![]() |
|
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <1 8788899091 174> |
Author | |||||||||||||||||
Ivan_Melgar_M ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19557 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
I'm not calling a winner, I can't prove religion is the truth in the same way you can't say beyond doubt that religion is false, I'm talking about your method.
You make claims that are false, and that's a fact, for example, you say that only by decree of the 60's we can accept evolution, when as a fact Evolution is at least accepted as a possibility since 1893 (Only 34 years after published). As a fact Darwin's theories were never banned or prohibited by the only Church I can talk about as you try to imply. And like this, many of your claims have nothing to do wi6th reality...Not talking about believing in the existence or non existence of God, that's a personal choice. BTW: I don't see how evolution undermines Christianity, unless you are a fundamentalist who believes that the Bible must be understood in a 100% literal way.
Again, you choose what to answer and what to ignore, but I will say that I'm not a perfect Catholic, never said I was, but I know my flaws.
I would say people today is able to understand what has to be understood as an allegory and what has to be understood as a truth, without loosing faith, and Church has to change with times.
100 years ago you couldn't talk about the Big Bang, because nobody would have understood you, today Christian scientists in the Vatican Observatory works 24/7 studying the effects of this singularity...Times change.
As a fact you are the one who refuses to understand we see our history only as history, we are able to change and we proved it, a Pope asked pardon for the acts of the Church admitting we also make mistakes, but you criticize us if we don't change and even more if we change.
Probably the worst threat for an atheist who wants to spread his ideas, is a church that evolves and changes, but that is happening and will continue happening.
So....You say Attheists are more evolved than religious people?...And also that your brains function better?
Wow...And you called me presumptuous some lines above?
![]()
We have already left the baggage behind, from the moment we accepted that some books of that era are only allegories, you're the one not ready to accept we did so, because it would hurt your crusade against religion..
Mike, the difference between you and me, is that I don't care if you believe, accept or like my beliefs, I don't think that the world needs to be exclusively formed by religious people or that we should evolve to a point where everybody is a Christian...You on the other hand have expressed repeatedly that you wish religion wouldn't exist.
So, if you believe or not..is not my problem, that's your personal call, and should be respected, even if you don't respect (you have said this repeatedly) our beliefs. Iván PS: Not getting angry, by the contrary. |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Mr ProgFreak ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
Are you telling me that in 1893 every Catholic accepted Evolution? Come on. I'm actually sure that even today many Catholics don't accept Evolution. It's one thing to make public statements about "embracing science", "being open-minded" or announcing/decreeing that "science and religion are fully compatible", and an entirely other thing to actually demonstrate that any of that is actually the case. As seen in this article, Ratzinger is far from actually embracing the theory of evolution in all it entails. BTW: I don't see how evolution undermines Christianity, unless you are a fundamentalist who believes that the Bible must be understood in a 100% literal way. You change, but you don't change. You change your behavior, but you still claim that your religion is right and has been right from the beginning. By this I don't mean that you - as a person - agree with everything the Catholic church has ever done. But if you're a Catholic, you believe not only that there is a God, but also that the core teachings of the Catholic church are true - and that this God wants people to be baptized, receive communion, confess their sins, priests and nuns not to have sex, people not to have sex before marriage etc.. Most of these rules follow from a literal understanding of the Bible. This literal understanding has been proven wrong in most cases. Yet you still go on and passionately defend Catholicism. It simply makes no sense to me how you can be a modern, enlightened human being on one hand and a devout Catholic on the other hand.
Probably the worst threat for an atheist who wants to spread his ideas, is a church that evolves and changes, but that is happening and will continue happening. I would prefer a world without religion. If you don't care about the world, that's fine by me.
Iván PS: Not getting angry, by the contrary. |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Textbook ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() Joined: October 08 2009 Status: Offline Points: 3281 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
Ivan: It doesn't matter to you whether other people share your faith? So it doesn't matter to you that they are not saved and go to hell?
Either you're incredibly callous and cold, or you don't really believe in your own eschatology.
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
seventhsojourn ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() ![]() Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 11 2009 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 4006 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
@Mike, Just want to ask about a couple of your previous comments.
''I would prefer a world without religion''. This seemes to tie-in with your explanation of Hitchens' Anti-Theist stance, i.e. that religion is undesirable. It's one thing to say that religion is useless, irrational and/or morally deficient but how can anyone say we would be better off without it? Take away God, the Bible, religion... who can say what the world would be like, therefore how can anyone then say they would prefer that world? And Theists are criticised for their disregard of logic.
