PDA

View Full Version : ctomie vs RapeU only


ctomie
07-02-2008, 01:39 AM
(Note: After consulting with Sternenlied and discussion with RapeU, we've agreed to create this new thread containing a personal argument between RapeU and I only. We will pick up where we left off in the "I'm so hurt..." thread. I will not be addressing anyone else's posts in this thread, unless they address mine first. With that in mind, let's continue).


The thread has been closed. This time I've actually enjoyed arguing with you because you have not thrown needless insults.

Now, I believe I have one thing I want to address from the argument.


1. Agreed
2. Don't be such a damn liar. Everyone here knows that you hate my guts. You totally lost it by calling me an asshole and demanding me to "shut the fuck up" previously. You wouldn't have spoken so intensely if your feeling was merely a "dislike" rather than "hatred" would you? I've recently revealed to you that I'm an atheist by calling your god "non-existent", and that might make you hate my guts even more.
3. You wanted me to "shut the fuck up" after listening to my beliefs, and that's not being intolerant?
4. I'm not talking about racial prejudice or any kind of prejudice that you're talking about.
5. The conclusion cannot be established under the grounds that some of your premises are questionable.

Try something else


2. I am not lying. The reason I told you to shut up and called you an asshole was because of the way you were behaving, not because of your beliefs. You went against a friend of mine and I didn't like it. The fact that you are an atheist and have called my god non existent does not make me hate or dislike you. People are entitled to their opinion. If you were to notice, I have not posted in your Fuck Christianity thread. People in there are defending Christianity better than I could and there are others who are arguing against it. One of my friends, Emily, has a few posts in there that are anti-Christian. Am I insufferable towards her? No! I am kind to her.

3. Clarification is in order. Yes, I wanted you to shut up. The reason is because you were throwing insults around. Also because you posted outside your thread something controversial with a link to a controversial site. Now we both know you are intelligent. Surely you didn't think that post would be ignored did you? Now I could have began debating you about the existence of God or non existence all day long, but I never instigated that debate. This is because I know your views on that and even though I disagree I respect your right to have them. That is also why I haven't posted in the Fuck Christianity thread.



2. I did not claim that you hate my guts due to my atheism alone; it merely increases the hatred that you already have. I'll assume that my atheism plays no role in your hatred. However, my point is that your hatred is reflected by the fact that you replied to my previous thread while accusing me of being an asshole. Now, you've just given me a reason why you made the reply in the first place, but it does nothing to address the issue at hand (i.e. hatred is present in you). Your response is completely irrelevant.

3. Same as #2. Your response is irrelevant and does nothing to address the claim that you're intolerant.

JohnnyReb
07-02-2008, 02:45 AM
I would suggest that if you want to have a personal argument between you and RapeU only, then that would be best done in PMs. :skull-ide

sindyloo
07-02-2008, 12:32 PM
hush JR here have some popcorn and beer this could be good??:skull-thu :D

RapeU
07-02-2008, 07:37 PM
Is this the only issue left? Because if it is, I find that disappointing.

I did not claim that you hate my guts due to my atheism alone; it merely increases the hatred that you already have.

I feel no hatred towards anyone. Yes, there was a time when I hated this person or that person. I see no reason to waste time and energy hating someone. What do I gain? Why let hate fester inside me when it would only lead to harm if I did something about it? Hating someone is illogical because there is no reason to dislike someone so much that it festers inside you and you absolutely have to do something to that person or group of people.

I'll assume that my atheism plays no role in your hatred.

False assumption. People believe what they are entitled to believe.

Consider This thread (http://www.rapeboard.com/showthread.php?t=11088&highlight=christians) I made. Does me saying that they need to be shot suggest I hate these people? At the time I hated what they believed. I hated what they said to people who sent letters claiming their arguments are illogical. I don't hate them, I only hate or extremely dislike their acts. They may make me angry with what they say, but that's all it is. I can't do anything to change their mind, so why hate them? The same way with you. You made me angry not because of your anti-christian talk, not because of what you said in the "why was jackie boy banned thread" but because you were hurling out insults without any basis to those insults to other members. Some of which were my friends.

And I also noticed that I was missing some of the action and wanted to get into the argument. I believe the expression is called jumping the bandwagon. Anyway, back to the anger talk.

Now the anger and my reaction to that anger does not imply that I have hatred towards you. If that were so then each time a person got mad and responded to that anger it could be said that they hated this person. While this may be so in some extreme cases, it isn't for this one.

However, my point is that your hatred is reflected by the fact that you replied to my previous thread while accusing me of being an asshole.

Again, just a little anger on my part and my reaction to it.


Now, you've just given me a reason why you made the reply in the first place, but it does nothing to address the issue at hand (i.e. hatred is present in you). Your response is completely irrelevant.

I suppose you are partially right about hatred being present in me. I do hate movies, I do hate some TV shows, and I do hate some people's acting skills. You are wrong about me hating another person. There is no point in hating someone. There may also be no point in hating things, but all humans have something they hate.

Same as #2. Your response is irrelevant and does nothing to address the claim that you're intolerant.

