Why Richard Dawkins should debate Christians

[smax]

... and despite the fact I went on to point it out, you still missed it.



What you have read as an attempt on my part to 'appear suporior' is socratic questioning. By attempting to get you to consider what you mean when you say we must 'preserve' our 'shared humanity', I am illuminating the Judao/Christian anthropocentrism that lies behind your statement.

It's not a contradiction.



You assumed incorrectly. Perhaps you should not try to 'read between' lines and pay more attention to what's actually in them.

Just because you used the words Judao/Christian and Liberal Humanism, doesn't mean that you made a valid point. As I said from the start, it's just a ridiculous and baseless presumption on your part.

And, your observations are not direct, therefore, all one can do is attempt to read between the lines.

Even at that, you are making poor use of words to indirectly imply your wild presumptions.

Not to be too bold here, but I find your approach to be cowardly. You are clearly affraid to speak plainly about what you think. And, while you probably think that makes you appear clever, it actually just causes many of your points to get lost.

Just an observation. But, unlike yours, at least I was able to provide some examples of how mine are AT LEAST based on something.

You still have yet to support yours.