Religion is human nature

[Husker_x]

Your conveniently self-serving and narrow definition does not encompass all forms of persecution. You do not have to cast a person to the lions to persecute them. It can be as simple as posting bills around the neighborhood that are anti-_______ religion. Persecution encompasses the manner, frequency, nature and intent of the action. Words alone can persecute.

 

You may attempt to insult me all you want by claiming I don't know the difference between "You're stupid" and "Your beliefs are stupid." It's not the first time you've stooped to such things, and I doubt it will be the last. I have been exceedingly lenient with you in these kinds of conversations, but as you are aware my patience has limits. I would counsel you not to explore those limits.

 

No, you don't get to cover your nonsense with loosely-veiled threats. For several months now religions threads have whizzed by without a peep from me. Certainly I haven't posted any, and we're not talking about religion here in the first place. I haven't been spending that time posting up fliers around catholic neighborhoods, either, so your attempt to pull the teeth on what you actually said still fails. You and I both know that I have neither persecuted nor been persecuted on this board. To my knowledge no one has. Certainly no one I've heard claim it for him or herself with evidence substantiating it. All we have is you saying so. You, of all people. Interesting.

 

Me pointing out your admitted inability or unwillingness to differentiate between attacking ideas and attacking persons does not an insult make. But given your long, storied history of misreading my––but not limited to my––intentions means I'm not surprised. I would remind you that it was your call alone in derailing the actual discussion by dredging up history (or your misconstrued version of it). My only interest here was the topic of parody in argument.

 

Clearly this was a mistake. I thought you were actually capable of having a discussion where it didn't wind up being some kind of half baked Dr. Phil episode. If it were the first time, I might actually be interested, but you've succeeded in boring the hell out of me. I don't know what your deal is, bro, and I won't venture a guess, but whatever it is should be worrying to you. It's not just me you have issues with.

[knapplc]

Your conveniently self-serving and narrow definition does not encompass all forms of persecution. You do not have to cast a person to the lions to persecute them. It can be as simple as posting bills around the neighborhood that are anti-_______ religion. Persecution encompasses the manner, frequency, nature and intent of the action. Words alone can persecute.

 

You may attempt to insult me all you want by claiming I don't know the difference between "You're stupid" and "Your beliefs are stupid." It's not the first time you've stooped to such things, and I doubt it will be the last. I have been exceedingly lenient with you in these kinds of conversations, but as you are aware my patience has limits. I would counsel you not to explore those limits.

 

No, you don't get to cover your nonsense with loosely-veiled threats. For several months now religions threads have whizzed by without a peep from me. Certainly I haven't posted any, and we're not talking about religion here in the first place. I haven't been spending that time posting up fliers around catholic neighborhoods, either, so your attempt to pull the teeth on what you actually said still fails. You and I both know that I have neither persecuted nor been persecuted on this board. To my knowledge no one has. Certainly no one I've heard claim it for him or herself with evidence substantiating it. All we have is you saying so. You, of all people. Interesting.

 

Me pointing out your admitted inability or unwillingness to differentiate between attacking ideas and attacking persons does not an insult make. But given your long, storied history of misreading my––but not limited to my––intentions means I'm not surprised. I would remind you that it was your call alone in derailing the actual discussion by dredging up history (or your misconstrued version of it). My only interest here was the topic of parody in argument.

 

Clearly this was a mistake. I thought you were actually capable of having a discussion where it didn't wind up being some kind of half baked Dr. Phil episode. If it were the first time, I might actually be interested, but you've succeeded in boring the hell out of me. I don't know what your deal is, bro, and I won't venture a guess, but whatever it is should be worrying to you. It's not just me you have issues with.

 

It's not just me that has issues with you, either. And of the two of us, I'm not the one on thin ice.

 

Bro.

 

This will be, by the way, the last post on this subject. If you feel the need to continue this conversation, you're welcome to PM me.

[Husker_x]

Your conveniently self-serving and narrow definition does not encompass all forms of persecution. You do not have to cast a person to the lions to persecute them. It can be as simple as posting bills around the neighborhood that are anti-_______ religion. Persecution encompasses the manner, frequency, nature and intent of the action. Words alone can persecute.

