|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
 Posted - 12/03/2008 : 20:51:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
The idea is that 'it's all part of God's plan'. Sure it does not seem to make sense, but that's because we do not see the whole plan.
Sure it might seem cruel and the end generally do not justify the means... except in this case. 'cause God created us and he is allowed to do whatever he pleases with his creation...
|
So at best his god was indifferent to the suffering of the youngest, most vulnerable, of his creation. But now his god may not even be indifferent but rather approves of brutally abusing children since it is a part of his god's plan. Bulloney. There is just no way this statement could be made by a rational and sane person. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2008 : 21:39:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by the_ignored
hah. To back up your point, check out her blog again. (The first link in this thread). My last two posts have been removed. 
|
I wrote a post asking why they were removed (you know, one can not amend until you know why you've wronged). Then I asked why Javier was allowed to abuse you by calling you Mr. Dense.
The post went into moderation-queue, so they obviously changed their moderation to filter out any dissent.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 08:46:08 [Permalink]
|
Well, Doc. She's replied.
I like her attitude.
This is, of course, my reply to her:
Condescending aren't you? Calling me "Mr. Dense" is within the realms of "christian civility" then? Your refusal to comment yourself when I reply to your post and getting someone else to do it for you is "christian civility"?
You people don't have civility. You have selective morality and self-righteousness. |
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 12/04/2008 08:49:33 |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 09:06:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by moakley
Originally posted by Simon
The idea is that 'it's all part of God's plan'. Sure it does not seem to make sense, but that's because we do not see the whole plan.
Sure it might seem cruel and the end generally do not justify the means... except in this case. 'cause God created us and he is allowed to do whatever he pleases with his creation...
|
So at best his god was indifferent to the suffering of the youngest, most vulnerable, of his creation. But now his god may not even be indifferent but rather approves of brutally abusing children since it is a part of his god's plan. Bulloney. There is just no way this statement could be made by a rational and sane person.
|
My point exactly.
Applying moral and reason would lead of the conclusion that anybody that acts that way is an evil person. So, the Christians decide not to apply logic or reason to these questions and rather trust God blindly:
-'God can do no wrong. So, when it seems he has committed one, it mustn't really be a wrong...' |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 09:12:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
His last post is the usual apologetic abandon of reason: 'Sure, by our logic and moral standards, God is an evil retard. But let's not apply these standards to him, shall we?'
|
My post, by the way, still has not cleared. Maybe it got censored on the way...
How does Christianity stand on the abortion of innocent blog-posts? |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 13:35:23 [Permalink]
|
Since I'm awaiting her moderation, I post a copy here just in case something happens with the original:
<b>trish</b> wrote: "<i>Dr. Mabuse...It was because of one of these three reasons:</i>"
Yes, yes... But which of the three? Since <b>Reynold</b> has identified himself as Atheist, he may be uncertain of where the boundaries of Christian civility is drawn. If that indeed was the offence, then a gentle pointer to him about there the line actually is drawn will parhaps help him avoid stepping over the line next time..
If his offence was not capitilizing the names "Jesus" and/or "God" as Javier harped about earlier, there may be an explanation to that too.
Let's consider this analogy:
I have a wife. I want everyone to show her proper respect by having you capitilizing her name. That's easy to do because you know her name is Liselotte. But I wouldn't demand that you capitilize <b>the reference to her<b> as my wife. If you say: "how about your wife?" I do not demand you to capitilize "wife" because it's not a reference to her by name, but by function.
Likewise it wouldn't be grammatically correct to have <b>Reynold</b> capitilize God when he is refering to God as the function of deity. Indeed, if you can replace the word "god" with the word "deity" then he has not violated rule #2 since he wasn't using <i>the name</i> "God", but the referent to the function, or title of the position of being a deity.
As such, what I recall of the deleted posts, <b>Reynold</b> has shown much respect by going out of his way to use proper grammar. With one exception: where he exchanged one letter in the name "Jesus".
The reason for his choice to do so is unknown to me, but I guess we won't know without asking him.
I don't recall Reynold posting any links. Indeed, if there is any one link I would like you to follow, you can find it in my profile. It's a hang-out for skeptic friends.
Trish also wrote: "<i>With that said, Reynold is free to comment more...but please make sure he follows the 3 rules.
</i>"
I'm not Reynold's keeper, so I'm in no position to oversee what he's doing, and I have no ability whatsoever to enforce the rules on your behalf. |
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 14:14:15 [Permalink]
|
Yeah, your post and my post afterwards made it. Mine will likely be taken down. I wasn't very nice.
