Sabine Grant

Hey Beyelzu... I think the point is that Livius and I can both relate when it comes to Italian culture and of course wines. Many differences would be settled as we drown our egos in glasses of Montevecchio and a Beaujolais Nouveau preferably from 1999. And to achieve the perfect tolerance of one another, a Montbazillac to sweeten our verbal joutes.

But cheer up .. it would not exclude liqueurs. You would love limoncelo made with the 4 seasons lemons of southern Italy. There is even artistry involved with some of the liqueurs in Europe... a particular pear liqueur necessitates that the fruit be inside the bottle, whole. So bottles are placed on the fruit on the tree while still small.
Also consider that Europeans drink wine in harmony with their meals. The precious liquid becomes a necessary ingredient to enhance the taste of a particular dish.
I know this is again off topic....in some places of France we will do what we call the "trou normand" ( the hole from Normandy) in the middle of a hearty meal. A straight shot of Calvados ( IMO as strong as bourbon) and it makes a " hole" in your loaded stomack to allow more delicacies to come in.

LIVIUS : are you ready to come and sit at my table?

Sabine Grant

Judgement ? I expressed merely my observations to support Infinity in his quest to bring some awareness to all as to how it " goes both ways". I did not include you in the minory of individuals I consider to be partakers in claims of humanism while they actualy display a need to treat a theist diffently simply because the person is a theist.
And Gurdur I have enjoyed your posts very much. I do not always comment but I read a lot thru various threads.
Please do not take personaly my observations.

Sabine Grant

I sent a PM to Smartblonde after I saw the extent of how she was treated... especialy after she made it clear that the comments directed to her were hurtful and she apologized for her own. It seemed that the trend was to just add fuel on the fire no matter what. Anyone who was to challenge the comments addressed to Amie was to be burnt no matter what. That is exactly what happened.
Based on your final statement, it appears that Amie's thread doest not constitute evidence of a theist being mistreated on her sweet intent. It does to me. And apparently I am not alone in that non silent minority.
As far as I am concerned.... case is closed. I support Infinity 100% in his quest of mutual awareness.

Gurdur

Disingenuous. Must I quote your words again ?
Then you should take far greater care with how you phrase things. Far greater care.
I'll simply point out:

1) Were I not rather amused by several hidden ironies here, and feeling very laid back as a result of livius drusus' charms, I would simply quote your post to me and point out the rather nasty attack by implication in it.

2) I've pointed out you're wrong about my knowledge. Just take my word for it. Better all round, I assure you --- not for my sake.

3) And you're wrong about the issues at stake.

The issues here important to me are personal integrity, honesty, consistancy, and straight-dealing.

A secondary issue is Infinity Lover's conduct over the last period.

Oh, and while we're on the subject of "not taking things personally", since you addressed your post to me, in which you bitterly attacked unnamed atheists for not being tolerant, I'll just point out many of my real-world friends are theists.

You just got it all so wrong. But hey, I can live with it.

Mad Kally

Oh codswallop,
tsk tsk tsk, I know one atheist who attacks everyone, atheist and theist alike. An old curmudgeon. Tiddly om pom pom.

Ta muchly,
Kally

Notice:
NO NAMES WERE MENTIONED IN THE MAKING OF THIS POST!

Sabine Grant

I am not under any obligation to find charming what a person considers to be what would charm me. The qualities that Livius expressed about her own person are not what charm me. Especialy when expressed with a narcissist touch. I favor qualities in a person similar to the qualities Amie has demonstrated thru various threads for example. Now... that charms me.
It appears that Livius favors honest and direct communication.... or is suddenly an expression of a personal preference " disgusting" and " venom"?
The fact is that Livius did display some sentimentality in a thread where she posted once a picture that is very dear to her from her beloved times in Rome, Italy. Had anyone dared to drag her personal sharing into their world of sour thinking, the non silent minority I am part of would have fussed about it.
There is no excuse or self justification valid IMO to the way Amie was handled in her thread.
Anyone who wants to continue to rationalize in some discourse in this thread how it was all fine will have to deal with my skepticism as to their justifications.

viscousmemories

Okay, I usually don't like to do this, but I'll stoop and play.

Well, duh! Of course you aren't. That's exactly, as I recall, the point that Livius made in her response to Amie in the original thread in question. Livius, and select others, were not "charmed" by Amie's attempt at being "charming", and so she and most of those who felt similarly expressed that, IMO, delicately enough.

My knee-jerk reaction to that thread, incidentally, was the same as yours. I like Amie well enough (what little I know of her) and I felt like she was being unnecessarily condemned for what in my opinion seemed to be a fairly honest attempt at expressing her satisfaction with being a member of these forums.

