 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Militant Atheism Threads
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: akenaton Date: 12 Feb 14 - 09:33 AM I didn't say you were a member of any clandestine organisation Dave, I give you more credit than that. I did think you would see the problem of abuse on a discussion forum? OK maybe you dislike religion or people who discuss HIV infection rates, but do you really think that obfuscation, abuse and outright lying, serve any purpose other than making the perpetrator look unhinged? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:47 AM Apparently Poundland are now selling vitamins and they have gone online. Maybe Betty had overdosed on the vitamins. Hopefully the incident will never get online... Ake. I am not missing any point. Jack is asking everyone to be kind and polite while criticising my sense of humour. If I could keep a straight face while saying it I would suggest I was deeply offended. As it is I can simply point out the hypocrisy. You, on the other hand, have quite spectacularly missed my earlier point that I have nothing whatsoever to do with anyone else on this thread. My exact phrase, to save you having to go all the way back, ooooh, the whole of 18 posts, was THERE IS NO WHETHER OR NOT ABOUT IT. I HAVE NOT, DO NOT AND WILL NOT CONSPIRE IN SECRET WITH ANYONE. ANYTHING I SAY IN HERE IS OPEN FOR ALL TO SEE. Yet you are quite happy to perpetuate the lie that we belong to some sort of clandestine organisation by asking me to tell your friends to stop trying to "throw their weight about" I can no more tell anyone to do anything than Jack can. I have no alliances on here. I do not try to kid myself that I have any influence either. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Musket Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:37 AM She's never been the same since the caretaker at the Knott End Working Men's Club made a pass at her. Probably the most romantic thing anyone has ever said to her really. "You don't sweat much for a fat lass." Anyway, our religion doesn't need resurrecting, we'll have no resurrection bollocks getting in the way of the true path. Just bingo, drinking horns and a wheel barrow for the co messiahs and co messiah emeritus with gnomish attributes to load the cash from the collecting plates / bingo takings. Two fat ladies, Betty Swollox and a misogynist mirror. Six and six, two thirds of you will burn in hell. On its own, you are never alone with an imaginary friend. Key of the door, the bible. Four and two, the answer to life, the universe and everything. Cameron's den, full of bigoted bishops. One and three, you are unlucky, and here's some guilt to pile onto your woes. Two little boys, you are getting the hang of this religion lark, aren't you? LINE! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:22 AM I found it very funny BECAUSE it went on for so long. Maybe it could go on for as long as religion has been subjugating others? Now, that would be hilarious:-) We could resurrect it, Dave (am I allowed to mention resurrections in a militant atheist thread?) Betty Swollox is available again as she's just been sacked from the Poundland plastic knickers factory for prancing around the warehouse bollock-naked with a pair of plastic knickers on her head shouting "how about this for a special offer!" Did you retrieve all the bingo balls from that car park or is Two Fat Ladies still missing? People were beginning to notice it never seemed to come up... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,concerened Date: 12 Feb 14 - 07:05 AM Tosh, tosh and ever more predictable TOSH!!!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 12 Feb 14 - 06:12 AM His belief that an ex organisation charged with protecting the public are the only source of health information would be funny if it weren't said for sinister reasons. It is a fact that HPA was, and PHE is, the only source of statistics on HIV UK. If it is not, produce another. You can not, because there is none, and you know it. You continue to link me with UKIP when there is no link. You know that too. You are a despicably dishonest person. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Musket Date: 12 Feb 14 - 04:41 AM The only thing definitive here is science. Even then, we are only observing and drawing conclusions till they get refined. Religion on the other hand, insults by it's very existence. No problem in saying that. No concerted effort to deny people their delusion. I'd rather be happy and deluded than sad and realistic. I doubt however I'd wish to delude others and get annoyed at those who don't share it. But some do. Which is why it isn't a bad idea to laugh at them, rather than with them. The sweet old biddy arranging the flowers is one thing. Using misogyny and homophobia as a tool of a religion in order to influence laws we all have to abide by.... That's an invitation to point and laugh. Pointing and laughing is far better than suggesting Marquis of Queensbury rules apply. Jack. I will continue to treat Keith with the contempt he deserves whilst ever he keeps repeating unhelpful tosh that feeds bigotry. His belief that an ex organisation charged with protecting the public are the only source of health information would be funny if it weren't said for sinister reasons. Don't forget, one of his elected mates claimed last month that the bad weather we are having here is God's retribution for gay marriage. You don't have the exclusive franchise on mental health in The USA after all..... We have a few slip through the net here too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: akenaton Date: 12 Feb 14 - 04:22 AM You are missing the point Dave. Jack is rightly saying