Anyway, here is a rough copy of my latest reply to javier
I'm looking for any flaws that I may have; I wrote this after having been awake for 21 straight hours...
My comments that he quoted in his reply, which I'm responding to, are bolded, his comments that I quoted in my response are in italics
Javier said...
Mr. Dense, this is your first and only warning, if you publish anything insulting to Christ, or God you will be banned from commenting on my blog. I will also recommend that you be removed from posting comments on Trishas blog as well.
Isn't your god the one who you said this about:
Why does God create children who will be kidnapped, raped and tortured and then murdered by a serial killer?
Because God will do as he please with His creation and has a purpose in even these things.
I don't have to insult your god; you've made him seem totally fucked up all by yourself.
Where exactly did the guy say that he was a "self-admitted" hedonist? Did he say that he devoted his life to the pursuit of pleasure as the dictionary defines "hedonist" (which Trish had put up on her blog post), or did he just say that he liked to party?
I spoke to Trish and she verbally confirmed it.
What did she claim the guy said though? Did he admit that his life's goal is to party or did he just say that he liked to party?
Secondly, the scripture already calls all unregenerate people sinners because they seek the pleasure of their sin, by this standard and the one that you defined they are Hedonists.
No, I had said that the dictionary definition was more precise. And not all "sinners" seek only self-gratification as their goal in life. That's just xian bigotry.
You're not catching the point are you? How can you people force your views on others if you can't even figure it out for yourselves?
You're not catching the point, I can argue my point as much as I can with you as much as I can with them. Some of the same arguments that I would use against you, I would use against people who believe they are scripture. Secondly, I don't have to defend those 'people' I defend my position.
And you're ignorant of the evidence for the inclusion of the last twelve verses of Mark. Most other xian denominations seem to side with me on this one. Maybe you should let your fellow believers know of this...I'm sure the "holy spirit" will let them discern which version is real...oh, but you don't believe in miracles anymore do you?
And you fail to recognize the logical failure of your position.
I notice you've not said anything about guidance from your "holy spirit".
If I cannot make any conclusions with the current data because the debate is not settled, then you cannot make any conclusions either, not even that it should be included. Who cares if they are on your side they can't make that conclusion. Remember these are your standards.
Except as far as I'm concerned, my point is that the bible is bunk. You are the one who's said that the entire bible is a debatable point. For me, the debate's over. The problem you have, and you don't understand it, is that all you xians see the bible as "god's word". But, which parts? For the non-believers we just figure it's all man made and that no god was involved at all. You people are the ones trying to push "god's word" onto others yet you people can't get it straight among yourselves just which parts are "god's word" and which is not.
So then any verse that implies that prayer is also a way to communicate with god is also suspect then?
I'm sorry, when did I say this?
I'm talking about your bible, not you.
You'd think that it'd be easy for your god to leave those verses out of the bible if that's the case...
No idea what you're talking about.
Let me try and explain it to you: one would think that your god who supposedly wants to have people understand his "word" would try his best to make sure that there would be as little confusion as possible (after all, the bible does say that your god is not the "author of confusion" does it not?) To that end, if prayer is not meant to be a form of communication with your god, he could have just made sure that no verses in the bible said that.
Easy enough for you to understand?
Aren't you the one who said it was, and provided testimony to that?
You obviously cannot follow an argument. Because you asserted that I cannot make any conclusions about these passages until the debate is over, then you cannot make any conclusions regarding this debate either. This goes both ways, you lose if you want to argue like this. So, since this debate is still being debate your arguments are being made too early and the debate is not over, so you cant and you'll have to get back to me when it is.
That kind of screws you, doesn't it, since you say near the end of your post that the entire book is a point of debate? I assume that won't stop you people from preaching though...
You should stick to your own circle of nincompoops and please stop debating. I answered you on your own terms. Which is why, again, according to your own standards you defeat your own position and your arguments self destruct.
Again, you're the one who admitted that your entire bible is "up for debate"...
Are you saying that the various xian denominations are "suppressing the truth in unrighteousness" is the reason they can't get the bible consistently interpreted? If they are as you say, "suppressing the truth in unrighteousness" then how can you later say: I believe that God calls his elect in all forms of Christendom all others are going to hell?
Are "his elect" the people who have not "suppressed the truth in unrighteousness"? If so, why can't they show us what the bible is really supposed to mean?
Go back and re-read what I said. I'm not your mother or your teacher, apparently the same problem that you accuse Christians of having with their texts you have with my blog. Now, stop. Re-read what I said, and you may paste again.
