Another One Bites The Dust!

[JimL]

Oh Jimmy, your lack of self awareness and ability to blame others for things you do yourself is rather amusing. Why do you think it's fine for you to shove words down CP's mouth and make him say things he didn't say? Oh that's right, what Jimmy is allowed to do isn't what others are allowed to do. Second yeah, you do want anybody who disagrees with you to shut up as you display now or do you deny that you called all republicans sociopaths. Do you deny that you said that or is Jimmy the only one allowed to use rhetoric and the only one allowed to use some exaggeration, but nobody else can?

You sound as if you've been reading the wacko rights political playbook lilpix, blame others for exactly the things you do. Btw, I don't consider all republicans to be sociopaths, a great many of them, just like a great many of democrats are just politically ignorant, but republicans are being led by sociopaths with a sociopathic policy agenda. Anyone knowingly voting for that agenda is in my opinion a sociopath as well.

Jimmy, I know exactly how I treat you because I do it on purpose because you deserve it with your poor treatment of others and how you act towards anybody who dares to disagree with you. What's the problem Jimmy, do you have the very lack of self awareness that you attack me for? The truth is Jimmy, I get along just fine with a number of people I don't agree with. I treat you this way because of the poor attitude you treat others with. Don't like it, change up your tune.

Apparently you think that your personal attacks have an effect on me Lilpix, they don't. Now stop your whining Lilpix.

[Cow Poke]

Wow, is there some reason that you people have such low regard for secretaries?

That doesn't work, Jimmy --- you blew it, but at least we've taught you how to SPELL the word.

Thats it, go on the offense and totally disregard the question. Good strategy CP, sometimes that works.

Truth hurts, eh?

There you go, stay on offense CP. Yes sometimes I misspell, try not to let it bother CP, not everyone is anal retentive like you with regards to their spelling.

A FINE example of government education you are, Jimmy.

Yeah, thats what I said, thanks for repeating me. Oh, and btw, i never even knew there was such a thing as an atheist Jew. Are there atheist Christians also CP?

This additional lack of knowledge on your part does not surprise me in the least, Jimmy. A JEW can be a Jew by nationality or tradition, and does NOT mean they are a RELIGIOUS Jew. My tour guide in Israel, for example, was a "secular" Jew -- meaning she was BORN there, but does not embrace the religion. There are MANY atheist Jews, Jimmy.

That you believe I assumed she was a secretary is you and yours issue, not mine.

It's right there in black and white for all to see, Jimmy. You would have been smarter to have said, "ooops, my bad", and move on.

Of course you would CP, good dodge.

Speaking of dodging, oh master of running away --- did you ever come up with actual specific offense with which to charge all those people you want in jail?

Now what would you have the HR policy be in such a case?

It's NOT what one would "have the HR policy be", Jimmy -- most corporations have an employee handbook that spells out EXACTLY what those policies are.

But, again, you show you are WAY over your head on this.


("never even knew there was such a thing as an atheist Jew")

[Cow Poke]

Thats nice CP, what other flaws did you detect of her? Was she a satan worshipping stripper also?

Hmmmmm.... you been smoking them funny cigs again?

So in other words, so long as her behavior had no adverse effects on the business, then no harm done? Makes sense to me.

I kinda figured you wouldn't be able to grasp the concept.

Lets see, thats a tough one CP, because I can't see anything wrong with it. Unfortunately with the two brothers in question, the harm is already done and would just continue if nothing were done to stop the bleeding. The 3 strikes your out policy isn't going to do the business any good at this point, nor do the brothers seem to care what the business thinks of their public posturing on controversial issues anyway. So for both reasons it would be disadvantageous for the business to prolong the inevitable.

WHAT "three strikes your [sic] out" policy? You're really not getting this at all, and I'm being more and more convinced that trying to talk to you is a waste of my time.

[Cow Poke]

Oh, and btw, i never even knew there was such a thing as an atheist Jew.

Jimmy, might I make a friendly suggestion? Before jumping in with an ignorant statement, why not do some incredibly easy "research". For example, I just Googled "atheist Jew", and this is the first response...

