Radorth

(Buffman turns on damage control system, changes the subject atheists pressed Radorth so hard on, and presents various theories)

Theory 1. Washington didn't intend to say it. (Compare with theory 2 below)

I never said Washington was a devout Christian. You know, I already predicted this response, which simply justfies my earlier reticence.

Suspect what you want. I don't suspect what I hope is true. Clearly atheists here need Washington to be a classical deist and NOT a Christian, and I don't need him to be anything.

Theory 2: Washington fully intended to say what he said, but merely for political reasons.

Believe what you want. Some of us like evidence, and don't make wild guesses and assertions about what such an enigma as Washington believed.

At least we've learned that all those atheist websites which assert Washington never mentioned Jesus are, according to the rules applied here, simply lying. I prefer not to call people liars who are merely ignorant.

Total B.S. I guess you conveniently forgot who first gave the source name for the above. And if you already knew about it, you were simply being disingenuous for saying nothing. Either way, you don't look so good yourself, and your preaching is entirely inappropriate.

Rad

Radorth

BTW, anyone who read my posts knows that I did not give GB the source for Franklin's comments about atheists because he kept calling it the Barton/Franklin quote. Had he stopped doing that and showed an attitude indicating some interest in the facts, i would have given it to him.

And how bright did Toto have to be to find it AFTER I said this:

Criminy. Nice try. Too bad we wasted so much time labeling and slandering Radorth and trying to condemn him as a Barton automaton without a trial. We could have been here days ago.

Rad

[ November 10, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>

Buffman

Radorth

Most founders were against slavery as were most Christians in the north.

Prove it!

1. Which signers of the Declaration of Independence were against slavery?

2. Which attendees of the Constitutional Convention were against slavery?

3. Which signers of the Constitution were against slavery?

4. Cite the accurate statistical data and source you are using to claim that most northern Christians were against slavery? (Does this not infer that most southern Christians, as well as some northern Christians, supported slavery?)

Radorth

LOL! Go back a few days and see what you can dig up to change the subject, eh Buffman?

Forget it, until some pots here admit they made presumptious undocumented remarks, supplied quotes with no way to find the context, lied about my contributions, and generally did everything they claim I did.

Kettle

Buffman

Radorth

Why are you here? Why is this childish semantics game so important to you? Please explain to me what it is that you think you are accomplishing? I would honestly and sincerely like to known.

I went back to all your posts in an effort to try an understand the nature of your belief system and current motivations. My original contact with you came when you claimed to have been a Boy Scout and an atheist at the age of 14; and then a Boy Scout theist at age 15. After determining that you weren't in that forum to contribute anything of a constructive nature, I returned to this this one after charging you as being nothing more than a radical religious right agent, propagandist, provocateur.

I opened this topic and you elected to join in and contribute more of your intentional anti-intellectual comments and nonsensical allegations. Once again I felt that the subject might be better served if I avoided responding to many of your inane allegations...but you persisted to taunt and demean everyone who had attempted to make a serious post...and continue to do so.

Obviously you relish the attention anyone gives you whether it is positive or negative. You also appear to take a perverse pleasure in attempting to make yourself into the aggrieved party when in fact you have consciously done just about everything possible to irritate almost everyone who comes in contact with you. That is the identical propaganda technique used by the radical Christian right to manipulate the minds of those who do not recognize it for what it is. The opportunity for you to pretend to be the oppressed (victim) rather than the oppressor.

Whenever you have been requested to provide the references or facts to support your contentions/allegations/charges, or shown that your statements have been in error, all you normally do is make self-delusional countercharges.

Sir, after reviewing the posts you have made in this topic string, I find that every charge that has been leveled against you has merit and a basis in fact. That you have finally realized that you lacked the slightest credibility in anyone's mind when you could not, or would not, provide reference material, has forced you to put up or shut up. Even now, with the two references you have finally provided, it is still left to others to find more accurate sources/references than yours. And you have the unmitigated gall to wish to take credit for this? That is hilarious!

So, until you are able to respond like a rational Christian gentleman, I will continue to view and treat you like a lying troll whose integrity and moral values demean the very religion you purport to support.

Radorth

Most founders were against slavery as were most Christians in the north.

Prove it!

1. Which signers of the Declaration of Independence were against slavery?

2. Which attendees of the Constitutional Convention were against slavery?

3. Which signers of the Constitution were against slavery?

4. Cite the accurate statistical data and source you are using to claim that most northern Christians were against slavery? (Does this not infer that most southern Christians, as well as some northern Christians, supported slavery?)

If you are unable to provide the information requested, why not be principled and mature enough to simply admit that you bit off more than you could chew with that statement. Surprise me by demonstrating that you are more than simply a blind faith Christian propagandist and can actually put into practice the moral precepts that you claim are the ultimate ones professed by your religious gods. So far, all you have demonstrated to me is that you must defend your faith beliefs by any means you can because they can not stand on their own merit. How sad!

Radorth

Er, I named the sources, and told you I searched for them on the web. I also told you why I didn't look very hard for the "Franklin/Barton source. If you and Toto want to take credit for knowing where to search after you know exactly what you are looking for, go ahead.

I'm sure the choir loved your sermon. To me it only reinforces my belief that you are no more honest than I am, though you preach incessantly that you are. You must need to hear yourelf say it.

Removing the deadwood, we are left with "We're holier than Radorth because we can find sources he has already named better than he can."

If that isn't a rant, I don't know what is, honestly.

Rad

Radorth

Oh yes, and "Our ad hom is holier than Radorth's."

Criminy.

Radorth

Why should I respond to someone who has already made up his mind, and imputes all kinds of political motives to people instead of taking there statements at face value? And how many here think Buffman does not already have more info than I do, which he will interpret according to his own predjudices, which he has completely failed to admit?

Criminy, well how about you admit statements about Washington never mentioning Christ, and your preachy statement "...with no help from you" were complete nonsense?

Rad

ybnormal

Hey, if you can't beat'em, join'em...

Radorth

How clever.

If you can't beat em, edit their posts a la Cygnus? I hope we haven't sunk that far.

Rad

[ November 11, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>