Let's see: you claim that the reason that we skeptics can't understand the bible is because of that "suppressing the truth in unrighteousness" bullshit. When you said that, you didn't think about the fact that you xians yourselves have many different interpretations of the bible.
For unbelievers, it's "suppressing the truth in unrighteousness", so what's the believer's excuse for them not having a consistent interpetation of the bible?
Are you seriously that slow?
Ever occur to you that maybe the bible is so confusing is because it's a man-made book, written by many people over a long period of time through different cultures? Don't you think an "omnipotent" god could have made the book more clear, regardless of man's sinful nature?
Do you know what sin is in Christianity?
Falling short of your mythological god's "standards" or, just disobeying him. And the relevance is what, exactly? Are you trying to say that I'm trying to make the bible confusing because I don't want to be convicted of "sin"?
Again, what's the believers excuse for having so many interpretations?
Do you understand the nature of your depravity?
Uh, I'm not the one who said:
Why does God create children who will be kidnapped, raped and tortured and then murdered by a serial killer?
Because God will do as he please with His creation and has a purpose in even these things.
Since you're the one defending the kidnapping, rape and torture of kids if your "god" allows is, you have no fucking right to call me "depraved".
Uh, there's more than that. If you'd read the info I had in the previous post:
Also, if we are going to use the TWO original manuscripts as proof that these signs are not for us today, then we must remember that other very important (and accepted) portions of scripture are also left out of the original manuscripts. Example: First 46 chapters of Genesis, Psalm 105-137, Heb.9:14 and 13:25,
Sir, with all due respect
That would be a first, coming from you...
if we cannot know because a debate is ongoing, then you cannot know either. This also applies to my opponents in the Christian faith. If the debate is not settled, according to your standards, then we cannot debate the issue. Likewise you're position is neutralized. And a pro-markan view of the last twelve verses cannot be argued. Afterall to engage in a debate about it, means its no settled and we can't do that, right?
If you'd bother to read what I said, my point was that you have no more right to assert that those verses in Mark 16 are not part of the bible than I do to say that they are part of the bible since you originally said that their is a "legitimate debate" about them.
It's your logic I'm pointing out.
Good, so now I know where you stand. Pretty much any xian I've met believes that miracles are still occurring. Thing is, which view is the correct view? Your view is pretty much in the minority from what I've experienced, and read, and heard...
So what? I dont care to debate it, especially with Mr. Dense. This is irrelevant to your attacks on myself and Trish.
Then let me explain. I presented a test that the bible said could be done to test it. You come in and disagree. Regardless, how is offering the test an insult? And I didn't insult you, asshole, until you started in on me.
And the fact that you've evolved your lame insults into lame arguments.
And your "Mr. Dense" is such a brilliant insult it's obviously holy spirit guided.
And by that uh, "logic", then a Muslim could say the exact same thing about the miracles in the Koran.
And you're calling me dense? When you're no longer dizzy from that circular reasoning you're doing then you can tell me how "dense" I am, hmm-kay?
Of course the Muslim can. You asked what evidence was there that miracles occured, I said the Bible. You didn't ask what evidence was there that the Bible was true. Uh, its consistent logic. Learn it.
Uh, you never gave any evidence that the bible was true. You just asserted it. I can only work with what I'm given. Not that it matters, because I will give evidence that it is not:
Archeology:
The View from Nebo by Amy Dockser Marcus
Out of the Desert by William Steibing
The Bible Unearthed by Finklestein
Then call him names then, not me.
Why would I call God names for causing your stupidity? Even if you did it of your own 'free will' you'd still be stupid, I wouldn't call nature stupid for creating a moron would I?
Well, let's see: Jebus "chose" to make me "stupid". Nature doesn't "choose" anything. It sure as hell doesn't stop you form insulting me because of the way your god made me. But then, you don't see any problem with your god allowing kids to be tortured, raped, and killed if it fits his plans, so what the fuck was I expecting, really?
Any more intellectual gems?
Because as far as I know, that is a minority view. Every xian I've ran into would have to deal with that verse. Odd that she hasn't weighed in on this herself...but rather called you over to deal with me. Real courageous of her. I let her know on her blog. Whether she prints it or not, I don't care.
Why is that so odd? Trish is an evangelist, not an apologist.
Guess what? Does't your holy book say that you're supposed to give a reason for the "hope" you have? Even without that, how in hell can you expect to convert people if you don't have any arguments for it? How fucking stupid.
Furthermore, Trish doesn't have to defend herself from anyone.
Wrong. She's posting on a public 'net, and she makes assertions. Anyone who talks in public can expect to be asked at some time to back up what they say.
