Er, let’s not be disingenuous, rather.
Everytime or rather often when you paraphrase my statements I perceive that you are deliberately reading into my posts the most negative connotation that you can render in order to perpetuate the rant of unsubstantiation.Coldfire claims that denial is no legitimate defense in this forum and if that is the case, then I have no defense for your charges.
denial,denial,denial
Unfortunate placement and ommission of commas. Should read “Ryan said, I believe, that some …”. I was referring to your putdown of Polycarp.Sorry for the misquote.
Do you mean like when christianity gets singled out so often?
Not a valid point. The church perhaps but not the state. furthermore this is not a crime against humanity.This isn’t even murder.
Bravo, I concede on that point. Islam is not exactly the church, normally a Christian entity, but clearly justified by the modern usage of the phrase “church and state”.
Wait a minute here! you are misrepresenting me again in furtherance to your position. As someone said earlier, West is West and I say the 20th century is still the 20th century. I have never used the phrase previous century in this forum.The validity of my previous examples remain intact.
Disingenuous. I had to look it up. Hmmm a nice way to call me a liar, that is lacking in candor. Oh well, but the fact that you have finally acknowledged my opening charges, allows me to relent. Bullshiter and liar were terms used in response to your mischaracterization of my opening post as pontification. The term coward was used since your criticism that I quoted was put forth after I said I had withdrawn from the debate. I have rarely referred to anyone in those terms, but I thought I could take licence wrt the nature of the Pit and yet not severely offend anyone. I wanted to have a little fun and have a pit experience. I didn’t expect the acrimony to go on forever. I don’t know you all that well, but in light of the results I wish I never got into it. Suffice to say I feel like Pandora.
Whatever. I suppose that’s a close as I’ll get to an apology. But it’s worth mentioning that your choice to oversimplify “being disingenuous” into “lying” might explain some of the communication difficulties you’re experiencing 'round these parts.
Oh, and it’s difficult to call someone a liar and a coward without offending them. Possible, but difficult. Fortuntely, I couldn’t care less, and so take no offense.
Andros discovered that grienspace had not actually read David’s cite about Hitler, and how does grienspace defend himself?
How does that compute?
Of course, grienspace’s whole argument is ridiculous. Grienspace maintains that Nazism was atheistic- even though the SS had “God is with us” written on their fricken belt buckles? Yeah, right- and the hymn “Glory to God in the Highest”? That’s sung by Shintoists, right?
-Ben
Well, fuck that.
A weasel? How can I be a weasel? For not substantiating a claim I did not make?
You’re a piece of work, alright.
[ul][li]On numerous occasions;[/li][li]Look it up yourself. I’m not the one laying down ridiciulous claims here.[/ul][/li]This is what I originally said:
In other words, I thought you were unclear, and using dogmatic implications. Hence my request for a clarification. Somehow, you read some sort of claim into that. There wasn’t one, other than an implicit “don’t polarise the discussion, you’re gonna make yourself look stupid”.
Obviously, that was bound to happen no matter what.
Thank you. You’ve just annihilated your entire range of arguments so far. But I’m sure you see it otherwise…
This statement reduces your original claim to “Sometimes when bad things happen, they happen in societies that have a separation of church and state, or they happen in societies where religion does not play an active roll altogether”.
To which the scientific answer is: "Well, duh."
Reciprocation (by means of substantiation) can only be expected when someone weighs in with a claim of his own. This was not the case.
At this stage, you basically have admitted that your initial implication that non-religious governments and crimes against humanity are related by something other than pure chance, was unsubstantiated.
Works for me.
Of course, you’re gonna tell me now that that’s NOT what you meant, right?
Hello grienspace
You seem to be having something of a rough ride! You kind of brought it on yourself though.
The subject line to your Great Debates OP, “All Athiests are Caucasian” was unfortunate. Although you later clarified that it was to attract attention and the word “caucasian” was used tongue in cheek, a subject line like that will automatically generate hostility before people even read your OP. At best they will assume that you’re an idiot, at worst a troll. Then your OP was a little unclear which led to you debating several different points at once, and you eventually became pretty hostile yourself.
I would suggest that you let this thread die, it soon will if you don’t post here anymore. If you want to debate the relationships between vocal atheism, culture and religious tolerance of dissent (which is what I think your OP was about) start a new OP in Great Debates and post a link to it here and in the “Athiests are Caucasian” thread. And try not to be too cute with your subject line!
Great Debates can be heated, and people make their points with various levels of diplomacy. Don’t take things too personally.
The Ryan said, of grienspace:
And then he whines like a wounded child when people point this out.
grienspace said, in response to the statement, “If you still want such examples, the Catholic Church in Ireland put children from unwed mothers up for aboption without the mothers’ permission.”:
Excuse you? Taking a child from its natural mother without the mother’s permission is not a “crime against humanity”? Says who? Since when did murder become the only “crime against humanity”?
Moron.
I can’t believe you said that. Uh, yes I can. I suppose we need to hang all those judges who award custody of the children to the fathers?
Did I say murder was the only crime? You idiot, try reading with comprehension.
5…
4…
3…
2…
1…
You implied it by saying “it isn’t even murder”.
Look, there’s about 2 dozen people here telling you, in various tones, to be more specific and clear in your writing.
Yet, you chose to tell us to “read with more comprehension”?
Could it be that the problem is you?
** what?**
what?
Sorry, but I don’t see the logic in your claims.
I didn’t think you would. Oh well :rolleyes:
Thankyou for your advice Matt.
Have you never heard of the concept of sarcasm?
Depends on the circumstance. If we’re talking about the situation in the US, then other religions aren’t much of a concern, and so ignoring them isn;t really singling out Christianity.
It’s rather difficult to procure adoption papers without the complicity of the State.
How am I furthering my position? Your insistence that only incidents from the 20th century can be interpreted two ways: either you believe that only recent events should be considered, or you have arbitrarily chosen the twentieth century because it supports your position. Of the two intepretations, I chose the one that was the most rational. If I were dead set in “deliberately reading into [your] posts the most negative connotation”, as you claim, why would I have done so?
David B
Huh? Care to elaborate?
Ryan: I was simply following up on your statement about grienspace. The “he” in my statement was not about you!
grienspace said:
That isn’t what you were talking about, was it?
No, but you sure did imply it strongly. Nice try at backing out, though.
As Coldfire already noted, perhaps you should consider that it’s not everybody else around here who are the idiots. In fact, there’s only one idiot here, and if you go look in the mirror, you’ll find him.
Run along, child.
While I agree with Matt’s suggestion that this thread be left to die quietly, I am nonetheless reviving it to point out that, although the GD thread which spawned it has been abandoned, I have posted a long, tedious response to the original post. If anyone here is still interested, check it out.
Oh, and as this is (I believe) my first Pit post:
Fuck you all! You stink and your mother wears army boots! (No, wait. my mother wears army boots. But some of you may already know that.)