| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"biedronka" |
| Date: |
20 Apr 2005 04:09:47 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
Użytkownik "Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> napisał w wiadomości
news:GMWdnUPsz8S5kvvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
"Just Mark" <neverassumeyouknow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eE79e.10951$Qu2.10217@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
"Jason Gastrich" <usenetspam1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5509e.431$JB.407@tornado.socal.rr.com...
: wrote:
: > What's the matter, Gastrich? Can't come up with a rebuttal yourself?
:
: .............................As a matter of fact, I haven't even read
Doug's
: post, yet...............
Riiiiiiiiight....
Just Mark
That's why he's already run to the Christian lists to ask people
there to 'critique' what Doug wrote. The fact is, Jason has read
Doug's rebuttal and can't handle a response on his own. He's
been caught in lies, misrepresentations and outright nonsense.
An honest response is beyond his meager talent.
Doug? Do you mean *the* Doug from the "Krueger vs. McHugh" debate?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/doug_krueger/krueger-mchugh/
Well, I have read that debate and it was hilarious to see how Doug was put
in his underpants by his opponent, and it was pathetic to hear Doug weep
that he had "won" that debate.
If I were Jason, I wouldn't spend my precious time on such an unlettered
barbarian as Doug.
isi
.
|
|
| User: "Secular Fundamentalist" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 04:32:42 AM |
|
|
The gates of alt.atheism slowly swung open, and there stood
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain>,who intoned thus:
Użytkownik "Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> napisał w wiadomości
news:GMWdnUPsz8S5kvvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
"Just Mark" <neverassumeyouknow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eE79e.10951$Qu2.10217@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
"Jason Gastrich" <usenetspam1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5509e.431$JB.407@tornado.socal.rr.com...
: wrote:
: > What's the matter, Gastrich? Can't come up with a rebuttal yourself?
:
: .............................As a matter of fact, I haven't even read
Doug's
: post, yet...............
Riiiiiiiiight....
Just Mark
That's why he's already run to the Christian lists to ask people
there to 'critique' what Doug wrote. The fact is, Jason has read
Doug's rebuttal and can't handle a response on his own. He's
been caught in lies, misrepresentations and outright nonsense.
An honest response is beyond his meager talent.
Doug? Do you mean *the* Doug from the "Krueger vs. McHugh" debate?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/doug_krueger/krueger-mchugh/
Well, I have read that debate and it was hilarious to see how Doug was put
in his underpants by his opponent, and it was pathetic to hear Doug weep
that he had "won" that debate.
If I were Jason, I wouldn't spend my precious time on such an unlettered
barbarian as Doug.
isi
Bring it on! My irony-o-meter can take it!
David Silverman F.L.A.H.N. aa #2208
Due to be prayed for by Gastrich 11.3.2011
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Great Hairy One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 07:56:14 AM |
|
|
In article <1d8c611p73qr8a6q1ln9l0rneg2k1rm6o7@4ax.com>,
abacab@answersingenesis.co.uk says...
Bring it on! My irony-o-meter can take it!
Crap, I'm not sure mine can!!
--
The Great Hairy One,
ICQ: 118086514
All BAAWA and blue
SMASH! Aha! They'll save every one of us!
====================================
CEO EAC Roleplaying Division
The last thing many players
hear is me asking for 45d6...
(Remove spam block to email)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Secular Fundamentalist" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 04:46:00 AM |
|
|
The gates of alt.atheism slowly swung open, and there stood
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain>,who intoned thus:
Użytkownik "Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> napisał w wiadomości
news:GMWdnUPsz8S5kvvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
"Just Mark" <neverassumeyouknow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eE79e.10951$Qu2.10217@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
"Jason Gastrich" <usenetspam1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5509e.431$JB.407@tornado.socal.rr.com...
: wrote:
: > What's the matter, Gastrich? Can't come up with a rebuttal yourself?
:
: .............................As a matter of fact, I haven't even read
Doug's
: post, yet...............
Riiiiiiiiight....
Just Mark
That's why he's already run to the Christian lists to ask people
there to 'critique' what Doug wrote. The fact is, Jason has read
Doug's rebuttal and can't handle a response on his own. He's
been caught in lies, misrepresentations and outright nonsense.
An honest response is beyond his meager talent.
