Lies more lies and Trollish behaviour

Well, if this thread did not meet with the criteria of the TOS with regard to the creation of a thread, and if this thread was in violation of a prohibition of the TOS with regard to content, don't you think that the administration would be prompt at removing the thread and naming the reason for which it was deleted or closed? I guess you don't place much confidence in the ability of the moderators... Just my opinion.

Which specific part of the OP is it that you are claiming to be in violation of the TOS? Oh yeah. The thing about 'respect' and 'civility' in discussion. Well, in that case, I am being respectful of the author (the person who coined that title) by giving that person the opportunity to PROVE his claims. Is that being disrespectful?

 

With a title of: "Lies more lies and Trollish behaviour"

Yes, that is being disrespectful.

 

Agh, more banal, but apparently civil and respectful debate from ANOTHER highli judgemental atheist who can hurl accusations but never produce the goods.

What you really mean to say is, "I hate anyone who disgrees with atheists! They are automatically trolls!"

When people document dozens of atheists doing exactly what you are doing, and you stand there is defiance of all the evidence and call it trolling? Yeah, it does have to do with atheism and the utter inability of atheists on this forum to engage is a civil discussion.

All I had to do to set off YET ANOTHER athtard was ask why discussing atheism in this section was so difficult?

BURN HIM!!!! er ... actually just ban him.

Its only your fault when you behave like a troll while demanding others e sanctioned as trolls simply because you cannot maintain a civil tone and support a logical form of arguementation is response to criticism of you faith.

Why we've watched the full circle - Get help you delusional morons - Oh the intent is 'respectful' debate - burn the trolls aho use dirty tricks that we cannot identify!!!!

As I said, its downright athtarded - but of course, that is no doubt a personal insult, everything you wrote was undoubtedly above the board.

What is you atheists like to say? If you can't take the criticism leave? Well, follow your own advice.

But if you launch into jerk fest demanding other be banned because you cannot argue or debate? Expect to be treated exactly how such behavior earns.

Interestingly enough, when I am not here, teh athtards say the EXACT same things about the other strong Christians on the forum. The best part is when you lecture us about how its fear that drives us ... but not you.

Your utter inability to respond in a civil and respectful manner? Clearly its because you are so smart, not because you are fearful?

Does that sting? Every word I wrote above has been used by an atheist against me - and plenty of others - so if it stings and when dished out?

Pretty athtarded isn't it?

 

It would appear that you are attempting to cause the discussion to go off-topic.

 

Ahhh but is ok for your buddy Neutral to come in here and rant and rave about Athiesm right?

Thats not taking the discussion off-topic at all right?

 

Did I say that? NO? For your information, I have already posted a complaint with the moderators about this line of off-topic discussion. It is now a matter for the moderators to resolve. So, back to the topic of this thread.

 

Well then, where is the post asking Neutral to stay on topic? I would quote it BUT I CANNOT FIND IT!

 

More double standards.

How about you ask your buddy Tram to stay on topic and respectful?

None of you will, or apparently can, make a single, civil, logical arguement - and every single thing you involve yourself it turns into an emotional excuse fest.

Help, Help I am a victim! But I am not a victim. There 's a Christian with a brain out there and my world is crashing down!!!!

Athtarded isn't it?

 

Did I say that I had directly addressed 'Neutral'? No? Gee, then no wonder you cannot find that precise posting. However, you did see where I have notified the moderators about 'such off-topic discussions'.... and where I said that the matter is not left to the moderators to resolve. Off topic discussion is off-topic discussion at the discretion of the moderators. So, leave it to the moderators. Now, back to the topic of this thread.

 

Well, there is a far simpler way to resolve this.

I challenge any of the atheists, even the athtards, in this forum to a civil and rational debate.

Go ahead, start a thread about something, in a civil matter, regarding your precious atheism, and we'll have a civil discussion about it.

All I ask is that you use the simple, widely accepted, format for logical arguementation.

Thesis - be nice to see one defined.

Supporting evidence - be nice to see any of this from atheists.

Rebuttal of common criticism - which means atheists would have to acknoweldge what other people are saying and ACTUALLY rebut it.

Conclusion.

See if ANY of you can. In the mean time, if you expect people sit by an watch you beat up on Inc in order to derive some kind of warpped pleasure - well, some of us don't like bullies.

Do we need mods to behave civilly? Perhaps atheists do?

 

Did you ever stop to think that if **YOU** never posted Post #17, then Tram Law would have never posted anything to begin with?

$20 says that NEVER crossed your mind......I'll await your next anti-atheism rant and rave.

 

What is wrong with 17?

Is the mention of atheism in and of itself reason to start screaming, "TROLL, BAN HIM!!!!"

I'll bet you an Ranger Tab that never entered your mind - which is why, once again, you deliberately skipped the question to launch another emotional accusation based on double standards.

Tram Law is responsible for Tram law.

Now - thesis, supporting evidence, rebuttal of common criticism, and conclusion.

Its not hard for logical people to use that format and maintain a civil tone. Apparently, atheists need moderators to come in and make anyone stop talking about atheism? And if not - just attack them?

Downright athtarded isn't it?

Does it require a moderator to come here and FORCE you to behave like a grown up? Thesis, supporting evidence, rebuttal, conclusion.

 

The mere fact you came in here and mentioned Atheists in Post #17.

Which is consistant with I said in Post #23 and Tram said in Post #24.

