Can anyone relate?

[LastPoet]

It may very well be, it the forum moderators deem it to be.

Personally I think that if I am banned for saying what I have said then everyone here who has ever cursed me or called me out of my name should be banned.

But alas, I do not make the rules.

You have a great lack of understanding abut many things, make reading comprehention another in your list. I was going to direct you to read the rules, but it seems pointless.

[discipulus]

Personally I think that if I am banned for saying what I have said then everyone here who has ever cursed me or called me out of my name should be banned.

Right, because being personally called insulting this is precisely the same as calling someone out by name to ask them (amongst other things) how they feel about being raped.

Oh wait, they're not. One is against the rules, the other is not. They differ in other subtle ways as well. Let's see if you can figure out how.

If what I wrote in my post was against the rules then I will be informed about it.

You see, what amazes me is that all of a sudden people are indignant at the allegory I wrote.

And yet no one is indignant when certain people here say what they do about little boys being raped by priests and venture to use obscenities to get their point across.

Spare me the guilt trip.

I have a hard time believing anyone here would be offended by what I wrote, considering how much horrid filth and garbage that is thrown around so casually here on an all too frequent basis and then sadly is seen as being funny.

Like I said, spare me.

---

It may very well be, it the forum moderators deem it to be.

Personally I think that if I am banned for saying what I have said then everyone here who has ever cursed me or called me out of my name should be banned.

But alas, I do not make the rules.

You have a great lack of understanding abut many things, make reading comprehention another in your list. I was going to direct you to read the rules, but it seems pointless.

Direct yourself. And next time spell "about" and "comprehension" correctly.

[*Deidre*]

Right, because being personally called insulting this is precisely the same as calling someone out by name to ask them (amongst other things) how they feel about being raped.

Oh wait, they're not. One is against the rules, the other is not. They differ in other subtle ways as well. Let's see if you can figure out how.

If what I wrote in my post was against the rules then I will be informed about it.

You see, what amazes me is that all of a sudden people are indignant at the allegory I wrote.

And yet no one is indignant when certain people here say what they do about little boys being raped by priests and venture to use obscenities to get their point across.

Spare me the guilt trip.

I have a hard time believing anyone here would be offended by what I wrote, especially not with as much filth and garbage that is thrown around so casually here on an all too frequent basis.

But, what does this have to do with me? I did nothing to you, except debate you (tactfully) in other threads. If you are offended by my replies, that is a different story.

As a Christian, if this was some form of 'retaliation' against me and what others have replied to you in other threads, you don't take your faith very seriously.

Actions speak louder than words.

Anyways...'nuff said.

[discipulus]

But, what does this have to do with me? I did nothing to you, except debate you (tactfully) in other threads. If you are offended by my replies, that is a different story.

As a Christian, if this was some form of 'retaliation' against me and what others have replied to you in other threads, you don't take your faith very seriously.

Actions speak louder than words.

Anyways...'nuff said.

I see clearly that good intent is not always sufficient to bring about a desired result.

Instead of encouraging the one who I have come to grow to love, I have instead been offensive.

Before you all and to you personally, I apologize Deidre. I beg your forgiveness.

[*Deidre*]

But, what does this have to do with me? I did nothing to you, except debate you (tactfully) in other threads. If you are offended by my replies, that is a different story.

As a Christian, if this was some form of 'retaliation' against me and what others have replied to you in other threads, you don't take your faith very seriously.

Actions speak louder than words.

Anyways...'nuff said.

I see clearly that good intent is not always sufficient to bring about a desired result.

Instead of encouraging the one who I have come to grow to love, I have instead been offensive.

Before you all and to you personally, I apologize Deidre. I beg your forgiveness.

Thank you, discipulus. Really. You don't know how far that goes.
Slate = wiped clean.

[discipulus]

Thank you, discipulus. Really. You don't know how far that goes.
Slate = wiped clean.

[*Deidre*]

Thank you for your pm, as well. Explaining the allegory.

I wish atheists and religious people didn't act like opponents. Now, that I'm on a different path...maybe I'm guilty of it, too, at times. :/

[discipulus]

Thank you for your pm, as well. Explaining the allegory.

I wish atheists and religious people didn't act like opponents. Now, that I'm on a different path...maybe I'm guilty of it, too, at times. :/

.......

lol..

[Rahul]

discipulus, I know where you're going with this. God doesn't force "himself" on us. I get it because I once preached it. But, I don't believe what you believe anymore.

For good reason.

Anyway!

That actually was not my point at all, but yes I would agree with what you said.

My point very simply is that love is something that must be freely given and freely received. Since the very nature of love requires this choice, it can be rejected or accepted. This applies to any relationship.

Hahaha.

This is sad. Speaking as a cured former Christian this is simply not an accurate analogy in the least.

The bible uses a very old technique to bind the victim to it. It teaches it's followers that they are weak, that they are sinners, that they are undeserving of god's grace.

That eternal torment in hell, a place that god himself created, is something we do to ourselves, even though he set up a binary choice to obey him and go to heaven or suffer there forever.

God is the classic abuser. Any psychiatrist can tell you how abusers break down their victims, make them feel like they are the reason the abuse happens, that they are worthless and undeserving of the magnanimity of the abuser. That only the abuser could ever care about the victim.

It's classic Stockholm Syndrome.

[Phatt Matt s]

lol...no, I'm not mad, I guess I just need to learn that when you treat people with kindness, that doesn't mean they will return it.

Oh well.

Treat some people with kindness and treat others with cattleprods.

Some need a high calibre lobotomy (this bit is NOT directed at discipulus).

As soon as I read lobotomy I knew you were talking about the necrophiliac son of a bitch!