Doug? Do you mean *the* Doug from the "Krueger vs. McHugh" debate?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/doug_krueger/krueger-mchugh/
Well, I have read that debate and it was hilarious to see how Doug was put
in his underpants by his opponent, and it was pathetic to hear Doug weep
that he had "won" that debate.
If I were Jason, I wouldn't spend my precious time on such an unlettered
barbarian as Doug.
isi
You mean *this* Christopher McHugh:
"1) If God is conceived to be something without deficiency of any
kind, then God cannot be conceived to have the possibility of not
existing. [This proceeds from the intuition that having the
possibility of non-existence is a form of deficiency.]"
That's where all the straw went.
" 2) God is conceived to be without deficiency of any kind. [This is
from the definition of God as an absolutely perfect being.]"
Does he mean 'perceived' rather than 'conceived'. In any case, if God
is conceived, who is he conceived by? Man?
" 3) God cannot be conceived to have the possibility of not existing.
[From 1 and 2]"
Since 1=strawman and 2 = nonsensical, 3 falls. What a pathetic effort
it is indeed when even a strawman argument doesn't work!
David Silverman F.L.A.H.N. aa #2208
Due to be prayed for by Gastrich 11.3.2011
.
|
|
|
| User: "biedronka" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 07:26:59 AM |
|
|
Uzytkownik "Secular Fundamentalist" <abacab@answersingenesis.co.uk> napisal
w wiadomosci news:co8c61p1bkbjftu9ssudp71ftjq3g6t6im@4ax.com...
The gates of alt.atheism slowly swung open, and there stood
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain>,who intoned thus:
Użytkownik "Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> napisał w wiadomości
news:GMWdnUPsz8S5kvvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
"Just Mark" <neverassumeyouknow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eE79e.10951$Qu2.10217@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
"Jason Gastrich" <usenetspam1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5509e.431$JB.407@tornado.socal.rr.com...
: wrote:
: > What's the matter, Gastrich? Can't come up with a rebuttal
yourself?
:
: .............................As a matter of fact, I haven't even read
Doug's
: post, yet...............
Riiiiiiiiight....
Just Mark
That's why he's already run to the Christian lists to ask people
there to 'critique' what Doug wrote. The fact is, Jason has read
Doug's rebuttal and can't handle a response on his own. He's
been caught in lies, misrepresentations and outright nonsense.
An honest response is beyond his meager talent.
Doug? Do you mean *the* Doug from the "Krueger vs. McHugh" debate?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/doug_krueger/krueger-mchugh/
Well, I have read that debate and it was hilarious to see how Doug was put
in his underpants by his opponent, and it was pathetic to hear Doug weep
that he had "won" that debate.
If I were Jason, I wouldn't spend my precious time on such an unlettered
barbarian as Doug.
isi
You mean *this* Christopher McHugh:
"1) If God is conceived to be something without deficiency of any
kind, then God cannot be conceived to have the possibility of not
existing. [This proceeds from the intuition that having the
possibility of non-existence is a form of deficiency.]"
That's where all the straw went.
" 2) God is conceived to be without deficiency of any kind. [This is
from the definition of God as an absolutely perfect being.]"
Does he mean 'perceived' rather than 'conceived'. In any case, if God
is conceived, who is he conceived by? Man?
" 3) God cannot be conceived to have the possibility of not existing.
[From 1 and 2]"
Since 1=strawman and 2 = nonsensical, 3 falls. What a pathetic effort
it is indeed when even a strawman argument doesn't work!
Christopher McHugh introduces the above argument with the phrase:
"Such an argument might go something like this:"
Then he proceeds to render the argument in symbolic logic, so that "there is
no controversy over its validity".
Then he mentions the critique by atheist professor Michael Martin, who
states that "there is little doubt that the argument is valid", but
questions the validity of the postulate which states that it is not
logically necessary that a perfect being does not exist. He (the atheist)
also attacks Anselm's principle.
Mc Hugh points out that Martin's argumentation can be called into question
on several accounts, but then presents a modified version of the modal
ontological argument, which is immune to Martin's and similar criticisms.
Krueger doesn't attempt to offer any sort of rebuttal - whether sound or
unsound - of McHugh's proof, and hence the conclusion of this debate is that
atheism is false.
