sigh
As I said before, THIS PARTICULAR GROUP’S CHARITABLE ACTS WERE NOT AN ISSUE UNTIL YOU MADE IT SO!
Here’s your original quote from this thread.
Now, I told you time and time again that the purpose of the trip was most likely NOT charity. I explained it to you in damn near every possible way, as did Brian. Now you’re saying that sure, it might have been a tent revival, but maybe they did some charitable deeds sometime during the trip. Whether or not charity occurred during the trip is pretty much irrelevant to the story at hand. If I’m going to a comic book meeting in Cleveland, I can give $5 to a homeless guy I see on the street. That doesn’t make it so that my comic book meeting is now a charitable event. I can get a t-shirt commemorating my comic book event, and I can wear it with a bunch of people, and I can be a stark raving asshole in public. But I can’t defend my actions on the fact that I gave a homeless guy enough money to get a quart of Ripple (and had I not gotten the t-shirt, I could have given him $25 instead of $5). And these fundie assholes with t-shirts are still not entitled to be assholes in public just because they helped a few people somewhere else.
However, now I have to address something that’s really cheesing me off. When you said “is it not possible,” we went away from the land of reality and started into the land of hypotheticals. I said “well, it’s possible, but it’s not likely, and here’s why.” I was trying to bring it back into the land of reality. But now, your first quote above refers to the original group again, as if our entire journey into the world of Make-Believe was a discussion of what actually happened! Until you can learn to separate reality from fantasy, I see no point in arguing with you. This sort of debate-and-switch maneuver really pisses me off. You’re missing so many points that I wish I could stick your head in a pencil sharpener.