 

You may attempt to insult me all you want by claiming I don't know the difference between "You're stupid" and "Your beliefs are stupid." It's not the first time you've stooped to such things, and I doubt it will be the last. I have been exceedingly lenient with you in these kinds of conversations, but as you are aware my patience has limits. I would counsel you not to explore those limits.

 

No, you don't get to cover your nonsense with loosely-veiled threats. For several months now religions threads have whizzed by without a peep from me. Certainly I haven't posted any, and we're not talking about religion here in the first place. I haven't been spending that time posting up fliers around catholic neighborhoods, either, so your attempt to pull the teeth on what you actually said still fails. You and I both know that I have neither persecuted nor been persecuted on this board. To my knowledge no one has. Certainly no one I've heard claim it for him or herself with evidence substantiating it. All we have is you saying so. You, of all people. Interesting.

 

Me pointing out your admitted inability or unwillingness to differentiate between attacking ideas and attacking persons does not an insult make. But given your long, storied history of misreading my––but not limited to my––intentions means I'm not surprised. I would remind you that it was your call alone in derailing the actual discussion by dredging up history (or your misconstrued version of it). My only interest here was the topic of parody in argument.

 

Clearly this was a mistake. I thought you were actually capable of having a discussion where it didn't wind up being some kind of half baked Dr. Phil episode. If it were the first time, I might actually be interested, but you've succeeded in boring the hell out of me. I don't know what your deal is, bro, and I won't venture a guess, but whatever it is should be worrying to you. It's not just me you have issues with.

 

It's not just me that has issues with you, either. And of the two of us, I'm not the one on thin ice.

 

Bro.

 

This will be, by the way, the last post on this subject. If you feel the need to continue this conversation, you're welcome to PM me.

 

Why would I need to PM you? I have nothing to hide, nothing I'm ashamed to say publicly. I'm also not intimidated in the least by your threats. If it costs me my ability to post so that the people who want to share/discuss ideas can see you abusing your position of authority on this board, so be it. I suppose you can go back and delete posts, change history, and drop the ban hammer all day long, but it won't change two simple things. The first is that you lied repeatedly and publicly about me without grounds or an apology, and the second is once you saw that you weren't going to get away with your lies, you attempted to threaten me and move the conversation away from where people could see it.

 

When argument fails, make it personal. When making it personal fails, try silencing your opponent. Now I'm interested. How far are you willing to go? The first time you doled out a warning you had cause. This time you don't. I have not attacked anyone or done anything except rebut your smears. In fact, this is the first time I've posted on this board in months. You are the instigator.

 

Lastly, I don't doubt there are other people on the board who would take issue with my point of view on the religion stuff. Of course they do. I would have, too. The difference between you and me, knapp, is that I'll take all comers. If anyone here has a problem with what I'm saying, they are free to say so publicly or in a PM and we'll talk about it. I won't tell them they're persecuting me. I won't threaten them. And I won't censor them. Ever.

[Ratt Mhule]

Jon Stewart is professionally funny, but by no means does he own a monopoly on any way of advancing an argument.

 

And it's not like his rowdy satire make for he best arguments either. When he goes on Larry King or has a long and serious discussion, that's when his real debating acumen shines through.

 

I agree with knapp that offending people isn't a great idea. Although, "you think I'll burn in hell, I think you believe in silly things" -- to me, that's even. There is such a thing as being too lenient in a debate too though, and it's a fine line. Bluntness can either push people further into their own shielded world, or cause them to re-evaluate.

 

Po, it's great that you got out of that rut. I just wonder why it is necessary to have it tied to your thoughts on our origins. I suppose we all need structure in our lives to keep them stable and fulfilling, but structure =/= beliefs. And while I can understand that beliefs can grant access (or even feel necessary) to the structure and comfort we all seek, that doesn't strike me as a good reason to suppose something is so.