As for the intolerance, I can disprove that I am intolerant easily. If I was intolerant I wouldn't have registered on EB. If I was intolerant I wouldn't be debating you now.

I think that about covers it. Unless there are more issues I see no reason to continue this. If you want to continue to believe I am intolerant and I hate you then go right ahead.

ctomie
07-02-2008, 10:47 PM
Is this the only issue left? Because if it is, I find that disappointing.


My previous post was much longer than that, but you only responded to a small part of it in PM. You basically had nothing to say about the other parts.

I'm merely quoting whatever you wrote in your PM. I'm definitely not responsible for your "disappointment".



I feel no hatred towards anyone. Yes, there was a time when I hated this person or that person. I see no reason to waste time and energy hating someone. What do I gain? Why let hate fester inside me when it would only lead to harm if I did something about it? Hating someone is illogical because there is no reason to dislike someone so much that it festers inside you and you absolutely have to do something to that person or group of people.


Believe it or not, I've heard that one from countless Christians. What they typically do is that they preach a bunch of theories in front of other people, but little did they realize that how they actually act is another story.

You happened to come up with a rational explanation on why hating someone is illogical or a waste of time and energy, but it still does not disprove the claim that you do not hate. Ever wonder why Christians are constantly being accused of being hypocrites? Because they say one thing and do another.

Your counter-argument (in this particular quote) has failed here. However, I noticed that you have another one (two quotes below) and I'll ensure that your whole counter-argument fails.



False assumption. People believe what they are entitled to believe.


I did nothing except stating that my atheism might or might not play a role in your hatred. That is just my extra argument; my position remains intact without it (thus I don't mind discarding it).


Consider This thread (http://www.rapeboard.com/showthread.php?t=11088&highlight=christians) I made. Does me saying that they need to be shot suggest I hate these people? At the time I hated what they believed. I hated what they said to people who sent letters claiming their arguments are illogical. I don't hate them, I only hate or extremely dislike their acts. They may make me angry with what they say, but that's all it is. I can't do anything to change their mind, so why hate them? The same way with you. You made me angry not because of your anti-christian talk, not because of what you said in the "why was jackie boy banned thread" but because you were hurling out insults without any basis to those insults to other members. Some of which were my friends.

And I also noticed that I was missing some of the action and wanted to get into the argument. I believe the expression is called jumping the bandwagon. Anyway, back to the anger talk.

Now the anger and my reaction to that anger does not imply that I have hatred towards you. If that were so then each time a person got mad and responded to that anger it could be said that they hated this person. While this may be so in some extreme cases, it isn't for this one.

Again, just a little anger on my part and my reaction to it.



That one is so damn predictable. All the examples that you've provided express the general notion called "hate the sins, not the person". I've heard that line millions of times (especially when witnessing debates on homosexuality between Christians and non-Christians) and that never ceases to amuse me. I generally am not buying the ridiculous nonsense that hating a person and hating their sins/actions are completely different states of mind. The action is associated with the person and if you hate the action then you, in a sense, hate the person. Noone in their right mind would say that they don't hate Bin Laden or Hitler when they're horrified and angered by their felonies.

When you called me an asshole, you were making a derogatory comment about my character. Demanding me to shut the fuck up further implies that I'm an asshole who should shut the fuck up. If you merely hate my action, then you would have commented on my action alone. You have clearly commented on my character and that is completely undeniable.



I suppose you are partially right about hatred being present in me. I do hate movies, I do hate some TV shows, and I do hate some people's acting skills. You are wrong about me hating another person. There is no point in hating someone. There may also be no point in hating things, but all humans have something they hate.


The scope of the "hatred" argument is only within the issue between us in RB and you should know better than that. I suggest you to retract this smart-ass comment.


As for the intolerance, I can disprove that I am intolerant easily. If I was intolerant I wouldn't have registered on EB. If I was intolerant I wouldn't be debating you now.

I think that about covers it. Unless there are more issues I see no reason to continue this. If you want to continue to believe I am intolerant and I hate you then go right ahead.


The converse (or more precisely, the contra-positive form) of your two conditional statements implies that registering in EB and debating me serve as examples of how you're being tolerant. How so? You can register in EB, you can debate me, etc. and then display your intolerance afterwards.

RapeU
07-03-2008, 07:50 PM
My previous post was much longer than that, but you only responded to a small part of it in PM. You basically had nothing to say about the other parts.

I'm merely quoting whatever you wrote in your PM. I'm definitely not responsible for your "disappointment".


True, I had expected the other parts to come back instead of this one. Perhaps someday I'll tackle the other things. For now, I'll think on them and may address them if I feel the need to do so.


Believe it or not, I've heard that one from countless Christians. What they typically do is that they preach a bunch of theories in front of other people, but little did they realize that how they actually act is another story.

You happened to come up with a rational explanation on why hating someone is illogical or a waste of time and energy, but it still does not disprove the claim that you do not hate. Ever wonder why Christians are constantly being accused of being hypocrites? Because they say one thing and do another.

