You were right to avoid it....it was a pointless display of vanity on both sides
24 Sex allegations that CNN ignored
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
I could do that boom for you, because there were many of them... but I just quoted your last post. But I want you to go through and find for me what you accuse me of. It's a fair question, so you go find whatever I said that's as derogatory, nasty, vindictive, spiteful, arrogant, disrespectful and downright disgusting as the things you've said to me in this thread.
I never claimed to be someone above calling someone a derogatory name.
Really boom "you're a lowlife"? what's that boom happy talk?
I just said that during our interchange I never belittled your religion or your way of thinking.
"You have very little vision, and must have your truths dictated to you" what was that boom...open praise?
Once you decided to attack mine, I returned fire.
I simply asked you to clarify your beliefs...like for Sin. Where did I "attack" your beliefs like the above line? In fact I said:
"I do appreciate your answers to my questions and I will give you all the credit you request for not running off or refusing to answer them OK?"
Then you sat back (like a proud little troll) and took pleasure in it. I called you a lowlife, for faking that you were genuinely interested in my personal thought process....when it was all just one giant troll trap, done so you can once again feel self righteous and some warped sense of achievement.
I said "I can assess what I read in you, but I don't even for one minute pretend to understand any of it"
That's what I said boom.
[QUOTE="Boomboom521, post: 1772244, member: 14642"]I gave you the respect of answering, then you call them bs and attack my thinking as if though it’s incorrect based on your own personal spiritual foundation.[/QUOTE]
So now you go and find in this thread where I did any of what you said and compare it to the nasty disrespectful things you've said to me.
All of those belittling, condescending statements were leveled on me prior to anything negative I said today. And I made a legitimate attempt to answer personal questions about my beliefs without judging yours....all the while you were constantly comparing mine to yours, but I never once chose to tear down any of yours. Until you decided to begin speaking to me like that
really boom...oh!!! Now that's really nasty like "lowlife little bitch"!!!!!!!
I'm sorry I almost forgot you're speaking relatively now...so my "Cantonese language" remark means the same thing to you as "low life little bitch"
How could I be so forgetful?
You are a very confused young man my friend. I'm simply asking you to clarify some of the more unusual beliefs you hold and I'm "attacking" you boom? That's rich.
How 'bout this one boom:
"I have no hostility towards religion. Just people like you" You weren't attacking me there boom?
Where did I say something similar like this to you to entertain that remark from you?
Yes, because you NEVER answer a direct question without qualifying it, revising it, reshaping it, or placing several possibilities onto your answer to the point where the question itself doesn't get answered directly.
Boomer are Democrats Socialists? (I asked you earlier in the thread....) "It depends on how Socialism is defined"...then you went on to define several ways Socialists are defined. Funny how they don't have a problem defining themselves. There are many many more examples of you avoiding simple direct declarative questions.
Who are the rich boom? "Well that depends on how they are defined relative to how much money they pay relative to their budgets relative to what others who have smaller budgets have and can therefore afford to pay more"
What?
Last edited:
I asked you that once before boomer if you'd prefer if I talked to you in disgusting derogatory language and you said YES! I refused, and let you have that stage to yourself. You do like performing as well as perfecting your craft boomer. The more of it you do it, the better at it you get.
Count me out.
Very open and accommodating remark there boom.
Making judgements boom.
Condescending boom.
attacking boom.
What relativistic term would you describe all of the above boom?
Are you having trouble finding my "nasty" quotes boomer to match yours? I admit I'm not as good as you are at it.
Was that comment to you? No. It was to the man calling saying my wife is more of a man than me, and that my children will resent me
1) that was yesterday during our heated exchange.
2) you claimed I was hosile towards religious people (or religion), I said I wasn’t, that my hostility in my posts had to do with you alone
Differences in opinion are met by you with accusations of deflection.Yes, because you NEVER answer a direct question without qualifying it, revising it, reshaping it, or placing several possibilities onto your answer to the point where the question itself doesn't get answered directly.
Boomer are Democrats Socialists? (I asked you earlier in the thread....) "It depends on how Socialism is defined"...then you went on to define several ways Socialists are defined. Funny how they don't have a problem defining themselves. There are many many more examples of you avoiding simple direct declarative questions.
Who are the rich boom? "Well that depends on how they are defined relative to how much money they pay relative to their budgets relative to what others who have smaller budgets have and can therefore afford to pay more"
What?
What are the rich to you? It’s funny you say the definition is so easily defined.
Democrats are not socialists when compared to true socialism....you see and read what you want.