''I will argue that Christianity is most likely not true, and even in the (IMO) unlikely case that it was true, I would not like it - independently of whether I would be sent to heaven or hell''. So, if it was true that there was an afterlife, miracles, transubstantiation, resurrection, supernatural intervention, hell etc, you wouldn't like it. How can you say that and claim to be open-minded? Also, where is the logic in being indifferent to going to hell?
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Trademark ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: November 21 2006 Location: oHIo Status: Offline Points: 1009 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
No Atheist is indifferent to the prospect of going to Hell. They are terrified of it. Atheism is
not based on logic. It is based on
fear. It is one of the most
fear-mongering religious positions on the planet (at this moment, anyway). What is the atheist afraid of? (I’ll
talk about them all here as if I knew them all in the same wan Mike speaks about
all Christians as if he knew anything at all).
The atheist is driven by one fear; the fear of being wrong. It’s an incredibly powerful primary-school oriented tool. This is why guys like his precious 4 Horsemen prey on school children. They use the fear of being wrong to convince school children to join them. Those children are at the most vulnerable time in their lives with respect to the “I must make sure I am always right” syndrome. The education system demands that all students take this stance and “Pitch Men” like Mike's high priests exploit that fear. (I see Dawkins and Britney Spears in the same light, pure entertainers with no regard for what they have to say or do to sell tickets). I’m and old man and a Christian and I can safely say that I don’t care if I’m right about it. I believe I am but if I’m wrong, I will never know. If the atheists are right and there is no afterlife I’ll never know. I will, however, die believing in it so I win. I have no reason to fear that it is not there. That possibility does not change my belief or day to day attempt to live out the tenets of my faith. When I die I will have won or lost the prize according to my behavior regardless of whether the prize exists or not. The atheist cannot stand in my shoes. His fear of being wrong drives his reliance upon science as a way of “knowing”. Scientists love to say that they don’t know everything as an easy statement to make, and one that excuses their errors. After all it was the scientists that told us the world was flat, not the Bible. Religious people simply believed it because it made sense at the time. Scientists were the olds who told us we could tell what kind of person someone was by reading the bumps on his head, not the Bible. Those were scientific mistakes and most scientists admit them. So science with its logic and reason seems to be the only way to be really sure of anything and logically, one must place all one’s faith in it. But as Dawkins says (and Mike parrots) “I caahhhn’T be 100% ssure thatT Gud doessn’T exissT”, (with heavy emphasis on the letter t and extra sibilance). This is the great and terrible fear of the atheist, that they may be wrong. As I said, if I am wrong I still win because I will never know I was wrong. For the atheist, however it is a different story. If he is wrong he will have to face God, explain himself, and be judged accordingly and this prospect is terrifying. Athiests will say that that don’t have this fear because of their lack of belief but that is testimonial and cannot be backed up by any facts or "even anything that could remotely be called evidence", so it is 99.77% (Dawkins’ number for the likelihood of God’s existence) probable that it is untrue. Atheism (post-theism may be different, more research is required) is a religious position based upon fear. Edited by Trademark - August 22 2010 at 08:18 |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
stonebeard ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: May 27 2005 Location: NE Indiana Status: Offline Points: 28057 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
I have to work but I'll get the first word in here before the DELUGE of responses to that.
My atheist stance is based on the inability to have faith in a religion. There was a fear of being wrong in the beginning of it, but the idiocy of the idea of hell just overpowers the fear into complacency with nothingness in death. Maybe it's suppression, it doesn't matter. Fear of hell is a horrible reason to have faith in any religion, so even if I did fear hell, it wouldn't make a difference. Even Christians have to fear hell, or do so involuntarily until they suppress the fear with it's corollary, the assurance that they'll end up in heaven. Thanks society for making hell so primal, terrifying and pervasive a thought that all people exposed to it fear it, not only atheists. No one's beliefs are watertight or void of suppression of things they don't like. I'm partially atheist because I want to be, to be free of religious constraints. I assume faithful people are reinforced in their faith by wanting to be faithful as well. |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Negoba ![]() Prog Reviewer ![]() ![]() Joined: July 24 2008 Location: Big Muddy Status: Offline Points: 5210 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
Most of us have mixed feelings about religious questions. Part of me is the Catholic I was raised, part of me is militant agnostic "I don't know and you sure as hades don't know either," and part New Agey dabbling in Eastern Philosophy.
