Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

Quote:

I was a ******* pleb, but aren't we all nowadays,

Quote:

The chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, John Tully, has told Sky News that Chief Whip Andrew Mitchell is not fit to hold office and should resign.

"I called for Mr Mitchell to resign this morning. I know what the officers have told me, and what was reported in The Sun this morning is absolutely what happened," Mr Tully said.

"So I think Mr Mitchell needs to address his position and resign as soon as possible.

"Someone who holds such high office, and who apparently holds the police in such contempt, is not deserving of such high office and he should resign."

Mr Tully's comments came after police groups and Labour questioned whether Mr Mitchell could hang on to his job after details emerged of his confrontation with police at Downing Street.

According to The Sun, the MP swore at police after being told he was not allowed to cycle out of Downing Street via the main gate.

He apparently branded the officers "plebs" when he was asked to use the side gate and said they should learn their place.

The incident occurred a day after two Manchester officers were shot dead.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/tory-chief-whip-denies-calling-police-plebs-021558196.html

Whether being ungovernable is a good thing or not is another debate. My reading of the Constitution is that it was intended to produce that condition so that the legal profession is abled to cream everybody's arse.

If I was President I would throw the USSC into the Potomac on a frosty night.

Oralboy's view of the world is about as far from reality as it's possible to get.

He's incapable of making an informed choice about anything.

No, what is richly ironic is that i posted a comment on this topic which did not contain any personal invective,

No, what is richly ironic is that i posted a comment on this topic which did not contain any personal invective, Frank responded to with sneering insults, and not a word about the topic, and claims that i am incapable of discussing a topic without insults--and you people lap up that bullshit as though Frank were some kind of oracle.

It is incredibly, richly ironic to hear that from Setanta.

But Setanta is so out of touch with how anxious he is to demean,
derogate and otherwise insult people with whom he is in discussion that calling it to his attention is almost futile.



But hope springs eternal.

No, what is richly ironic is that i posted a comment on this topic which did not contain any personal invective, Frank responded to with sneering insults, and not a word about the topic, and claims that i am incapable of discussing a topic without insults--and you people lap up that bullshit as though Frank were some kind of oracle.

While it is certainly a commonplace that the putative Jesus said to love one's enemies and do good to those who harm you, and leaving aside that we don't even have a reliable basis for asserting that he ever existed--it's more than a little silly to harp on what he did not say. The "scriptures" on which christianity is based are based on versions no earlier than the first half of the fourth century--as much as 300 years after the putative Jesus is thoguht to have lived and died. Given the number of contradictions in those texts, and the historical and geographic absurdities which appear in them, they can hardly be taken for reliable reports of what he did or did not say, if he ever existed. A lot of editing and interpolation can take place in three centuries. It is dicey enough to discuss what he is said to have said, it is the height of absurdity to focus on what one claims he did not say.

Quote:

It is dicey enough to discuss what he is said to have said, it is the height of absurdity to focus on what one claims he did not say.

If anyone should know about "the height of absurdity" it is you, Setanta...so I thank you for your brilliant observations.

Go back to read the sequence of posts, David. My post criticized the thesis, it challenged the premises. Frank's reply was personal invective, he never addressed the topic. Yet here he is, continuing to attempt to suggest that i'm the one who cannot discuss the topic without personal invective. I guess his only defense is that he doesn't discuss the topic with personal invective--he doesn't discuss the topic at all, he just pukes up the personal invective.

I said i would not post this again, but since no one seems to be paying attnetion, here it is.

Setanta wrote:
While it is certainly a commonplace that the putative Jesus said to love one's enemies and do good to those who harm you, and leaving aside that we don't even have a reliable basis for asserting that he ever existed--it's more than a little silly to harp on what he did not say. The "scriptures" on which christianity is based are based on versions no earlier than the first half of the fourth century--as much as 300 years after the putative Jesus is thoguht to have lived and died. Given the number of contradictions in those texts, and the historical and geographic absurdities which appear in them, they can hardly be taken for reliable reports of what he did or did not say, if he ever existed. A lot of editing and interpolation can take place in three centuries. It is dicey enough to discuss what he is said to have said, it is the height of absurdity to focus on what one claims he did not say.


There is no personal invective in that post. It criticizes the premises of the topic. This is Frank's response:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Quote:
It is dicey enough to discuss what he is said to have said, it is the height of absurdity to focus on what one claims he did not say.


If anyone should know about "the height of absurdity" it is you, Setanta...so I thank you for your brilliant observations.


It does not discuss the topic at all, it just indulges in sneering personal invective. Yet Frank continues to allege that i cannot discuss the topic without insults, even though this is clearly a description of what he is doing. And you people just nod your heads, "Yup, that Setanta, he's such a mean guy."

Take a look at your own posts, hypocrite.

I've made no such claims, and your sneering sarcasm here is ample evidence of just how you conduct "discussions." I have yet to see you address the criticisms in my post about the thread topic, and you have not addressed the thread topic once since i made that post. All you 've done is make snide remarks, and then attempt to blame the tenor of the exchange on me. I don't feel put upon, you're not that important Frank. However, if you insult me, i'll insult you in return. All you're doing now is whining about that.