David Silverman F.L.A.H.N. aa #2208
Due to be prayed for by Gastrich 11.3.2011
Such debates are a waste of time. Every proof requires postulates, and
there will always be those who reject even the most intuitively obvious
truths.
There is no bootstrap method to logically prove the validity of the
scientific method, yet most (all) atheists believe in it.
isi
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "biedronka" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 04:40:59 AM |
|
|
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d4568i$qr9$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> napisał w wiadomości
news:GMWdnUPsz8S5kvvfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
"Just Mark" <neverassumeyouknow@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eE79e.10951$Qu2.10217@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
"Jason Gastrich" <usenetspam1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5509e.431$JB.407@tornado.socal.rr.com...
: wrote:
: > What's the matter, Gastrich? Can't come up with a rebuttal
yourself?
:
: .............................As a matter of fact, I haven't even read
Doug's
: post, yet...............
Riiiiiiiiight....
Just Mark
That's why he's already run to the Christian lists to ask people
there to 'critique' what Doug wrote. The fact is, Jason has read
Doug's rebuttal and can't handle a response on his own. He's
been caught in lies, misrepresentations and outright nonsense.
An honest response is beyond his meager talent.
Doug? Do you mean *the* Doug from the "Krueger vs. McHugh" debate?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/doug_krueger/krueger-mchugh/
Well, I have read that debate and it was hilarious to see how Doug was
put
in his underpants by his opponent, and it was pathetic to hear Doug weep
that he had "won" that debate.
If I were Jason, I wouldn't spend my precious time on such an unlettered
barbarian as Doug.
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
isi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 05:07:20 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 11:40:59 +0200 in alt.atheism, biedronka
("biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
[snip]
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
"Vanity, definitely my favourite sin".
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118971
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 07:47:10 AM |
|
|
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who couldn't
get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you offered her ten times
her asking price. B'bye, *****.
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
22 Apr 2005 12:14:52 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:47:10 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who couldn't
get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you offered her ten times
her asking price. B'bye, *****.
It's the Unkle Davina fuckwit.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
22 Apr 2005 12:22:39 PM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:q7ci61h63daot6mcidb6q7a61ngdcpunli@4ax.com...
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:47:10 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w
wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who
couldn't
get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you offered her ten times
her asking price. B'bye, *****.
It's the Unkle Davina fuckwit.
Really? Oy, what a shmuck :P
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
23 Apr 2005 11:43:46 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:22:39 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:q7ci61h63daot6mcidb6q7a61ngdcpunli@4ax.com...
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:47:10 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w
wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who
couldn't
get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you offered her ten times
her asking price. B'bye, *****.
It's the Unkle Davina fuckwit.
Really? Oy, what a shmuck :P
That was apparent many many many moons ago.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "David" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
23 Apr 2005 12:00:08 PM |
|
|
Uzytkownik "stoney" <stoney@the.net> napisal w wiadomosci
news:gpuk61hhqtroa0bh8m2idqpn372q85guur@4ax.com...
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:22:39 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:q7ci61h63daot6mcidb6q7a61ngdcpunli@4ax.com...
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:47:10 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w
wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who
couldn't
get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you offered her ten
times
her asking price. B'bye, *****.
It's the Unkle Davina fuckwit.
Really? Oy, what a shmuck :P
That was apparent many many many moons ago.
Watch it. That's not me, I'm telling you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "biedronka" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 07:56:28 AM |
|
|
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:3cn19rF6ocg04U1@individual.net...
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who
couldn't
get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you offered her ten times
her asking price. B'bye, *****.
Stop projecting and wipe off your dirty Sanchez.
isi
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SonOfFred" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 01:08:15 PM |
|
|
Well, just so we have a better idea what we're dealing with here, let's
consider that this "biedronka:"
Complained that someone used "filth" in the group:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/01b0cbc37d2428e6?hl=en
Then later changed Mark Bilbo's name to "Mark *****" in the
introductory header of a reply:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/4cb1f440cd2a10e4?hl=en
And responded to Robyn (Robibnikoff) with the statement, "stop
projecting and wipe off your dirty Sanchez," in:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/165cdb625912586a?hl=en
www.urbandictionary.com is as good a place as any to get a definition
of a "dirty sanchez." It would seem that the definition of "filth"
depends on the person uttering the alleged "filthy" comments.
