[CanadianJeff]

Gunnair Gunnair:

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

My apologies on the late response. I've worked a LOT of OT this week and I've also been in excessive pain so I'm writing this while I have one of the few breaks from both in the next few weeks.

First of all Gunnair even if I disagree with you I do value the dialog so please don't think I'm simply dismissive of what you say.

I do however still find myself in disagreement (surprise!) that I was right. You do see it as live and let live your disagreement stems from the fact you do not feel I wish to live and let live.

So I was correct but so are you. I do not wish to ever let such nonsense live and let live in this day and age. Bronze age systems of belief do not belong in the modern age and I beleive threaten to keep us all chained to ignorance.

To address your first point you may wish to go look up the fallacy of ad populum. It does not matter if the majority wish for something if it is wrong. By that definition if the majority of people oppose allowing gays to marry it makes it right. It does not.

On that first point you are correct. Public prayer likely will come down to whatever group makes the most noise and in the same way that gay people fought for their equal rights so will we non religious folks fight for our right to be free of religious ceremony in public. It is not whining to find the courage and conviction to stand up and take ridicule for fighting what you beleive is correct.

On your second point I shouldn't need to point out that you are the party that started this thread calling us "smug" and ignorant of science fiction. In this case I am standing up for myself from such accusations. The only ignorance that would occur on my part would be if I somehow thought that it was wrong of religious people to respond if I made open mockery of their religion. Non religious preference in public events is not mockery but simply non commentary.

Actually it was the writer that made up the title, not me. You could take it up with him.

Wow. Out of every rebuttal I put up here you choose to pick on the point that the author's words mean nothing when your the one choosing to post the topic.

Really?

[ShepherdsDog]

it sounds like you want your preference to take precedence over the preference of others...how very accepting.

[Gunnair]

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

Gunnair Gunnair:

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

My apologies on the late response. I've worked a LOT of OT this week and I've also been in excessive pain so I'm writing this while I have one of the few breaks from both in the next few weeks.

First of all Gunnair even if I disagree with you I do value the dialog so please don't think I'm simply dismissive of what you say.

I do however still find myself in disagreement (surprise!) that I was right. You do see it as live and let live your disagreement stems from the fact you do not feel I wish to live and let live.

So I was correct but so are you. I do not wish to ever let such nonsense live and let live in this day and age. Bronze age systems of belief do not belong in the modern age and I beleive threaten to keep us all chained to ignorance.

To address your first point you may wish to go look up the fallacy of ad populum. It does not matter if the majority wish for something if it is wrong. By that definition if the majority of people oppose allowing gays to marry it makes it right. It does not.

On that first point you are correct. Public prayer likely will come down to whatever group makes the most noise and in the same way that gay people fought for their equal rights so will we non religious folks fight for our right to be free of religious ceremony in public. It is not whining to find the courage and conviction to stand up and take ridicule for fighting what you beleive is correct.

On your second point I shouldn't need to point out that you are the party that started this thread calling us "smug" and ignorant of science fiction. In this case I am standing up for myself from such accusations. The only ignorance that would occur on my part would be if I somehow thought that it was wrong of religious people to respond if I made open mockery of their religion. Non religious preference in public events is not mockery but simply non commentary.

Actually it was the writer that made up the title, not me. You could take it up with him.

Wow. Out of every rebuttal I put up here you choose to pick on the point that the author's words mean nothing when your the one choosing to post the topic.

Really?

Yeah, really Jeff. There is no requirement for me to go around the buoy with you on this. You're not going to change your attitude and I'm not going to change mine. I might engage with others but you are a decidedly closed minded individual with an obvious agenda so I don't see what the point is. I doubt the forums need that particular noise source.

[OnTheIce]

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

Wow. Out of every rebuttal I put up here you choose to pick on the point that the author's words mean nothing when your the one choosing to post the topic.

Really?

[CanadianJeff]

Yeah I'm totally unwilling to ever change my mind which is why I changed it after being brought up for ministry and believing for 23 years.

No I never change my mind on topics as important as religion. That never happens.

Also Shep I'm advocating for no active preference to be present in public affairs not for any specific preference.

It's like the difference between allowing a moment of reflective silence for those who wish to partake vs demanding no allowance of any such thing as a waste of time.

[Gunnair]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

Wow. Out of every rebuttal I put up here you choose to pick on the point that the author's words mean nothing when your the one choosing to post the topic.

Really?

One of your two daily posts and you wasted it on cheerleading.

[OnTheIce]

Gunnair Gunnair:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

Wow. Out of every rebuttal I put up here you choose to pick on the point that the author's words mean nothing when your the one choosing to post the topic.

Really?

One of your two daily posts and you wasted it on cheerleading.

Wow, still stuck on last night eh Gunny? Time to move on my friend..it's just a internet forum. Life goes on.

[Gunnair]

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

Yeah I'm totally unwilling to ever change my mind which is why I changed it after being brought up for ministry and believing for 23 years.

No I never change my mind on topics as important as religion. That never happens.
.

You've shown no inclination you're in this for anything other than unleashing judgements on religion in general for the negative actions of the few. Believing for 23 years and have become a born again atheist - and you expect anyone to buy into your open minded approach?

