Do you lunatics actually listen to yourselves? Or do you just drift in and out of reality?
Wilso wrote:Do you lunatics actually listen to yourselves? Or do you just drift in and out of reality?
We exist for your enjoyment and entertainment.
Arella Mae wrote:And do you ever have anything nice to say about someone that has different views than your own? 
About these dangerous freaks? NO. If you don't like it, then don't f@cking read it!
Wilso wrote:Arella Mae wrote:And do you ever have anything nice to say about someone that has different views than your own?
About these dangerous freaks? NO. If you don't like it, then don't f@cking read it!
To more be more precise. I hope he doesn't mind me typing his name here. I think Timberlandko is an incredibly intelligent man. I disagree with his politics almost completely, and can't understand how someone so bright, can support the dribbling moron in the Whitehouse. But I still think he's a smart guy.
But the lunatics on these forums? No. They are demented, brain damaged freaks, and it's them and their deranged ilk, that are responsible for just about every problem in existence. They're sick weirdo's who should be locked up where they can't hurt anyone. And if you don't like it, you're quite free to kiss my arse.
There is nobody more fanatical in their religion than is the true atheist. And that person's religion requires him to despise all who profess a different faith.
Just imagine a whole planet filled with them after the believers are removed and you might have an idea what the tribulation will be like.
There once was a kooka in Kanahooka
Who
Oops, sorry I think this is the wrong thread
Wilso wrote-
Everybody has a life.
Why do you use this trite and meaningless expression?
Why don't you just say that you hate others and then scram.
If you are the only one with a life go live it and leave those of us who haven't got a life to enjoy ourselves.
Do you normally converse in blurts and squeaks?
Get a literary education.
I take exception to foxfyre's characterization, inclusive of all true atheists, but will not hijack the thread to call her an idiot (not in a personal way, but intellectually) more than this once.
Gee Edgar, thanks for contributing and helping to make my case. This is much appreciated. (I don't really understand why you would not call me an idiot here, however. It never stopped you on any other thread.)
Foxfyre wrote:There is nobody more fanatical in their religion than is the true atheist.
Rubbish. What about the fundamentalist Muslim? No one can get more fanatical than a guy that suicide bombs and crashes planes into buildings.
Quote:Just imagine a whole planet filled with them after the believers are removed and you might have an idea what the tribulation will be like.
Edgar may not call you an idiot for this horrible characterisation but I will. I didn't before in your previous posts because at least you showed some decent logic.
Wolf_ODonnell wrote:Foxfyre wrote:There is nobody more fanatical in their religion than is the true atheist.
Rubbish. What about the fundamentalist Muslim? No one can get more fanatical than a guy that suicide bombs and crashes planes into buildings.
Quote:Just imagine a whole planet filled with them after the believers are removed and you might have an idea what the tribulation will be like.
Edgar may not call you an idiot for this horrible characterisation but I will. I didn't before in your previous posts because at least you showed some decent logic.
Oh for Pete's sake, lighten up. My post was in direct response to Wilso's insulting tirade that didn't seem to bother Edgar or you in the least. At least have the decency to be fair. Not that I think the true Atheist is not fanatical in his/her religion. The truely non-religious are not in the least concerned, if even interested, in Christian thoughts and discussions. The fanatical Atheist jumps right in, not to discuss or throw ideas around, but to tear down the Christian's belief and condemn or ridicule Christians in general.
Wilso did that in spades. Response from you and Edgar? Zilch.
I return fire. I'm the idiot. I'll concede that it is idiotic to argue with idiots and/or to feed the trolls.
I have never called you an idiot, foxfyre. I think almost all of your positions are idiotic, however. How that makes your case is another example of idiocy.
edgarblythe wrote:I have never called you an idiot, foxfyre. I think almost all of your positions are idiotic, however. How that makes your case is another example of idiocy.
Edgar's post
Quote:Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:58 am Post: 2195109 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I take exception to foxfyre's characterization, inclusive of all true atheists, but will not hijack the thread to call her an idiot (not in a personal way, but intellectually) more than this once.
Sure looks to me like you're calling me an idiot.
You have a way with words.
Wilso speaks for Wilso. Retaliating against all atheists because of his remarks, well . . .
My point is that true Atheism (big A) is a religion as much as any religious belief is a religion. Atheists have their own websites and some have organized into groups with religious not-for-profit status. Their doctrine is to deny any existence of a God and they do this by damning religion, ridiculing or criticizing believers, and showing up on message boards with their tirades and screeds against whatever believers believe or even discuss.
The truly non-religious are not bothered or angered by those who profess, discuss, suggest, theorize about, or speculate on religious beliefs. They may join in with interesting or productive insights or questions or, as often or not, are not the least bit interested in the subject. They are quite tolerant of religious belief because it bothers them not in the least. They may call themselves Atheists, but in my opinion they are not. They are non-religious or a-religious.
So no offense was intended to any of you a-religious types and I hope you stick around. As to offense taken by those of you who are intolerant of anybody who professes a religious faith, you're going to be offended no matter what anybody says unless they agree with you.
And I speak for myself as does Wilso, Edgar. And you did clearly call me an idiot as did Wolf. I very well may be, but I reserve the right to have my own insights, perceptions, and beliefs right along with everybody else. It was quite telling that you took strong offense to my comment, and not to his however.
Foxfyre,
You stated that very well and there are some (well, at least me :-) ) that agree with you.
Okay, apologies for any offence caused.
Secondly, I still don't think you've got your terminologies right. Why invent a new a-religious term when you can just call use the term, fundamentalist Atheist or extreme Atheist?
I am an Atheist, but I'm reasonably tolerant of other religions (so long as they don't try and fop off lies as facts). In fact the only religion I'm intolerant of is Scientology and I see that more as a cult than anything else.
Furthermore, wouldn't a religion have to involve the worship of a God or some kind of spirituality? What with Atheists not having either, you can't really say they're a religion of sorts.
Dogmatic belief, perhaps, but not religion.
P.S. Can anybody see a way to get back on topic? Because I can't. I fear Wilso's comments may have permanently derailed the topic.
