Should moderation be applied equally - even to theists?

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by phlogistician, May 18, 2011.

  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,720
    Mmmmm..

    The irony made me chuckle!
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,452
    quadraphonics:

    Don't call phlogistician a shithead!

    He won't like you any more.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    Oh do go on, and share the lolz.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,720
    Phlog..

    I have always had a huge appreciation and respect for you on this forum. We have disagreed and we have agreed in the past. You are intelligent and I also consider you to be a nice individual.

    But you are probably one of the most think skinned people I have seen on here.

    You are arguing about something so minute.. To the point where you are arguing about the true definition of an atheist. I'll put it this way.. when it gets to the point where James tries to sound cool and "hip" a la Brady Bunch, it's time to let it go.

    And when it gets to the poing that I have to agree with quad, where he states:

    "More to the point, the object of contention is simply whether "disbelief" is a positive state like "belief" is.

    That question is somewhere in the grey area between a philosophical proposition and a purely semantic one. Which is to say that it isn't really possible to be "correct" about it, in the way that one can be "correct" about some point of, say, physics (i.e., conclusively demonstrate through argumentation that positions inconsistent with yours are factually incorrect).
    "

    (Source)


    You are better than this. Move on.

    :m:
     
  8. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    Bells, Quad and I are in agreement, which bit of that are you missing here? Or that

    "Or, you can paper over these facts, pretend that you're discussing some resolvable matter of fact, and then exploit the resulting stalemate for page after page of juvenile drama and bullying. If you're the type of ragingly insecure shithead who gets off on such things, that is." - was directed at James? Quad has accused James of bullying me here on several occasions.

    James is being dishonest, twisting words, narrowing definitions, stuffing straw men, and generally presenting characteristics which make him unfit to moderate. You say I am better than this, well that's what James has brought us to. Blame the guy that is supposed to uphold the standards here, that is currently not achieving them, not me.
     
  9. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,720
    I read it as being addressed to you.
     
  10. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    If you read the entire thread, it's quite clear:


     

Share This Page