that if the abusive language and name calling continues, the forum will suffer, as people will just stop contributing. Most of us come here to discuss issues...some of them are controversial, but serious discussion cannot continue while two or three people indulge their strange sense of humour by personally insulting other members. Just stick to addressing the issues, tell your friends to stop trying to "throw their weight about", it doesn't impress anyone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Feb 14 - 03:29 AM Got it now? No. I am criticizing the boring repetition of the three of you going on with the same lame joke for months on end. Very impolite and unkind to criticise someone else's sense of humour. Just as it would be unkind and impolite to criticise someone else's taste in music. I found it very funny BECAUSE it went on for so long. Maybe it could go on for as long as religion has been subjugating others? Now, that would be hilarious:-) We are all different. Can you just not accept that? Or is it one law for Jack and another for everyone else? DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 12 Feb 14 - 02:15 AM If you say "hypocrite" or "liar" in response to a specific statement that justifies that description, then it is not gratuitous abuse. It is a different issue to random abusive name calling. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Steve Shaw Date: 11 Feb 14 - 06:11 PM I think that calling me a hypocrite is unkind and impolite. But what if it's true? And how unkind and impolite is it to smear a person with a groundless accusation? In fact, as yet I haven't called you a hypocrite. First off, I asked you why we shouldn't regard you as a hypocrite. Second time, I asked you if you were a hypocrite. The words "Wacko, you are a hypocrite!" have not passed my lips (or keyboard), nor will they. This is one of those "if the cap fits" thangs, Wacko! And might I ask you again: do you think one of the forum rules should be that we shouldn't try to smear others with groundless, snide little slurs? Incidentally, what makes you think you're so important that Dave and I would even dream of getting our heads secretively together to gang up against you? Cor, if that cap does fit it must be a bloody big cap! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:50 PM No DtG, I am criticizing the boring repetition of the three of you going on with the same lame joke for months on end. Since that is what I am criticizing, what you choose to call your participation in that matters little to me. Got it now? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,concerened Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:42 PM The only smell my wee manneen is the smell of your Buuuuuuuuuuuuullshit!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,Troubadour Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:37 PM "It doesn't help your argument and it is annoying to the forum." Supreme monomania and arrogance to assert that what annoys you is per se annoying to "the forum". Who gave you the right to speak for all of us? You are far more irritating with your constant attempts to police this site. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:09 PM Did someone just fart? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,concerend Date: 11 Feb 14 - 04:29 PM How does it not surprise me Gnomet that you are the kind of dork that would even admit to OWNING a drinking horn?How very average it must be to actually meet you.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:49 PM Got it? No. Whether or not "conspiring" is exactly the right word does not matter. Yes it does, We only have words to put across our meanings on this forum. The right words matter a lot. You participated. Of course I did. As I just explained, religions deserve all they get. How is mocking a religion mocking you exactly? seemed to have no idea of the boundary between funny and tedious Are you criticising my sense of humour by any chance? Surely that is unkind. Or impolite at least? DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:24 PM >>>From: Steve Shaw - PM Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:08 PM I am trying to convince Steve that there are rules to this forum which are a good idea that we all should learn and abide by. Hows about a rule that says that trying to smear people groundlessly with nasty slurs is approx. ten times worse than "calling you a mocking name"? Sticks and stones...? You are a hypocrite, aren't you? <<< Please show me this rule. In the mean time... "You are a hypocrite, aren't you?" If you click on the "membership" link you will find this rule. "You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak." I think that calling me a hypocrite is unkind and impolite. It is also inviting an argument on whether I am one or not and also argumentative on the grounds that it is meant to provoke me into argument through anger. You have a unique talent to be able to break so many rules so thoroughly with so few words. You also have a talent for making things up and then arrogantly presenting the things you have made up as things we should have known already. This is not a method conducive to clear and reasoned communication. Please do not do this in future. Thank you for your cooperation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:13 PM Steve and Musket made it plenty clear many times, who and what they were mocking. You participated. Whether or not "conspiring" is exactly the right word does not matter. You "cooperated." You were their confederate? You played along. Choose your own words. It doesn't matter. The fact that you were involved in the process of mocking me for so long and that you, like Steve