RE: WELCOME TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER...
January 15, 2015 at 8:40 am
(This post was last modified: January 15, 2015 at 8:43 am by Huggy Bear.)
(January 15, 2015 at 3:51 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: You're arguing against something you don't understand, which is painfully obvious to everyone reading this thread. You can't just add 'it's coincidental' to your argument as though that suddenly absolves you of the utter tripe you've posted thus far on this thread, mate. It's ridiculous. I could talk to you about things like nominal ascription in religious/political demographics but it would go over your head. Also I could talk (Again) about how religious adherence has nothing to do with secularism, but that too is a very easy to understand point you've failed to get.
Keep on embarrassing yourself, though, it's funny. I want everyone to read this exchange and get as many chuckles as I have. So pass this thread around nappies if you can, please.
I put it to you that you can't define secularism because you don't know what it is. So, what, -10 now nappies? How low can you go?
nice filibuster!
Said all that without addressing anything in my last post, and still managing to bring up more irrelevant topics.
The point of this debate is if "secular states" tended to be happier than "non-secular states". I've proved by your own evidence that this statement is false, do you agree or disagree, that is the only question.
Not to mention your statement
(January 6, 2015 at 8:52 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: And you ignored that all the top 10 states are secular.was also wrong, when in fact 4 of those are non-secular/ambiguous.
(January 15, 2015 at 4:32 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: I'm still waiting for you to learn the difference between a study and a poll. Have you figured that out yet? I mean, I know it's a terribly difficult task, akin to the three-body-problem of physics, but I'm sure a genius such as yourself should be able to figure it out in a few days.
What's that? You'll need more time?
The fact is, you don't know what the difference is between the two. You don't know what the word "secular" means. And you don't even understand what this discussion is about.
SMH, again with the irrelevant topics. Like I said, a tactic straight out of Fidel's book. In case you missed it, the discussion was about whether or not secular societies tended to be happier, do you agree or disagree?
(January 15, 2015 at 4:32 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: I'd suggest silent consideration in order to ameliorate those defects, but clearly you're capable of neither silence nor thinking.Actually you should be going the other direction and proclaiming my genius, because basically, all your saying is that your argument was destroyed by an idiot....
I do have to hand it to Rhythm though, he is the first and only Atheist on this forum I've seen admit they were wrong.
Just concede defeat and move on dude...
