weeping and gnashing of teeth

Originally posted by dj2becker
Well it is obvious why you would not like to revisit the fact that you cannot know which of 2 contradictory moral systems is correct when you believe there is no universal truth, where everyone is entitled to their own opinion and everyone's opinion is equally valid, even ISIS and Nazi Germany. Feel free to bury your head in the sand.

I didn't bury my head in the sand at all when you were using the name Fetchmujunk. In fact I discussed it with you extensively and tackled the questions head on. You repeating over and over again your self-serving characterization of my stance - and your self-aggrandizing characterization of those personal opinions and preferences of yours that constitute your stance - and repeating the same questions ad nauseam, as if we haven't already discussed them, will get you nowhere. Try it on someone else.

Originally posted by FMF
I didn't bury my head in the sand at all when you were using the name Fetchmujunk. In fact I discussed it with you extensively and tackled the questions head on. You repeating over and over again your self-serving characterization of my stance - and your self-aggrandizing characterization of those personal opinions and preferences of yours that constitute your s ...[text shortened]... nauseam, as if we haven't already discussed them, will get you nowhere. Try it on someone else.

Like you are now you were evading questions then by saying you had discussed them in the past. Nothing has changed there. Saying you have answered a question that you haven't is dishonest. But then again you said it is ok to lie in certain circumstances when we were discussing morality so that explains it.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Like you are now you were evading questions then by saying you had discussed them in the past. Nothing has changed there. Saying you have answered a question that you haven't is dishonest. But then again you said it is ok to lie in certain circumstances when we were discussing morality so that explains it.

You claimed all this before.

Originally posted by FMF
You claimed all this before.

You are the one who claimed lying is ok, not me.

Originally posted by dj2becker
You are the one who claimed lying is ok, not me.

Of course lying is OK in certain circumstances, as I explained. In fact I think you agreed at one point in that discussion, didn't you? [You were posting as Fetchmyjunk at the time.] I haven't lied about what my views on morality are; I haven't lied about the fact that we have already discussed the issues you are trying to revisit; and I haven't lied about my lack of interest in repeating myself in further discussions on the same things over and over again, with you in particular.

Originally posted by FMF
Of course lying is OK in certain circumstances, as I explained. In fact I think you agreed at one point in that discussion, didn't you? [You were posting as Fetchmyjunk at the time.] I haven't lied about what my views on morality are; I haven't lied about the fact that we have already discussed the issues you are trying to revisit; and I haven't lied about my la ...[text shortened]... ng myself in further discussions on the same things over and over again, with you in particular.

There are quite a few questions that I have asked you that you have not yet answered. You claim to have discussed a similar topic which may be true but that doesn't mean you have actually answered the specific question.

Originally posted by dj2becker
There are quite a few questions that I have asked you that you have not yet answered. You claim to have discussed a similar topic which may be true but that doesn't mean you have actually answered the specific question.

You claimed all this before. And I responded. Read what I said.

Originally posted by FMF
You claimed all this before. And I responded. Read what I said.

😴

Originally posted by dj2becker
😴

The feeling is mutual, as you know, but I say what I mean candidly and have not resorted to emoticons.

Originally posted by FMF
The feeling is mutual, as you know, but I say what I mean candidly and have not resorted to emoticons.

Well maybe you are wise to stay away from discussions where you feel a little shaky. And saying you have addressed an issue in the past is quite smart because it's impossible to prove that you haven't especially if you really haven't.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Well maybe you are wise to stay away from discussions where you feel a little shaky. And saying you have addressed an issue in the past is quite smart because it's impossible to prove that you haven't especially if you really haven't.

You've tried repeatedly to apply this spin to the fact we have already discussed these things and that I am opting not to play along.

Originally posted by FMF
You've tried repeatedly to apply this spin to the fact we have already discussed these things and that I am opting not to play along.

Obviously if you had evidence that you have answered my questions you could provide it. On the other hand it is impossible for me to provide evidence that you haven't because no evidence of a discussion would exist.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Obviously if you had evidence that you have answered my questions you could provide it.

But I can't be bothered to go back and scour the threads. Nor can I be bothered to repeat what I wrote before. It's not worth it to me.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Well it is obvious why you would not like to revisit the fact that you cannot know which of 2 contradictory moral systems is correct when you believe there is no universal truth, where everyone is entitled to their own opinion and everyone's opinion is equally valid, even ISIS and Nazi Germany. Feel free to bury your head in the sand.

Why are you asking this again?!

Are you expecting different answers from the ones given you when you were FetchMyJunk.

Originally posted by FMF
But I can't be bothered to go back and scour the threads. Nor can I be bothered to repeat what I wrote before. It's not worth it to me.

Yes if you had in fact written it. Which would be possible to prove if you had but impossible to prove if you hadn't. So there you go win win for you.