(June 20, 2013 at 12:30 pm)John V Wrote: Of course, as you have tiger blood. WINNING!Not sure what the tiger blood is a reference to but when you lose an argument, there's always appeals to ridicule, it would seem.
Quote:As already noted: the distinctions between religious and civil aspects of religious morality are clear and don’t cause confusion; and, secular morality also has victimless offenses such as public nudity.Still waiting for you to justify the increased and confusing complexity that religious-based morality dumps on top of the issues of secular morality. No more red herring evasion for you. Your options are:
1. Answer the challenge or
2. Concede point #1
Quote:Special pleading.You and Frodo love to bandy around terms that describe logical fallacies but don't seem to understand what they mean.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist