"V" <vfr44@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184247604.606878.184730@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

On Jul 12, 7:47?am, "Mark K. Bilbo" <g...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:07:52 -0700, V wrote:

No

HO!!!!! <WHACK>

--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------

I do not see a reply from Neil?

You are stupid?

HO! <Whack>

I have evidence that you are vindictive. Lots of it. Your post below
is nothing but a red herring, and has nothing to do with the topic.

Whether you are tough and fair is irrelevant to whether you are
vindictive. You ARE in denial, however.

You want to be taken seriously, but no one does. Most people take that
as a sign that they might need to modify their behaviour, that there's
something they can do, a compromise they can make, to improve their
situation. For instance, they might learn to recognize when they have
encountered a simple disagreement, which is when two parties have
different opinions about something. Instead of trying to browbeat the
other party to agree with them, they learn to back off and allow the
other party their opinion.

You haven't learned that. You are furious that atheists don't buy your
brand of theism. If you stopped at saying you believe in a God of
Inner Peace and a God of (whatever the ***** it is) then fine, you're
just another theist. But you don't. You also claim you're an agnostic.
You avoid addressing this obvious contraciction (which is just one of
hundreds) when we point it out, and instead post out of context posts
about the people who question you, designed to make them feel the same
pain that you obviously feel.

That is a vindictive act. Doesn't matter if you deny it, avoid
responding, attack my character in a new post, it doesn't change the
fact.

I have no idea how you got like this, that's about all I'm curious
about. Like I said, most people would be embarrassed if they behaved
like you do, and change their behaviour, but you just get more
entrenched and browbeat the people you hate even more. I am thinking
you have wrapped your psychology in the religious concept that
suffering is the sign of the godliest of the godly, so you create a
world in which your suffering is assured. To me, that's insane. But
I'm an atheist, so IF there is no god, then I'm right. But YOU'RE a
theist, so it fits your theist beliefs perfectly well. Martyrdom is
the religious ideal. It's just really odd that you think you can
achieve this off the backs of anonymous strangers typing messages on a
TV screen. You must have really pissed everyone off who you know in
person so that we're all you have left.

I have a different perspective. I'm an atheist. Humans are one of
millions of species of animals. Humans are social animals. Since we
are social animals, pro-social behaviour is a successful strategy and
anti-social behaviour is an unsuccessful strategy. You have been
confused by religion to think martyrdom is an ideal, so you achieve
that by behaving in an anti-social manner. Being a theist trying to
join an atheist group is a great way to feel matryred. Except in your
case, you're not a very good martyr, since you get really *****
at people for not acknowledging your noble suffering. So you lash out
at them. I have evidence. Lots of it. You are vindictive.

HO! <WHACKO!>

School of Red Herrings deleted.

V <v...@aol.com> writes:

On Jul 12, 7:47?am, "Mark K. Bilbo" <g...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:07:52 -0700, V wrote:

No

HO!!!!! <WHACK>

I do not see a reply from Neil?

So? You don't decide who's allowed to respond to your dysfunction.

Usually he has the courtesy to add a few words to the subject.

Maybe one day you'll actually figure out how Usenet is organized. Today
obviously isn't that day.