I answered both questions....it makes you cranky and judgemental, because the answers aren’t what you want to hear.
Did I say nasty? No. I said condescending, I said belittling, and I pulled out several.
And as a whole, how ridiculous it is to wear the disguise of an understanding, curious person who rages against anyone who dare attacks his religion....while asking another person to explain their beliefs, only so you can dissect and conquer them by wielding your own ideology. You weren’t curious, you were eager. You were discussing, you were setting me up......so you could belittle my thinking.
IMO, only lowlifes would do such an underhanded thing. Esp while posing as someone who accepts and discusses openly.
If you can't defend what you believe in my friend why is that my problem? If I'm asking you to explain your beliefs and you're explaining and I still don't understand is it OK if I ask for further clarification?
Why am I "attacking" you if I compare what I believe to what you believe and then I get this?
"I’m not perfect, because perfection is a bullshit term, IMO. Sin and salvation are religious concepts and do not hold firm in my spiritual landscape. I tried to draw parallels in order to foster discussion and understanding between the two of us. If you don’t seek that....if you only seek to belittle my beliefs through a comparison of your own....than my time is better spent doing almost anything else. If I choose to question theology and examine the doctrines of organized religion, I will find someone well versed in multiple doctrines to school me"
So I'm not qualified to defend my Faith to you but you of course are perfectly free to not only defend your beliefs, but in so doing attack mine simply because I seek to learn our differences?
Then you accuse me of being insincere! Schizophrenia is not a relative term boom, but in your case I'll make an exception.
I asked you several questions in an attempt to not only understand what you believe, but have you define it in terms one can realize practically. I NEVER said your beliefs were invalid. I wanted YOU to defend them. If that's attacking you, then you're not very firm in what you believe.
You however attacked me & my Faith with this little gem;
"I’m not impressed with your intellect. I’m not impressed with your beliefs. I have not one reason to cater to your ideology or your idea of what mine should be. I find your entire approach manipulative and lacking any real substance"
Now if we were having a true dialogue, then why am I the only one who is being "manipulative"? In what way were you trying to understand me with that remark and where did I attack your beliefs like that simply asking you to explain yourself?
You don’t seek to learn the differences, you just want to tear mine down.
I never attacked your faith. I said multiple times that you can believe what you want. I never said Jesus didn’t exist or that your religion was wrong. I never attacked your family. I only attacked you.
I didn't attack you or what you believe...I simply asked you to explain it and in your relativistic world I was attacking you.
What is a human being boomer?
"It can mean many things to many people"
That is how you began your answer to my question to you about the unborn and if they are Human...if not what are they?
Would you like me to re post it boom or would I be attacking you?
"It can mean many things to many people"
That is how you began your answer to my question to you about the unborn and if they are Human...if not what are they?
Would you like me to re post it boom or would I be attacking you?
Did I ever ask you to explain your beliefs? Did I want your explaination? No. You asked me. I explained. You decided to give me a lesson in your beliefs. For what reason? Dialogue? No no no. It was in order to use your ideology to dwarf mine. Absolutism (your truth) versus my relativism (as you put it - in what was an extremely negative way). I thought you were curious to my beliefs, and sought to know more about me. I was wrong. No such legitimate reason was behind your motivation. Only the motivation to point out to the board how superior you are in thought. Another righty beating a lefty. It’s bullshit.
Because of your religion’s doctrine being forced onto my life? That’s some liberty you pretend to love and respect
Really? You could at least own it. You most certainly attacked me, as a weak thinker and someone who “invents” by belief system for debate.
There you go again. But that’s not an attack is it, to say I don’t know what truth means. Have I ever once said that truth is relative?
I answered that there are multiple different beliefs about the unborn amongst Democrats. Then I directly answered exactly what I believe the unborn (as well as all of us are). Human? Sure. At what point? Conception? What’s your definition of human? Are sperm human? Embryos? When does it begin? When sex is determined by chromosomes? When the body is formed?
Answers to these questions range within the Democratic Party. But that doesn’t match your pretty little idea of what Democrats are, and so you seek to find a way to lump me in with the lot and burn the whole group.
It’s a gotcha question. I still Answered. I even went more specific in another interchange saying that the human form, IMO, is independent of the womb. But again, you just keep pushing that narrative that leftists don’t answer questions, because.....?
It's all a relative matter of interpretation, but if I was being disrespectful to you in any of this it should be easy for anyone to see relatively or absolutely.
Latest posts
-
WVSPORTS.COM Frazier drafted by the Pittsburgh Steelers in second round- Latest: brandonjags8
-
-
-