Mike provokes several parts of me, and the smugness of some Atheists certainly does their position no good. We all have fear. Fear of hell is actually pretty low on the totem pole for me these days but there was a time when it certainly was strong. I don't want to die the final death. I fear it viscerally and monstrously. I can tell myself "If that is the nature of the universe then I started with nothing, end with nothing, and whatever I get in the middle is just bonus." But that only helps to a certain extent. At some level I could see Atheism being an attempt to embrace the fear, fully accept the terrible truth, etc. But the kicker is, that even that doesn't give you any certainty. You still can't know. So we're all in the same boat, trying to figure out what to do with our time when we have any choice in the matter. And we'll keep discussing the nasty puzzle and sometimes getting nasty about it. Some things are prettty inherent in the human condition. So carry on.
|
|||||||||||||||||
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Mr ProgFreak ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
It's simply my opinion that a world without who hold false beliefs would be preferable. I don't claim to know that it would be. We all have opinions, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Does open-mindedness mean that I have to like everything? I don't think so. And about my heaven/hell comment: First of all, I believe that neither exist, so in my daily life (despite of what Trademark claims to know about me and other Atheists) I'm really being indifferent about it. But if it existed and was anything like it is described to be by Christian doctrine, I wouldn't want to be in heaven. Praising the Biblical God for all eternity? Thanks, but no thanks. Being tortured for eternity? I can't see the difference. ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Mr ProgFreak ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
Why should Atheists be afraid of hell? I mean, if they were, they would become religious. Of course a problem would be which religion to choose. They all claim to be the right ones, yet they can't all be correct.
I could say something in response here, but I'll rather sit back and enjoy watching you make a fool of yourself. [insert popcorn munching emoticon here]
What a selfish attitude. Well, I care about the world we live in. I don't know whether I still will 20-30 years from now.
Fear. Of hell? Not at all. Of dying? Sure. Who isn't afraid of death? Right ... religious people who bought into the idea that this life is just a prelude to the real life. If I'm right, we'll both never know. If you're right, there's a good change that we'll meet again in hell - at least if you didn't pick the right religion (there are 30,000+ denominations of Christianity alone). In any case, I doubt that even jampa or Iván would agree with your theory that all Atheists are driven by fear of hell. Like I said in the first post, if they were they would try to become religious.
[more popcorn munching ... and some hollering like in the Married With Children sitcom]
Now it's a "great and terrible fear" ... sounds like something you'd read in the Lord of the Rings. What if you're wrong? What if Hinduism is right - or Buddhism? How can you even sleep at night? Atheists don't believe that there is a god. I guess that you, as a Christian, are not afraid of the Muslim version of hell. And you believe in the supernatural. Now, why should an Atheist, to whom the concept of an afterlife is completely ridiculous, fear any of this nonsense?
If your premise was true - don't you think that Atheists would be depressive and paranoid? I dare you to watch some episodes of the Atheist Experience show from Austin. http://www.atheist-experience.com/ You can even call in and confront them with your theory that Atheists are driven by fear. It's a ridiculous theory IMO, and in all the books I've read and debates I've watched I've never heard anyone bring it up. But: I'm glad that you finally decided to post something that's relevant to the topic. ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Mr ProgFreak ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
And since this is so spot on regarding your theory of Atheists being afraid that they might be wrong:
(And since you love to rant about Dawkins ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Trademark ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: November 21 2006 Location: oHIo Status: Offline Points: 1009 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
"I have to work but I'll get the first word in here before the DELUGE of responses to that."
Just a way to keep the thread moving. I was getting bored.
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Equality 7-2521 ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15784 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
I feel sorry for you Mike.
|
|||||||||||||||||
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Dean ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() ![]() Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
I'm hope you'll excuse us if we answer individually since we do not have a common script to quote from.
Disregarding "hell" for a moment (and not all Christians believe in that construct either). I have no fear of after-death. Of course I fear death itself, and I also fear those who have no fear of death for I certainly have no desire to be a passenger on any bus they are driving.
Fear of death is what keeps us alive, it stops us doing stupid things, like wondering what 240 volts tastes like or seeing if you can stop a truck like superman. If there is an after-death then I am in no rush to see what it is like.
I have no fear of being wrong. I've been wrong several times and it doesn't frighten me - In 1978 I said Kate Bush's Wuthering Heights would never be a hit and put money on it - that statement of utter wrongness cost me 5 quid. Give me enough time and I'll think of more cases where I was wrong.