Source: wiki

Jewish atheism refers to atheism as practiced by people who are ethnically, and to some extent culturally, Jewish. Because Jewishness encompasses ethnic as well as religious components, the term "Jewish atheism" does not necessarily imply a contradiction. Based on Jewish law's emphasis on matrilineal descent, even religiously conservative Orthodox Jewish authorities would accept an atheist born to a Jewish mother as fully Jewish. One recent study found that half of all American Jews have doubts about the existence of God, compared to 10–15% of other American religious groups.

© Copyright Original Source

I shall continue to attempt to help you expand your horizons.

Are there atheist Christians also CP?

Unlike "atheist Jew", that would actually be a contradiction. But there ARE Jumbo Shrimp!

[Joel]

I support anti-discrimination laws regulating business-customer interaction.

I'm assuming you mean only for the seller. You are not saying that you should be forced to purchase things from someone (say, someone who is bigoted), right? Otherwise boycotts would be illegal.

And then on the other hand, are you saying that you should be legally forced to sell things to someone who has these "wrong" or "harmful" views you hate? If you need a couple examples, try:
(a) Suppose you do remodeling, and the worst bigot you can imagine wants to hire you to remodel his kitchen.
or
(b) Suppose you make t-shirts, and a bigot comes in to hire you to make some t-shirts for him with his "wrong" or "harmful" ideas displayed on the shirts.


One more question: Do you also recognize that even outside legality, there are some cases where we ought to be tolerant of views we disagree with (even though we aren't required by law), such as in academia or discussion forums like TWeb? Right?

[Joel]

You make a good point but I hope it is clear that The Fall is not a trivial thing. If you take it a particular way, it has a subtle but pervasive effect on your thinking about the world and everything in it (Westboro Baptish Church being the extreme example of a destructive logic of The Fall at work). I get the impression that most modern Christians are moving away from the sort of thinking that says this island earth is corrupted (just try living somewhere else). So how do you square the idea of The Fall with an appreciation of the beauty of nature? Or is it just us homo sapiens that are corrupted?

I found this helpful short essay on the subject:
http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/bron/p...ristianity.pdf

In that essay, the "eco" criticisms of the Fall are contradictory, with some saying that the traditional doctrine of the Fall implies that we can and should fix the Fall right now with respect to the rest of Creation (but complaining that efforts to do so have been couterproductive). While others say that the doctrine implies neglect and disrespect for the rest of Creation.

I don't think it implies either.

I don't know much about historical support for whether the Fall affected mankind or all creation (and by how much). It seems there may be some amount of debate there.

But regardless, the way we "square the idea of The Fall with an appreciation of the beauty of nature" is (along the lines of Aquinas) that the Fall did not obliterate the goodness and beauty in God's creation, but marred it. Like how evil/badness has no existence of its own, but is only a marring/corruption/disharmony of what is good, implying that the underlying good remains. Not only can we see this remaining goodness, but can get an idea at least of what its perfection would be. I think it is traditionally held that the Fall did not obliterate God's image in man, but marred it. I've also heard it argued that the Fall marred the intended harmony and order between man and the rest of Creation. The other side of this issue, too, is the teaching that God will put things to rights. That what has been marred may be restored.

[RumTumTugger]

Who said all Christians HATED homosexuality? We don't hate people that have sex with many different people in one year. Sexual sin shouldn't be considered so much worse than every other sin! Seriously, I agree that people shouldn't beat up some one or kill them just because they're attracted to their own gender! And we believe that all have sinned, so we're saying that we are sinners also! So, every human on the planet should be "offended" at the fact we are sinners?!

aah but for the intolerant left to call Sin Sin is harmful and should not be tolerated.

[RumTumTugger]

Ah, so I kept this atheist lesbian liberal Jew on board because I "hated" her? I disagreed with her lifestyle, I valued her as a person. And she FULLY understood that.

You have to play this game that, because we disagree with somebody's choices, that we necessarily "hate" them.

On the other hand, somebody who DOES disagree with the lifestyle choices of homosexuals would, in your world, be totally unacceptable. You don't see a double standard?

New Amen button

[Psychic Missile]

I'm assuming you mean only for the seller. You are not saying that you should be forced to purchase things from someone (say, someone who is bigoted), right? Otherwise boycotts would be illegal.

Correct.