and Musket seemed to have no idea of the boundary between funny and tedious, makes me believe that you are not the best person to criticize my manners for being repetitive? Got it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:08 PM How can someone in healthcare planning who uses the data lie about it, you stupid prick? Your job prevents you lying? Good argument Musket! HPS/PHE statistics are definitive. There are no others that are better, more reliable, etc. That is why you can not produce any such. You lied about it because the figure contradicted the wrong figure that you put up, and you were embarrassed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Steve Shaw Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:08 PM I am trying to convince Steve that there are rules to this forum which are a good idea that we all should learn and abide by. Hows about a rule that says that trying to smear people groundlessly with nasty slurs is approx. ten times worse than "calling you a mocking name"? Sticks and stones...? You are a hypocrite, aren't you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Feb 14 - 02:38 PM Whether you conspired with Steve and Musket in private or not, you did join in their months and months of mocking of me and my religion. Jack, how many times do I have to say it? I don't want to continue until you see the light but you do seem to have set a precedent :-) Maybe I will try it in big letters this time. THERE IS NO WHETHER OR NOT ABOUT IT. I HAVE NOT, DO NOT AND WILL NOT CONSPIRE IN SECRET WITH ANYONE. ANYTHING I SAY IN HERE IS OPEN FOR ALL TO SEE. Shout mode off. Now, how about this mocking you business? I don't recall having mocked you personally but you could put me right. If so I will apologise and put it down to the heat of the moment. I will mock religion happily. Not just yours. Any organisation which tries to control the minds of innocent and vulnerable people by telling them fairy stories are true deserves everything it gets . But I accept that people at your level are not the organisation. I have said many times that I am happy for anyone to practice whatever religion they like. Pretty much like their sexual preferences, as long as it is between consenting adults and does not affect me I am happy with it. However, as soon as someone tells me that I should also worship their imaginary friend I will treat them with the contempt they deserve. What is more, any organisation that allows it's leaders to get others to kill, maim and torture is, quite simply, evil and should be spoken against. Any clearer now? DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 11 Feb 14 - 01:45 PM You both seem to agree on the stats and their source and the only agenda either of you are putting forth is that you don't like the other. Ian, I don't see how you can hide from your identity in real life and use it in an argument. That doesn't make any sense at all to me but that is your business. If I ever get the chance to buy you a beer. Just tell me which name to use. Musket, Please stop calling Keith names. It doesn't help your argument and it is annoying to the forum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,Musket Date: 11 Feb 14 - 12:10 PM How can someone in healthcare planning who uses the data lie about it, you stupid prick? I don't make decisions on things I am not qualified in. Professionals do and I give them the freedom to do so , that's it. Considering the use of the data informs service provision I'd soon look the fool you seem to be if I didn't understand what I have to do. You wished to dogmatically use data falsely to support the bigoted lies nasty shits such as Akenhsteon use to demonise gay people. In doing so, you seem to think that the data The NHS releases to HPA is then used exclusively to plan health provision. It isn't how these things work. Public health epidemiology is rather complicated which is why I see so much money spent on interpreting many sources of data. Stop saying the national collator and advisor of particular sections of health data (about 20% of what is collected for commissioning purposes) is the bible for commissioning. If it is, I for one will be able to propose making 268 people redundant in one region alone. You have been caught out telling lies to support homophobia. If you have an issue with that, take it out on the worm whose views you appear to support. Jack. Nobody is trying to give an opinion on how health care planning is done in England. I am merely correcting false assumptions by people with political agendas in my other role as an advisor to NHS England on certain matters and ex Chair of the then Dept of Health body responsible for developing commissioning and planning of services. Granted, using my real name. It's because of slanderous bigots that I keep such things separate. Sadly, I occasionally pop up in the media and gave already had my words quoted at me to call me a liar. You cannot begin to realise how much enjoyment I get out of that. In reality, I have to smile and indulge political agendas so it is nice to say what I think from time to time. Keith A Hole of Hertford and the worm like to discuss sexual health. My pet subject too but from a perspective of reality and indeed responsibility. I am not however responsible for using historical data to demonise sections of society in a country where rights of all are enshrined in law. Ian is my name by the way. I don't have a false name , more of an aka for professional purposes. A bit like my wife being Miss and then her maiden name , as most surgical consultants over here tend to. But I don't wish to be stalked on reality by weirdos and mental health sufferers, so best that Keith doesn't make links. He too has more than one persona by the way. The one that said on Mudcat that he supports a right wing political party and the back pedalling fool who doesn't like it when his views are compared to his politics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 11 Feb 14 - 11:30 AM Dave the Gnome, I think you are a good person and I generally enjoy what you have to say. Whether you conspired with Steve and Musket in private or not, you did join in their months and months of mocking of me and my religion. I certainly understand your point that the same thing repeated enough times can get very tedious. Imagine it all being aimed specifically at you, going on whether you are reading it or not and with third parties gleefully joining in. Imagine how many times Steve Shaw has called me a mocking name? Imagine how tired I am of that. I am not calling to "mommy." If you haven't noticed by now, no one comes when I call. I am trying to convince Steve that there are rules to this forum which are a good idea that we all should learn and abide by. That Max wrote those rules and that if he is grateful to Max for this forum then he should indeed respect the rules. Steve saying, that pete deserves to be vilified, calling this a "pointless" forum, saying that he has never insulted anyone and continuing to rant at people and call them names indicates to me that I have a long and daunting quest ahead of me. But I am not going to stop until Mr. Shaw stops "vilifying" people (his word) or finds somewhere else to do it. You telling me that repeatedly telling the rules to someone who hasn't learned them is rude (in your opinion) is not going to deter me. Steve is stubbornly asking for this treatment. He asks for it every time he is rude and unkind, which on these threads is pretty much every time he posts. I told you before, I'll tell you again, if you want it to stop. You have a much higher likelihood of making that happen by working on Steve. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Feb 14 - 11:12 AM Jack, a few weeks ago I put up a figure published by our Health Protection Agency. Musket tried to rubbish it by telling blatant lies about it. Preliminary report, out of date, superseded, and much more. It was the very latest and only set of statistics on that topic. To deny that, knowing it is true, is to tell a lie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 11 Feb 14 - 11:05 AM Sorry guys a piece of my post got lost in the upload. The pattern of your argument seems to be |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 11 Feb 14 - 11:01 AM Keith and Musket, I still can't figure out what your difference is. I've studied statistics for three different academic subjects, and in two of the four courses the purpose of the course was to prevent being mislead by false conclusions. I have to disagree Musket. On this thread, Keith is not being stupid or an A Hole. Keith, Musket is not lying. I don't see either of you being stupid about the stats, who reports them or what data they represent. The pattern of the argument seems to be |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Feb 14 - 09:50 AM The Office For National Statistics do publish HIV statistics. "Source Health Protection Agency" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Feb 14 - 09:32 AM There is nothing definitive about statistical conclusions, HPA/PHE do not put up "statistical conclusions." They do provide statistics. They are the only providers of HIV stats. for UK. Unless you know of another Musket? Will you share it with us? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Musket Date: 11 Feb 14 - 08:50 AM CSE English module. Question 1 If a source is definitive, does a definitive conclusion have to stem from it? Answer. There is nothing definitive about statistical conclusions, so it is correct that this is in English rather than any other subject as the aim of the question is to point out stupid use of language. If I were as dishonest as Keith, I'd possibly be well qualified for selection committees. Eyup Dave! I'll bring my clay tankard I spun and fired at the Stainsby Folk Festival circa 1981. It holds exactly one pint. Amazingly enough. The problem with drinking horns is that once you get a pint of cookin' in them, you can't put them down till they are empty. Thinking on, got a spare horn? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Feb 14 - 06:42 AM I am sure you have a position of great importance Musket, but if you say that HPA/PHE statistics are not definitive, or that there is another source used in preference, you are a liar. Lying about me personally does not change that fact. Nothing you said about me has any truth in it at all. You are indeed a thoroughly dishonest person. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Feb 14 - 05:26 AM Funnily enough, I own a drinking horn. My lovely wife bought it me, from an online shop in Russia, for a birthday some time back. Along with a Ushanka and a Cossack knife. Not sure what the message coming across was there:-) Anyway, should you happen by Gnome Towers any time I will gladly treat you to a horn of mead or any other beverage of your choice. Same applies to you, Jack, although I am not sure if treating you to a horn full would be classed as kind or polite :-) D. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Musket Date: 11 Feb 14 - 04:51 AM It's true. I can't recall swigging horns of mead served by buxom wenches with Dave or any other gnome for that matter. Mores the pity. Anyway, back to the grind. Coincidentally, for the benefit of my UKIP troll, today's light reading includes a study commissioned by WHO using primary care data previously not used outside of clinical audit to find cluster criteria for, amongst other things, STDs. Put the kettle on Keith. Might as well be useful for something. I in the meantime might highlight a few bits from the report for when I meet with the regional commissioning support unit (CSU) tomorrow. Isn't it weird that as someone on record for promoting openness, candour and access to information on health, I see irresponsible stupid comments in public by the likes of Keith A Hole of Hertford and wonder if there might just be a case for dumbing it down before armchair professors with political agendas read it? I mean, I'm no healthcare professional myself. It's my business / governance background that they make use of, yet even a bog standard engineer like me can tell the difference between source and conclusion. Best not tell him I am allowed to teach this shit to medical students, junior doctors and post grad nurses....... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Feb 14 - 04:18 AM My only claim is that the HPA/PHE stats are definitive and the ones used by NHS for all purposes including planning. It is not enough to claim otherwise. Your assurances are worthless. You have failed to produce any source to support your claims, or any other statistics on UK HIV infection. Will you now? Of course not. You can't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:52 AM tell them to stop being so childish? I think Steve has already explained but just in case it did not sink in... I cannot tell them to stop being childish. You seem to have the mistaken impression that Musket, Steve and I actually know each other. We do not. I have no influence over their posts any more than you have over mine. As Steve said, I have sent one PM to both Co-Messiahs and that was simply because I did not want to prolong the nonsense being preached in a specific thread. Other than I believe that Steve was raised a couple of miles from where I was dragged up we have no connection whatsoever. Having said all that, my views are far closer to theirs than they are to yours. I would not hold that against you though. Some of my best friends have views on major issues that are disparate to mine. I would also happily put up with any amount of bad language in place of someone childishly repeating 'You are not allowed to do that. Mum says so'. Or insults over incitement to hatred. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,Musket Date: 11 Feb 14 - 03:26 AM Jack. You say that Akenhateon doesn't insult you. He demonises a section of society and because you don't fall into that section, it's not a problem ? When they found the concentration camps, the allied armies took local townsfolk to see what they had been ignoring because. "They hadn't come for them." A bit of a severe comparison but if his wish of rounding up gay people and putting them on a register has a precedent it is Germany 1937. Oh, and Uganda 2014. Keith. Leave it. If you can't read what the grown ups write, wait till your balls drop eh? My tolerance of precocious children was never that high. You make it sound as if PHE, who I increasingly work with, are somehow different to me? Stupid prick. I expect NHS commissioning to take HPA / PHE data into account. Like anybody within The Dept of Health in any capacity, I don't expect services to be modelled on anything so crude. If Keith was accurate in his mental leaps , I and a few thousand others should resign and make way for real people, appointed by Keith and his role model Farage. Hey! Marriage is between one man and one woman eh? Now... I don't live in The USA and I have no time for religious nonsense when it comes to legislation but I notice Utah has just turned the clock back in support of Christians who er.. Didn't read the script? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Bill D Date: 10 Feb 14 - 10:22 PM " Everybody (even guests like me ) knows that the subject not to be discussed is the way the forum is run." I'm sorry, but that is NOT the forbidden topic. It (rules) is a contentious topic, and a useless one, because it involves infinite regress of debating the rules about the rules. Threads that drift into too much of that often get closed. I am not sure whether to explain the forbidden topic, because that would lead, inevitably, to opening it up. I would explain it 'briefly' to someone who I could PM- but those who decline to be 'members' are at that disadvantage... (have done so twice, and they kindly refrained from remarking on it openly.) It is an awkward situation from several years back, but Max asked for it to be observed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Feb 14 - 09:54 PM "increasingly". The word needed a little increasing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Feb 14 - 09:52 PM Dave, ally of Mr. Steve Shaw, nice try. Did he put you up to that? Well, I love the fun we have here and I don't get cross about Jacko's multifarious stupidities - usually. But, for once through gritted teeth, Wacko, let me clear this up for you. I've just checked: I have never sent Dave a PM. Dave has only ever sent me just the one PM, last September (forgive me a little here, Dave), literally a one-liner, saying that he'd enjoyed the fun of the new religion jape and that he was sorry it was coming to an end. I don't quote PMs verbatim but I can do if Dave wants me to. That single message aside, every exchange I've ever had with Dave has been in public, up here on the forum for you and everybody else to read, Wacko. You really are getting desperate, aren't you? Not only do your posts increasing read like those of a man totally losing it, but you're now resorting to nasty little slurs such as the one above. Tell me: how does this fit in with you sanctimonious parrotting of "the forum rules"? Do tell us, briefly, why we should not think that you're just a hypocrite. Alternatively, do consider a short period of red-faced silence, huh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST Date: 10 Feb 14 - 08:23 PM Just for clarity, "Ducky" is the twit formerly known as concerened |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,Troubadour Date: 10 Feb 14 - 08:20 PM "Do you what "that" is, I don't. Don't want to know." You're a liar Jack! Everybody (even guests like me ) knows that the subject not to be discussed is the way the forum is run. Ake is consistently sniping at the mods and you use feigned ignorance to selectively harangue others. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,Troubadour Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:05 PM Fuck off ducky! Unless you fancy doing something useful? Mine's white with two sugars! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:05 PM Ake doesn't insult me so I discuss my differences with him civilly. "either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak." Do you what "that" is, I don't. Don't want to know. "If you are serious about pointing out rule infringements," I am not. I said this a couple of posts ago. It still applies now. I didn't make up the rules, did I? A respectful and polite member of this form would learn the rules, respect the rules and abide by the rules. Wouldn't they? Steve Shaw and Musket appointed me the "Law enforcer and Judge" for them by attacking me and currently for Steve and up until recently for Musket How is what I am doing argumentative? I'm not arguing with them. I am just showing them Max's words and asking them to stop insulting people. I am not inviting a discussion. I am not provoking a response. I am simply and persistently trying to educate. I am simply using a tool that Max gave us to fight back against badgering without arguing and without running to the admins and asking them to babysit our tormentors. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,concerened Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:48 PM I see this thread is going the way of the other two..sad but inevitable when you have so called adults/men usually, loose with a computer.. Begrudgery, inane posturing, testosterone fueled chest thumping hominids..and that is just the class clown shaw, the totally waste of space gmomet and now the latest no mark buffoon Troubadour..with his own cut and paste cracker barrel wisdom? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,Troubadour Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:36 PM "Moderators have let too much go ....I know they cant read everything, but they should keep an eye on threads which could be controversial."....Ake Where are you Jack? If you are serious about pointing out rule infringements, why are you not taking the Pharaoh to task for being "either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak." The truth is that you are only interested in the rules which others than you and your pals break. You are a failure! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,Troubadour Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:25 PM "You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak." And you are FREE to take your pompous, posturing pontifications elsewhere, but of course you won't. You are too busy being argumentative and snooty! Cast out the beam........... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:21 PM "The church defines marriage as between a man and a woman exclusively" It will be a sad day when the followers of an invisible friend are given the right to enact law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: GUEST,Troubadour Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:17 PM "Homosexuality IS perverse as we, male and female, were given the organs of reproduction, solely to reproduce....the pleasure we gain from sexual intercourse is an added incentive for reproduction. So sexual intercourse with someone of the same gender is in essence a perversion of the true purpose." THe usual puritanical blether! If the above were in any sense logical, why is it that in the whole of the animal kingdom, mankind alone has sex throughout the year and the result is only infrequently pregnancy, while animals in the main only have sex when pregnancy CAN occur? The logical conclusion is that human sex is not simply for procreation, but that the pleasure derived is a means of finding, selecting, and bonding of a long term partner, such as might be needed for offspring which will be dependent for 18 -25 years upon the parents. Such a system would naturally throw up a small percentage who would tend to bond outside of that structure, either on a same sex, or a no sex level. All perfectly natural. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads From: Jack the Sailor Date: 10 Feb 14 - 05:54 PM I don't think you are worried. I know that you are being argumentative. So I am not going to take the bait. I think you are arguing both sides of this and accomplishing nothing. As I said you and your pals tried to pull the same Messiah joke constantly for several months. I let that pass with very little comment. Virtually none of it aimed at you. Now you say it is rude for me to point out the rules when and only when someone insults me or tries to break up a conversation I want to have with silly childish forbidden insults. Weellllll EXCUUUUUSSSSEEE MEEEEEE! If you don't want for me to tell them to stop being childish why don't you attack the problem at its source and tell them to stop being so childish? I am sorry if I am ruining your entertainment and your childish mocking of religion. But there are plenty of places on the Internet without being exposed to me. |