 

I didn't start going to church just to get out of that lifestyle. I actually got myself together before I found God. Something happened in my life that I believe God was calling me back to him. You guys might think Im crazy, but thats okay. Many of my prayers have been answered. Some faster than others. For example, I love coaching little league baseball, its a passion of mine and Im good at relating to the kids. After last season, I didn't have a team to coach anymore and I thought my coaching was done until I have kids and this bummed me out. I prayed that God would give me another opportunity to coach and do what I love. Literally a week later, my mom ran into a guy she knew and he asked her what Ive been up to this summer. She told him I just finished coaching baseball. Well it just so happens that this guy was looking for someone to coach the 9 year old team for my old high school's feeder program and asked my mom to ask me if I wanted the job. Most of you will probably just say its coincidence or just sheer luck. I believe my prayer was answered and extremely quick. Its says in the Bible that God knows all the desires of our heart and he knew this was something I loved to do. This is just one example of many prayers that have been answered for me.

[knapplc]

No, the difference between you and me is that I help run this site and you are a member. You don't see the complaints, you don't get the PMs, you don't have to deal with the BS that you cause. You just post here and walk away. It's my job to keep this place clean, civil and open to all members.

 

This isn't the "Husker_x isn't afraid of anyone" forum. This is a public forum where a broad range of views - not just yours - need to be made to feel welcome. You do not make people feel welcome, and that becomes my problem. I'm tired of dealing with you as a problem.

 

Your claims that I'm lying about you are patently false, but they serve to illustrate a fact - the first person to turn this personal, to make this about the person and not the topic, is you. Again. I did not approach you in this thread, you approached me. In fact, I've gone out of my way to engage in pleasant conversations with you, despite your history on this site. This conversation started because you felt the need to justify the fact that you choose to use "attacks" to explain your point of view on religion. Your word, not mine.

 

I'm not interested in playing this "how far can I push knapplc" game. If that's what you want to do, I will solve that problem.

[Husker_x]

No, the difference between you and me is that I help run this site and you are a member. You don't see the complaints, you don't get the PMs, you don't have to deal with the BS that you cause. You just post here and walk away. It's my job to keep this place clean, civil and open to all members.

 

I feel in this discussion I have been clean and civil. I haven't posted anything on any subject for months now, so whatever complaints you might be referring to are not current. I'm sorry that you have to deal with PMs from people who are apparently not interested in taking it up with me and instead try to go behind my back to––well, what do they want done? A ban? I have a higher opinion of you than that and can't believe you'd give it the time of day. If someone doesn't want to talk to me about religion and they say as much, for me that ends the conversation. I can't help people who repeatedly post responses and then expect no response. That's not an open forum. That's not free discussion.

 

This isn't the "Husker_x isn't afraid of anyone" forum. This is a public forum where a broad range of views - not just yours - need to be made to feel welcome. You do not make people feel welcome, and that becomes my problem. I'm tired of dealing with you as a problem.

 

Public forum for a broad range of views...except––what? I cannot help how I 'make people feel.' I'm no wizard. If a Christian wants to post a Christian article, or make a Christian argument, sometimes I'll respond to it. I in no way intend to get in the way of them posting something or a hundred things. I wouldn't want them to get in my way, either. I respect their right and your right to believe whatever dang thing you want. When you welcome all views you also welcome scrutiny of those views. Can't handle that, you're in the wrong place.

 

Your claims that I'm lying about you are patently false, but they serve to illustrate a fact - the first person to turn this personal, to make this about the person and not the topic, is you. Again. I did not approach you in this thread, you approached me. In fact, I've gone out of my way to engage in pleasant conversations with you, despite your history on this site. This conversation started because you felt the need to justify the fact that you choose to use "attacks" to explain your point of view on religion. Your word, not mine.

 

1. I appreciate your efforts and I feel like I've been returning them to no benefit. Somehow even though we are on topic, the topic––the IDEA––I responded to, you managed to make some offhand comment about how I'm 'not as good at satire as I think I am' and it all fell apart from there. Note that I never claimed to be a satirist myself, only that I wouldn't rule out using such an effective argumentative tool. It was an out of left field comment that served no purpose and felt quite a bit like an attack not against any point I was making, but against me, at the exclusion of responding to anything substantive that I did post. When I engaged you it was on topic, a simple example of someone who uses satire to brilliant effect. You then made it about me. I wish you hadn't.