Come on, Jeff, at least be honest here. I can't be any more bothered to try and have a reasoned discourse with such an adamant closed minded atheist such as you appear to be than you would have with Jones or Phelps.

It's a waste that will not likely produce a reasonable dialogue.

[CanadianJeff]

First of all I don't beleive in being "born again" in regards to anything. It goes against the very core of what I hold as moral honesty. The ability to be open to new information and change accordingly.

It may just be that the arguments presented are just unconvincing and badly constructed as I've pointed out a few times to you. You present bad arguments repeatedly and then just try and blame it all on the other side having a bad attitude.

Neither the bad arguments nor the shifting blameful accusations are true. Hell you won't even present the answer to the question "What do you believe and why?". Instead you just try and poison the well over and over.

I'm not the one being closed minded here at all.

[Gunnair]

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

First of all I don't beleive in being "born again" in regards to anything. It goes against the very core of what I hold as moral honesty. The ability to be open to new information and change accordingly.

It may just be that the arguments presented are just unconvincing and badly constructed as I've pointed out a few times to you. You present bad arguments repeatedly and then just try and blame it all on the other side having a bad attitude.

Neither the bad arguments nor the shifting blameful accusations are true. Hell you won't even present the answer to the question "What do you believe and why?". Instead you just try and poison the well over and over.

I'm not the one being closed minded here at all.

Of course you are, Jeff. You've situated the estimate and it's a lot clearer why. Whatever crisis you had that erased your faith has left you fairly bitter and closed minded to anything but your agenda.

I get it, I understand it, and I respect it. That does not mean I won't respond to it when it gets overly negative, but I certainly see no discernible possibility it can be reasoned with.

[Gunnair]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Gunnair Gunnair:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

One of your two daily posts and you wasted it on cheerleading.

Wow, still stuck on last night eh Gunny? Time to move on my friend..it's just a internet forum. Life goes on.

Just watching you taking yet another break from reality to play here.

Guess life ain't so hot for you that you feel the compulsion to visit a place that holds so little value for you.

[OnTheIce]

Gunnair Gunnair:

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

First of all I don't beleive in being "born again" in regards to anything. It goes against the very core of what I hold as moral honesty. The ability to be open to new information and change accordingly.

It may just be that the arguments presented are just unconvincing and badly constructed as I've pointed out a few times to you. You present bad arguments repeatedly and then just try and blame it all on the other side having a bad attitude.

Neither the bad arguments nor the shifting blameful accusations are true. Hell you won't even present the answer to the question "What do you believe and why?". Instead you just try and poison the well over and over.

I'm not the one being closed minded here at all.

Of course you are, Jeff. You've situated the estimate and it's a lot cleaner why. Whatever crisis you had that erased your faith has left you fairly bitter and closed minded to anything but your agenda.

I get it, I understand it, and I respect it. That does not mean I won't respond to it when it gets overly negative, but I certainly see no discernible possibility it can be reasoned with.

He's been anything but close minded. Why is it when an atheist expresses his beliefs, he's immediately labelled as "close-minded"?

Like Jeff, I'm an atheist but nowhere close to be close minded when it comes to religion nor am I bitter about those who have faith. Just because I don't believe doesn't make me any less open-minded than someone who believes, we just believe different things.

I could care less about the way people lead their lives religiously as many of us atheists do, we have no agenda to push.

[Gunnair]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Gunnair Gunnair:

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

First of all I don't beleive in being "born again" in regards to anything. It goes against the very core of what I hold as moral honesty. The ability to be open to new information and change accordingly.

It may just be that the arguments presented are just unconvincing and badly constructed as I've pointed out a few times to you. You present bad arguments repeatedly and then just try and blame it all on the other side having a bad attitude.

Neither the bad arguments nor the shifting blameful accusations are true. Hell you won't even present the answer to the question "What do you believe and why?". Instead you just try and poison the well over and over.

I'm not the one being closed minded here at all.

Of course you are, Jeff. You've situated the estimate and it's a lot cleaner why. Whatever crisis you had that erased your faith has left you fairly bitter and closed minded to anything but your agenda.

I get it, I understand it, and I respect it. That does not mean I won't respond to it when it gets overly negative, but I certainly see no discernible possibility it can be reasoned with.

He's been anything but close minded. Why is it when an atheist expresses his beliefs, he's immediately labelled as "close-minded"?

Like Jeff, I'm an atheist but nowhere close to be close minded when it comes to religion nor am I bitter about those who have faith. Just because I don't believe doesn't make me any less open-minded than someone who believes, we just believe different things.

I could care less about the way people lead their lives religiously as many of us atheists do, we have no agenda to push.

I'm not sure you have a mind, friend. I think you're more of a collection of miserable partisan driven emotive stimuli that floods the forums like a leaky diaper two times a day according to your average.

[Thanos]

Every single one of you are worse that Hitler and a mouth canker sore combined. Take that, jabronis.

[Gunnair]

Thanos Thanos:

Every single one of you are worse that Hitler and a mouth canker sore combined. Take that, jabronis.

That is worse. Huh, guess you aren't so tough now.