And then on the other hand, are you saying that you should be legally forced to sell things to someone who has these "wrong" or "harmful" views you hate? If you need a couple examples, try:
(a) Suppose you do remodeling, and the worst bigot you can imagine wants to hire you to remodel his kitchen.
or
(b) Suppose you make t-shirts, and a bigot comes in to hire you to make some t-shirts for him with his "wrong" or "harmful" ideas displayed on the shirts.

You should be forced to not deny business to someone based on their belonging to a protected class. Just like one's right to free speech ends when it does harm (falsely yelling fire) one's right to deny business to whomever one pleases should end when it does harm (prejudice against a protected class).

One more question: Do you also recognize that even outside legality, there are some cases where we ought to be tolerant of views we disagree with (even though we aren't required by law), such as in academia or discussion forums like TWeb? Right?

Absolutely.

[RumTumTugger]

Thinking that being born gay is inherently bad is not a social movement.

PM builds another Strawman here.

[lilpixieofterror]

Misinformed.

Well of course they are because medical experts are obviously wrong because they disagree with PM.

I don't know what you mean here.

I mean that sexual relationships only between two people, tend to be rather safe.

I think they do fail. What question are you referring to? I looked back through the thread and couldn't find an instance of Bill asking me anything.

You don't remember the question he asked you on other threads? Oh my...

[lilpixieofterror]

Yeah you do Lilpix, whether you like it or not. I don't have to be a mind reader to know that you have certain rights whether you want them or not, and that you want to deny those same rights to others that are different. Or are you now saying that you are all for gay marriage ?

Foaming at the mouth and continuing to attack positions I do not hold to and just repeating what you said again doesn't make anything you said true Jimmy. They can marry the exact same people as everybody else can marry Jimmy, so what are they being denied? The right to marry anybody they want? That isn't a right I have either and one you don't have as well. Can you actually think before you decided to rant next time?

Nice dodge as usual Lilpix. Whether you agree with government acknowledgement of marriage or not, do you or do you not support gays having those same Government acknowledgement of marriage and the benefits that come with it as you have?

And as I pointed out again (and you totally ignored). I can't marry anybody I want either, so what 'rights' are being denied or will you also start standing up for incest and polygamy next? They are also being denied the right to marry anybody they want. When are you going to do something about it?

[lilpixieofterror]

You sound as if you've been reading the wacko rights political playbook lilpix, blame others for exactly the things you do.

You really have a total lack of self awareness, don't you Jimmy? You still haven't got it though your thick skull yet I see. I treat you this way because of the horrible way you treat anybody who disagrees with you. I do it on purpose, my slow witted friend and I am well aware of when I'm doing it. Unlike you, who seems to be totally clueless of his own attitude and just projects his flaws upon others.

Btw, I don't consider all republicans to be sociopaths, a great many of them, just like a great many of democrats are just politically ignorant, but republicans are being led by sociopaths with a sociopathic policy agenda. Anyone knowingly voting for that agenda is in my opinion a sociopath as well.

AKA anybody who dares to disagree with Jimmy is politically ignorant and/or sociopaths. Yep, just as I said. Jimmy knows all there is to absolute truth and anybody who dares to disagree with him, must have some problem because they dare to disagree with Jimmy in any way. Thanks for proving my point for me.

Apparently you think that your personal attacks have an effect on me Lilpix, they don't. Now stop your whining Lilpix.

And somehow calling people sociopathic and politically ignorant isn't a 'personal attack', but treating Jimmy the way he treats others is wrong. Yep, insults are only wrong when others do it, but not you, eh Jimmy? Like I said, you're a hypocrite and a thin skinned cry baby that doesn't like it when he gets treated the way he treats others.

[Psychic Missile]

PM builds another Strawman here.

That is?

Well of course they are because medical experts are obviously wrong because they disagree with PM.

I think medical experts would agree with me.

I mean that sexual relationships only between two people, tend to be rather safe.

That's true.

You don't remember the question he asked you on other threads? Oh my...

I've been on this forum for a while now and Bill has asked me lots of different questions over that time. Can you be specific?

[lilpixieofterror]

I think medical experts would agree with me.

I somehow doubt that because even you seem to have admitted otherwise.

That's true.

And what is among one of the major issues among much of the gay community?

I've been on this forum for a while now and Bill has asked me lots of different questions over that time. Can you be specific?

You don't remember the one you were asked that you ran away from just last month? Oh my...