Pali Posted May 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 Pragraph 1: I agree there are other factors that have come into play within our laws over time' date=' however, the foundation for the Constitution is Puritanical.[/quote'] Which is why it in no way references god or the Bible. Paragraph 2: I, once again, agree, as I believe in that little thing known as Transformative Learning. However, I believe you are failing to connect with the audience I'm failing to connect with Nameless - but I'm willing to bet that there are plenty of people who have read these posts and thought about them without posting (edit: 50 posts, 330+ views ). They're the audience. I, sir, bid you good day and good luck in your endeavors. Thanks! You too. Your not simply stating your position' date=' you are slandering mine.[/quote'] Once again the false accusation of slander. I live in a society where most people think I deserve to burn in Hell for eternity because I disagree with them on a philosophical argument (something I would not wish on anyone for any crime)... and you think I'm offensive? EDIT: There's a simpler way for you to avoid being offended here that places no imposition on anyone else: if religious discussions that may conflict with your beliefs offend you, don't read them or participate in them. I'm not forcing you to read this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Nameless Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 or you could stop being an overbearing prick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyzarius Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 I live in a society where most people think I deserve to burn in Hell for eternity because I disagree with them on a philosophical argument (something I would not wish on anyone for any crime)... and you think I'm offensive? You live in a society where you ASSUME that most people think that you deserve to burn in hell. So you go out of your way to lash out at anyone who even discusses religion(s). Perhaps it is you who needs to back off the fire and brimstone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted May 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 You live in a society where you ASSUME that most people think that you deserve to burn in hell. So you go out of your way to lash out at anyone who even discusses religion(s). Perhaps it is you who needs to back off the fire and brimstone. Most was the wrong word to use - a significant percentage, however, is not. The majority of Americans believe in a literal Hell - I can point you to numerous surveys that support this claim if you don't believe me. As I'm sure you're aware, blaspheming the Holy Spirit is the one unforgivable sin according to Jesus, so any Christian who believes that believes that I will burn for eternity in Hell. I'm also assuming they think that their god is justified in having me burn in Hell for eternity (actually, my general assumption is that they haven't thought their beliefs through enough to realize that their god is responsible for it and would say it's my fault that I'm going there, not their god's - this assumption being based on this being the usual response I get) - if they think he isn't justified in this act, then why would they worship him? If they think he is justified in this act - then yes, they think I deserve to burn for eternity. And I go out of my way to argue with just about anything that I see as incorrect - religion's just a big target, but hardly the only one (it's not like I stay out of the politics threads ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyzarius Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 I actually agree with you, on the religion as well as polotical points you bring up. I just see your bombastic tone as harmful to your points more often than not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted May 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 I just see your bombastic tone as harmful to your points more often than not. This is something that honestly confuses me, because I truly don't see it (edit: I can in the opening post, which I freely admit was made while fairly irritated and I beg a bit of indulgence there, but I don't in any of the following). Is it the word choice, the phrasing? I mean, when I compare my wording on these posts to the way Mali worded his posts regarding Obama's Israel speech, I don't see much of a difference, and nobody complained about his tone - it's strongly opinionated, it's supporting a position by providing the necessary information that's considered relevant and logical argument... as far as I can tell, the primary distinction is simply that I'm talking about religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyzarius Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 This is something that honestly confuses me' date=' because I truly don't see it (edit: I can in the opening post, which I freely admit was made while fairly irritated and I beg a bit of indulgence there, but I don't in any of the following). Is it the word choice, the phrasing? I mean, when I compare my wording on these posts to the way Mali worded his posts regarding Obama's Israel speech, I don't see much of a difference, and nobody complained about his tone - it's strongly opinionated, it's supporting a position by providing the necessary information that's considered relevant and logical argument... as far as I can tell, the primary distinction is simply that I'm talking about religion.[/quote'] you tend to dismiss your opponents debates with strrong rhetoric that leaves them appearing less intelligent or even stupid for having thought such in the first place. just 3rd party view man, like I said, I agree with you on a lot of things you talk about. I am an athiest taoist liberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted May 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 Well, I'd like to think I'm countering arguments rather than dismissing them - and I'd also like to think I'm countering them with reasoned arguments rather than intimidating rhetoric. My goal isn't to make anyone look or feel stupid (if I'm coming across that way then I apologize for that) - it's just to give them something to think about, and see if they've got something to give me back (in general, the longer my response to someone's post, the more I appreciate it because it means I have to put more thought into it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.