Meanwhile, "biedronka" admits that "she" doesn't like to be in
killfiles and will change her username to avoid them:
"When I post, I may sometimes change my username; life in a killfile is
very lonely."
This shows that "she" is basically an attention-junkie.
She also considers atheists to be "the enemy:"
"I will, however, have the clear purpose of waging a holy war against
atheists, all of whom I will consider my enemies."
See http://www.usenetposts.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3&start=15 and
posts by "isi" for the context of both of these latter comments.
In other words, what we have on our hands here is yet another shining
example of fundamentalist Christianity, and a particularly stupid,
nasty, and arrogant one, at that. Let the games begin!
.
|
|
|
| User: "biedronka" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 02:24:52 PM |
|
|
Uzytkownik "SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:1114020495.124993.264330@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Well, just so we have a better idea what we're dealing with here, let's
consider that this "biedronka:"
Complained that someone used "filth" in the group:
Yes, I made such a complaint. Do you think the complaint was not justified?
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/01b0cbc37d2428e6?hl=en
Then later changed Mark Bilbo's name to "Mark *****" in the
introductory header of a reply:
That's because "Mark Godemiche" didn't serve my purpose.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/4cb1f440cd2a10e4?hl=en
And responded to Robyn (Robibnikoff) with the statement, "stop
projecting and wipe off your dirty Sanchez," in:
And what did the self-proclaimed Satan's bride write in her numerous posts?
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/165cdb625912586a?hl=en
www.urbandictionary.com is as good a place as any to get a definition
of a "dirty sanchez." It would seem that the definition of "filth"
depends on the person uttering the alleged "filthy" comments.
It would seem that this is a strange idea.
Meanwhile, "biedronka" admits that "she" doesn't like to be in
killfiles and will change her username to avoid them:
"When I post, I may sometimes change my username; life in a killfile is
very lonely."
Been spying, eh? You make me feel important.
This shows that "she" is basically an attention-junkie.
Your reading is highly selective, which is not surprising, it being given
that all atheists are incorrigible revisionists. In the same non-Usenet
thread, which you have obviously been monitoring like only a
compulsive-behaviour junkie would do, you can also read that I was not at
all certain whether I would post at all.
To date, I have posted exactly 22 articles to free.christians; this shows
that your attention-junkie theory is just a plain untruth.
She also considers atheists to be "the enemy:"
They are the enemy, not because *I* say so, but because the anti-theists
themselves have openly declared that it is their goal to see religion gone.
"I will, however, have the clear purpose of waging a holy war against
atheists, all of whom I will consider my enemies."
See http://www.usenetposts.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3&start=15 and
posts by "isi" for the context of both of these latter comments.
In other words, what we have on our hands here is yet another shining
example of fundamentalist Christianity,
How did you arrive at such a conclusion?
and a particularly stupid,
nasty, and arrogant one, at that. Let the games begin!
What games? Do you play chess?
isi
(post #23)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Just Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 02:45:38 PM |
|
|
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d46aak$g5b$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
:
: Uzytkownik "SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> napisal w wiadomosci
: news:1114020495.124993.264330@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
: They are the enemy, not because *I* say so, but because the anti-theists
: themselves have openly declared that it is their goal to see religion
gone.
Ravi Zacharias fan? Hmmmm....I used the word "anti-theist" when I was a
Ravi-parrotting fundy; thought I was being clever.
You've used other Ravi-isms here, IIRC.
Of course, the difference is that he's doing his thing (impotent though it
may be) in the real world, while you're sitting behind your computer in your
skivvies, posting to USENET during TV commercials.
:
: > "I will, however, have the clear purpose of waging a holy war against
: > atheists, all of whom I will consider my enemies."
: >
: > See http://www.usenetposts.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3&start=15 and
: > posts by "isi" for the context of both of these latter comments.
: >
: > In other words, what we have on our hands here is yet another shining
: > example of fundamentalist Christianity,
:
: How did you arrive at such a conclusion?
Case study method.
JM
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Harvest Dancer" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 03:22:53 PM |
|
|
biedronka wrote:
Uzytkownik "SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:1114020495.124993.264330@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/4cb1f440cd2a10e4?hl=en
And responded to Robyn (Robibnikoff) with the statement, "stop
projecting and wipe off your dirty Sanchez," in:
And what did the self-proclaimed Satan's bride write in her numerous
posts?
Self-proclaimed Satan's bride? I never saw her proclaim that.
Jason Harvestdancer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 03:31:25 PM |
|
|
"Harvest Dancer" <harvestdancer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114028573.676096.193670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
biedronka wrote:
Uzytkownik "SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:1114020495.124993.264330@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/4cb1f440cd2a10e4?hl=en
And responded to Robyn (Robibnikoff) with the statement, "stop
projecting and wipe off your dirty Sanchez," in:
And what did the self-proclaimed Satan's bride write in her numerous
posts?
Self-proclaimed Satan's bride? I never saw her proclaim that.
Oh, it's in the sig now. Weatherly called me that and I thought it was
hilarious. That being said, until this post I have never used the phrase
"dirty Sanchez", so I don't know what the hell that biedronka jackass is
babbling about :)
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harvest Dancer" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 03:54:20 PM |
|
|
Robibnikoff wrote:
"Harvest Dancer" <harvestdancer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114028573.676096.193670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
biedronka wrote:
Uzytkownik "SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:1114020495.124993.264330@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/4cb1f440cd2a10e4?hl=en
And responded to Robyn (Robibnikoff) with the statement, "stop
projecting and wipe off your dirty Sanchez," in:
And what did the self-proclaimed Satan's bride write in her
numerous
posts?
Self-proclaimed Satan's bride? I never saw her proclaim that.
Oh, it's in the sig now. Weatherly called me that and I thought it
was
hilarious. That being said, until this post I have never used the
phrase
"dirty Sanchez", so I don't know what the hell that biedronka jackass
is
babbling about :)
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
Oh, there it is. It seems more like stealing an insult than a
self-proclamation. What led up to that label?
Jason Harvestdancer
.
|
|
|
| User: "SonOfFred" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 07:15:23 PM |
|
|
Harvest Dancer wrote:
Robibnikoff wrote:
"Harvest Dancer" <harvestdancer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114028573.676096.193670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Self-proclaimed Satan's bride? I never saw her proclaim
that.
Oh, it's in the sig now. Weatherly called me that and I
thought it was hilarious.
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
Oh, there it is. It seems more like stealing an insult than
a self-proclamation. What led up to that label?
I'm not sure which label, but if it's the "self-proclaimed" label, I'd
say it was dishonesty.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 07:44:13 PM |
|
|
"SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114042523.833256.274490@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Harvest Dancer wrote:
Robibnikoff wrote:
"Harvest Dancer" <harvestdancer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114028573.676096.193670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Self-proclaimed Satan's bride? I never saw her proclaim
that.
Oh, it's in the sig now. Weatherly called me that and I
thought it was hilarious.
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
Oh, there it is. It seems more like stealing an insult than
a self-proclamation. What led up to that label?
I'm not sure which label, but if it's the "self-proclaimed" label, I'd
say it was dishonesty.
Pardon?
--
---------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "SonOfFred" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 07:46:27 PM |
|
|
Robibnikoff wrote:
"SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114042523.833256.274490@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Oh, there it is. It seems more like stealing an insult than
a self-proclamation. What led up to that label?
I'm not sure which label, but if it's the "self-proclaimed" label,
I'd
say it was dishonesty.
Pardon?
No, no, pardon *me* for posting too quickly. The dishonesty to which I
refer is that of "isi."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 08:16:30 PM |
|
|
"SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114044387.022891.232260@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Robibnikoff wrote:
"SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114042523.833256.274490@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Oh, there it is. It seems more like stealing an insult than
a self-proclamation. What led up to that label?
I'm not sure which label, but if it's the "self-proclaimed" label,
I'd
say it was dishonesty.
Pardon?
No, no, pardon *me* for posting too quickly. The dishonesty to which I
refer is that of "isi."
Alrighty then ;)
--
---------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "SonOfFred" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 07:09:17 PM |
|
|
biedronka wrote:
Uzytkownik "SonOfFred" <horndw@gmail.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:1114020495.124993.264330@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Well, just so we have a better idea what we're dealing
with here, let's > consider that this "biedronka:"
Complained that someone used "filth" in the group:
Yes, I made such a complaint. Do you think the complaint
was not justified?