However, my opinion was swayed by the later discussions on the subject, and I came to agree that in spite of the fact that I like Amie, and despite the fact that she surely meant well, I was quite easily able to see the point others were making in criticising her action. I'm not even sure I agree, to be honest, because frankly I don't care enough about most people to be concerned about who may or may not have been alienated by her generalizations.

But the fact remains, some people were displeased by the post and exercised their right to express their feelings about it. That you and IL feel this overwhelming desire to protect Amie is cute. However, you have provided no evidence (as Blake commented) that Amie being a theist had anything to do with the comments she received on that post.

I would just like to add that venom needn't have a bitter flavor to be poisonous. You may coat your insults with candy all you like, but when I respond I will treat them as what they really are. Or did you mean to compliment Livius when you said that you aren't charmed by her? Bah.

Sabine Grant

no need to quote... I reread my post. There is no personal judgement of your person.

That you evaluate that someone who disagrees with you is automaticaly wrong means that you can only be right. So the subjectivity of your statement leaves me wordless at this point on the topic of your knowledge.

The issues at stake? the only issue I see in this thread is that Infinity is taking some degree of rather defensive responses from a few participants for hitting the nail on the head.

I happen to agree with his comments.

Now.. personal integrity... how can you evaluate from cyber communication that a person does not have personal integrity? I am always amused ( my turn) by how some people can draw a portrait of a person where their character is being reduced to lacking personal integrity based only on their cyber communication. What if that person was the hand that fed a homeless man? or the hand that would rescue you from a predicament in real life. You would sound a bit funny questionning their integrity. Unless you have actual evidence based on real life observations of an individual that they lack personal integrity, I am not one to support those charges.
Am I to assume that you have lived in close contact with the individual whose personal integrity you may question? Even so I would have to see evidence that would withstand the due process of law to accept any incrimination on anyone's personal integrity.

As far as Infinity's conduct.... it is extremely ironical to me that you will complain of " bitter attacks" on some fellow atheists, but you will not walk in his shoes when it comes to the cynical and sarcastic and yes gratuitous flames thrown at Amie's OP in her thread. I hope you can see why it is ironical to me.

I think Gurdur, your loyalty to humanism in your real world relationships by exercising tolerance and non prejudicial thinking can only be reinforced by your objectivity when fellow freethinkers fail to exhibit the qualities humanism is to produce.
The same applies to me the theist specificaly the christian. I do not have to rally and support nasty attitudes from another christian. It does not jeopardize my faith. It does not compromise my cause. It does not mean I am not loyal to my faith. It means I am objective enough to recognize untolerance when I see it even coming from " my own kind".

In my real world... I chose to marry and love a man who despises christianity. ( mostly what he calls corporate christianity). However, my hubby would have no problem fussing at anyone who makes assertions on my account which publicaly difame my character without any real life evidence to stand on. And I would fuss equaly for him. That is what people who have real life experience of one another do. They have a knowledge of the person that cyber communication cannot ever replace.

As far as I am concerned I entrust Infinity lover for his perception and knowledge of Amie.

Ronin

Sabine and IL ~

Now do you see?

We have each here shown that we have our own particular secular preferences as individuals...and will favor or disfavor a personality based on our own private notions.

However, the very OP in this thread has brought divisiveness to our communication based directly upon the case of theist vs atheist.

...and that is the tragedy that theism brings with it, for it is the assertive position.

That irreverence, sarcasm, mockery and rudeness become part and parcel of an argument is quite inevitable...I even invoked a barf smilie on IL once when he was being inane toward ju'iblex in a christmas thread (as I recall) and no mortal injury was struck.

Three atheists just goofing around.

Beyelzu and I (two strong atheists) have met in direct contrast on a few threads with our respective verbal weaponry and have not run to our respective mommies as of this date.

So, unless we directly observe these implied offending threads as they evolved, it really is just a matter of sticks and stones...and, in the mood of perpetual debate on the issue of mythical sky fairies, magic spell books, zombies and wizards ~ let's get back to the dance...sans all this poonanny inspired temperamental foot stomping!



PS ~ viscousmemories...very well put, however, Sabine has been exposed in this manner before. I seriously much doubt that it will register.

Blake

Three points.

1. An apology is worth very little if it doesn't apologize for the actual offenses, which was the case with SmartBlonde57.

2. The "burning" of SmartBlonde57 was done on her account, not because she defended Amie.

3. At least two other people who challenged the "comments addressed to Amie," marduck and viscousmemories, were not "burnt."

So no, that is not "exactly what happened" at all.

*shrug* What can I say; you're wrong. I've backed my claims up with close examination of the evidence in question. All you've done is make assertions. That other people agree with you is meaningless; they're wrong too. Other people agree with me.

I'll support him too, if he shows that his quest is grounded in reality & not some set of preconceived notions.