Strong Atheism starts from faith

[Edwardo Piet]

Evie... it was you that started with the [content removed] replies. You going over the same bullshit considered points that you've made to me personally, what... 50 times now(?) _yet again_ is nothing more than brain dead. We've done it to death... I've bent over backwards many times for you to repeat the same old line back at me. We even 'debated' it officially; and I stopped when the circle once more completed. We have nothing more to say to each other on the matter. Let it be and lets get on with enjoying the forum.

You're quite right I think, I do believe I did 'start with' that. I believe you may have also done it to be before in the past - but none of that is the point.

The point is that I was trying to explain how once more (from my perspective at least) you appear to have digressed from the previous post in your response and so haven't dealt with my points. I am sorry if it seemed rather impolite the way I did it with the '[content removed]' thing. But the difference with when you did it is that you did it, it seems, in order to not reply to all the points I made in my post. Furthermore, you seem to keep claiming that we've basically 'been all through this before', but the post that I made in which you used the 'content removed' to ignore my post was in fact stating that I disagree with you there. I believe that when we, according to you, 'went all over the matter', 'back and forth' or whatever - you have actually failed to be inconsistent in your claims and statements (from my perspective at least, that's why I'd like clarification) - or you'd just ignore or 'dodge' (whichever it may be) my posts altogether.

It was not at all that I was at all concerned with the fact you used '[content removed]' (as I did previously (and you may have done in the past before that but I'm not sure about that claim of mine, my memory is hazy on that matter)) - it was what you used 'content removed' for. I would have been just as 'concerned' (if that's the right word? Hm) if you'd have ignored or 'dodged' my posts altogether but not used '[content removed]'. I do not want this to get into silly matters of whoever used '[content removed]' first because I consider such matters to be, well, silly. That was not at all my point, as I hope I've made clear in this post.

Oh, one more thing.

I am enjoying this forum. And part of my enjoyment here comes from debating - and I do think it would be nice if you'd answer some of my points more often. You seem to be saying that you're ignoring them because we've 'been all through this before', but I disagree actually because I think the reason why we've 'been all through it' so much and so long round circles is because you ignore and/or 'dodge' my points. That's from my perspective of course. The other, additional, factor for why we've been 'going round and round' for so long I think, is that I'm so persistent with you (I believe).

EvF