1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou said that divegeester had the same moral disposition as lynchers. Not "similar" or "symptomatic". You said "the same". Not a similar disposition. You said he had the "same moral disposition" as the lynch mob.
when you can produce the statement where i claim they are morally one and the same then please do so. citing an example of stating that something is symptomatic of a moral disposition is not that claim, no matter how much you would like to attempt to shoehorn it into one.
Originally posted by googlefudgeyes you are correct, it is enough for me to know that dweebster and his hero attempt to misrepresent a position in order to land cyber rockets. To simply fabricate claims in the hope that they will have some leverage. Its now clearer than ever.
After 21 pages of posts, you are now all three just flogging a dead horse.
Originally posted by FMFthat still doesn't equate to a claim that lynching and criticising my religion are morally synonymous. Infact it says nothing about the morality of lynching or critiquing another religion.
You said that divegeester had the same moral disposition as lynchers. No "similar" or "symptomatic". You said "the same". Not a similar disposition. You said he had the "same moral disposition" as the lynch mob.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell you've been offered several examples. This one is as good as any:
when you can produce the statement where i claim they are morally one and the same then please do so. citing an example of stating that something is symptomatic of a moral disposition is not that claim, no matter how much you would like to attempt to shoehorn it into one.
FMF: "I think the expression "'they are symptomatic of an underlying moral disposition" is failing you, not me. You are trying to use it to justify the preposterous comparison of criticisms of JW doctrine with lynch mobs murdering black people. On one level, I sense that you are trying to be a funny maverick but I think you are losing sight of how simply daft and appalling this whole convoluted ad hominem is, here and on the thread where you tried it out the first time."
robbie: "sure you keep telling yourself whatever it is you need to find comfort for your failure to tell us why this underlying moral disposition is in any way different."
That was on page 34-35 in case you've forgotten.
Originally posted by FMFthese are your silly claims, you justify them.
Well you've been offered several examples. This one is as good as any:
FMF: "I think the expression "'they are symptomatic of an underlying moral disposition" is failing you, not me. [b]You are trying to use it to justify the preposterous comparison of criticisms of JW doctrine with lynch mobs murdering black people. On one level, I sense that you are try ...[text shortened]... al disposition is in any way different.[/b]"
That was on page 34-35 in case you've forgotten.[/b]
-Removed-I have already retracted that you are equally bigoted, ignorant etc on the basis that hate, bigotry etc are difficult to quantify, this is the second or third time i have done so, you are still a tiresome fellow for asking the same things again and again and again, No apology is necessary nor will be forthcoming until I see a change in your attitude.
-Removed-sigh another silly attempt to misrepresent a position, you think you would havevlreaned your lesson from your failure to produce other claims, what i have said is that FMF can substantiate his own claims, I certainly will not be doing so for him. Now your technique has been uncovered you hold little interest for me now, its the same thing again and again and again and again and again. the same silly contrived and loaded questions again and again and again and again, answered three or four times. Adios dweebster, I got bigger fish to fry on the other side of town.
