26 Jan 11
8 edits
Originally posted by AgergMy views are based on the fact that despite what you and others have invented, and lets be clear about it, INVENTED, stupid and contrived scenarios, which i refuse to acknowledge nor answer, and then proceed to assign to me values based on those stupid and contrived scenarios which i have neither acknowledged nor answered, of which this post is yet another example, you have not shown one example where lying is to be preferred to telling the truth.
There are many ideas to which fundamentalists subscribe that cannot be seen (by myself at least) as anything short of absurd - this is one of them! It also crops up in other discussions and so I wanted to use this thread as a point of reference in those. Unfortunately, it has been somewhat soiled by Robbie's racism (towards yourself), religious bigotry, and bl tion!) - whether I'm wrong or otherwise, fundamentalism is a very dangerous thing in my view!
I am a Christian, I have an exemplar Christ, who also did not tell lies, that's it, we do not need to explain anything to you, do you understand? we do not need to resort to anything other than telling you that its a Christian teaching, do you understand? if you don't like it, then dont adopt it, its really as simple as that.
What is more dangerous is inventing stupid and contrived scenarios and then basing an evaluation on those invented stupid and contrived scenarios as if you were proclaiming some kind of truth. You people need to get over yourselves, pontificating from your room full of mirrors, self proclaimed moralists, basing your evaluations on your own invented scenarios, deluded or what!
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI see! so your cowardly failure to acknowledge any examples
My views are based on the fact that despite what you and others have invented, and lets be clear about it, INVENTED, stupid and contrived scenarios, which i refuse to acknowledge nor answer, and then proceed to assign to me values based on those stupid and contrived scenarios which i have neither acknowledged nor answered, of which this post is yet a ...[text shortened]... proclaimed moralists, basing your evaluations on your own invented scenarios, deluded or what!
such as the nice german and the nazi
where lying is preferable to being truthful counts as failing to offer any such examples!???
Crikey!
26 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by AgergCowardly, you really dont know where to get off, do you Agers, here a scenario, not invented, you know, that actually happened, that is, in real life, that is, to real people.
I see! so your cowardly failure to acknowledge any examples[hidden]such as the nice german and the nazi[/hidden]where lying is preferable to being truthful counts as failing to offer any such examples!???
Crikey!
Five Million Often Forgotten
Jehovah Witnesses
The Holocaust is usually taught as the mass genocide of almost six million Jews in Europe during World War II. But, more than five million others were also persecuted, tortured, tattooed and killed. These five million included innocent citizens - men women and children. The survivors and the families of these five million often feel left out -- overshadowed by the Jewish casualties. Nonetheless, these people need to be recognized and memorialized. Many of these died for their race or their beliefs. Many of these died while helping their Jewish neighbors. They too deserve their place in history.
http://www.holocaustforgotten.com/Jehovah.htm
I suggest Agers, you just shut your mouth!
26 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt's difficult to see what I could possibly gain by explaining how this post, again, completely misses the point!
Cowardly, you really dont know where to get off, do you Agers, here a scenario, not invented, you know, that actually happened, that is, in real life, that is, to real people.
Five Million Often Forgotten
Jehovah Witnesses
The Holocaust is usually taught as the mass genocide of almost six million Jews in Europe during World War II. But, more ...[text shortened]...
http://www.holocaustforgotten.com/Jehovah.htm
I suggest Agers, you just shut your mouth!
It seems you think this place to be the "argument room" - ah well, I'll leave you to conduct your, ahem, "thoughts" in peace. Cheerio!
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by Agergyes indeed, real life events certainly seem to have a greater potency than merely fabricated ones, as does truth, it has a potency all of its own!
It's difficult to see what I could possibly gain by explaining how this post, again, completely misses the point!
It seems you think this place to be the "argument room" - ah well, I'll leave you to conduct your, ahem, "thoughts" in peace. Cheerio!
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by Agergyeah so i am supposed to just let you call me a coward and a racist, and be subject to a whole host of other deluded fabrications heaped upon even more fictitious nothingness, yes indeed, let you debate the issues, for the matter is crystal clear in my own mind. The only farcical thing is that you actually believe your own propaganda!
Well that's the farcical interlude finished with...back to debating!
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobiewell you are a coward. and with the racism, he was a little wrong. it wasn't racist what you just did, only a cowardly, illogical, unrelated to the discussion and totally uncalled for attack on someone's nationality while avoiding to answer a question that nobody but the most brainwashed nazi would have answered "the human must betray his fellow humans and not lie to the gestapo officer"
yeah so i am supposed to just let you call me a coward and a racist, and be subject to a whole host of other deluded fabrications heaped upon even more fictitious nothingness, yes indeed, let you debate the issues, for the matter is crystal clear in my own mind. The only farcical thing is that you actually believe your own propaganda!
26 Jan 11
3 edits
Originally posted by ZahlanziWell one really doesn't get much choice in where they're born, colour of skin, etc.. and so anyone who attacks the character of a person on the basis of their nationality is being racist as far as I'm concerned.
well you are a coward. and with the racism, he was a little wrong. it wasn't racist what you just did, only a cowardly, illogical, unrelated to the discussion and totally uncalled for attack on someone's nationality while avoiding to answer a question that nobody but the most brainwashed nazi would have answered "the human must betray his fellow humans and not lie to the gestapo officer"
I justify this position on the grounds that to counter your evaluation of his morality in light of what he has posted so far, he saw it as reasonable to call into your question your own morality based upon the fact you are a Romanian; and that you therefore bear some weight of responsibility for the events that took place on the part of Romanians in WW2.
26 Jan 11
2 edits
Originally posted by Agergso what race is Zhalanzi then?
Well one really doesn't get much choice in where they're born, colour of skin, etc.. and so anyone who attacks the character of a person on the basis of their nationality is being racist as far as I'm concerned.
I justify this position on the grounds that to counter your evaluation of his morality in light of what he has posted so far, he saw it as reasonabl ...[text shortened]... some weight of responsibility for the events that took place on the part of Romanians in WW2.
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by Agergof course, i am not arguing that the robbie is insane. (at this point it isn't a matter of jerkiness or stupidity, i think he clearly leapt over those into the insanity pool)
Well one really doesn't get much choice in where they're born, colour of skin, etc.. and so anyone who attacks the character of a person on the basis of their nationality is being racist as far as I'm concerned.
I justify this position on the grounds that to counter your evaluation of his morality in light of what he has posted so far, he saw it as reasonabl ...[text shortened]... some weight of responsibility for the events that took place on the part of Romanians in WW2.
i am arguing over the semantics. racism is when race comes into question. xenophobism is when nationality comes into question. basically it isn't that important what you call it, it is wrong and i understood your point.
26 Jan 11
Originally posted by Agergi do not accept that definition, for Romanian is a nationality, not a designation of ethnicity, i therefore repeat the question, which race is Zhalanzi.
[b]race:
5. any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc.: the Dutch race.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/race
In this case, Romanian.[/b]