Thanks for all of the responses guys. I have been feeling quite guilty about this for some time. I guess I did over step my bounds a bit. Seriously though, he did not ask an innocent question. Perhaps I should have backed down, but I felt I was justified in challenging him for what was an obviously ill-informed opinion. His question said that he thought that religions would find it heretical to think that natural processes such as lightning could effect their places of worship. I was merely trying to dispossess him of this rather ignorant position. I feel fairly justifed based on the caliber of many of his responses. Perhaps the trolling comment on my part was a bit too much, but his initial question was worded in such as way that it seemed to me his only purpose in posting was to pick a fight.
BTW, I myself am 100% non-religious, but I still feel that it is not my position to insult the billions of people who DO practice a religion of some sort. Maybe, however, it should not be my position to confront the sort of ignorance and bigotry that Kalt was displaying. I get very emotional when I see this sort of bigotry. It’s one thing to debate religion in an intelligent manner, but another entirely to spout half-truths and prejudices in order to attack peoples belief systems.
Ultimately, I can see that I may have carried things too far in trying to make him be a little more tolerant of others.
Oh, and I never made any comment regarding his age. If he were 50, his initial post would have still been as bigoted and mis-informed as if he were 20.
Jason R Remy
“And it could be safely said that at that moment, in the whole of India, no one, absolutely no one, was f^(king a goat.”
– John Irving A Son of the Circus (1994)