 

2. I've tried to explain the difference between 'attacking' and idea and 'attacking' a person. I can 'attack' a syllogism––traditional theistic arguments, sometimes––by pointing out a flaw in a premise. Don't get so hung up on the word. Any argument is a form of attack. I think what we're trying to discuss is how you go about it, and we're more in agreement than it would appear.

 

I'm not interested in playing this "how far can I push knapplc" game. If that's what you want to do, I will solve that problem.

 

Nor am I. But if you push me I'll push back. I don't appreciate the accusations you've made about me. I for one think you're very much above that kind of thing. For me this should be a dead issue, closed here and forever. I would never want or deliberately try to make anyone feel persecuted on this board for any reason, and if anyone got that impression, know it was never my intent.

 

You should know, knap, that I don't hold you any animosity at all. I like that you post here and I enjoy the discussions we have. All I want is to keep this stuff on an actual topic, else this stuff just gets silly. If we can do that, onward. If not, I was plenty satisfied doing what I was doing before checking in on you all.

[knapplc]

Don't get so hung up on the word.

 

Take your own advice. This whole drama started with you taking umbrage to the word "persecute." Whether you want to use the "persecute" or "attack," you have been at the epicenter of every religious argument on this site for the past couple of years, "attacking" (to use your word) religion. There isn't a religious thread in this forum in which you haven't "attacked" the topic.

 

But if you push me I'll push back.

 

Do you really expect to be taken seriously with your protests of innocence when you say things like this?

[Husker_x]

Being involved in discussions has nothing to do with persecution. Amazing, the more you post the wronger you get.

 

To be honest I'm having a tough time taking any of this seriously. Do I need a lawyer? Wasn't aware I was standing trial.

[knapplc]

All I want is to keep this stuff on an actual topic, else this stuff just gets silly.

 

Every single post you make that is about you or about me adds to the lie of this quote.

 

Have you already forgotten this? Or were these just words?

[zoogs]

Appreciate the response, Po. That is very cool and I'm glad for you!

[The Dude]

Jon Stewart is professionally funny, but by no means does he own a monopoly on any way of advancing an argument.

 

And it's not like his rowdy satire make for he best arguments either. When he goes on Larry King or has a long and serious discussion, that's when his real debating acumen shines through.

 

I agree with knapp that offending people isn't a great idea. Although, "you think I'll burn in hell, I think you believe in silly things" -- to me, that's even. There is such a thing as being too lenient in a debate too though, and it's a fine line. Bluntness can either push people further into their own shielded world, or cause them to re-evaluate.

 

Po, it's great that you got out of that rut. I just wonder why it is necessary to have it tied to your thoughts on our origins. I suppose we all need structure in our lives to keep them stable and fulfilling, but structure =/= beliefs. And while I can understand that beliefs can grant access (or even feel necessary) to the structure and comfort we all seek, that doesn't strike me as a good reason to suppose something is so.

 

I didn't start going to church just to get out of that lifestyle. I actually got myself together before I found God. Something happened in my life that I believe God was calling me back to him. You guys might think Im crazy, but thats okay. Many of my prayers have been answered. Some faster than others. For example, I love coaching little league baseball, its a passion of mine and Im good at relating to the kids. After last season, I didn't have a team to coach anymore and I thought my coaching was done until I have kids and this bummed me out. I prayed that God would give me another opportunity to coach and do what I love. Literally a week later, my mom ran into a guy she knew and he asked her what Ive been up to this summer. She told him I just finished coaching baseball. Well it just so happens that this guy was looking for someone to coach the 9 year old team for my old high school's feeder program and asked my mom to ask me if I wanted the job. Most of you will probably just say its coincidence or just sheer luck. I believe my prayer was answered and extremely quick. Its says in the Bible that God knows all the desires of our heart and he knew this was something I loved to do. This is just one example of many prayers that have been answered for me.

This might be where we're running into confusion. You're assuming my opinion of the concept of God changes my opinion of you. I can assure you that's not the case.