Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

"I think we should throw those books in a fire"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    So why do you repeatedly use the slang term of someone getting spanked when you consider they have been shown to be wrong?

    There are other phrases or idioms that you could employ. It does suggest something of a fixation on your part with corporal punishment.
    Talking about the other team getting "spanked" when they lose badly is pretty common in sports.

    Not everyone has the same fixations that you do.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

    WHy should I desist from it? I'm not the one with a psychosexual obsession with it,
    So why do you repeatedly use the slang term of someone getting spanked when you consider they have been shown to be wrong?

    There are other phrases or idioms that you could employ. It does suggest something of a fixation on your part with corporal punishment.


    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
    I am applying your logic, that you are using for the Graeco-Roman world to deny anti-semitism,
    Where did the pre Christian Graeco-Roman world institutionalise anti-Judaism?

    How many of these tropes - from the ADL- apply to the pre Christian Graeco-Roman world?
    • Jews have too much power.
    • Jews are disloyal
    • Jews are greedy
    • Jews killed Jesus
    • Jews use Christian blood for religious rituals
    • The Holocaust didn’t happen
    • Anti-Zionism or delegitmization of Israel]
    https://www.adl.org/news/press-relea...semitic-tropes

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

    Looks like you are the one with unusual interest in it, to the point of reading tomes about it, hun....... You got something to tell us?

    But as we know, this is your usual personal comments that you resort to when you know you've lost the argument and need a quick derail and distraction from it.

    Krafff-Ebing and Freud were two very important names in late nineteenth century psychiatry and psycho-analysis.

    As for losing an argument you are the one who has refused to provide any citations from those "actual historians" in support of your contention, not me.

    As I previously noted, you make an unsupported pronouncement and everyone is supposed to just accept it as fact.



    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

    Given she derailed that one thread that she herself started, where everyone universally agreed with her, and then she started some idiotic argument over the phrasing of a statement rogue used..... no.

    I still am not sure what books we are supposed to be burning.
    "those books". You know, not THESE ones.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    Has there ever been a time where she was able to have an ongoing discussion without all her usual derails?
    Given she derailed that one thread that she herself started, where everyone universally agreed with her, and then she started some idiotic argument over the phrasing of a statement rogue used..... no.

    I still am not sure what books we are supposed to be burning.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

    As far as I can deduce only one poster attempts to go down flowery sexual paths about spankings.

    Especially interesting from the poster who any other time declares that she can only read what is said and cannot make assumptions on the poster's thoughts and meaning........
    Has there ever been a time where she was able to have an ongoing discussion without all her usual derails?

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    As far as I can deduce only one poster repeatedly references spanking other correspondents.
    As far as I can deduce only one poster attempts to go down flowery sexual paths about spankings.

    Especially interesting from the poster who any other time declares that she can only read what is said and cannot make assumptions on the poster's thoughts and meaning........

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    You seem to have a preoccupation with spanking as some sort of sexual thing. This isn't the first time you have tried to make this connection and its always with such... enthusiasm.

    IOW, please keep your personal peccadillos personal. Thanks in advance.
    Yep. Just her usual attempt to go down a flowery path to distract from her embarrassment in the thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    You might ask Gondwanaland to desist from referring to spanking people. Although I suspect you won't.
    WHy should I desist from it? I'm not the one with a psychosexual obsession with it, unlike yourself, and also not the one attempting to go down a flowery path about tomes you've read about sexual spanking or whatever the hell your book is about.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Why have you suddenly leapt from the Graeco-Roman world to Nazi Germany? It is your allegations about the Graeco-Roman world that I am refuting [and I have provided comments from other academics who hold the same view as myself].
    I am applying your logic, that you are using for the Graeco-Roman world to deny anti-semitism, to Nazi Germany, to show how utterly absurd said logic is. I know that's hard for your little mind to grasp.

    It was not anti-Semitism in the modern understanding of the term, despite your repeated assertions to the contrary.
    Except it was. That you don't agree, does not make it not exist.
    Your ridiculously peevish posturing is hilarious.
    I suggest a long look in the mirror.


    You seem to be labouring under the arrogant delusion that because you have claimed [without an iota of evidence] that something is a "fact" everyone else must accept it to be a fact

    You have been asked to provide citations from those "actual historians" whom you allege share your opinion that anti-Semitism. as we now understand that term, was to be found within societies throughout the Graeco-Roman world and you have declined to do so.

