in the Lord Savioe Jesus Christ. I always have and i always will. It doesn't matter what anyone tries to throw out there. If you are not a believer than thats your choice as well. We need to be respectful of each other regardless of our beliefs or non-beliefs. Some of us have been harsh, rude and ridiculous with our comments. We may not want to admit it but we have. If someone post about their beliefs and you don't agree, just don't comment. Same if someone post who don't believe, don't comment. Sometimes the best thing you can do for yourself and others is to keep your comments to yourself.
I agree that this same road is being traveled too many times, and will keep being traveled. Just to clarify from my point of view of my remarks, I have no issue with anyone who chooses their own direction to believe or dis-believe. Like you said, it's everyone's choice as to how they choose to live their life.
I only have an issue when posters come in deliberately to mock, make fun of, and bash believers, for even just posting verses or quotes of inspiration. Sure, they can be ignored, but at the same time, believers help each other, encourage each other, through those kinds of hateful remarks, including standing up for our right to believe in and support Christ. Thanks for speaking from your heart, too.
-
Just to clarify from my point of view of my remarks, I have no issue with anyone who chooses their own direction to believe or dis-believe.
That's not an accurate statement since your "issue" is with those who choose not to 'believe' and oppose such superstitious beliefs rationally/logically. When your inherent religious bias causes you to characterize opposing viewpoints as "mocking", "bashing", etc., as if those opinions weren't inherently biased assumptions is disingenuous.
I only have an issue when posters come in deliberately to mock, make fun of, and bash believers, for even just posting verses or quotes of inspiration.
Those adjectives reflect religious bias and are not accurate since they are subjective opinions and not based on objective fact. On the other hand, others have produced evidence that followers of xtianity are directly responsible for the inquisitions, crusades, (three), witch hunts and generally persecuting non-believers with torture and deaths. Opposing the offensive proselytizing of the exact same belief system isn't considering "rude" or "mocking" by those dissenting against such reprehensible practices steeming from the same religious blind faith.
Sure, they can be ignored, but at the same time, believers help each other, encourage each other, through those kinds of hateful remarks, including standing up for our right to believe in and support Christ.
There's no inherent "right" to "support christ"; the applicable Constitutional guarantee concerns "freedom of religion", not the "freedom" to proselytize UNOPPOSED, (because others have the Constitutional option to oppose it).
-
Everyone should be able to give their opinion. Its just the way that some of us are giving them. Actually its not some of us its one person. Falcon has a serious issue with religion. Theredore i feel you Falcon, should avoid the post that deal with religions and beliefs tht you don't agree with. Why, because it makes you to look as a , inconsiderate, rude, obnoxious person. I don't think thats who you are. You just have strong beliefs and thats fine. Maybe find a better way to express them instead of how you have been doing. Be mindful of peoples feeling. Show some respect.
-
Please stop twisting my words out of the context which I present, just to make it look like I am saying something I'm not.
That's unnecessary since your twisted words are archived, unaltered.
That's a great point - your twisting of my words are also archived, unaltered. And copied to my own personal files as well, in the event you would go back and either delete or alter your twisting of my words, to make it look as if I was wrong.
-
If someone post about their beliefs and you don't agree, just don't comment. Same if someone post who don't believe, don't comment. Sometimes the best thing you can do for yourself and others is to keep your comments to yourself.
The problem with that is that it's one-sided. You fundies appear to believe in several falsehoods; in this instance, that you're permitted to post about 'private' religious beliefs, (thus making them public), but believe that others shouldn't comment in opposition. That's irrational, suppressive and disregarded as such.
No, it's not one-sided. It's definitely two-sided. Believers share inspiration, while you oppose vehemently through mocking and bashing. Your side counts within the issue here.
-
Just to clarify from my point of view of my remarks, I have no issue with anyone who chooses their own direction to believe or dis-believe.
That's not an accurate statement since your "issue" is with those who choose not to 'believe' and oppose such superstitious beliefs rationally/logically. When your inherent religious bias causes you to characterize opposing viewpoints as "mocking", "bashing", etc., as if those opinions weren't inherently biased assumptions is disingenuous.
I only have an issue when posters come in deliberately to mock, make fun of, and bash believers, for even just posting verses or quotes of inspiration.
Those adjectives reflect religious bias and are not accurate since they are subjective opinions and not based on objective fact. On the other hand, others have produced evidence that followers of xtianity are directly responsible for the inquisitions, crusades, (three), witch hunts and generally persecuting non-believers with torture and deaths. Opposing the offensive proselytizing of the exact same belief system isn't considering "rude" or "mocking" by those dissenting against such reprehensible practices steeming from the same religious blind faith.
Sure, they can be ignored, but at the same time, believers help each other, encourage each other, through those kinds of hateful remarks, including standing up for our right to believe in and support Christ.
There's no inherent "right" to "support christ"; the applicable Constitutional guarantee concerns "freedom of religion", not the "freedom" to proselytize UNOPPOSED, (because others have the Constitutional option to oppose it).
Once again, you are misrepresenting the truth. No one is forcing anyone to receive or deny Christ. Both believers and dis-believers are protected by the Constitution. Freedom of religion and no religion. You seem to have a problem letting Christians enjoy their freedom of religion in these forums, while no one is coming down on you for your personal choice of dis-believing. Intolerance and disrespect are obvious. It also seems that you are just itching to have someone be intolerant and disrespectful to your personal choice of dis-believing. That's not going to happen from me, and from many - because it's your personal choice to believe or dis-believe what you want. It's a shame you can't offer the same common courtesy.
My issue is NOT with those who dis-believe. My issue IS WITH your mocking, intolerant, bashing attitude of disrespect you only aim toward believers. That is a major difference. While you are free to oppose religion, God, and what believers choose to believe, you continue to go overboard with the obvious loathing and basically, "trolling" constantly, trying to continually disrupt any believer's threads. You don't seem to have any other problems toward other religions, just Christianity - that is intolerance and bias.
No matter how many times you keep trying to infer that Christians, as a whole, are connected to the Crusades, witch burnings, etc., you are showing your misunderstanding and intolerance again and again to those believers who live for God and do not side with, nor support, any of those previous things that happened. I will keep reminding you that you cannot box ALL people who call themselves Christians, in ONE BOX, just because they have the name Christian attached. True and genuine believers in Christ do NOT take part in nor support those horrible issues. You are using them, as part of your loathing, to get at Christians and make ones in here look bad - you are only making yourself look intolerant and foolish.
-
well said jcribb16 :thumbsup:
-
Everyone should be able to give their opinion. Its just the way that some of us are giving them. Actually its not some of us its one person. Falcon has a serious issue with religion. Theredore i feel you Falcon, should avoid the post that deal with religions and beliefs tht you don't agree with. Why, because it makes you to look as a , inconsiderate, rude, obnoxious person. I don't think thats who you are. You just have strong beliefs and thats fine. Maybe find a better way to express them instead of how you have been doing. Be mindful of peoples feeling. Show some respect.
I have tried saying the same. Everyone of us are free to choose what we believe or don't believe. I have not encountered others coming down on him disrespectfully, for what he chooses (to dis-believe.) Yet, there is constant disrespect, under the guise of "dissenting and challenging opinions" towards believers, through the use of name-calling, pics that are mocking Christ, quotes and remarks that are worded in such a way as to provoke negative responses from believers. Those are beyond opposing challenges - they are thoughtless and disrespectful, and are trying to make believers appear to be insane and irrational because of what they believe.
That's the only issue I have about this whole thing. I respect his choice, yet he refuses to offer the same common courtesy, and keeps it going. It's not right, nor fair, to other people who are trying to encourage and inspire each other in threads that are allowed in this forum, especially when in the Off Topics section.
-
well said jcribb16 :thumbsup:
Thank you.
-
I've had no problem with what falcon is saying, He's simply trying to make you xtians see how illogical and indefensible your, or any religion, is. You have no facts that support what you believe in.
-
If someone post about their beliefs and you don't agree, just don't comment. Same if someone post who don't believe, don't comment. Sometimes the best thing you can do for yourself and others is to keep your comments to yourself.
The problem with that is that it's one-sided. You fundies appear to believe in several falsehoods; in this instance, that you're permitted to post about 'private' religious beliefs, (thus making them public), but believe that others shouldn't comment in opposition. That's irrational, suppressive and disregarded as such.
No, it's not one-sided.
The suggestion to not comment, (made by both of you), is one-sided. If you don't like dissenting viewpoints, not commenting on those would be symetrical. Suggesting that dissenters not comment on religious topics is one-sided.
It's definitely two-sided. Believers share inspiration, while you oppose vehemently through mocking and bashing. Your side counts within the issue here.
Your religiously-biased illogic aside, (because that's been pointed out numerous times already); the point is that a few of you xtians have been trying to suppress opposing viewpoints by falsely characterizing them variously as "mocking", "bashing", "rude", disrespectful" and in any way which promotes restricting/censoring/suppressing opposing viewpoints. Just as you have the option to continue such an ineffective campaign, so too do others have the same option to oppose such repressive tactics employed by faith blinded xtians.
-
I've had no problem with what falcon is saying, He's simply trying to make you xtians see how illogical and indefensible your, or any religion, is. You have no facts that support what you believe in.
That's the gist of it; without substantive evidence, the superstitions they 'believe in' must rely entirely upon blind faith alone. No logical arguments or rational basis for a superstitious religious belief has been presented, (such irrational things are apparently 'believed' because the holder of such an illogical belief chooses to do so, not because there's any substantive supporting evidence for it - because none is presented).
-
No matter how many times you keep trying to infer that Christians, as a whole, are connected to the Crusades, witch burnings, etc., you are showing your misunderstanding and intolerance again and again to those believers ...
It was xtians who participated in all three crusades against non-xtians and were responsible for so many deaths. It was xtians who prosecuted the Inquistions and witch hunts which resulted in the torture and deaths of xtians and non-xtians alike. It was the exact same xtian religious beliefs which were the underlying basis of those atrocities and are being "shared", (your word for it), today. Undoubtedly, xtians today would prefer that the same religious belief system as those previous xtians held blindly to not be associated in any way with the exact same religion. This is however, an irrational preference because the religious belief system is not essentially different in any significant ways.
-
If someone post about their beliefs and you don't agree, just don't comment. Same if someone post who don't believe, don't comment. Sometimes the best thing you can do for yourself and others is to keep your comments to yourself.
The problem with that is that it's one-sided. You fundies appear to believe in several falsehoods; in this instance, that you're permitted to post about 'private' religious beliefs, (thus making them public), but believe that others shouldn't comment in opposition. That's irrational, suppressive and disregarded as such.
No, it's not one-sided.
The suggestion to not comment, (made by both of you), is one-sided. If you don't like dissenting viewpoints, not commenting on those would be symetrical. Suggesting that dissenters not comment on religious topics is one-sided.
It's definitely two-sided. Believers share inspiration, while you oppose vehemently through mocking and bashing. Your side counts within the issue here.
Your religiously-biased illogic aside, (because that's been pointed out numerous times already); the point is that a few of you xtians have been trying to suppress opposing viewpoints by falsely characterizing them variously as "mocking", "bashing", "rude", disrespectful" and in any way which promotes restricting/censoring/suppressing opposing viewpoints. Just as you have the option to continue such an ineffective campaign, so too do others have the same option to oppose such repressive tactics employed by faith blinded xtians.
Just as you continue to deny your "dissenting opinions" are indeed "mocking," "bashing," "rude," and "disrespectful," so, too, do others have the same option to oppose such repressive tactics employed by someone using the personal loathing of God-related posts to try and make believers cower and look stupid. If you would attempt using mature thoughts and views on the matter, it would be worth discussing. People can't discuss maturely with one who is hateful and mocking, in the first place, including rejecting each and every comment, quote, verse, thoughts, made by others.
I feel sorry for your cold intolerance towards believers for something they just want to express with others who enjoy conversing (I'm speaking of Off Topic Bible verse threads, inspirational threads, or uplifting quotes.) I feel sorry for the fact that you take your loathing of God-related things out on any believer who attempts to share anything God-related.
-
Just as you continue to ...
What I continue to do is point out that your religious bias is reflected in the irrational repetitions of the false assertions you keep making; something you avoid adressing in your pseudo-martyrdom. Since so many of your posts simply keep repeating refuted points, (and your denials that they were refuted), you apparently have no substantiation, (other than the inherent circularity of 'belief is faith is belief'), for your contentions you've reverted back to attacking the poster rather than the content of a post.
-
I feel sorry for your cold intolerance towards believers for something they just want to express with others who enjoy conversing (I'm speaking of Off Topic Bible verse threads, inspirational threads, or uplifting quotes.)
Sometimes I pity those whose blind religious faith is so self-deluding that they cannot *see* that it is blinding. It blinds them to reason, to questioning assumptions and to the very "tolerance" which they want from others being withheld from 'non-believers'. It blinds them to the inherently offensive nature of religious proselytizing with "verses" and faith-based platitudes, (including those stolen from other belief systems). It blinds them to the documented facts of the crusades, inquistions, witch hunts and other xtian-instigated atrocities having the same foundational religious beliefs as they hold. It's ironic when the faith-blinded speak hypocritcally of "enlightenment" when none are so blind as the self-blinded ones of faith.
-
I've had no problem with what falcon is saying, He's simply trying to make you xtians see how illogical and indefensible your, or any religion, is. You have no facts that support what you believe in.
That's the gist of it; without substantive evidence, the superstitions they 'believe in' must rely entirely upon blind faith alone. No logical arguments or rational basis for a superstitious religious belief has been presented, (such irrational things are apparently 'believed' because the holder of such an illogical belief chooses to do so, not because there's any substantive supporting evidence for it - because none is presented).
And this makes you so concerned for the believers that you feel you must oppress them with your views? No go. You, and this other poster, can believe how illogical it is, but it comes down to each individual, making their own personal choices, in the situation.
Remember the Constitution you brought up? You bring it up, in your defense, which I already said you and others have the rights and freedoms to dis-believe or believe how you choose. Yet, you are not accepting the fact that the Constitution is also protecting the rights of people who do choose to believe in God, or whatever religion they feel is best for them.
It may seem illogical to the both of you, but get over it. Trying to browbeat believers for not accepting what you choose to accept, is domineering and rude. You have chosen your paths; so have we, as believers. Don't like it? No apology is necesary nor will be given for something someone believes in strongly about, no matter how foolishly you keep trying to make believers look. No one is harping on your dis-belief at all; only your cold intolerance of their choice to believe in God.
You are accountable for your choices, just as believers are for theirs - fairness and common courtesy are sorely lacking from you, yet the same fairness/common courtesy is being given to you because of your right to choose your own desired path. You should be examining your own motives of why you are doing what you are towards believers.
It's strange we still haven't seen any threads started by you regarding your choice of dis-belief, including the why's, and reasons, for your choice. It's strange that you can accept those who have chosen *Wicca, and even start a thread of info for anyone of interest, even though you aren't Wiccan, yet you can't extend the same acceptance and info for believers. And then get miffed if a believer even comes in the Wiccan thread to comment at all, on anything about it. Which means, you are apparently trying to make that thread a believer-free, Wiccan exclusive country club, for you, those who practice Wiccan, or those who are interested enough to ask questions.
*PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying anything against those who practice Wiccan - that's your choice and belief, as Christianity is for me. I have no issue with your choice. I am only speaking of the unfairness and lack of common courtesy of one towards only believers in Christ. :)
Of course, we already know you will deny this and twist my words around, because you cannot and will not tolerate anyone daring to challenge you, or make it seem in any way whatsoever that you are showing bias or are a tad wrong with some of your comments, etc. But that's okay - we see and read what is going on, what your purpose is, and expect your comebacks - no surprises there. You don't wish to see the truth of your bias towards only the believers, but others do see it, and no other explanation is needed.
-
I've had no problem with what falcon is saying, He's simply trying to make you xtians see how illogical and indefensible your, or any religion, is. You have no facts that support what you believe in.
Says you. Thank you for your opinion and thoughts on the matter. I'm sorry you refuse to see how believing in God is logical for believers. I respect your choice in dis-believing, and only ask for the same in return.
Any evidence provided by believers is refused by a couple of posters, but to outright say that my God and my belief in Him is illogical and indefensible, and have no facts supporting my beliefs, is strictly your opinion and thoughts, and do not sway me from my confidence I have in Christ. I'm not saying how illogical you are for dis-believing, because it's your life and your personal right to dis-believe. I would only ask for the same respect in return, even if you disagree with my choice or think I'm stupid, the point is that I'm free to make my own choice, too, and do not have to explain myself over and over, and do not have to accept your trying to make me appear illogical, insane, or even irrational, for believing in God.
-
I've had no problem with what falcon is saying, He's simply trying to make you xtians see how illogical and indefensible your, or any religion, is. You have no facts that support what you believe in.
Says you. Thank you for your opinion and thoughts on the matter. I'm sorry you refuse to see how believing in God is logical for believers. I respect your choice in dis-believing, and only ask for the same in return.
Any evidence provided by believers is refused by a couple of posters, but to outright say that my God and my belief in Him is illogical and indefensible, and have no facts supporting my beliefs, is strictly your opinion and thoughts, and do not sway me from my confidence I have in Christ. I'm not saying how illogical you are for dis-believing, because it's your life and your personal right to dis-believe. I would only ask for the same respect in return, even if you disagree with my choice or think I'm stupid, the point is that I'm free to make my own choice, too, and do not have to explain myself over and over, and do not have to accept your trying to make me appear illogical, insane, or even irrational, for believing in God.
:thumbsup:
-
No matter how many times you keep trying to infer that Christians, as a whole, are connected to the Crusades, witch burnings, etc., you are showing your misunderstanding and intolerance again and again to those believers ...
It was xtians who participated in all three crusades against non-xtians and were responsible for so many deaths. It was xtians who prosecuted the Inquistions and witch hunts which resulted in the torture and deaths of xtians and non-xtians alike. It was the exact same xtian religious beliefs which were the underlying basis of those atrocities and are being "shared", (your word for it), today. Undoubtedly, xtians today would prefer that the same religious belief system as those previous xtians held blindly to not be associated in any way with the exact same religion. This is however, an irrational preference because the religious belief system is not essentially different in any significant ways.
Your inability to understand the ramifications of those events of the past, including those who participated in those horrors, is really sad and pitiful. You refuse to separate those who think they are either God, or think God told them to do those things, with those who genuinely accept Christ and try to help others in need, such as poor and needy people, providing clothes and food to those who need them, helping and supporting children and families who have disabilities, providing transportation to drs. appts., grocery shopping; or doing the shopping for them, and way more. That is the real and genuine way of being a child of God, and follows His commandment of loving your neighbor as yourself, and helping those in need.
It's a shame the "rotten apples" have impacted the genuine believers' reputation, and it takes a mature person to see and understand the differences, and to stop blaming believers of today for any association with those horrible people. You are placing yourself, technically, in the role of God, and judging today's believers harshly and unfairly for the actions of those in the past whose actions went against what Jesus would have us do for the ones who have needs. You aren't so perfect that you have the right to place yourself on a high pedestal and judge believers like you do. We are all sinners, everyone of us, and for as much as you push this issue like you are doing, you are forgetting that you, yourself, have committed some types of sin, at one time or another, and are not any better than any one of us in this forum, whether believer, non-believer, or dis-believer. We all need to examine our own dirty laundry before judging others' dirty laundry (figuratively speaking.)
-
I've had no problem with what falcon is saying, He's simply trying to make you xtians see how illogical and indefensible your, or any religion, is. You have no facts that support what you believe in.
Says you. I'm sorry you refuse to see how believing in God is logical for believers.
There is no logic in holding an irrational belief based upon blind faith alone, sans evidence.
Any evidence provided by believers is refused ...
Invalid "evidence", (such as "biblical hearsay" or, unsuported belief), does not constitute evidence. Again, no valid evidence has been presented to support religious beliefs, (apparently because "faith" is a belief specifically without supporting evidence).
...I'm stupid, the point is that I'm free to make my own choice, too, and do not have to explain myself over and over, and do not have to accept your trying to make me appear illogical, insane, or even irrational, for believing in God.
No one makes religious adherents appear as such moreso than the archived, (and current), posts of the religious adherents themselves.
-
No matter how many times you keep trying to infer that Christians, as a whole, are connected to the Crusades, witch burnings, etc., you are showing your misunderstanding and intolerance again and again to those believers ...
It was xtians who participated in all three crusades against non-xtians and were responsible for so many deaths. It was xtians who prosecuted the Inquistions and witch hunts which resulted in the torture and deaths of xtians and non-xtians alike. It was the exact same xtian religious beliefs which were the underlying basis of those atrocities and are being "shared", (your word for it), today. Undoubtedly, xtians today would prefer that the same religious belief system as those previous xtians held blindly to not be associated in any way with the exact same religion. This is however, an irrational preference because the religious belief system is not essentially different in any significant ways.
Your inability to understand the ramifications of those events of the past, including those who participated in those horrors ...
On the contrary, I do understand the ramifications of those xtian atrocities and your desire to dissassociate yourself from those who held the exact same religious belief system. It's called xtian hypocrisy and faith blindness.
-
Just as you continue to ...
What I continue to do is point out that your religious bias is reflected in the irrational repetitions of the false assertions you keep making; something you avoid adressing in your pseudo-martyrdom. Since so many of your posts simply keep repeating refuted points, (and your denials that they were refuted), you apparently have no substantiation, (other than the inherent circularity of 'belief is faith is belief'), for your contentions you've reverted back to attacking the poster rather than the content of a post.