Neutral, do you even read what is posted? Seriously do you?

 

In direct answer to your question at the bottom of your text: Some people do need such supervision. Others don't.

As for starting another thread. I would also love to see a thread where such civil conduct was the most prominent feature. Do you have any idea of where such a discussion can be found?

 

Personally I would like to find a thread where I can mention the word and its meaning is universally known with out a poster bring up dictionary definitions after dictionary definitions.

Do you have any idea of where such a thread can be found?

 

Why don't we try actaully quoting the entirety of the post.

Clearly, athtards are allowed to run around calling people delusional. Christians, however, in sharp contrast are NOT ALLOWED to call atheists running around acting morons anything at all or ask any questions about why so many atheists act like this? That is AUTOMATICALLY TROLLING - and subjected to any old emotional accusation ...

But NOT, once again a civil, respectful, unemotional rebuttal

Well, here is a question for the mods: can you infract someone for flame baiting themselves? For acting like a total jerk to get a rise out of people, and then flying off the handle when someone confronts them? Having just successfully incited themselves?

That is a particularly 'special' talent.

Thesis, supporting evidence, rebuttal, conclusion.

Why are atheists entitled to respect and dignity - but no one else? Why when treated EXACTLY as you treat others are you all screaming for mods and crying hysterically? Why are SO MANY so-called logical people unable to respond in a civil, rational, logical format?

 

Unfortunately, as you can see the atheist ALREADY getting emotional in the face of such a challenge, the answer is clearly no.

But that is a trolling dirty trick - to say, "Thesis, supporting evidence, rebuttal, conclusion."

 

No need to. You asked what was wrong with Post #17 I told you. The rest of the post has nothing to do with the question.

Nice Red Herring.

Show me where I mention the word "christian" in ANY post in this thread.

Conversly, I CANNOT find a post of yours that does NOT mention the word Atheism in this thread, yet this thread HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ATHEISM.....NOTHING.

And for the record, Atheism would include Atheists and the same goes for christian.

 

That, IMHO, would be an interesting title for a new thread, but the thread would have to meet with the standards of the TOS and also must be relevant to 'religion' (which in the United States would include atheism). Do you think that would be helpful in taking this current off-topic discussion to another area?

 

Agh, already changing goal posts.

Do you see why I have to continuously ask you atheists for a thesis statement?

Its everyone else who is a malicious troll though.

Thesis, supporting evidence, rebuttal, conclusion.

Not hard for logical people - do you need a moderator to come in and FORCE you to behave like an adult?

Its a simple challenge. Every atheist started out in response to this thread dismissing it as whining. Now, when challenged, within three posts they are ALL whining about how the bad Christian should be banned?

It is amazing thing to witness such obtuse human behavior - particularly from those who consider themselves logical.

Do you need a moderator to FORCE you to be civil? Why?

 

Probably, we just reduced another set of atheists into emotional accusation after THEY demanded civility and teh use of logic in assessment.

Should be simple - thesis, supporting evidence, rebuttal, conclusion.

No atheist will step up - but you cannot fault an atheist for it - that is trolling.

 

Then the originator (the person who coined that title -- Giftedone) was also being disrespectful in his original posting where that title was originally used. So go talk to that 'originator' of the title.

 

Your invitation here has a couple of faults to it. One is calling a group of people, or in this case, a subsection of that group, a type of retard and then demanding civility from them.

The other is the idea that there anything to debate in atheism itself. You could potentially debate whether the word means to passively not possess a belief in gods or to actively believe that no gods exist, but this is not much more than a preference and in two different athesists both may be true and applicable and don't alter either ones status as an atheist; neither one believes in the existence of a god, and that is all that atheism entails. Perhaps then, now you'd be interested in making the case that atheism is something more than just the lack of a belief in god(s)? You're perfectly entitled to, though I can say clearly this is wrong, and it will still not be a debate about atheism so much as us defending ourselves against accusations and bigotry and other false associations.

You want a civil exchange? Try being civil first. Calling people you disagree with '***** is not civil and does not merit civility in response.

You want an honest exchange? That's where everyone plays by the same rules, part of which include using the same language, and not one person demanding their meanings are the only correct ones and then further demanding that everyone obey them and crying foul when they don't.

You're probably going to say that these are not things you have done. Save it. You've done both. Repeatedly.

If you are genuinely interested in a civil exchange, by all means start one, and as long as I myself don't become the subject or object of your arguments, I will be happy to engage you on whatever topic you like to the best of my abilities. I'm certain several others here will also be happy to engage you under these terms as well. That is for the most part why we as individuals are gathered here correct?

Let me put it into terms everyone here should be able to relate to: treat others as you yourself wish to be treated. If anyone else is interested in such civil and respectful exchanges, please acknowledge as much with a response here. Thanks.

 

Once again you did not read what was posted.

Your whole premise in this thread is that atheists are incapable of 'respectful' debate, Yet YOU have knocked atheists in every single post in this thread. Every single one.

That is my whole point to my Post #23 and every single post directed at you since. Instead of realizing what I am posting, you are off on some tangent about how mods should come in here and force me to behave like and adult or force me to be civil. What are you even talking about at this point? I don't have a clue and nor does anyone else who has been following this thread.

 

The 'all seeing eye' of rstones199. Able to see cross country without the aid of any man made instrument and determine what a person has read and what a person has not read. Amazing. How do you KNOW that he did not read what was posted?