question for athiests
- Thread starter thefanwithnoname
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
so an asumption?
yes yes semantics and word play
how is that being an internet warrior? you talk but wont address the source directly
talk is cheap
Where's the assumption?
It was a suggestion of one reason.
I didn't claim that it was the reason that BoleynAli had chosen.
As I've already said repeatedly, there would be nothing to gain by me addressing the source directly, even if I were to accept your claims to know the bigot personally.
Im sorry did I misunderstand your initial question? Did you not want an Islamic perspective?
So issues offended you? I do apologise.
However the fact remains we dont go past athiesm. All else is not relevant
and again why ask if you dont want to discuss/answer?
didnt say that though eh?
Most literate people would have thought it was clear enough.
so you like to talk on other people behalf? assuming that could be their reason?
so why bring it up on more than one occassion?
one way to find out
Most literate people would have thought it was clear enough.
you seen how it is
been talking tgo PNP
and you have to be exact with words
I said that a public repentance seems unlikely, as there's been no public admission of wrongdoing from either party.
I didn't assume it was BoleynAli's reason, I merely offered one possible reason, as her suggestion that she was going to block you suggested that you might not get one.
Why bring up your mate's lack of a real job and sponging off the state?
Why not?
what you said was
I don't think that they've publicly admitted any wrongdoing, so a public admission of repentance would be both unlikely and irrelevant.
If they were to repent as you 'assume' then not doing so publicly is also an assumption
and it could be very relevant.
based on an assumption that she would respond thus way
no spine though to gain the answer directly
There's no assumption there.
I didn't suggest that they had repented or that they were going to.
I suggested what would happen to them under two different theistic scenarios if they did.
TFWNN - You cannot respond to all. So I suggest you ignore those that make jibes and deal with the questions or assumptions that have come up.
Viking Erik saying what he has said should have been completely ignored. His post has no baring on the post and is just there to get you riled up.
This way, it would be better and easier for you to respond to what needs to be responded to and easier for anyone who jumps in the middle of the post to get what is going on. You are the only one who is debating the atheist. I know its like 5 against 1 and any back-up might be fine but these threads all go the same way.
I must say though UIR get on my tits. He takes his opinion as fact. E.g. Capello being the worst England Manager of all time or that "Card Waving" players are only helping the ref doing their jobs.
Viking Erik saying what he has said should have been completely ignored. His post has no baring on the post and is just there to get you riled up.
This way, it would be better and easier for you to respond to what needs to be responded to and easier for anyone who jumps in the middle of the post to get what is going on. You are the only one who is debating the atheist. I know its like 5 against 1 and any back-up might be fine but these threads all go the same way.
I must say though UIR get on my tits. He takes his opinion as fact. E.g. Capello being the worst England Manager of all time or that "Card Waving" players are only helping the ref doing their jobs.
Not based upon any assumption, at all.
I offered an answer to your question.
I didn't make any assumptions about whether it would be the answer that someone else would give.
I have no reason to believe that I'd get an honest answer or even any answer at all from the source, as he's repeatedly avoided the question in public.
More baseless claims of cowardice from someone that can't even tell me what I'm supposed to be scared of.
No. I am insulted you think I would his parent. I would not raise my kids that way.
Anyway, he quoted your early start with what he commented on.
What he said is out of order. And like I said previously, you should ignore people who spout such hatred.