Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 8, 2011 at 4:41 am
(May 7, 2011 at 9:14 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:
(May 7, 2011 at 8:31 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Go fuck yourself.
How's that? And take fucking jesus with you.
He won didn't he?
No, he's dead.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 8, 2011 at 11:37 am
While rumbuggerylash posted something quite provoking, I must say that a lot of the more insulting replies just weren't that...impressive. His conclusion is also incorrect, but honestly, how do you think he would react to this sort of thing?
But what really annoys me is that rumbuggerylash has conveniently skipped over some of the replies here, which deserved some attention and an answer. Plus, there is enough proof on the internet in plenty of atrheist forum databases that religion did not stop certain religious persons from name calling and other vile behavior. It seems that religion or the lack thereof has little to do with such behavior. Hence my signature
I think that both sides lost, but both in a different way.
When I was a Christian, I was annoyed with dogmatic condescending Christians. Now that I'm an atheist, I'm annoyed with dogmatic condescending atheists. Just goes to prove that people are the same, regardless of what they do or don't believe.
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 8, 2011 at 12:28 pm
(May 8, 2011 at 11:37 am)Girlysprite Wrote: While rumbuggerylash posted something quite provoking, I must say that a lot of the more insulting replies just weren't that...impressive. His conclusion is also incorrect, but honestly, how do you think he would react to this sort of thing?
But what really annoys me is that rumbuggerylash has conveniently skipped over some of the replies here, which deserved some attention and an answer. Plus, there is enough proof on the internet in plenty of atrheist forum databases that religion did not stop certain religious persons from name calling and other vile behavior. It seems that religion or the lack thereof has little to do with such behavior. Hence my signature
I think that both sides lost, but both in a different way.
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 8, 2011 at 12:55 pm
(May 8, 2011 at 9:37 am)fr0d0 Wrote:
(May 8, 2011 at 3:08 am)Chuck Wrote: A man without religion might have ditched the tattoos and left himself with a face, fr0d0.
Boring man
Wait..that avatar is actually your picture? All kiding aside, if that is your pic... is that real tats, or did you put face pain on to look like a sith lord?
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 8, 2011 at 1:50 pm
(May 8, 2011 at 1:04 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: Theres a new sherif in town and the name is girlysprite.
so stop your cussin you bad bad boys.
I'm not wasting a fuckin' skill I learned from 20 years in the Navy just to keep some monkey-raping blue noses from having to stick their heads up their ass to avoid seeing any cocksucking dirty words.
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 8, 2011 at 2:35 pm
(May 8, 2011 at 12:55 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: Wait..that avatar is actually your picture? All kiding aside, if that is your pic... is that real tats, or did you put face pain on to look like a sith lord?
No Rev
But if I were ever to get a tattoo the Maori style is one I'd get. That's a real tat.
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 8, 2011 at 3:29 pm
(May 8, 2011 at 11:37 am)Girlysprite Wrote: While rumbuggerylash posted something quite provoking, I must say that a lot of the more insulting replies just weren't that...impressive. His conclusion is also incorrect, but honestly, how do you think he would react to this sort of thing?
No. Just no. If there was a whoosh sound loud enough to represent your missing the point, we'd all be torn apart from the vorticies and eddy currents.
In my short time here, I've seen many visitors. Some members here have been around for far, far longer and seen more. That said, this.... thing that waltzed in to Atheistforums.org matched the profile of other flamers, trolls and abusers. Remember Godhead anyone? He was far more innocuous then this turd and we all saw how badly that entire affair turned out to be.
"Rumbuggerylash" is an interesting name. Were I to assume that he was here on good will, then I'd expect to see some of these criteria matched: good humor (perhaps in explaining his name?), answering posts, telling us more about himself, etc,.
I saw none of that. Ergo, he is classified as a troll. Until he shows different, he will remain under close watch. And hope his "God" helps him if we see a smidgen more troll than already seen.
(May 8, 2011 at 11:37 am)Girlysprite Wrote: But what really annoys me is that rumbuggerylash has conveniently skipped over some of the replies here, which deserved some attention and an answer. Plus, there is enough proof on the internet in plenty of atrheist forum databases that religion did not stop certain religious persons from name calling and other vile behavior. It seems that religion or the lack thereof has little to do with such behavior. Hence my signature
I love how you pass judgement, after conviniently ignoring certain things on the internet that nearly any savvy user would be quick to notice. It's a little thing called trolling.
Instead, I have seen you routinely chastise members with far, far greater a record here and respect for their justifiable annoyance at dealing with the next "atheists are evil" crazy.
Who the fuck are you to play sheriff?
(May 8, 2011 at 11:37 am)Girlysprite Wrote: I think that both sides lost, but both in a different way.
If Rumbuggerylash were to depart forever, never to return, I will be the first one to say,
"And nothing of value was lost."
Just because we're open minded doesn't mean we have to deal with stupid bullshit repeated ad nauseam, and we certainly don't have to tolerate some prick waltzing in and expelling oral diarrhea.
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 8, 2011 at 3:49 pm
(May 8, 2011 at 3:29 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote:
(May 8, 2011 at 11:37 am)Girlysprite Wrote: While rumbuggerylash posted something quite provoking, I must say that a lot of the more insulting replies just weren't that...impressive. His conclusion is also incorrect, but honestly, how do you think he would react to this sort of thing?
No. Just no. If there was a whoosh sound loud enough to represent your missing the point, we'd all be torn apart from the vorticies and eddy currents.
In my short time here, I've seen many visitors. Some members here have been around for far, far longer and seen more. That said, this.... thing that waltzed in to Atheistforums.org matched the profile of other flamers, trolls and abusers. Remember Godhead anyone? He was far more innocuous then this turd and we all saw how badly that entire affair turned out to be.
"Rumbuggerylash" is an interesting name. Were I to assume that he was here on good will, then I'd expect to see some of these criteria matched: good humor (perhaps in explaining his name?), answering posts, telling us more about himself, etc,.
I saw none of that. Ergo, he is classified as a troll. Until he shows different, he will remain under close watch. And hope his "God" helps him if we see a smidgen more troll than already seen.
(May 8, 2011 at 11:37 am)Girlysprite Wrote: But what really annoys me is that rumbuggerylash has conveniently skipped over some of the replies here, which deserved some attention and an answer. Plus, there is enough proof on the internet in plenty of atrheist forum databases that religion did not stop certain religious persons from name calling and other vile behavior. It seems that religion or the lack thereof has little to do with such behavior. Hence my signature
I love how you pass judgement, after conviniently ignoring certain things on the internet that nearly any savvy user would be quick to notice. It's a little thing called trolling.
Instead, I have seen you routinely chastise members with far, far greater a record here and respect for their justifiable annoyance at dealing with the next "atheists are evil" crazy.
Who the fuck are you to play sheriff?
(May 8, 2011 at 11:37 am)Girlysprite Wrote: I think that both sides lost, but both in a different way.
If Rumbuggerylash were to depart forever, never to return, I will be the first one to say,
"And nothing of value was lost."
Just because we're open minded doesn't mean we have to deal with stupid bullshit repeated ad nauseam, and we certainly don't have to tolerate some prick waltzing in and expelling oral diarrhea.
Some people have the need of maintaining a moral high ground, for purpuses only known to themselves Syn. Its a power trip
