Originally posted by Charles
View Post
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.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Mike Pence on how presidents should behave
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYou whine a lot, Charles. "Oh poor me, everyone attacks me, you bad people!" while doing the same thing yourself and not saying anything when Tassman or JimL does it. How come you aren't condemning yourself for being a hypocrite?
I actually don't whine. I know perfectly well why CP goes for the ad hominem. I see it as rather good evidence that he (and you) has got nothing of substance.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostHow do you know I don't?
I actually don't whine. I know perfectly well why CP goes for the ad hominem.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostYou missed the important part: "I see it as rather good evidence that he (and you) has got nothing of substance."
This adresses your post.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostHow do you know I don't?
I actually don't whine. I know perfectly well why CP goes for the ad hominem. I see it as rather good evidence that he (and you) has got nothing of substance.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostBecause you haven't.
Originally posted by Sparko View PostAnd there we go with the ad homs from Mr. Hypocrite.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostI actually have.
It is not an ad hominem. I simply point to the fact that CP has not answered to the content of my posts but gone for the idea that I am hateful instead of adressing the issue. It is a fact he did this and refused to discuss the content provided. I allow myself to see that as rather good evidence that he has got nothing of substance. I have repeatedly asked him to provide what he may have. And I do so once again.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostClaiming he has nothing of substance is an insult and not true. You are using an insult about him as an argument to dismiss what he says, which is the very definition of "Ad Hominem" -- look it up.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostNope. It is not an insult when it is a fact that he called me hateful instead of answering my posts. He did not say anything that did adress my point so what I say is not an insult.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYes you did use ad hom. You do it all the time. I admit I do too, but then I don't deny it and then do it like you do. And you never pounce on Tassman, JimL or Starlight when they do it. In fact, you have gotten a reputation around here as someone who doesn't do anything constructive, you just snipe at Christians and conservatives from the sidelines. A heckler. And ironically, a heckler who is constantly heckling about other people using ad homs.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostCharles gets the same reputation from the right that all of us on the left get from ya'll. You never pounce on CP, rogue or anyone else on the right either so stop with the obvious hypocrisy, will ya!
Let me post the tweb manual on it:
Many areas of our forum are designated for debates, which at times can get aggressive. Our open debate forums, in which persons holding opposing worldviews are encouraged to participate, are not designed for persons who are easily offended or insist upon Moderator-enforced politeness at all costs. While we strongly ask that our members use discretion and tailor their responses appropriately, we recognize that the nature of spirited debate may include the use of satire, humor, and strong statements of position or faith that may at times offend some.
Strongly inflammatory characterizations, such as allegations of criminal conduct or severe moral turpitude, must be backed up as to the truth of the matter at the time of the assertion. This includes accusations of egregious behavior such as pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, objectophilia, and similar vulgar claims. Such posts may be edited in full at moderator discretion until such substantiation is provided.
So if you or Chuck or CP want to be rude, then that is fine, we don't expect overly civil discussions on theologyweb. But don't go around trying to nanny other people while doing the very same thing yourself (Charles).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostBecause I don't pounce on anyone for tossing out insults unless they do so hypocritically like Chuck. Chuck has taken it upon himself to be a thread nanny, telling me and others that we are using insults and being rude, while at the same time Chuck tosses out insults and is rude and never says a word to you or Tassman who are just as rude if not more.
Let me post the tweb manual on it:
Many areas of our forum are designated for debates, which at times can get aggressive. Our open debate forums, in which persons holding opposing worldviews are encouraged to participate, are not designed for persons who are easily offended or insist upon Moderator-enforced politeness at all costs. While we strongly ask that our members use discretion and tailor their responses appropriately, we recognize that the nature of spirited debate may include the use of satire, humor, and strong statements of position or faith that may at times offend some.
Strongly inflammatory characterizations, such as allegations of criminal conduct or severe moral turpitude, must be backed up as to the truth of the matter at the time of the assertion. This includes accusations of egregious behavior such as pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, objectophilia, and similar vulgar claims. Such posts may be edited in full at moderator discretion until such substantiation is provided.
So if you or Chuck or CP want to be rude, then that is fine, we don't expect overly civil discussions on theologyweb. But don't go around trying to nanny other people while doing the very same thing yourself (Charles).
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThe point is that you don't pounce on anybody on your side for doing the same thing that you accuse Charles of doing. Hypocrisy pure and simple.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Ronson, Today, 08:45 AM
|
5 responses
48 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Today, 03:01 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 05-03-2024, 01:19 PM
|
26 responses
205 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 03:06 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-03-2024, 12:23 PM
|
100 responses
420 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Today, 07:45 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 05-03-2024, 11:46 AM
|
21 responses
138 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Yesterday, 06:52 AM
|
||
Started by seer, 05-03-2024, 04:37 AM
|
23 responses
115 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
05-03-2024, 02:49 PM
|
Comment