(July 4, 2009 at 1:21 am)Tiberius Wrote: If you are going to be a member here, you are not going to fling unfounded accusations of blackmail at people for no reason.
I think you were taking me a little too seriously, Adrian. I found Dotard's remark amusing; the "blackmail" remark was tongue-in-cheek, underscored by the tantrum reference. Not exactly serious, there. But if atheists are allowed to mock theists yet not vice-versa (whether an actual rule or an unspoken policy), I will keep that in mind. I've seen stranger rules on other forums but I abide by them.
(July 4, 2009 at 1:21 am)Tiberius Wrote: ... since you are seemingly unwilling to answer any of our questions about your beliefs ...
Well this is bullshit. I haven't answered every single question, but to suggest I haven't answered any at all ("unwilling to answer any") is simply false. Some I have answered already, others I refused to answer with stated reasons, and still others I said I'll probably answer later if I find a thread the question is related to and falls within my interests.
At any rate, to conclude that I was not a real atheist based on the fact that I haven't described my conversion experience is illegitimate at best.
(July 4, 2009 at 1:21 am)Tiberius Wrote: As for your comment about this being "completely inappropriate" for Rhizomorph's intro thread, please explain how this was any less inappropriate:
Because my comment addressed a topic, not a person. If there is something wrong with me addressing the Genetic Fallacy in Rhizomorph's thread, is there something wrong with padraic addressing the 'tu quoque' fallacy in my thread? However, for Dotard to address me and my beliefs in Rhizomorph's thread seems rather inappropriate because (i) it's a thread about Rhizomorph, not me; moreover, (ii) a thread about me exists.
Any thoughts?
Man is a rational animal who always loses his temper when
called upon to act in accordance with the dictates of reason.
(Oscar Wilde)
called upon to act in accordance with the dictates of reason.
(Oscar Wilde)