    The simple fact is that no such accredited historian would ever make such a claim. However, you cannot bring yourself to acknowledge that you have made foolish remarks.
    I don't have to hop through the hoops of a person who falsely claims to be a historian yet does not know the history of anti-semitism and who has no earthly idea what a Hellenistic Scholar is. Sorry that makes you irate. I especially won't jump hoops put forth by a dishonest interlocutor such as yourself, who has rejected numerous citations by others on this very thread because of unsupported claims by yourself that they come from 'Wikipedia'. Why in the world would I waste my time citing things for a person like you? Especialyl someone that has dishonestly shifted the goalposts from 'anti-semitism' to "anti-semitism as we now understand that term", and then demanded evidence.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    It's interesting that you seem to consider I might get pleasure from your references to being physically abused. Isn't that often presented as the stereotypical plea of the abuser/rapist "She wanted it"?

    However, I would note that your remarks about inflicting corporal punishment on others extend beyond your various comments about it to me. You have also referred to other contributors getting "spanked" in your replies to correspondents:.

    This was to Oxmixxmud here: https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum/social-studies/civics-101/1225149-armed-protest-are-planned-in-all-50-state-capitals-and-dc/page8#post1225881



    This was to Ronson here: https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...e2#post1214659

    My emphasis.

    The unusual interest in inflicting corporal punishment was dealt with [alongside other conditions] by Krafff-Ebing in his work Psychopathia Sexualis.

    Looks like you are the one with unusual interest in it, to the point of reading tomes about it, hun....... You got something to tell us?

    But as we know, this is your usual personal comments that you resort to when you know you've lost the argument and need a quick derail and distraction from it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    The original argument never said "as we now understand that term."
    However, it seems unlikely that even the "as we now understand that term" is accurate in any case.
    You need to go back and read what I repeatedly written. I would also note that citing ancient beliefs about the Exodus - which in turn have their roots in other texts - does little to argue your case.

    Furthermore the views of one important but patrician Roman historian who grew up during the First Jewish War and who lived through another serious Jewish uprising across different provinces [the so-called Kitos War] it is understandable that he held somewhat unflattering views about the Jews. That his views may have been held by many others of his class [or indeed other classes] is not improbable. However, Tacitus was not writing on behalf of the state. There was no institutionalised enmity towards the Jews.

    Did you actually read the extract I gave you from E Mary Smallwood?

    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    Tacitus' comments are however reflected in the church attitudes that you reported.
    Where does Tacitus accuse the Jews of killing the Christ? Where does Tacitus accuse the Jews of being children of the devil?

    You might like to read this https://jcpa.org/article/the-origins...anti-semitism/

    Later on, as is also made quite clear in the New Testament, gentile Christians began to claim that their communities were the true Israel.[2] They asserted that in neglecting many of the Torah’s commandments, they-and not the Jews-knew what God wanted from His people. The issues of the centrality and the remaining value and validity of the Torah were among the first reasons for tensions. Here one sees the beginnings of a split between Judaism and Christianity.

    “With this came the beginning of anti-Jewish sentiments in Christianity. It was also aggravated by a second factor. In the same period, perhaps in the second and certainly in the third generation of Christians-by the end of the first century of the Common Era-they began to explicitly call Jesus God. He, as a Jew, had never done so. In the four chronologically latest books of the New Testament, Jesus is called God, though only incidentally. These documents are all from around the turn of the first to the second century: the Gospel of John, the Epistle of the Hebrews, the Second Epistle of Peter, and the so-called Epistle of Titus.

    [...]

    “Why then does Matthew exculpate the Romans from the death of Jesus? The text has to be understood in the context of his time, around the 80s of the first century. In the middle of the 60s CE, under the Emperor Nero, the first persecutions of Christians had begun. There are indications that after that period there were further minor persecutions on a local level. This frightened the Christians.

    “For political reasons Matthew was keen that his writings should give the Romans the impression that Christians were not a danger to their empire. If a highly positioned person like Pilate says about Jesus ‘This man is completely innocent,’ it implies that Christianity is not something Romans have to fear. This in turn leads to the story of the Jews supposedly shouting ‘Let his blood come over us’-which means, ‘We take the responsibility for his death.’ Shifting the responsibility for Jesus’ death to the Jewish people is at odds with what Matthew says in the earlier parts of his Gospel to the effect that Jesus enjoyed immense popularity with the masses, that is, with the majority of the common Jewish people.”





    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

    You seem to want to go down a flowery path. Your distraction tactic is noted.
    flowerypath.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

    You seem to want to go down a flowery path. Your distraction tactic is noted.
    As far as I can deduce only one poster repeatedly references spanking other correspondents.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Bill the Cat, Yesterday, 04:39 PM
13 responses
68 views
0 likes
Last Post Gondwanaland  
Started by One Bad Pig, Yesterday, 12:33 PM
5 responses
62 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 11:04 AM
10 responses
63 views
1 like
Last Post seer
by seer
 
Started by seer, 02-01-2023, 01:09 PM
11 responses
73 views
2 likes
Last Post CivilDiscourse  
Started by rogue06, 02-01-2023, 10:24 AM
27 responses
153 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Working...
X