It's none of your concern, especially when you use such words as "irrational," "false assertions," and much more. Who in the world do you think you are, sir? You are certainly not going to change what I believe, and have the freedom and right to believe, no matter how stupid or irrational you "think" I am (or others are.) You want to speak with respect and use words wisely? Then we can do so. Your mocking pictures, quotes, and remarks, make you one of the very last people on earth that some believers would even listen to, because of your harsh and cold manner. You deny God - that is your choice. I don't deny God - that is my choice. You are simply a person on the other side of the computer screen, who has shown how much you hate God-related things, so you have totally blotched your chances of getting anyone to listen to you. You don't want proselytizing? I don't want cold intolerance pushed on me.
-
I feel sorry for your cold intolerance towards believers for something they just want to express with others who enjoy conversing (I'm speaking of Off Topic Bible verse threads, inspirational threads, or uplifting quotes.)
Sometimes I pity those whose blind religious faith is so self-deluding that they cannot *see* that it is blinding. It blinds them to reason, to questioning assumptions and to the very "tolerance" which they want from others being withheld from 'non-believers'. It blinds them to the inherently offensive nature of religious proselytizing with "verses" and faith-based platitudes, (including those stolen from other belief systems). It blinds them to the documented facts of the crusades, inquistions, witch hunts and other xtian-instigated atrocities having the same foundational religious beliefs as they hold. It's ironic when the faith-blinded speak hypocritcally of "enlightenment" when none are so blind as the self-blinded ones of faith.
So? Your pity won't help yourself nor anyone else when it's your time or our time to die, and what will happen beyond the burials. If someone wants to "blind faith accept Christ" then it's none of your business what they choose. It's also none of our business why you have chosen what you have. So live your choice and believers will live their choice. So simple, yet you must make a mountain out of a mole-hill, by trying to bully believers to see what YOU want them to see.
-
I've had no problem with what falcon is saying, He's simply trying to make you xtians see how illogical and indefensible your, or any religion, is. You have no facts that support what you believe in.
Says you. Thank you for your opinion and thoughts on the matter. I'm sorry you refuse to see how believing in God is logical for believers. I respect your choice in dis-believing, and only ask for the same in return.
Any evidence provided by believers is refused by a couple of posters, but to outright say that my God and my belief in Him is illogical and indefensible, and have no facts supporting my beliefs, is strictly your opinion and thoughts, and do not sway me from my confidence I have in Christ. I'm not saying how illogical you are for dis-believing, because it's your life and your personal right to dis-believe. I would only ask for the same respect in return, even if you disagree with my choice or think I'm stupid, the point is that I'm free to make my own choice, too, and do not have to explain myself over and over, and do not have to accept your trying to make me appear illogical, insane, or even irrational, for believing in God.
:thumbsup:
Thank you.
-
It's none of your concern, especially when you use such words as "irrational," "false assertions," and much more.
It becomes anyone else's "concern" once private beliefs flood a publically-accessible venue, should they choose to become concerned enough to oppose specious religious superstitions.
Who in the world do you think you are, sir?
Simply a rational person who is dissenting against irrational religious superstitions. Not coincidentally, you're apparently a religious adherent who clings to such superstitions with blind faith in lieu of reason. This would seem obvious enough to require little explanation, (mainly because the explanation for blind religious faith is generally desparate fear).
You are certainly not going to change what I believe ...
That's what puts the "blind" in blind faith alright.
-
I've had no problem with what falcon is saying, He's simply trying to make you xtians see how illogical and indefensible your, or any religion, is. You have no facts that support what you believe in.
Says you. I'm sorry you refuse to see how believing in God is logical for believers.
There is no logic in holding an irrational belief based upon blind faith alone, sans evidence.
Any evidence provided by believers is refused ...
Invalid "evidence", (such as "biblical hearsay" or, unsuported belief), does not constitute evidence. Again, no valid evidence has been presented to support religious beliefs, (apparently because "faith" is a belief specifically without supporting evidence).
...I'm stupid, the point is that I'm free to make my own choice, too, and do not have to explain myself over and over, and do not have to accept your trying to make me appear illogical, insane, or even irrational, for believing in God.
IN RED: I HAVE ASKED YOU TO NOT ONLY QUOTE A PORTION OF MY QUOTES, WHICH TAKES THEM OUT OF CONTEXT OF WHAT I MEANT IN MY QUOTE. YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE I AM CALLING MYSELF STUPID, AND YOU TWIST IT AROUND TO YOUR MEANING TO TRY AND MAKE ME SEEM THAT WAY.
KOHLER, I HAVE REPEATEDLY ASKED HIM TO QUOTE MY QUOTES IN THEIR ENTIRETY AND HE REFUSES. I QUOTE HIM IN HIS ENTIRE QUOTES AND IT IS ONLY FAIR AND RESPECTABLE OF HIM TO DO THE SAME. I ALSO TOLD HIM IF HE DID IT AGAIN I WOULD TELL YOU. THANK YOU.
No one makes religious adherents appear as such moreso than the archived, (and current), posts of the religious adherents themselves.
And again - so what? It's not your business to tell them what you think they should do, just because you think it's illogical. They aren't hurting anyone and their lives don't interfere in yours. Just as yours should not interfere in ours.
-
No matter how many times you keep trying to infer that Christians, as a whole, are connected to the Crusades, witch burnings, etc., you are showing your misunderstanding and intolerance again and again to those believers ...
It was xtians who participated in all three crusades against non-xtians and were responsible for so many deaths. It was xtians who prosecuted the Inquistions and witch hunts which resulted in the torture and deaths of xtians and non-xtians alike. It was the exact same xtian religious beliefs which were the underlying basis of those atrocities and are being "shared", (your word for it), today. Undoubtedly, xtians today would prefer that the same religious belief system as those previous xtians held blindly to not be associated in any way with the exact same religion. This is however, an irrational preference because the religious belief system is not essentially different in any significant ways.
Your inability to understand the ramifications of those events of the past, including those who participated in those horrors ...
On the contrary, I do understand the ramifications of those xtian atrocities and your desire to dissassociate yourself from those who held the exact same religious belief system. It's called xtian hypocrisy and faith blindness.
No, it is not called hypocrisy and faith blindness. You cannot see through the loathing to see the differences. You choose to not see through, and you choose to blame all Christians for those who used God's name to achieve their power control and playing God themselves. They will be punished for their actions. You need to clean the scales from your own eyes.
-
I feel sorry for your cold intolerance towards believers for something they just want to express with others who enjoy conversing (I'm speaking of Off Topic Bible verse threads, inspirational threads, or uplifting quotes.)
Sometimes I pity those whose blind religious faith is so self-deluding that they cannot *see* that it is blinding. It blinds them to reason, to questioning assumptions and to the very "tolerance" which they want from others being withheld from 'non-believers'. It blinds them to the inherently offensive nature of religious proselytizing with "verses" and faith-based platitudes, (including those stolen from other belief systems). It blinds them to the documented facts of the crusades, inquistions, witch hunts and other xtian-instigated atrocities having the same foundational religious beliefs as they hold. It's ironic when the faith-blinded speak hypocritcally of "enlightenment" when none are so blind as the self-blinded ones of faith.
So? If someone wants to "blind faith accept Christ" then it's none of your business what they choose.
So, such religious self-delusions aren't nominally the concern of others unless they leave the confines of the fait-blinded ones' minds and begin running around starting such religiously-based pograms as inquistions, witch hunts and crusades, (nothing but opposition to the basis of such atrocities prevents their reoccurance). No one said others couldn't hold superstitious beliefs based upon blind faith. The holders of such blind faith don't get to suppress dissent or proselytize without opposition either.
-
No, it is not called hypocrisy and faith blindness.
Such an assertion, coming hypocritically from a religious adherent blinded by faith remains dubious at best.
You need to clean the scales from your own eyes.
I'm not the one blinded by religious faith. The ability to reason permits one to *see* more than restrictive religious beliefs permit. Consider trying it sometime and questioning your own assumptions or, is such "faith" too weak to withstand even an internal challenge?
-
And again - so what? It's not your business to tell them what you think they should do, just because you think it's illogical. They aren't hurting anyone and their lives don't interfere in yours. Just as yours should not interfere in ours.
Sure, just like the xtian-instigated witch hunts, three xtian-instigated crusades against "non-believers" and various xtian-instigated inquistions didn't "hurt anyone" ... unless you consider torture and death to be "hurting".
-
It's none of your concern, especially when you use such words as "irrational," "false assertions," and much more.
It becomes anyone else's "concern" once private beliefs flood a publically-accessible venue, should they choose to become concerned enough to oppose specious religious superstitions.
Who in the world do you think you are, sir?
Simply a rational person who is dissenting against irrational religious superstitions. Not coincidentally, you're apparently a religious adherent who clings to such superstitions with blind faith in lieu of reason. This would seem obvious enough to require little explanation, (mainly because the explanation for blind religious faith is generally desparate fear).
You are certainly not going to change what I believe ...
That's what puts the "blind" in blind faith alright.
You choose to make it your "concern" or "business" by entering the thread in the first place, already knowing that you don't believe in Christ. You are minding other posters' business when they are minding their own with others who are in like agreement with the topic and just want to enjoy posting with each other. You also choose to then say it's not an "exclusive Christian club." No one ever said it was or set it up like that - only you have bothered to make a big deal out of it, all because you loathe the subject. That's your problem to deal with. You could be enjoying topics you are interested in, yet you choose to subject yourself to threads you don't like.
OR - it could be that the whole TRUTH of this, is that you ENJOY going in those threads you loathe, for the express purpose of agitating, trolling, and trying to provoke believers to emotional and irrational responses back to you. That you enjoy and crave the attention from posters who react certain ways to your disrespect and cut downs. Personally, I believe it's this that you thrive on. I would love to hear a denial or an agreement from you about this. You might as well go all out and be honest about this...
-
I feel sorry for your cold intolerance towards believers for something they just want to express with others who enjoy conversing (I'm speaking of Off Topic Bible verse threads, inspirational threads, or uplifting quotes.)
Sometimes I pity those whose blind religious faith is so self-deluding that they cannot *see* that it is blinding. It blinds them to reason, to questioning assumptions and to the very "tolerance" which they want from others being withheld from 'non-believers'. It blinds them to the inherently offensive nature of religious proselytizing with "verses" and faith-based platitudes, (including those stolen from other belief systems). It blinds them to the documented facts of the crusades, inquistions, witch hunts and other xtian-instigated atrocities having the same foundational religious beliefs as they hold. It's ironic when the faith-blinded speak hypocritcally of "enlightenment" when none are so blind as the self-blinded ones of faith.
So? If someone wants to "blind faith accept Christ" then it's none of your business what they choose.
So, such religious self-delusions aren't nominally the concern of others unless they leave the confines of the fait-blinded ones' minds and begin running around starting such religiously-based pograms as inquistions, witch hunts and crusades, (nothing but opposition to the basis of such atrocities prevents their reoccurance). No one said others couldn't hold superstitious beliefs based upon blind faith. The holders of such blind faith don't get to suppress dissent or proselytize without opposition either.
I agree that believers don't get to suppress dissent. What I disagree with is that they can stand their ground against the issue of the name-calling, discourtesy, disrespect, mocking pictures of Christ, and personally insulting remarks of trying to make believers appear foolish and stupid. Dissent and disrespectful dissent are two entirely separate things, and the second one is not debate and discuss whatsoever, as much as it is provoking and trolling. But, you already know this - just can't admit it or agree because then you would have to show that you aren't as perfect about this as you seem to think you are.
-
No, it is not called hypocrisy and faith blindness.
Such an assertion, coming hypocritically from a religious adherent blinded by faith remains dubious at best.
You need to clean the scales from your own eyes.
I'm not the one blinded by religious faith. The ability to reason permits one to *see* more than restrictive religious beliefs permit. Consider trying it sometime and questioning your own assumptions or, is such "faith" too weak to withstand even an internal challenge?
You're right - because you are blinded by your loathing of believers choice of accepting Christ. You can't get past that stigma.
-
It's none of your concern, especially when you use such words as "irrational," "false assertions," and much more.
It becomes anyone else's "concern" once private beliefs flood a publically-accessible venue, should they choose to become concerned enough to oppose specious religious superstitions.
Who in the world do you think you are, sir?
Simply a rational person who is dissenting against irrational religious superstitions. Not coincidentally, you're apparently a religious adherent who clings to such superstitions with blind faith in lieu of reason. This would seem obvious enough to require little explanation, (mainly because the explanation for blind religious faith is generally desparate fear).
You are certainly not going to change what I believe ...
That's what puts the "blind" in blind faith alright.
You choose to make it your "concern" or "business" by entering the thread in the first place ...
Yes, any member of FC can choose to concern themselves with any particular thread or, choose not to. Once again, you're trying to restrict who can participate in a thread's subject based upon whether they agree or disagree with you - that's attempted censorship. Though why you persist in pursuing such attempts when they continue to fail can only be speculated about.
You also choose to then say it's not an "exclusive Christian club." No one ever said it was or set it up like that ...
Then why are you and some other xtian fundies treating threads which contain xtian superstitions as if they were exclusive xtian countryclubs, where no dissent is tolerated and repeated attempts to suppress it are evidently-extant? <--rhetorical question which will be dodged
OR - it could be that the whole TRUTH of this, is that you ENJOY going in those threads you loathe, for the express purpose of agitating, trolling, and trying to provoke believers to emotional and irrational responses back to you.
Once again, you've failed to discern the difference between a posted response and the initial trolling of religious superstitions which resulted in responses. A response comes after the initial xtian trolling of offensive proselytization of blind faith with emotional/irrational disrepect of rationality and logical thinking processes, (or, "satanic ways", to blind faithers).
-
And again - so what? It's not your business to tell them what you think they should do, just because you think it's illogical. They aren't hurting anyone and their lives don't interfere in yours. Just as yours should not interfere in ours.
Sure, just like the xtian-instigated witch hunts, three xtian-instigated crusades against "non-believers" and various xtian-instigated inquistions didn't "hurt anyone" ... unless you consider torture and death to be "hurting".
I'm not going in a circle again with you about this. You continue to delude yourself about this and blame all Christians for the actions of those in the past using God's name to further their wicked agenda. I DID NOT SAY THOSE THINGS DID NOT HURT ANYONE - they were murderers and were torturers - so stop trying to make it look like I disagree about how horrible they were. They were despicable.
-
I agree that believers don't get to suppress dissent.
Yet, you continue to attempt to suppress dissent by falsely characterizing it. That's disingenuous. Everytime your religious bias labels an opposing viewpoint as "rude", you're trying to suppress dissent. Every instance of mislabeling a view which disagrees with your religious one as "disrespectful" is another attempt to suppress dissent.
-
It's none of your concern, especially when you use such words as "irrational," "false assertions," and much more.
It becomes anyone else's "concern" once private beliefs flood a publically-accessible venue, should they choose to become concerned enough to oppose specious religious superstitions.
Who in the world do you think you are, sir?
Simply a rational person who is dissenting against irrational religious superstitions. Not coincidentally, you're apparently a religious adherent who clings to such superstitions with blind faith in lieu of reason. This would seem obvious enough to require little explanation, (mainly because the explanation for blind religious faith is generally desparate fear).
You are certainly not going to change what I believe ...
That's what puts the "blind" in blind faith alright.
You choose to make it your "concern" or "business" by entering the thread in the first place ...
Yes, any member of FC can choose to concern themselves with any particular thread or, choose not to. Once again, you're trying to restrict who can participate in a thread's subject based upon whether they agree or disagree with you - that's attempted censorship. Though why you persist in pursuing such attempts when they continue to fail can only be speculated about.
You also choose to then say it's not an "exclusive Christian club." No one ever said it was or set it up like that ...
Then why are you and some other xtian fundies treating threads which contain xtian superstitions as if they were exclusive xtian countryclubs, where no dissent is tolerated and repeated attempts to suppress it are evidently-extant? <--rhetorical question which will be dodged
OR - it could be that the whole TRUTH of this, is that you ENJOY going in those threads you loathe, for the express purpose of agitating, trolling, and trying to provoke believers to emotional and irrational responses back to you.
Once again, you've failed to discern the difference between a posted response and the initial trolling of religious superstitions which resulted in responses. A response comes after the initial xtian trolling of offensive proselytization of blind faith with emotional/irrational disrepect of rationality and logical thinking processes, (or, "satanic ways", to blind faithers).
You need to get over yourself, sir. The religious topics are allowed in the first place, which means anyone can start a topic of interest regarding whatever they choose to make the topic. Which means nothing is instigated deliberately as you continue to accuse them of. You are going in circles over something that is totally a lame excuse for trying to place any blame only on believers. Fail, fail, fail, fail, fail - but keep trying, because you won't accept the word fail, and you can only allow yourself to be the only one correct about everything. Poor thing...
-
And again - so what? It's not your business to tell them what you think they should do, just because you think it's illogical. They aren't hurting anyone and their lives don't interfere in yours. Just as yours should not interfere in ours.
Sure, just like the xtian-instigated witch hunts, three xtian-instigated crusades against "non-believers" and various xtian-instigated inquistions didn't "hurt anyone" ... unless you consider torture and death to be "hurting".
I'm not going in a circle again with you about this. You continue to delude yourself about this and blame all Christians for the actions of those in the past using God's name ...
Documented facts are not delusions; those atrocities were instigated by xtians who held the exact same blind faith as xtians nowadays claim to hold in the same alleged "g-d". To reiterate the point in mentioning that minor fact; it's my choice to oppose the same belief system which lead to those xtian atrocities as it's your choice to tacitly support them by believing in the exact same thing those xtians did.
-
The religious topics are allowed in the first place, which means anyone can start a topic of interest regarding whatever they choose to make the topic.
Just because they're allowed doesn't mean they cannot be opposed. You still don't get to suppress opposing posts.
Which means nothing is instigated deliberately as you continue to accuse them of.
Are you suggesting that xtians are 'accidentally' posting religious propaganda because they aren't bright enough to realize that it is proselytiing or, they their blind faith dictates that they don't consider proselytiing to be proselyting?
You are going in circles ...
Illogical religious beliefs cause that sort of thing. The best that reasoning can do in the face of such blind religious irrationality is to point out teh circularity of blind faith and trust that those who still retain the ability to reason will come to their own conclusions.
-
And again - so what? It's not your business to tell them what you think they should do, just because you think it's illogical. They aren't hurting anyone and their lives don't interfere in yours. Just as yours should not interfere in ours.
Sure, just like the xtian-instigated witch hunts, three xtian-instigated crusades against "non-believers" and various xtian-instigated inquistions didn't "hurt anyone" ... unless you consider torture and death to be "hurting".
I'm not going in a circle again with you about this. You continue to delude yourself about this and blame all Christians for the actions of those in the past using God's name ...
Documented facts are not delusions; those atrocities were instigated by xtians who held the exact same blind faith as xtians nowadays claim to hold in the same alleged "g-d". To reiterate the point in mentioning that minor fact; it's my choice to oppose the same belief system which lead to those xtian atrocities as it's your choice to tacitly support them by believing in the exact same thing those xtians did.
No sir. They used the name of God to achieve their agenda. They went beyond the boundary of God's commands, and let their personal hate get involved. I DO NOT BELIEVE AS THEY DID. KNOCK IT OFF - YOU ARE ONLY SHOWING YOUR IGNORANCE AND NON-ABILITY TO BE REASONABLE ABOUT THIS - BECAUSE YOU LOATHE THE IDEA OF GOD SO MUCH, THAT YOU CANNOT DISCERN RIGHT FROM WRONG.
You are still playing the role of God yourself, by judging believers in here, and labeling them according to what you think is true - stop the judging - you are no better than anyone else, believer or not. Oh, and your rulings don't count anyway - since you aren't the judge and ruler over all. Thank goodness for that. A believer, in your court, should fear for their rights being stripped - you would not be able to logically make a right decision in their case because of your loathing of Godly things. In essence, you would be supporting the same horrible agendas of those past people, that you keep trying to blame believers for supporting, when they don't.
-
I agree that believers don't get to suppress dissent.
Yet, you continue to attempt to suppress dissent by falsely characterizing it. That's disingenuous. Everytime your religious bias labels an opposing viewpoint as "rude", you're trying to suppress dissent. Every instance of mislabeling a view which disagrees with your religious one as "disrespectful" is another attempt to suppress dissent.
No way am I falsely characterizing it. You need to be the man and own up to your hateful actions and trolling towards believers. It is what it is, no matter how much you try to gloss over or make it seem the opposite. People in these forums are not stupid - they see exactly what you are doing. Some even agree with you and enjoy what you do. But the majority of posters see through you regarding this.
-
And again - so what? It's not your business to tell them what you think they should do, just because you think it's illogical. They aren't hurting anyone and their lives don't interfere in yours. Just as yours should not interfere in ours.
Sure, just like the xtian-instigated witch hunts, three xtian-instigated crusades against "non-believers" and various xtian-instigated inquistions didn't "hurt anyone" ... unless you consider torture and death to be "hurting".
I'm not going in a circle again with you about this. You continue to delude yourself about this and blame all Christians for the actions of those in the past using God's name ...
Documented facts are not delusions; those atrocities were instigated by xtians who held the exact same blind faith as xtians nowadays claim to hold in the same alleged "g-d". To reiterate the point in mentioning that minor fact; it's my choice to oppose the same belief system which lead to those xtian atrocities as it's your choice to tacitly support them by believing in the exact same thing those xtians did.
They used the name of God to achieve their agenda.
Yep, same "g-d", same religious belief system and that "agenda" was the torturing/killing of others under the same 'banner' of self-deluding faith which blinds 'believers' today.
-
The religious topics are allowed in the first place, which means anyone can start a topic of interest regarding whatever they choose to make the topic.
Just because they're allowed doesn't mean they cannot be opposed. You still don't get to suppress opposing posts.
Which means nothing is instigated deliberately as you continue to accuse them of.
Are you suggesting that xtians are 'accidentally' posting religious propaganda because they aren't bright enough to realize that it is proselytiing or, they their blind faith dictates that they don't consider proselytiing to be proselyting?
You are going in circles ...
Illogical religious beliefs cause that sort of thing. The best that reasoning can do in the face of such blind religious irrationality is to point out teh circularity of blind faith and trust that those who still retain the ability to reason will come to their own conclusions.
"JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE ALLOWED DOESN'T"T MEAN THEY CANNOT BE OPPOSED." Falcon9 - you are slipping badly. I agree with that - I have said that several times. I SAID THAT IT DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE DELIBERATELY INSTIGATING PROBLEMS. Wow! Are you having reading comprehension issues tonight, or are you just deliberately goading with this because it's all you've got?
When you choose to "point out" what you said, it's only natural and expected for others to "point out" to you that they do not accept or agree with your reasoning. They may be willing to actually discuss things if you weren't acting like you are playing the role of GOD, and acting like you are the only correct one on this subject.
You act like they cannot choose to keep their choice of believing - so you provoke and mock. You don't believe our way - fine - your choice. In fact, no one is pointing out the yays or nays about your choice. But you can't leave it alone with giving courtesy to the believers. Sorry, sir, but it's not all about falcon9's way or the highway. Whether you like it or not, people choose their paths, and they aren't all going to agree with your path. You don't agree with others' paths, so it doesn't mean they must agree with yours.
-
You act like they cannot choose to keep their choice of believing ...
False; I've repeatedly stated that anyone has the option to hold superstitious religious beliefs which are based upon blind faith, just as others have the option to reject such irrationality by way of reason.
-
And again - so what? It's not your business to tell them what you think they should do, just because you think it's illogical. They aren't hurting anyone and their lives don't interfere in yours. Just as yours should not interfere in ours.
Sure, just like the xtian-instigated witch hunts, three xtian-instigated crusades against "non-believers" and various xtian-instigated inquistions didn't "hurt anyone" ... unless you consider torture and death to be "hurting".
I'm not going in a circle again with you about this. You continue to delude yourself about this and blame all Christians for the actions of those in the past using God's name ...
Documented facts are not delusions; those atrocities were instigated by xtians who held the exact same blind faith as xtians nowadays claim to hold in the same alleged "g-d". To reiterate the point in mentioning that minor fact; it's my choice to oppose the same belief system which lead to those xtian atrocities as it's your choice to tacitly support them by believing in the exact same thing those xtians did.
They used the name of God to achieve their agenda.
Yep, same "g-d", same religious belief system and that "agenda" was the torturing/killing of others under the same 'banner' of self-deluding faith which blinds 'believers' today.
Poor thing. You are really playing the forgetful old man by repeating what you have repeated, which isn't the complete truth about Christians today. This shows your spitefulness in only repeating something to deliberately provoke a response.
I actually have better things to do than to keep humoring you. I am going to watch a movie with my family, among other things, and spend some quality time with my loved ones. Have a great night.
-
You act like they cannot choose to keep their choice of believing ...
False; I've repeatedly stated that anyone has the option to hold superstitious religious beliefs which are based upon blind faith, just as others have the option to reject such irrationality by way of reason.
No, I disagree with that. You are being mean and spiteful with name-calling their choice to believe what they choose, when it doesn't agree with your choice. You are showing your inability to reason with this.
Ta ta for now - my family awaits.
-
You are really playing the forgetful old man by repeating what you have repeated ...
The reason it was repeated is not because I'm forgetful but, because faith-blinded xtians who believe the same way those xtians did and who don't recall those atrocities may one day repeat them. This is despite any desire for current xtians to disassociate themselves from past xtians by somehow judging that some self-declared xtians aren't really xtians like other self-declared xtians.
-
I guess I will have to look up the word. But if your talking about faith. I have it. Don't know where it came from but I caught it just the same. Have a good day FusionCash members
-
You act like they cannot choose to keep their choice of believing ...
False; I've repeatedly stated that anyone has the option to hold superstitious religious beliefs which are based upon blind faith, just as others have the option to reject such irrationality by way of reason.
No, I disagree with that. You are being mean and spiteful with name-calling their choice to believe what they choose, when it doesn't agree with your choice. You are showing your inability to reason with this.
Of course you do however, such an empty disagreement is not according to any logical reasoning. Instead, it stems from the inherent bias of your religious beliefs, (whereas, my contention does not stem from any religious belief). Your 'opinion' is therefore devoid of substance and is a specious one.
-
Coward's because no one will end the madness of excessive commenting on things that seem to just go round and round.
-
Coward's because no one will end the madness of excessive commenting on things that seem to just go round and round.
You must mean like xtians do; basing their specious religious opinions on "blind faith" which is based on "belief" which is based on blind faith ... around and around.
-
Coward's because no one will end the madness of excessive commenting on things that seem to just go round and round.
You must mean like xtians do; basing their specious religious opinions on "blind faith" which is based on "belief" which is based on blind faith ... around and around.
People have the right to believe and base their belief on whatever evidence or otherwise. They do not have to answer to you, nor is it any of your business what they choose to do - you see "specious religious opinions" on "blind faith" yet none of that is forcing or coercing you to choose anything but what you wish to choose, for your own personal reasons. Who cares if things go around and around? You seem to be so concerned with minding a believer's business instead of minding your own choices. And yes, I've just gone round and round and round with you, again. It never ends...
-
Coward's because no one will end the madness of excessive commenting on things that seem to just go round and round.
You must mean like xtians do; basing their specious religious opinions on "blind faith" which is based on "belief" which is based on blind faith ... around and around.
People have the right to believe and base their belief on whatever evidence or otherwise.
I've already stated the same; just as those who oppose such specious religious beliefs have the same option to dissent. 'Believers' do not have any "right" to unopposed superstitious beliefs.
They do not have to answer to you ...
True, even when they post such in a publically-accessible forum, they don't "have to answer to" anyone. It's also true that once such private beliefs become public, (because the believers themselves posted their superstitions), otehrs who choose to can post opposing viewpoints. You 'believers' have the same option to not respond as otehrs have to respond. Your ongoing attempts to restrict/censor/suppress such responses are repressive and rejected as such.
-
dont know what this is about, sounds like the person who wrote it has some personal issues going on.
-
Coward's because no one will end the madness of excessive commenting on things that seem to just go round and round.
You must mean like xtians do; basing their specious religious opinions on "blind faith" which is based on "belief" which is based on blind faith ... around and around.
People have the right to believe and base their belief on whatever evidence or otherwise.
I've already stated the same; just as those who oppose such specious religious beliefs have the same option to dissent. 'Believers' do not have any "right" to unopposed superstitious beliefs.
They do not have to answer to you ...
True, even when they post such in a publically-accessible forum, they don't "have to answer to" anyone. It's also true that once such private beliefs become public, (because the believers themselves posted their superstitions), otehrs who choose to can post opposing viewpoints. You 'believers' have the same option to not respond as otehrs have to respond. Your ongoing attempts to restrict/censor/suppress such responses are repressive and rejected as such.
Your ongoing attempts to restrict, censure, suppress, try and provoke emotional responses, try and accuse others of being irrational and delusional, for believing how they wish and using their freedom of speech and expression, are repressive and rejected as such.
-
Coward's because no one will end the madness of excessive commenting on things that seem to just go round and round.
You must mean like xtians do; basing their specious religious opinions on "blind faith" which is based on "belief" which is based on blind faith ... around and around.
People have the right to believe and base their belief on whatever evidence or otherwise.
I've already stated the same; just as those who oppose such specious religious beliefs have the same option to dissent. 'Believers' do not have any "right" to unopposed superstitious beliefs.
They do not have to answer to you ...
True, even when they post such in a publically-accessible forum, they don't "have to answer to" anyone. It's also true that once such private beliefs become public, (because the believers themselves posted their superstitions), otehrs who choose to can post opposing viewpoints. You 'believers' have the same option to not respond as otehrs have to respond. Your ongoing attempts to restrict/censor/suppress such responses are repressive and rejected as such.
... try and accuse others of being irrational and delusional, for believing how they wish and using their freedom of speech and expression ...
Those contentions have been substantiated by the religious adherents posting irrationally and delusionally about religious 'beliefs' which lack any rational/logical basis and rely completely upon blind faith. Just as such adherents have the option to hold irrational and delusional superstitious beliefs, so too does the Constitution protect the option of others to reject what the irrational are promoting with dissenting logic which refutes it.
-
Coward's because no one will end the madness of excessive commenting on things that seem to just go round and round.
You must mean like xtians do; basing their specious religious opinions on "blind faith" which is based on "belief" which is based on blind faith ... around and around.
People have the right to believe and base their belief on whatever evidence or otherwise.
I've already stated the same; just as those who oppose such specious religious beliefs have the same option to dissent. 'Believers' do not have any "right" to unopposed superstitious beliefs.
They do not have to answer to you ...
True, even when they post such in a publically-accessible forum, they don't "have to answer to" anyone. It's also true that once such private beliefs become public, (because the believers themselves posted their superstitions), otehrs who choose to can post opposing viewpoints. You 'believers' have the same option to not respond as otehrs have to respond. Your ongoing attempts to restrict/censor/suppress such responses are repressive and rejected as such.
... try and accuse others of being irrational and delusional, for believing how they wish and using their freedom of speech and expression ...
Those contentions have been substantiated by the religious adherents posting irrationally and delusionally about religious 'beliefs' which lack any rational/logical basis and rely completely upon blind faith. Just as such adherents have the option to hold irrational and delusional superstitious beliefs, so too does the Constitution protect the option of others to reject what the irrational are promoting with dissenting logic which refutes it.
The point, though, is you don't just give your opinion. You still have to be condescending and mocking using words such as, "irrationally and delusionally; lack any rational/logical basis; rely completely upon blind faith; irrational and delusional superstitious beliefs;" and more. You are still being judgmental and minding the business of what they believe, by continuing to try and make them look irrational, delusional, etc.
Sure, we all can express views, but we still have the conscious duty, as law abiding citizens of this country, of promoting kindness, respect, and common courtesy, to others, even when our views differ. Who are you to think you have the right to lam-bast a belief someone else has just because you don't believe that way? They do not deserve those put down words for something they believe and that is their business. I respect your dis-belief choice, even if I don't agree totally with it, and do not call you names and try to make you look like an idiot for something you feel strongly about. There is no need for cut downs like you enjoy doing.
The Constitution protects, yes, but it's not intended to protect hatefulness and hate words for others like that.
-
The point, though, is you don't just give your opinion.
I've already made that point in providing the logical reasoning which substantiates the contentions that a belief, (any belief, not just a religious one), without evidence is empty and irrational. No valid counter-argument which substantiates a contention that a belief lacking evidence is rational has been presented, (an empty counter-claim does not constitute evidence).
... using words such as, "irrationally and delusionally; lack any rational/logical basis; rely completely upon blind faith; irrational and delusional superstitious beliefs;" and more. You are still being judgmental and minding the business of what they believe, by continuing to try and make them look irrational, delusional, etc.
See reply above. Those religious claims are irrational because they lack rationality. They are delusional because they lack evidence and are instead, based upon blind faith alone, (which circularly lacks substantiation). I've never denied that such assessments are accurately 'judging' because I'm not under any religious injunction about judging, (actually, neither are religious zealots who 'judge' my judgements while claiming that only their hypothetical 'deity' which lacks evidence of existing has the "right" to judge).
Who are you to think you have the right to lam-bast a belief someone else has just because you don't believe that way?
I am someone who has the same option to oppose religious superstitious nonsense as those who post have to hold irrational and delusional religious beliefs. The U.S. Constitution does not provide for the type of suppression, censorship, restriction and repression of opposing viewpoints which you've been promoting for months.
-
I only have one stupid question. WHY, WHY is everyone responding and giving falcon what he wants, ATTENTION.
-
I only have one stupid question. WHY, WHY is everyone responding and giving falcon what he wants, ATTENTION.
Just because some xtian fundies ignorantly misuse the "ignore" button to not ignore doesn't mean anyone else has to to, nor does it mean that such fundies get to dictate whether anyone replies to any post.
-
How did this become about people and what they write? When I first read this it was about a thread that someone created or so I thought.
-
This thread was started by a passive-aggressive xtian coward in an attempt to troll non-xtians and control response posts. Objections to such ensued and here we are now.
How did this become about people and what they write? When I first read this it was about a thread that someone created or so I thought.
-
This thread was started by a passive-aggressive xtian coward in an attempt to troll non-xtians and control response posts. Objections to such ensued and here we are now.
How did this become about people and what they write? When I first read this it was about a thread that someone created or so I thought.
Name-calling gets you nowhere. You provoke responses and then question why people say things they do. If you are going to continue provoking Christians, you must toughen up and take the heat...
-
Nothing stops a xtian fundie from excessive drinking or, drug use, right?
... gets you nowhere. You provoke ... If you are going to continue provoking Christians ...
-
Nothing stops a xtian fundie from excessive drinking or, drug use, right?
... gets you nowhere. You provoke ... If you are going to continue provoking Christians ...
This Christian does not drink nor use drugs. If you do that to extreme, you are just as guilty as the next person. You should really take heed of your words, because you are going to trip yourself up with that haughty attitude, and fall flat on your face.
-
This Christian does not drink nor use drugs. If you do that to extreme, you are just as guilty as the next person. You should really take heed of your words, because you are going to trip yourself up with that haughty attitude, and fall flat on your face.
Then it's perhaps your senility, "prescription meds", or faith-blindness as the root cause of your irrationalities ... who knows? Certainly not some unsubstantiated "g-d".
-
This Christian does not drink nor use drugs. If you do that to extreme, you are just as guilty as the next person. You should really take heed of your words, because you are going to trip yourself up with that haughty attitude, and fall flat on your face.
Then it's perhaps your senility, "prescription meds", or faith-blindness as the root cause of your irrationalities ... who knows? Certainly not some unsubstantiated "g-d".
Actually, it is none of your business about my senility, prescription meds, or "faith-blindness," now, is it. Remember the kid saying "It takes one to know one?" You should be careful calling names like this - especially insinuating things about my senility. Look in your own heart, falcon9, and clean up your own rottenness before trying to mess with mine.
-
Actually, it is none of your business about my senility, prescription meds, or "faith-blindness," now, is it.
True, carry on being irrational then, whatever the cause.
-
And of course with you we know its your wheelchair and radishes
-
Apparently, your cult's blind faith causes such mental instability as you demonstrate when you post. It's an unfortunate infliction upon the sanity of others but, you're still allowed to post such trollings. For now.
And of course with you we know its your wheelchair and radishes
-
Actually, it is none of your business about my senility, prescription meds, or "faith-blindness," now, is it.
True, carry on being irrational then, whatever the cause.
Why, falcon9, thank you so much!!! Oh my, I'm in such shock that you would let me carry on, even irrationally, in your book. What a big achievement we have here! *Clapping* Lol...
-
Apparently, your cult's blind faith causes such mental instability as you demonstrate when you post. It's an unfortunate infliction upon the sanity of others but, you're still allowed to post such trollings. For now.
And of course with you we know its your wheelchair and radishes
I feel the same way..im workin on tryin to get you removed too
-
I feel the same way..im workin on tryin to get you removed too
If you feel the same way about your posts as I do about your posts, are you trying to get yourself removed? Good luck with that endeavor.
-
Sometimes I start to read some of the comments and just close the page. Everyones entitled to thier opinion but some take it too far.
-
Never say anything in print or computer that you can't say publicly. :o
-
Never say anything in print or computer that you can't say publicly. :o
What can't you save publicly? I don't know what country you live in, but in the United states we are allowed the freedom (or at least, ideally.) to express ourselves any way we want too. As long as we follow health codes and don't yell too loudly (which would not apply to a forum or any written language since you cannot actually yell.)
Besides the fact, there are certain situations where it is not in my best interest to argue against someones faith (I live in a bible belt, so this is especially true for me.) But just because its not appropriate to argue someone's opinion at a job interview doesn't mean I should not do so on a forum, especially one which allows the freedom to express ones views.
-
Sometimes I start to read some of the comments and just close the page. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but some take it too far.
I have not seen anyone take it too far on this forum. The only way one could is if we broke the rules, and blatantly troll other people (Regardless of what anyone says, I have not seen any trolling going on at all by the athiest side. So far there have been threads started by theist that where against the forum's rules. Most of the thiest who has called out on someone trolling does not truly know the definition of trolling.)
And besides the fact, even if anyone did troll it wouldn't matter. The admin would come in, tell us to stop, and if we where to continue the admin would simply ban us. I would hardly call that taking it too far, because you're only getting banned on 1 forum.
You wanna know what taking it too far means? How about murdering other people, hanging them, publicly humiliating them, burning them, and drowning them in water for having different beliefs? That is what I say taking it too far means, and none of these can be achieved through a forum. The fact that we now have a way to debate and express ideas without the threat of real, physical violence should be celebrated.
-
what is with you people at this "troll" stuff? ??? Cant anyone on here just have a decent conversation anymore? Does it have to be so hateful?
-
Sometimes I start to read some of the comments and just close the page. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but some take it too far.
I have not seen anyone take it too far on this forum. The only way one could is if we broke the rules, and blatantly troll other people (Regardless of what anyone says, I have not seen any trolling going on at all by the athiest side. So far there have been threads started by theist that where against the forum's rules. Most of the thiest who has called out on someone trolling does not truly know the definition of trolling.)
And besides the fact, even if anyone did troll it wouldn't matter. The admin would come in, tell us to stop, and if we where to continue the admin would simply ban us. I would hardly call that taking it too far, because you're only getting banned on 1 forum.
The thing is, several of the religious adherents starting the trolling/calling-out threads have not been banned for doing so - because they've proceeded to do it again. This week alone there have been four xtian-instigated threads moved do to being posted in inappropriate forums, two xtian-instigated threads locked and two xtian-instigated threads removed. It's unclear why the repeat-offender members instigating those last four threads have not been banned but, that is an FC moderator decision.
You wanna know what taking it too far means? How about murdering other people, hanging them, publicly humiliating them, burning them, and drowning them in water for having different beliefs? That is what I say taking it too far means, and none of these can be achieved through a forum. The fact that we now have a way to debate and express ideas without the threat of real, physical violence should be celebrated.
I concur that torturing and murdering other people under a banner of religious belief is in extremely poor taste and quite rude.
-
what is with you people at this "troll" stuff? ??? Cant anyone on here just have a decent conversation anymore? Does have to be so hateful?
It's an adjective used to describe those on FC who post "calling-out" threads to 'troll' other members, either by 'nym or by initial inflamatory content intended to instigate 'flames'. Such is against FC policy, despite the repetition of that offense by religious adherents who have had four recent threads locked or removed for repeat violations of FC posting policies.
-
Never say anything in print or computer that you can't say publicly. :o
What can't you save publicly? I don't know what country you live in, but in the United states we are allowed the freedom (or at least, ideally.) to express ourselves any way we want too. As long as we follow health codes and don't yell too loudly (which would not apply to a forum or any written language since you cannot actually yell.)
Besides the fact, there are certain situations where it is not in my best interest to argue against someones faith (I live in a bible belt, so this is especially true for me.) But just because its not appropriate to argue someone's opinion at a job interview doesn't mean I should not do so on a forum, especially one which allows the freedom to express ones views.
When somone wants to have a different view that is their opinion. I just don't like it when they have to try to be hateful and tear others down.
-
what is with you people at this "troll" stuff? ??? Cant anyone on here just have a decent conversation anymore? Does it have to be so hateful?
My point exactly. Theres a better way to communicate.
-
Sometimes I start to read some of the comments and just close the page. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but some take it too far.
I have not seen anyone take it too far on this forum. The only way one could is if we broke the rules, and blatantly troll other people (Regardless of what anyone says, I have not seen any trolling going on at all by the athiest side. So far there have been threads started by theist that where against the forum's rules. Most of the thiest who has called out on someone trolling does not truly know the definition of trolling.)
And besides the fact, even if anyone did troll it wouldn't matter. The admin would come in, tell us to stop, and if we where to continue the admin would simply ban us. I would hardly call that taking it too far, because you're only getting banned on 1 forum.
The thing is, several of the religious adherents starting the trolling/calling-out threads have not been banned for doing so - because they've proceeded to do it again. This week alone there have been four xtian-instigated threads moved do to being posted in inappropriate forums, two xtian-instigated threads locked and two xtian-instigated threads removed. It's unclear why the repeat-offender members instigating those last four threads have not been banned but, that is an FC moderator decision.
You wanna know what taking it too far means? How about murdering other people, hanging them, publicly humiliating them, burning them, and drowning them in water for having different beliefs? That is what I say taking it too far means, and none of these can be achieved through a forum. The fact that we now have a way to debate and express ideas without the threat of real, physical violence should be celebrated.
I concur that torturing and murdering other people under a banner of religious belief is in extremely poor taste and quite rude.
-
And you forgot all of your posts that prove you shouldnt be on here either.
-
what is with you people at this "troll" stuff? ??? Cant anyone on here just have a decent conversation anymore? Does it have to be so hateful?
I agree with you. I, personally, am not trying to be hateful to anyone, but felt the need to stand up to one's overly rude and intolerant comments to people who are allowed to share their opinion in here without feeling like they will be jumped on unmercifully every time they post in a religious thread, which also is allowed in here. Thank you for saying that.
-
I can't help but think of a certain poster here whenever I hear this song.See if you agree.... ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=h4Kc_mB9N_M&vq=small
-
There's a ring of familiarization about that.
-
I, personally, am not trying to be hateful to anyone, but felt the need to stand up to one's overly rude and intolerant comments to people who are allowed to share their opinion in here without feeling like they will be jumped on unmercifully every time they post in a religious thread, which also is allowed in here.
It's can also become necessary to object to any religious superstition directly responsible for the oppression, torture nd deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who didn't follow that particular rude and impolite self-delusion.
-
I, personally, am not trying to be hateful to anyone, but felt the need to stand up to one's overly rude and intolerant comments to people who are allowed to share their opinion in here without feeling like they will be jumped on unmercifully every time they post in a religious thread, which also is allowed in here.
It's can also become necessary to object to any religious superstition directly responsible for the oppression, torture nd deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who didn't follow that particular rude and impolite self-delusion.
Objection and opposition are fine. Adding your personal hatred and accusations, along with your bias and prejudices, with not presenting correctly and honestly, is wrong. So I, in turn, will oppose your rude remarks then.
-
I, personally, am not trying to be hateful to anyone, but felt the need to stand up to one's overly rude and intolerant comments to people who are allowed to share their opinion in here without feeling like they will be jumped on unmercifully every time they post in a religious thread, which also is allowed in here.
It's can also become necessary to object to any religious superstition directly responsible for the oppression, torture and deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who didn't follow that particular rude and impolite self-delusion.
Objection and opposition are fine. Adding your personal hatred and accusations, along with your bias and prejudices, with not presenting correctly and honestly, is wrong. So I, in turn, will oppose your rude remarks then.
The various xtian-instigated crusades, inquistions and witch hunts did occur and were presented as xtian-instigated because they were. There's no "bias and prejudice" in pointing out that those xtian fundies maimed and killed hundreds of thousands of people who didn't believe in the xtian 'religion'. You can oppose that, like any holocast-denier can however, the facts oppose such opposition.
-
The various xtian-instigated crusades, inquistions and witch hunts did occur and were presented as xtian-instigated because they were. There's no "bias and prejudice" in pointing out that those xtian fundies maimed and killed hundreds of thousands of people who didn't believe in the xtian 'religion'. You can oppose that, like any holocast-denier can however, the facts oppose such opposition.
This is a recording,if you feel you have reached this message in error please try again later...i am out for a stroll with my wheelchair!
-
This is a recording,if you feel you have reached this message in error please try again later... i am out for a stroll with my wheelchair!
-
"He's got too much--time on his hands...."
-
He needs those hands to wheel himself
-
I, personally, am not trying to be hateful to anyone, but felt the need to stand up to one's overly rude and intolerant comments to people who are allowed to share their opinion in here without feeling like they will be jumped on unmercifully every time they post in a religious thread, which also is allowed in here.
It's can also become necessary to object to any religious superstition directly responsible for the oppression, torture and deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who didn't follow that particular rude and impolite self-delusion.
Objection and opposition are fine. Adding your personal hatred and accusations, along with your bias and prejudices, with not presenting correctly and honestly, is wrong. So I, in turn, will oppose your rude remarks then.
The various xtian-instigated crusades, inquistions and witch hunts did occur and were presented as xtian-instigated because they were. There's no "bias and prejudice" in pointing out that those xtian fundies maimed and killed hundreds of thousands of people who didn't believe in the xtian 'religion'. You can oppose that, like any holocast-denier can however, the facts oppose such opposition.
So in that respect, you continue to hold the Germans responsible even today for the horror that those ones did back then? It's in the past, those people are gone, and Christians, (most that is, except for those few rotten apples,) are being held responsible today anyway? You have a real problem, sir. You are a danger to Christians with that kind of thinking. I guess Germany should beware also...
-
I, personally, am not trying to be hateful to anyone, but felt the need to stand up to one's overly rude and intolerant comments to people who are allowed to share their opinion in here without feeling like they will be jumped on unmercifully every time they post in a religious thread, which also is allowed in here.
It's can also become necessary to object to any religious superstition directly responsible for the oppression, torture and deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who didn't follow that particular rude and impolite self-delusion.
Objection and opposition are fine. Adding your personal hatred and accusations, along with your bias and prejudices, with not presenting correctly and honestly, is wrong. So I, in turn, will oppose your rude remarks then.
The various xtian-instigated crusades, inquistions and witch hunts did occur and were presented as xtian-instigated because they were. There's no "bias and prejudice" in pointing out that those xtian fundies maimed and killed hundreds of thousands of people who didn't believe in the xtian 'religion'. You can oppose that, like any holocast-denier can however, the facts oppose such opposition.
So in that respect, you continue to hold the Germany responsible even today for the horror that those ones did back then?
No, it's not that difficult a concept unless you're biased by blind religious faith. I'd hold current "neo-nazis" who have the same national socialist beliefs as the members of the Third Reich did as responsible. Not your avergae non-*bleep* German today.
-
I, personally, am not trying to be hateful to anyone, but felt the need to stand up to one's overly rude and intolerant comments to people who are allowed to share their opinion in here without feeling like they will be jumped on unmercifully every time they post in a religious thread, which also is allowed in here.
It's can also become necessary to object to any religious superstition directly responsible for the oppression, torture and deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who didn't follow that particular rude and impolite self-delusion.
Objection and opposition are fine. Adding your personal hatred and accusations, along with your bias and prejudices, with not presenting correctly and honestly, is wrong. So I, in turn, will oppose your rude remarks then.
The various xtian-instigated crusades, inquistions and witch hunts did occur and were presented as xtian-instigated because they were. There's no "bias and prejudice" in pointing out that those xtian fundies maimed and killed hundreds of thousands of people who didn't believe in the xtian 'religion'. You can oppose that, like any holocast-denier can however, the facts oppose such opposition.
So in that respect, you continue to hold the Germany responsible even today for the horror that those ones did back then?
No, it's not that difficult a concept unless you're biased by blind religious faith. I'd hold current "neo-nazis" who have the same national socialist beliefs as the members of the Third Reich did as responsible. Not your avergae non-*bleep* German today.
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Hold them responsible, and hold ones responsible, like Westboro Church, and others who are irrational in what they are doing - they are not following what God wants us to do as His followers. But understand that most Christians are humans like everyone else, who love their families, friends, and relatives; work or not work; help others when needed or when asked; give from the heart; have compassion; and much more. The only difference between them and dis-believers is that they follow Christ and try to live their lives as Christ-like as possible, possibly attend church; study their Bibles, etc., while dis-believers do what they feel they are doing to live a good life, as well. People of other faiths, most of them, are trying to live right, as well.
Many Muslims get very upset when their Islam is compared to be the same as the radical extremists Islamists. They do not believe in what the radicals do, do not approve of it, and do not wish to be known as the same as them, even though it is "Islam." Do you hold all Muslims accountable for the acts of the radical Islamists, who stone, kill, hang, stab, and more, those who do not do as they think they should do? They say "Allah" tells them to do it so they are using "Allah" to fulfill their personal prejudices and desires for violence. Is it fair to hold the other Islamists accountable for the actions of the "bad" guys, just because they serve "Allah?" To them, "Allah" is not a god of hatred and killings.
Same with Christians - those were some bad people back then, using "God's" name to fulfill their wicked prejudices and personal bias against others. They were wrong. But it is wrong and unfair to hold us Christians accountable for their horrible actions.
-
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Same with Christians ...
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
-
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Same with Christians ...
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
I will not accept this comment of yours as rational, since you chose to nit pick this one comment only. I used the Muslims as an example of this very thing you responded about, and you have chosen to ignore it. Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen. I will await your answer to my question; thank you. In fact, here it is again for you, to make it easier for you:
Many Muslims get very upset when their Islam is compared to be the same as the radical extremists Islamists. They do not believe in what the radicals do, do not approve of it, and do not wish to be known as the same as them, even though it is "Islam." Do you hold all Muslims accountable for the acts of the radical Islamists, who stone, kill, hang, stab, and more, those who do not do as they think they should do? They say "Allah" tells them to do it so they are using "Allah" to fulfill their personal prejudices and desires for violence. Is it fair to hold the other Islamists accountable for the actions of the "bad" guys, just because they serve "Allah?" To them, "Allah" is not a god of hatred and killings.
Same with Christians - those were some bad people back then, using "God's" name to fulfill their wicked prejudices and personal bias against others. They were wrong. But it is wrong and unfair to hold us Christians accountable for their horrible actions.
-
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Same with Christians ...
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
I will not accept this comment of yours as rational ...
Your acceptance or denial of logical reasoning is irrevelant to logical reasoning. The reasoning is sound; your non-acceptance of sound logical reasoning is irrational.
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
Guess what, 'sunshine'? You've refused/dodged/avoided answering direct challneges of mine to your faith-based beliefs so often that you'd 'owe' me at least one. To that end; I get to choose what to respond to, you do get to dictate that response. The same applies to yours.
and unfair to hold us Christians accountable for their horrible actions.[/color]
[/quote]
-
Falcon9 what kind of trouble are you stirring up now ?????????????
-
Falcon9 what kind of trouble are you stirring up now ?????????????
None, since I didn't start this calling-out thread; a xtian did, (shocker!).
-
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Same with Christians ...
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
I will not accept this comment of yours as rational ...
Your acceptance or denial of logical reasoning is irrevelant to logical reasoning. The reasoning is sound; your non-acceptance of sound logical reasoning is irrational.
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
Guess what, 'sunshine'? You've refused/dodged/avoided answering direct challneges of mine to your faith-based beliefs so often that you'd 'owe' me at least one. To that end; I get to choose what to respond to, you do get to dictate that response. The same applies to yours.
[/color]
[/quote]
It's pretty obvious you are avoiding that particular question for a reason. Does it hit too close to home? Is it false and it's ONLY Christians you have this loathing problem with? Are you associated with something? By not answering this question, you have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter.) If you hold the same hate towards those Islamist, who are trying to live right and peacefully, as you do Christians, then you are pretty fair in your hatred. If you don't hold the peace loving Islamist accountable as the radical Islamist, then Houston, we have a problem, with your proven bias and prejudice toward ONLY Christians.
