Duck!

I'd just like to mention that it's not how "followers" of a certain faith behave that we're discussing. It's how a certain single follower of a certain faith behaves that we're discussing.


Duck!

Sabine Grant

Did you read the entire post I mentionned and encouraged you to read or are you determined to quote sentences out of the context for the purpose of trying to start an argument?

OK... last chance... read my post in its entirety or I am afraid we cannot discuss the content of my thoughts without you pursuing more assumptions.

livius drusus

Sabine, Duck is correct that you misinterpreted my question to GeoTheo. The sole point I was raising, and it's one you've made eminently clear that you've already answered as far as you're going to, is why GeoTheo feels that extrapolating the validity/truth/happy factor of a religion from a single example of good behavior is perfectly acceptable while doing the exact same thing based on a single example of bad behavior is not.

You've said you don't judge the validity/truth/happy factor of a religion by the behavior of its adherents. That's fine. GeoTheo, however, to whom I addressed my question, does judge a religion by its good adherents. That being the case, I wonder why he earlier implied, rather snidely and without a single quotation to support his implication, that atheist participants in this thread were applying a double standard.

Duck!

Okay, I've just reread that post.

I appreciate what you said in that post but I don't think it's entirely relevant to what I personally have posted in this thread.

I was merely responding to the following comment...
I just thought that this quote was a bit strange and didn't bear any relevance to the discussion of whether or not Richard's example was worth investigating Christianity for.

However, if I have misrepresented you, I do apologise and I hope there's no anomosity between us.


Duck!

[edited for typo]

Sabine Grant

Duck... we are a OK! I have to leave for a while but I truly want to answer any question you may have for me based on what I wrote. Will check in tomorrow.
You all have a nice night.

Rhea

Sabine, it is exhausting trying to get you to stand behind what you write.

Sorry it came across that way. Actually, I just got lazy about using code and resorted to CAPS. It can be tedious to do extra typing when you're only using one hand. I understand caps seems like shouting. Rest assured it was merely expediency. You can assume I am sitting in a chair with my feet up, nursing my baby and sipping lemon water. I'm not feeling defensive at all. If anything, exasperated, but that's all. I was trying to explain to you what conclusions could be drawn from what you said. And whispers said. Which I think you didn't read very carefully and I'll show why.



Alrighty, please tell us all what you meant by this (next quote), who you were responding to and what you were responding to. Or do you just make general statements about people (us?) being insulting for the fun of it and don't really have any actual reason to do so? It APPEARS to accuse me (or someone - who?) of demeaning and denigrating Richard, thereby exhibiting prejudice. Strong words, and worthy of a reply, no? See for yourself.


Not only that but after calling me (or someone) prejudicial, you continue by saying that you are NOT prejudicial when you do the EXACT SAME THING.

Can you explain the ditty "sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander"?

I am swimming in prolactin. If I relaxed any more I would fall out of my chair.

Then you didn't read his post very carefully. He's been discussing christianity for YEARS with richard. Now, based on richard's example (and he states he really doesn't talk to anyone else abput religion), now he is READY TO DRAW A CONCLUSION. To wit: based on richard's example, he is beginning to conclude that, and I quote,
He is saying that richard's example is VALIDATING CHRISTIANITY to him.

So now you know what we're all talking about. You appear to have skipped over that sentence when you read the thread.
I enjoy it also. And it appears that you, on the other hand, are reading LESS than is actually expresed here.

I agree that talking is the way to grow. But I beg you to notice that whispers was fairly clear on HIS gender, if you were reading everything.

Duck!

Okie Dokie,

Yours drunkenly,


Duck!

Starboy

Sabine Grant, I am cognizant of the Christians that frequent this board. I certainly would not wish to quash Wispers quest for "truth". However if I wanted to know about astronomy I would not go to a geology website with the hope that there may be astronomers there that could answer my questions. That is my point. The fact that he posted his spiritual questions about Christianity on an atheist web site along with his profession of Buddhism and his Christian like tone and statements and his specious reasons for considering Christianity makes me suspicious. As you point out there have been many Christians posting on this board and I am sure that even you would admit that not all of them were agreeable or intellectually honest. As I said in my first post on this thread (which was deleted) the OP stinks to high heaven. It still does.

I can�t help but think that you may be accusing me of evangelizing atheism. All I can say is that I do not visit Christian forums. I do not discuss religion with Christians unless they bring it up. And I do not care if you or anyone else wishes to believe in god, the devil, Zeus or whatever. I will respect your right to believe as you wish as long as you respect my right not to believe. But there are so many Christians in the world who do not appreciate my rights and think it is their right to turn me to their god however they can, even it means lying for Jesus. Such people in my opinion only deserve contempt.

Starboy

Sabine Grant

May I say " Erin go brah" ? ( sorry for the spelling....). Best memory of my voyage to Ireland....listening to an " underground" band in a pub in Donegal singing " Skibereen".

Are you " drunk" on Tullamore Dew?

Sabine Grant

STARBOY... no problem! do not be so parano about theists being here. Some of us are not so obsessed with detaining the " absolute truth". But we seek to find what non theists and theists can have in common and accomplish together. Look... you have a few for example who do support the separation of church and state. Which means that we are on the same team....

I like to look for what needs to be accomplished and mostly for the betterment of our society.
It is a reality Starboy that if we both were to face a common tragedy, we would both work hand in hand to survive thru it. And would it matter if you draw strength from yourself or if I draw mine from God?
Those are the precious lessons from life. I did not mean to accuse you of anything derogative. I merely pointed that you did not see any of us theists turning into evangelistic vultures on Whispers. I guess I was hoping you would recognize that some of us will equaly recognize ( as you do) the right for any individual to pursue or not pursue a spiritual path.
And of course as an atheist you will to promote atheist ideology. It a mode of thinking and living you cherish. It drives you nuts that us the theists do not want to experience your own solace. You even expressed concern for my mental health... starboy... come on.
Personaly I like to sense the passion a person may have in presenting his ideology. As long as it does not turn into a desire to endoctrinate others.
Did you read the Little Prince by the way?