I agree with you - it is completely dispicable and should be outlawed with a strict punishment. The corruption of young minds by self-serving busibodies is a henious crime.
Fifteen years ago my daughter came home from primary school in floods of tears having been told by her teacher that I would go to hell for not believing in god - I was (and still am) as outraged and angered by that harpy's interference in how I raise my child as you are with Dawkins - more so in fact since she is my child, not yours, not Dawkin's and certainly not that hag's. Children's minds are maleable and will believe whatever nonsense they are told, and the more authoritive the person the more it will be believed. I had intended to enlighten my daughter when she had reached an age where she could form her own opinions and beliefs based upon her own observations and experiences, but thanks to this "well-meaning" harridan I had to attempt to do that when she was just five years old: "Sorry tuppence, teachers don't know everything and sometimes they are wrong."
Good for you.
There is also the option of living by those very same tenets without the need for faith to justify it or accompany it. Following those ideals in fear of some divine retribution or the promise of some reward in the after-death is to me, a dishonesty. Surely it is better to live following all those well-intentioned ideals without goading and coercion and without the need to stop every five minutes to thank the stick-wielder for allowing you that privilege. For mankind (bless us) to achieve a level of humanity that extends beyond self-preservation and self-protection that is dictated by the simple need to survive, then I would rather do that through my own will and judgement, than to follow a doctrine written in some ancient tongue by a group of men in a far away time whose cultural requirements and habits are as distant from mine as it is possible to get. The prize for that is not in some imagined after-death - it is in the here and now - it is in the smile on a face, it is in the knowledge that you moved through life leaving the slightest of footprints and doing the most possible good and the least possible harm that it you could, it is in the simple pleasure of making someone happy for no reward or gain and for not making someone utterly miserable just because you could. Anyone can do this - it's not beyond anyone's reach just because they've hitched their waggon to the "wrong" caravan. I don't need a prize to win.
But if there is a prize and I am denied it then it actually changes nothing, if that then results in some eternal damnation of fire and brimstone because I lived my life exactly like a "good christian" should, but wasn't actually "a christian" and didn't actually praise and worship a god, so should recieve the same punishment some despot who murdered millions, then as long as that harpy who made my daughter cry is stood beside me I'll not complain.
![]()
I can
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Erm... well No. Or Yes. Or whatever the contrary answer is.
Early "scientists" were not scientists, they were philosophers, scholars, alchemists and (to a man) religious followers. All of their "science" was adapted from scripture and adapted again to fit the observations they made. Flat Earth was discarded by Pythagoras (a non-christian
![]()
Is this a rant? Whatever point you are making has passed me by, but given your concept of science, that doesn't worry me much.
Terrifying for whom? To me this appears to be a lose-lose situation for all concerned (and those not concerned too). If you "win" you can still "lose" because the ultimate judgement is beyond your control and cannot be anticipated, whereas if an atheist "loses" there is still a chance that they could "win" simply because you cannot know the mind of your god (and if you presume to know I believe that's an automatic forfeit) - which leads to the interesting scenario where you win but lose while he loses yet wins. Cool, I'm beginning to like this game, though I don't think Cain was impressed with it.
|
|||||||||||||||||
What?
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Ivan_Melgar_M ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19557 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
As I explained before, we believe not only Catholics can reach salvation, but you guys seem to ignore what we say repeatedly, here is the quote:
Will quote again the document, and hope you remember it this time:
Now, about the atheists, I have been taught that what was understood as hell is not a place of torture, but the eternal separation from God, and Atheists have already decided they don't need God, as a fact Mike said that he would prefer anything that an eternal life with a tyrant...So eternity without God would not be a punishment for them.
So I'm not cold neither I believe in my own eschatology, I believe God gave us freedom to decide what we want, and every person is free to make that choice, an all of this in perfect agreement with my Church's dogma.. Iván
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Textbook ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() Joined: October 08 2009 Status: Offline Points: 3281 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
But doesn't all that watering-down make actually being Christian not particularly important? |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
tuxon ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: September 21 2004 Location: plugged-in Status: Offline Points: 5502 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
That isn't watering down, it's accepting there's more ways that lead to rome than just Via Appia.
