Quote:I am fully aware that my ability to convey understanding is lacking. I am not perfect and can not do ANYTHING perfectly.
Then why get so condescending when people do not agree/understand you? I have to reiterate that your powers of communication would be improved exponentially if you used established definitions to communicate. It is simply one of the fundamentals of language that make it possible for people to communicate.
Quote:Furthermore, I get that I may sound preachy. I am arguing for truth. I will continue to argue for truth at my own peril.
Okay, you are arguing for what you think is the truth. If your goal is to argue for this position, you really need to work on your evidence and delivery. The way you go from one assertion to the next is often flawed and under-thought. Note: Saying the same mistaken thing over and over again does not help. Universal constants are not what you think they are, try a new phrase. Religion is not a single belief, even if atheism were a belief. Religion does not mean club nor are all atheists in a club. Some don't even talk to other atheists. All of these things are fact, acke. I am not in the business of spouting what I believe as fact to "win" an argument. I assure you, the above is truth. You have to find a way to move on from the misunderstandings you possess.
Quote:If you deny truth at the outset I will invariably sound preachy, like I am trying to force something on you. If I say the sky is blue and you say it is red and I persist, I will sound preachy.
No, no, no. This is where your impressions are askew. No one has a problem with you saying the sky is red or blue. In fact, if you said, "I believe the sky is red," people would simply tell you it is not, but you are entitled to your beliefs. If you leave out the believe part of it, that is when we run into problems. You are asserting an opinion based on beliefs as fact. Now, you can prove the sky is blue by telling anyone of us to look up. You have yet to prove your beliefs are facts. Therefore, you can hardly assert them as facts and call people ignorant for not agreeing with you. It is beyond childish and it is, again, unacceptable in debate.
Quote:Unfortunately, I am not willing to desist in my assertion that the sky is blue until someone logically shows me how the sky is not blue and will continue offering argument to how the sky is blue and not red until i have convincing reason no longer to assert such. I am not arguing "why", I am arguing "how".
How can someone logically tell you something if your idea of logic consists of using whatever definitions suit your goal? Here is the thing, acke. You are drawing conclusions based on nothing but the fact that you believe there is a god. You assert those conclusions and then attempt to form an argument behind it. You should take the steps through evidence and observation before asserting your conclusions. Furthermore, you should never, ever regurgitate stuff you hear from other theists unless you understand what they are saying. I believe, and I may be mistaken, that you heard another theist use the term "universal constant" in an argument that you found impressive. You are now using it to describe anything a person believes exists. You can't do that an expect people to go along with you. If you are going to spout nonsense, you have to be persuasive. All persuasive speakers have good vocabularies. Work on yours. I don't mean that to be rude. I'm being utterly sincere.
Quote:I am not trying to get anyone to change their beliefs, I couldn't if I wanted to. I am simply trying to get people to understand the implications of having beliefs by challenging them through logical argument.
I'm sorry, but you dropped the ball on the logical part. Logic suggests a sort of order, an expectation of evidence and clarity, if you will. You cannot have that when you use whatever term you think sounds good and adjust it to suit your argument. It takes the order out of things. You cannot have logic from chaos. This is why none of us feel challenged. Having a fly buzz you is not challenging; it is annoying.
Quote:Refusal to attempt at understand is ignorance.
Again, you misuse words so much it is impossible to converse with you. I am making a very big attempt at patience right now. You are challenging that, at least. Ignorance is not a refusal to attempt to understand something. Ignorance is not knowing or understanding something for just about any reason. Now, the above statement is also operating under the assumption that people are refusing to attempt to understand you. That is not the case. As you admitted above, you are not conveying your message very well. Therefore, it is logical to assume that people either A. understand your perfectly and simply disagree with you or B. do not understand what you are saying due to a communication failure probably brought on by misused words.
Note: Calling people ignorant is just as rude as calling someone an asshole or a cunt. They are just words. Let it be known that you have been calling people ignorant for days. I won't be surprised if you go on a rampage calling everyone here ignorant meanies that use foul language, as just about everyone with your modus operandi has done the same. That is why I want to make it clear now that you are being a cunt by calling people ignorant. You are no longer in any place to deserve respect as far as personal insults mixed with arguments. If you tone it the fuck down and actually try to converse politely, I am sure the people here will follow suit.