I think the complaint is hypocritical based on your previous and
subsequent statements in the groups.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/01b0cbc37d2428e6?hl=en
Then later changed Mark Bilbo's name to "Mark *****" in the
introductory header of a reply:
That's because "Mark Godemiche" didn't serve my purpose.
I have absolutely no intent use my foil and fence with a person using a
plastic butter knife, and while Davey may find you enchanting, I find
you loathsome, so let's cut to the chase: Commentary about the "filth"
of others while spewing filth is hypocritical. No real Christian that
I know would use this kind of commentary, make the statements or the
implications that have made, or display the attitudes that have been
displayed. Furthermore, you excuses, evasions, and refusal to take
responsibility for your actions are not going to relieve you of your
responsibilities. I find you neither charming nor clever and I'm not
even sure that you're not a sock for Davey, though I don't find the
idea as compelling as some.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/4cb1f440cd2a10e4?hl=en
And responded to Robyn (Robibnikoff) with the statement, "stop
projecting and wipe off your dirty Sanchez," in:
And what did the self-proclaimed Satan's bride write in her
numerous posts?
Is that at all relevant? When Jesus is said to have preached, "if a
man smite you on one cheek, turn to him the other, also, was there a
provision in there for variation given whatever might be said or
written by another person? Let me save you the trouble. The answer is
"no."
And by the way, your lies and misrepresentations won't be tolerated,
either. Robyn is no more a "self-proclaimed Satan's bride" than is
Heather Locklear. The fact is that she was called such by someone else
and she uses it in humor.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/free.christians/msg/165cdb625912586a?hl=en
www.urbandictionary.com is as good a place as any to get a
definition
of a "dirty sanchez." It would seem that the definition of "filth"
depends on the person uttering the alleged "filthy" comments.
It would seem that this is a strange idea.
Was the reference to a "dirty sanchez" by a religionist such as
yourself *not* filty?
Meanwhile, "biedronka" admits that "she" doesn't like to be in
killfiles and will change her username to avoid them:
"When I post, I may sometimes change my username; life in a
killfile is
very lonely."
Been spying, eh? You make me feel important.
In truth, I don't post much to Usenet as much as I used to because,
quite frankly, I'm tired of people like you, but the fact also is that
it was pointed out to me and it's good information based on what was
seen there and what has been seen here. Furthermore, it was a post in
a public form. It hardly can be called "spying." Having pointed
*that* out, I will also point out that you neither deny nor seem to
have any explanation for this obvious breach of what is commonly
understood as "netiquette" and which is also reportable as a breach of
most terms of service for Internet providers.
This shows that "she" is basically an attention-junkie.
Your reading is highly selective...
No, my reading is analytical.
...which is not surprising, it being given that all atheists
are incorrigible revisionists.
Get over yourself. I'm not an atheist, and there's nothing revisionist
about it. It's a theory based on the observed behavior and that of
many before you.
In the same non-Usenet thread, which you have obviously been
monitoring like only a compulsive-behaviour junkie would do,
Don't be so stupid. I read the thread *once*. That's all that was
needed.
...you can also read that I was not at all certain whether
I would post at all.
....and that you could change your mind quite readily. I don't have it
in front of me, and won't bother. I'm pretty good with detail. On the
16th, you wrote that you probably wouldn't continue and on the 20th you
wrote something about changing your mind. Upon writing that, you
appeared in the groups last night and this morning spewing your bile
and vitriol and pseudoclever nonsense. Obviously, putting all of that
together, it was *not* a matter of you being certain whether or not you
would post, as you *were* and *are* posting. It was the combination of
those things that prompted *my* response. There was no "revisionism."
It was *observation*.
To date, I have posted exactly 22 articles to free.christians;
this shows that your attention-junkie theory is just a plain
untruth.
I based what I wrote on the comments that you actually made in the
context in which they were made. You can make all of the excuses you
wish to make with regard to the evidence that we have before us so far,
but it won't wash. The number of posts is concentrated within the
period of time covered by any reasonable interpretation of the comment,
and is considered in light of comments and a presence in singles and
support groups. People who are not "attention-junkies" do not change
their sign-ons to avoid kill-files. If you have another explanation
for why you would do that, let's see it.
She also considers atheists to be "the enemy:"
They are the enemy, not because *I* say so...
A person who declares another person an enemy has an enemy because that
person has made a conscious decision to *be* an enemy.
...but because the anti-theists themselves have openly declared
that it is their goal to see religion gone.
Have they, now? *All* of the "anti-theists have declared this? And
"openly?" We're being a bit paranoid on top of everything else, aren't
we? The fact is that this is false, and that most "anti-theists" give
little or no thought to religion unless it intrudes on them in some
way. There's no denying that some would like to see an end to
religion, by whatever means they could ever hope to bring *that* about.
But to complain that "anti-theists" as a whole have made such
declarations is either stupid or dishonest. Most just don't *care* as
long as you go about your business and leave them to theirs.
"I will, however, have the clear purpose of waging a holy war
against
atheists, all of whom I will consider my enemies."
See http://www.usenetposts.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3&start=15 and
posts by "isi" for the context of both of these latter comments.
In other words, what we have on our hands here is yet another
shining
example of fundamentalist Christianity,
How did you arrive at such a conclusion?
By your own words and actions, and I *was* being sarcastic, of course.
You are no such example, although you are far too common in being the
sort of example that you are.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 04:07:45 PM |
|
|
Witchy pooped:
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who
couldn't
get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you offered her ten times
her asking price. B'bye, *****.
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
Can we say Isi touched a noive?
Yes, I think we can. We can definitely see ..... the smoke coming out of
her ears ... is black.
No bells.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harvest Dancer" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 04:15:35 PM |
|
|
David wrote:
Witchy pooped:
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
U=BFytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisa=B3 w
wiadomo=B6ci
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who
couldn't get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you
offered her
ten times her asking price. B'bye, *****.
Can we say Isi touched a noive?
Yes, I think we can. We can definitely see ..... the smoke coming
out of
her ears ... is black.
You like the idea of there being smoke (and therefore fire) around
witches? I'm not too fond of burnings myself, and Christians aren't
either.
Jason Harvestdancer
.
|
|
|
| User: "David" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
20 Apr 2005 04:26:04 PM |
|
|
Uzytkownik "Harvest Dancer" <harvestdancer@hotmail.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:1114031735.550145.213790@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
David wrote:
Witchy pooped:
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
Użytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisał w
wiadomości
news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
snip
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent who
couldn't get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you
offered her
ten times her asking price. B'bye, *****.
Can we say Isi touched a noive?
Yes, I think we can. We can definitely see ..... the smoke coming
out of
her ears ... is black.
You like the idea of there being smoke (and therefore fire) around
witches? I'm not too fond of burnings myself, and Christians aren't
either.
Jason Harvestdancer
She wrote as though she were about to self combust. I didn't say that she
should be burned for being a witch. Don't put words in my mouth.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harvest Dancer" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist vs. Theist Debate - We Need Your Comments! |
21 Apr 2005 09:49:06 AM |
|
|
David wrote:
Uzytkownik "Harvest Dancer" <harvestdancer@hotmail.com> napisal w
wiadomosci
news:1114031735.550145.213790@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
David wrote:
Witchy pooped:
"biedronka" <ladyday@dont.explain> wrote in message
news:d45833$ba$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
U=BFytkownik "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> napisa=B3
w
wiadomo=B6ci news:3cml4lF6nsv78U1@individual.net...
Another Jason sockpuppet or just a pathetic moron?
Better being called a sockpuppet than a warty witch.
I bet you don't have any mirrors in the shed you live in.
And I bet you're an overweight pimple-faced slovenly adolescent
who
couldn't get a date with a desperate crack ***** even if you
offered her ten times her asking price. B'bye, *****.
Can we say Isi touched a noive?
Yes, I think we can. We can definitely see ..... the smoke
coming
out of her ears ... is black.
You like the idea of there being smoke (and therefore fire) around
witches? I'm not too fond of burnings myself, and Christians
aren't
either.
She wrote as though she were about to self combust. I didn't say that
she
should be burned for being a witch. Don't put words in my mouth.
She didn't talk about her combustion, you did. If you think I put
words in your mouth, I was merely following your christian example.
You like the idea of there being smoke (and therefore fire) around
witches.
Jason Harvestdancer
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