She didn't say 'come defend me' she asked me to check out her blog. She can pick and choose her fights, she was wise in this one. I should have followed her.
Well, I'm not going to argue with your admitted lack of wisdom.
The reason becomes later at the end, don't worry. Uh, by the way, once the "debate" is settled about Mark 16:9-18 you will let me know, eh?
Yes, you are convinving me you cannot follow a single argument.
And you're just "convinving" me that you don't know what you're talking about, and you're one of those cafeteria xians whenever it comes to verses that make you uncomfortable (like the verses that let you actually test that book)!
If you are asserting the debate is still on,
Uh, genius, you are the one who first admitted that the entire bible is up for debate. That doesn't stop you from pushing it though, does it?
So what are you criticizing me for again?
then you are unable to cite it against Trish because you cannot conclusively consider it scripture. How many times do I have to say this?
As long as you keep asserting that Mark 16:9-18 is not scripture, even though you admit that there is a debate over it.
Let me get this straight; if I admit that there's a debate about whether those verses are in the bible, I am not allowed to say that it is in the bible, but you admit that those verses are debatable, but you are allowed to assert that those verses are not in the bible, am I right?
So, how many xians out there are asserting their views on other people in churches, schools, etc? How many xians are railing against well established science because it contradicts their "holy book" which you've admitted is all a point of debate.
That isn't the point. You asserted that an opinion cannot be formed until a debate is settled. Since atheism, naturalism, darwinism, evolution, Christianity, religion, God or any other thing is still up to debate
You've forgotten something. As far as the atheists are concerned, the debate is over. Where you have made your mistake is you say that your "holy book" is the word of god, except for certain verses that are up for debate.
You're pushing a holy book that you believers can't make up your minds on as to which parts of god's and which are later additions by men.
you are unable to make any conclusions and are therefore stuck in the mire of skepticism. You shoot yourself in the foot and keep shooting because you fail to recognize it.
You're the one whose feet are bleeding... |
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 12/04/2008 14:18:15 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 14:37:12 [Permalink]
|
| You're letting your temper get the better of you. I suggest not giving him more ammo to get you booted. 'Jebus' will get his juices running as will 'fuck'. Maybe I would have left 'asshole' because I'd feel it approriate in context, but uncapitalised 'god' will also itch his banning-finger. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 14:56:43 [Permalink]
|
Cool. Now, anything about factual/argumentative/logical flaws? I'll be looking at this tomorrow to check it over myself before I either post it there or send him the link to here.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 14:59:16 [Permalink]
|
| Isn't the whole of the fucking Bible apocryphe anyway to some extend? |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2008 : 17:27:33 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
Isn't the whole of the fucking Bible apocryphe anyway to some extend?
|
I supposed. But really, you should ask Jehova's Wittnesses. I believe it was they who claimed they had the original transcript from God. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2008 : 08:30:35 [Permalink]
|
Wow, that guy is at it again, and yet again.
Why not just make more comments instead of making up new blog posts? Not that it matters, but I am curious.
Gee, I guess I'm not the only one with no life. He should come over here. It looks like we get more readers than his blog does.
He'd find more heathens to convert.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 12/05/2008 08:36:38 |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2008 : 11:03:44 [Permalink]
|
Since this idiot's word caused me such anger I posted the following. Maybe it will pass moderation.
Why does God create children who will be kidnapped, raped and tortured and then murdered by a serial killer?
Because God will do as he please with His creation and has a purpose in even these things.
|
This just might be the most hideous of apologetics that I have ever read or heard in support of the Christian God. At best this makes it seem that the Christian God is indifferent to the heinous brutality suffered by the smallest, most helpless, of his creation. At worst in makes the Christian God seeming approving of such brutality since it is part of his plan. I can't help but believe that should the Christian God exists that he would experience total exasperation that one of his faithful followers would say such a dispicable thing in his defense.
|
|
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2008 : 11:04:12 [Permalink]
|
My latest reply.
Ok, replies.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 12/05/2008 11:14:13 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2008 : 11:23:42 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
You're letting your temper get the better of you. I suggest not giving him more ammo to get you booted. 'Jebus' will get his juices running as will 'fuck'. Maybe I would have left 'asshole' because I'd feel it approriate in context, but uncapitalised 'god' will also itch his banning-finger.
|
Yeah, or he'll do what he actually did. He quoted all that on his blog. Meh. If I didn't want it read, I wouldn't have typed it.
It's not as anti-human as the stuff he was saying in a previous post that Simon pointed out.
Still, it's a good thing to keep in mind!
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 12/05/2008 13:34:08 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Time for a smackdown