Your counter-argument (in this particular quote) has failed here. However, I noticed that you have another one (two quotes below) and I'll ensure that your whole counter-argument fails.


Hypocrisy exists in everyone. Christians are merely looked at harder than anyone else because of their belief.

Example. All the religions of the world preach non-violence. Some Muslims decide to speak out with violence, especially when something is said about their religion that angers them. Remember what their reaction was when the Pope said something about their religion being a sword? (I don't know in full what he said but I do remember the reaction.) They got mad! They took to the streets and for some reason burned the American Flag. Those people were hypocritical. Yet you hardly ever hear someone say that fact.

The above is not a statement against the Muslim religion, only against those who decide to use it as an excuse for violence.

I did nothing except stating that my atheism might or might not play a role in your hatred. That is just my extra argument; my position remains intact without it (thus I don't mind discarding it).

ok


That one is so damn predictable. All the examples that you've provided express the general notion called "hate the sins, not the person". I've heard that line millions of times (especially when witnessing debates on homosexuality between Christians and non-Christians) and that never ceases to amuse me. I generally am not buying the ridiculous nonsense that hating a person and hating their sins/actions are completely different states of mind.

Really?

I was watching TV the other day flipping through channels when I stumbled upon a real court case. I don't remember the show, but I do remember this:

An ex-alcoholic father and his alcoholic son were being sued. The reason why is not relevant to this discussion. The judge got a gist of their background information related to the case. I'll skip the details and jump right into what is relevant.

The father said that he had successfully quit drinking for 20 years. He also said that he hated that his son was an alcoholic, but he has done all he could for him. It is up to his son to quit on his own.

Now we have an example of someone hating the sin but not the sinner. I highly doubt that the dad hated his son. He has tried everything in his power to help his son to quit drinking and now realizes that he can't do anything else to help. His son has to do the rest on his own.

The action is associated with the person and if you hate the action then you, in a sense, hate the person. Noone in their right mind would say that they don't hate Bin Laden or Hitler when they're horrified and angered by their felonies.

Again I say no. If you hate the action of a boy playing with a Barbie doll would you hate your best friend if you found out he played with a Barbie doll?

If two parents hated the action of a teen getting pregnant then would they hate their daughter whom they have loved all her life when she gets pregnant?

[COLOR="DarkOrange"]
When you called me an asshole, you were making a derogatory comment about my character. Demanding me to shut the fuck up further implies that I'm an asshole who should shut the fuck up. If you merely hate my action, then you would have commented on my action alone. You have clearly commented on my character and that is completely undeniable.


I hadn't thought about an insult being about someone's character. Very good way of seeing it.

However, the insult was for that particular time period with certain actions. It did not insult your whole character, only part of it.

Right now if I was angered by you I would not call you that again. You have used far less insults and I'm learning from you.

The scope of the "hatred" argument is only within the issue between us in RB and you should know better than that. I suggest you to retract this smart-ass comment.

Ok, fair enough.


The converse (or more precisely, the contra-positive form) of your two conditional statements implies that registering in EB and debating me serve as examples of how you're being tolerant. How so? You can register in EB, you can debate me, etc. and then display your intolerance afterwards.


That is possible. Then I'm assuming you are saying I can't prove I'm not tolerant by a few small actions. Based upon that, you can't prove that I'm intolerant because of a few small actions. So neither of us can prove the other tolerant or intolerant of other's beliefs based on the small part of each other that we see. In the same way, I can't prove that you hate me or vice versa because of the small part of what the other sees.

RapeU
07-04-2008, 05:57 PM
Someone has PM'd me about the comment I made pertaining to the Muslim's reaction to the Pope's words.

This person will remain unknown unless they want to be known. Please don't try to guess who the person is because I won't answer.

I was mistaken when I said that the Muslims burned the American flag after the Pope's words. I went by memory when I said that and my memory at times can be poor.

My comment was intended to show that those who use religion as an excuse for violence when their religion preaches nonviolence are hypocritical. It was not intended to target the Muslim religion. Instead, it was intended to target the people who follow the religion and use that as an excuse to conduct violence.

Sternenlied
07-04-2008, 06:14 PM
I was mistaken when I said that the Muslims burned the American flag after the Pope's words. I went by memory when I said that and my memory at times can be poor.

Isn't really the subject matter but no, you were not mistaken.
Next to burning German and US American flags a figure of the Pope was burned as well, churches were attacked and a nun was murdered. Additionally several death threats towards the Pope were sent.
Politcial correctness is all fine and politeness is also never wrong but there's no need to keep quiet about events that actually took place.

MARADONA
07-08-2008, 01:57 PM
Never liked the image of the pope...especially in acient history...
we are lucky to live in this era...especially who is ginger!!!
god knows how many people is died for those fucking "cristiani"...
they changed the history...in an awful...they burn everything that was against their cult...
today they has billions of dollars...yeah with all the moneys they has they could save the third world...

Sternenlied
07-13-2008, 05:49 AM
RapeU and ctomie have come to an agreement to continue their personal debate via PM and ctomie asked me to close this thread.
Thus it is closed.