|
|||||||||||||||||
I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Finnforest ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() ![]() Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 03 2007 Location: The Heartland Status: Online Points: 17231 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Thanks Dean, that was killer.....wish I could have gotten in on that wager ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell"
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Trademark ![]() Forum Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: November 21 2006 Location: oHIo Status: Offline Points: 1009 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
Arrrggghh, Dean! You of all people I’d never have thought would fall for this. According to the rules of Mike’s thread I have to disqualify all your statements as being testimonial and lacking any scientific proof. Therefore, according to Mike’s rules I am correct in saying that you, actually are afraid because you have not properly proven otherwise. (Mike chose the “personal attack” method of answering my post which is usually the only way to avoid the trap.) I was just trying to contribute (Its bloody difficult to contribute something relevant to a thread that is totally irrelevant and radiator noodles was already taken) according to the rules of engagement Mike set out from the beginning: 1. 1. Make an outlandish and (hopefully) insulting broad statement misrepresenting the beliefs of a large group of people who never did anything to you and whom you know next to nothing about. 2. 2. Post dozens of pointless internet videos to prove… well I don’t know what that’s supposed to prove. (I realize I did not follow through on this part) 3. 3. Disqualify any and all responses due to lack of scientific proof (it helps if can work some extra ridicule into your disqualification by saying something like, “It even features a talking snake.” o “none of that is objective, let alone evidence”, or something along those lines). Extra points are given for the use of the words ”fairy tale” or “delusion” 4. 4. Always make sure to remind everyone that the burden of proof falls not on the person making the original outlandish and insulting post, but upon any and all who try to respond to it. 5. 5. Amend the rules in any way needed whenever it looks like someone else may be right. AnsAnd anyway, Kate Bush had a hit?? Not in this country pal. An Edited by Trademark - August 22 2010 at 20:41 |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
The T ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() ![]() Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
Kate Bush had a hit/She didn't... is it settled?
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
Ivan_Melgar_M ![]() Special Collaborator ![]() Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 27 2004 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 19557 |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||
Mike, don't change my words to make my statement seem absurd, I never said all Catholics believed in evolution in 1893, I said:
Saying all Catholics believed in evolution in 1893 is different that proving with official documents that the Pope admitted in an Encyclical document that evolution is a possibility that must be studied.
Some Christian beliefs maybe, Catholic beliefs not....But again you want to place us in a no win situation, if we stay with our early beliefs as some fundamentalists do, it's wrong, and if we evolve...We are liars...Please Mike!!!!!
Yes, I'm a sinner, never said the contrary, we all are sinners in one or another way, but that's an issue between God and me.
Maybe our perception of some dogmas will change....I have to admit this because I don't own the only truth...But we don't make excuses it's an official document of the Pope by the powers invested to him 2,000 years ago. Most surely we will evolve more, and that's a good thing.
I defend Catholicism mainly because we are able to accept we are fallible and that the Bible must not be understood literally. BTW: Most of our beliefs don't come from a literal interpretation of the Bible, for example celibacy of priests and Nuns is not mentioned in the Bible, it's an ecclesial law declared by the Pope and not a doctrine ....BTW: There are exceptions to this rule, actually many Anglican married priests are joining the Catholic Church, and they are allowed to remind married and be priests..
I won't commen his quote,. because the comparison so arrogant and absurd, that needs no comment.
Yes you said it
Maybe you should read what you write.
Probably they are teaching his to very young children somewhere (Even when I don't know what's a Sunday school, I never went to one, we go to Mass with our parents since we are able to walk and even before), but when reach the age to understand the whole reality, we are taught the official doctrine, as I was taught in first or second grade. And you are right, not all the Catholics have became scientists, neither all the atheists
So..must I understand that those who have a religion don't care for the world?
Have I said t or have the church said that any belief is laughable? I have just copied the Lumen Gentium in athe previous reply, read it (even when I have posted it twice before in replies to you) and then tell me if we laugh about any belief.
No Mike, you are absolutely wrong, I'm expressing my disagreements with your position since the start, but this doesn't mean I don't respect your position.
And if I do it, is because I have been taught to respect other person's beliefs or disbeliefs, not because I ask anything in exchange......What you respect, is your choice, not mine, I only ask for the normal courtesy in a forum in the same way you ask for respect when you are talking about a metal band..
If you are offended by respect...well, that explains many posts
Do this words come from a person that have said that the world wouuld be better without religion?
And you said we are not honest?
BTW: I never asked for non criticism, I asked for normal respect even if you disagree with us.
Iván Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - August 23 2010 at 01:10 |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <1 8788899091 174> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |