Continued theology discussion... Not sure what to call this really....

[Pauldohert]

Then what gives you the right to decide that this isn't the time and the place?

I think its self evident - that this is not the time or place.

 

[Rich]

Infamy, why have they got it infamy,
ask Kraj, Ken Higg, Rich, Brian,etc., etc.

 

[chergh]

I think its self evident - that this is not the time or place.

No there is nothing self evident about this not being the time or place. A theology thread is exactly the place to test the ideas of religion and to post personal views regarding these ideas, in my opinion.

Now please explain why this is not the time and place.

 

[Pauldohert]

I've never made any fabricated slurs on anyone for their associations, other than with Catholicism and Muslim bombers

Rich - you are a self confessed bigot - one who resorts to fabricated slurs .

 

[JamesMcS]

Religion and women, two things never to get on the wrong side of

 

[Pauldohert]

No there is nothing self evident about this not being the time or place. A theology thread is exactly the place to test the ideas of religion and to post personal views regarding these ideas, in my opinion.

Now please explain why this is not the time and place.

I already have.

 

[chergh]

I already have.

You haven't, you said it was self evident and left it at that and have provided no justification.

So paul why are you objecting to me using my right of free speech to give my opinion on religous ideas in a theology thread?

 

[Pauldohert]

You haven't, you said it was self evident and left it at that and have provided no justification.

So paul why are you objecting to me using my right of free speech to give my opinion on religous ideas in a theology thread?

How about opening another thread with a poll attached asking if a theology debate is a good place for statements like God is a dick. Its up to you.

Maybe you should enquire with the site owner - or the mods - if they think its the way to go.


I am quite happy for you to abide by that decision. Afterall everyone will know what they are going to get then want they. (though the rules of engagement are pretty clear anyhow really)

 

[chergh]

How about opening another thread with a poll attached asking if a theology debate is a good place for statements like God is a dick. Its up to you.

Maybe you should enquire with the site owner - or the mods - if they think its the way to go.


I am quite happy for you to abide by that decision. Afterall everyone will know what they are going to get then want they. (though the rules of engagement are pretty clear anyhow really)

How about you answer my question of why you object to me using my right to free speech regarding religous ideas in a theology thread? You said it was neither the time or the place so justify your statement!

 

[Rich]

though the rules of engagement are pretty clear anyhow really

That's a fabricated lie and you know it

 

[chergh]

Maybe you should enquire with the site owner - or the mods - if they think its the way to go.

I assume you checked with the site mods and/or owner before asking me if my dead mother loved dick? What did they say?

 

[Pauldohert]

I assume you checked with the site mods and/or owner before asking me if my dead mother loved dick? What did they say?

They'd never met her?

 

[Rich]

I assume you checked with the site mods and/or owner before asking me if my dead mother loved dick? What did they say?

Paul D makes up his own rules, and he knows it

 

[chergh]

They'd never met her?

I think at this point I am safe in concluding that you're nothing but a nasty little man making insulting personal remarks and then trying to take the moral high ground, pathetic really. Still if homophobia and insulting peoples mothers makes you feel good then go for it.

 

[chergh]

Paul D makes up his own rules, and he knows it

I think you're giving him to much credit rich he just makes up shit as he goes along. His IQ probably drops 20 points every time he goes to the toilet.

 

[dan-cat]

This is really what you seem to be missing, dan-cat. You're comparing apples to oranges. And I hate to bring it up again because Paul already apologized for it, which to me was a commendable thing on his part.

You're seeing things in a very balanced way and I'm impressed by your reasoning.

I would like to add this though.

Personally I am not religious but have many closest and dearest who are. I have first-hand experience of how integral the concept of God is in their lifes to an extent that I know that referring to God in such a way extends to more than insulting a concept. It is insulting a concept that they have dedicated themselves to.

I don't feel comfortable insulting a concept with full knowledge of how certain good people are personally engaged with it.

Basically when discussing a concept I like to take into account what that concept actually means in the real world and this includes how others are connected to it. To insult it, in my opinion, is not to do this. Because that is what a good discussion involves. A certain degree of empathy between the participants.

Anyway hats off to you for keeping level on a very turbulent thread.

 

[dan-cat]

You got there before me Rich, however I have to say that althougth I would argue against a concept I would try to avoid being insulting and offensive

Why if the concept and subscriber are mutually exclusive?

The fact is they are not and to argue otherwise is daft.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Brian is good at that, he did it to me a couple of weeks back and never had the nerve (a bit like Americans) to answer the simple question I asked him.

Col

Any chance at pointing me at that post as I try to answer all reasonable questions put to me. Must have missed this one.

Brian

 

[Brianwarnock]

Why if the concept and subscriber are mutually exclusive?

The fact is they are not and to argue otherwise is daft.

I'm not following youu here, I am saying that I might argue against religion, but would not be insulting or abusive. Why do you object to that?

Brian

 

[dan-cat]

I'm not following youu here, I am saying that I might argue against religion, but would not be insulting or abusive. Why do you object to that?

Brian

I'm not objecting to that.

I'm saying you wouldn't be insulting to the concept of religion because you understand that the concept and the subscribers to the concept are not mutually exclusive. Insulting one is risking insulting the other.

I'm arguing that viewing the concept and the subscriber to the concept as mutually exclusive is daft which is what you and Rich seem to be arguing.