Here it is again, for we would be very interested in your outlook on this, since it compares with how you hold today's Christians accountable for past actions; and the radical Islamist are continuing from the past through today with their hateful treatment, while other Islamist are trying to find peace from that hatefulness, not to mention trying to distance themselves from the same. I cannot believe that you would refuse to answer a question like this, unless you will be giving something away that you don't want to openly admit....
Many Muslims get very upset when their Islam is compared to be the same as the radical extremists Islamists. They do not believe in what the radicals do, do not approve of it, and do not wish to be known as the same as them, even though it is "Islam." Do you hold all Muslims accountable for the acts of the radical Islamists, who stone, kill, hang, stab, and more, those who do not do as they think they should do? They say "Allah" tells them to do it so they are using "Allah" to fulfill their personal prejudices and desires for violence. Is it fair to hold the other Islamists accountable for the actions of the "bad" guys, just because they serve "Allah?" To them, "Allah" is not a god of hatred and killings.
Same with Christians - those were some bad people back then, using "God's" name to fulfill their wicked prejudices and personal bias against others. They were wrong. But it is wrong and unfair to hold us Christians accountable for their horrible actions.
-
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Same with Christians ...
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
I will not accept this comment of yours as rational ...
Your acceptance or denial of logical reasoning is irrevelant to logical reasoning. The reasoning is sound; your non-acceptance of sound logical reasoning is irrational.
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
It's pretty obvious you are avoiding that particular question for a reason.
I've replied above. You've refused/dodged/avoided answering direct challneges of mine to your faith-based beliefs so often that you'd 'owe' me at least one. To that end; I get to choose what to respond to, you don't get to dictate that response. The same applies to your previous dodges.
By not answering this question, you have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter.)
The question was answered. Any inability to comprehend that answer, (for instance, by misinterpreting it), is your own deception. Applying the same illogical non-reasoning as you're trying to do; your prior dodges/avoidance/smoke-screen non-answers "have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter )". That sort of irrationality doesn't work since it doesn't run both ways.
-
Ha I know the motive behind this post rea talk.
-
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Same with Christians ...
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
I will not accept this comment of yours as rational ...
Your acceptance or denial of logical reasoning is irrevelant to logical reasoning. The reasoning is sound; your non-acceptance of sound logical reasoning is irrational.
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
It's pretty obvious you are avoiding that particular question for a reason.
I've replied above. You've refused/dodged/avoided answering direct challneges of mine to your faith-based beliefs so often that you'd 'owe' me at least one. To that end; I get to choose what to respond to, you don't get to dictate that response. The same applies to your previous dodges.
By not answering this question, you have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter.)
The question was answered. Any inability to comprehend that answer, (for instance, by misinterpreting it), is your own deception. Applying the same illogical non-reasoning as you're trying to do; your prior dodges/avoidance/smoke-screen non-answers "have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter )". That sort of irrationality doesn't work since it doesn't run both ways.
No you have not answered a yes or no to my question. You are showing your true colors and "cowardliness" by not answering it. Here it is again for you:
Many Muslims get very upset when their Islam is compared to be the same as the radical extremists Islamists. They do not believe in what the radicals do, do not approve of it, and do not wish to be known as the same as them, even though it is "Islam." Do you hold all Muslims accountable for the acts of the radical Islamists, who stone, kill, hang, stab, and more, those who do not do as they think they should do? They say "Allah" tells them to do it so they are using "Allah" to fulfill their personal prejudices and desires for violence. Is it fair to hold the other Islamists accountable for the actions of the "bad" guys, just because they serve "Allah?" To them, "Allah" is not a god of hatred and killings.
Same with Christians - those were some bad people back then, using "God's" name to fulfill their wicked prejudices and personal bias against others. They were wrong. But it is wrong and unfair to hold us Christians accountable for their horrible actions.
-
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Same with Christians ...
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
I will not accept this comment of yours as rational ...
Your acceptance or denial of logical reasoning is irrevelant to logical reasoning. The reasoning is sound; your non-acceptance of sound logical reasoning is irrational.
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
It's pretty obvious you are avoiding that particular question for a reason.
I've replied above. You've refused/dodged/avoided answering direct challneges of mine to your faith-based beliefs so often that you'd 'owe' me at least one. To that end; I get to choose what to respond to, you don't get to dictate that response. The same applies to your previous dodges.
By not answering this question, you have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter.)
The question was answered. Any inability to comprehend that answer, (for instance, by misinterpreting it), is a result of your own self-deception. Applying the same illogical non-reasoning as you're trying to do; your prior dodges/avoidance/smoke-screen non-answers "have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter )". That sort of irrationality doesn't work since it doesn't run both ways.
No you have not answered a yes or no to my question.
The question was answered. Any inability to comprehend that answer, (for instance, by misinterpreting it), is a result of your own self-deception. Applying the same illogical non-reasoning as you're trying to do; your prior dodges/avoidance/smoke-screen non-answers "have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter )". That sort of irrationality doesn't work since it doesn't run both ways.
You are showing your true colors and "cowardliness" by not answering it.
Since the question was answered, (in the previous posts in this thread), the only 'cowardice' has been on your part for either being unable to comprehend that answer or, continue to falsely-accuse me of not answering, (which is a direct lie). Your lies are becoming tedious; repeating them will never make them true.
-
Then you should understand that Christians are not the same as those killers as from the past. Same with Christians ...
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
I will not accept this comment of yours as rational ...
Your acceptance or denial of logical reasoning is irrevelant to logical reasoning. The reasoning is sound; your non-acceptance of sound logical reasoning is irrational.
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
It's pretty obvious you are avoiding that particular question for a reason.
I've replied above. You've refused/dodged/avoided answering direct challneges of mine to your faith-based beliefs so often that you'd 'owe' me at least one. To that end; I get to choose what to respond to, you don't get to dictate that response. The same applies to your previous dodges.
By not answering this question, you have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter.)
The question was answered. Any inability to comprehend that answer, (for instance, by misinterpreting it), is your own deception. Applying the same illogical non-reasoning as you're trying to do; your prior dodges/avoidance/smoke-screen non-answers "have basically answered it (by your silence on the matter )". That sort of irrationality doesn't work since it doesn't run both ways.
No you have not answered a yes or no to my question. You are showing your true colors and "cowardliness" by not answering it. Here it is again for you:
Many Muslims get very upset when their Islam is compared to be the same as the radical extremists Islamists. They do not believe in what the radicals do, do not approve of it, and do not wish to be known as the same as them, even though it is "Islam." Do you hold all Muslims accountable for the acts of the radical Islamists, who stone, kill, hang, stab, and more, those who do not do as they think they should do? They say "Allah" tells them to do it so they are using "Allah" to fulfill their personal prejudices and desires for violence. Is it fair to hold the other Islamists accountable for the actions of the "bad" guys, just because they serve "Allah?" To them, "Allah" is not a god of hatred and killings.
Same with Christians - those were some bad people back then, using "God's" name to fulfill their wicked prejudices and personal bias against others. They were wrong. But it is wrong and unfair to hold us Christians accountable for their horrible actions.
Please answer the bold red questions - this is extremely important to how you view Christians in this forum. If you will not answer them, then it is very obvious you are sympathetic to something that is indeed a danger to other people.
-
Pretty sad when Falcon can't condem Muslem extremists of the present,while continually condeming Christianity because of "Christian" extremists from centuries ago. :'(
-
Pretty sad when Falcon can't condem Muslem extremists of the present,while continually condeming Christianity because of "Christian" extremists from centuries ago. :'(
You are indeed correct, if that is the case.
-
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
-
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
Why thank you. I would like to say that you are disgusting in your intolerance, but rather, I will say that you are totally ignorant in your dis-belief, and chalk it up that you do not understand what you are talking about. Sadly, you are mixing your personal prejudice and bias, in with your so-called view. Now, you indeed have a choice to voice your views and opinions. As do we. But your views are dangerous to those who you think you have to judge wrongfully for something they had no control over that happened in the past, or is happening now, under the name of a god/God, when those despicable killers are not true to their god/God. They are using God's name to achieve their horrible goals because of some personal vendettas they hold against certain people. You are doing the same thing by holding your personal vendetta of hating anything of God, and holding it against people who do not deserve it.
In that respect, I am grateful and thankful to my nation's leaders and to God, that you are not in leadership over Christians and Islamists that are not the radical killers, including any other faiths, as well, and that you will never have the opportunity to be a judge or leader over me or them.
Radical Islamists wish to take over the world and rid the world of Christianity. They will kill to achieve their goals. Atheists want to rid the world of Christianity. They want to strip Christians of being able to share their beliefs in public, by removing certain things, by not allowing prayer groups, and so much more that I will not go into here. You have proven that you are either of the same caliber, or else very sympathetic to their cause, unless you choose to deny that. If you don't deny, then I consider you a danger to Christians and you should be avoided at all costs.
To clarify, this is just my humble and concerned opinion, and only you know if it's fact, false, or a put-on for show, just to troll and provoke Christians. Whichever it is, I am not impressed whatsoever with your reasoning of why you think this is necessary or funny or whatever you think you are doing.
-
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
Why thank you.
That answer was available in this thread, and had been - several previous exchanges ago. Don't speak to me of ignorance when you're the one who has continually shown such. To summarize the salient point here; I'm not separating the same basic religious superstitions into different piles of sects or so-called "true-believers". That's what the religious followers do; apparently in order to try disassociating themselves from other followers of the same religious belief systems.
-
Until you read and comment with your answer to my question regarding the Muslims' Islam, this answer is null and void and deliberately posted because you refuse to listen.
The same religious beliefs were held by the xtians who commited the atrocities of the Inquisitions, Crusades and witch hunts as the followers of that same religion hold today. The same applies to islam; the ones who commited atrocities in the name of their religion hold the same general superstitious religious beliefs as other followers of islam. Separating the 'extremists' of any superstitious religious belief into different piles so that one pile can try disassociating itself from the other piles is a pointless religious fiction. To any non-adherent, if the same religious belief is held by extremists of that religious belief as by non-extremists, it's still the same underlying religious belief that's being opposed.
Why thank you.
That answer was available in this thread, and had been - several previous exchanges ago. Don't speak to me of ignorance when you're the one who has continually shown such. To summarize the salient point here; I'm not separating the same basic religious superstitions into different piles of sects or so-called "true-believers". That's what the religious followers do; apparently in order to try disassociating themselves from other followers of the same religious belief systems.
I stand on what I said. You are extremely judgmental and are a danger to Christians and others.
-
You are extremely judgmental and are a danger to Christians and others.
You're as judgemental, (something which I have no religious prohibitions against). Further, your false accusation about being a "danger", (other than to the self-deceptions of religious zealots), is specious.