Judge: Iowa gay marriage ban unconstitutional

[there's nothing here]

A PLAGUE ON BOTH YOUR HOUSES!!

[Innoc]

Originally Posted by halo

If it's public record it shouldn't be hard for you to get a quote or two together to prove then because I just don't remember that happening. From what I've read ekiM is one of the most intelligent forum members and extremely good at critical reasoning. What doesn't allow people to "engage in intelligent and thoughtful discourse" is more to do with them. He can be very critical but he doesn't lower the tone.

He does jump on Scuzzy a lot, as do I, not because he's a Christian but because he's supremely ignorant, hypocritical, patronising and has no capacity for logical thought but is also very opinionated. He's not picking away at nothing when he has a go at Scuzzy, he's picking at the above character flaws and the massive wholes in Scuzzoid arguments.

To what end do we belabor this fight? Look a few posts up and see those that don't seem to understand the clear difference between "contempt" and "hatred". ekiM lacks a very critical component of effective communication and that is the element of acknowledgment. His posts commonly demonstrate that. BTW, looking up the dictionary definition of the word is, likely, not going to help you. Even more fun is the fact that males do not, typically, grasp this concept intuitively. Most often I find that those who say they do not see that are either hold sympathetic views and cheer his attacks or are those for whom this nuance escapes them. Many of you appear to not like Scuzzy so I see the cheering as Gladiatorial bloodlust. He's attacking someone you cast in the light of a villian so it helps cloud your ability to see him objectively. Sure he makes mistakes and stupid comments sometimes. We all do.

[ekiM]

Originally Posted by Innoc

ekiM lacks a very critical component of effective communication and that is the element of acknowledgment. His posts commonly demonstrate that. BTW, looking up the dictionary definition of the word is, likely, not going to help you. Even more fun is the fact that males do not, typically, grasp this concept intuitive

Here's a good example of someone not practicing acknowledgement : In a debate on abortion, a pro-lifer claims that pro-choicers know that abortion is murder and are just trying to rationalize what they know is evil. That's not even ignoring what someone is saying - it is ignoring the possiblity that anyone who disagrees with you could possibly be being reasonable.

Originally Posted by Innoc

Most often I find that those who say they do not see that are either hold sympathetic views and cheer his attacks or are those for whom this nuance escapes them. Many of you appear to not like Scuzzy so I see the cheering as Gladiatorial bloodlust. He's attacking someone you cast in the light of a villian so it helps cloud your ability to see him objectively. Sure he makes mistakes and stupid comments sometimes. We all do.

And I find that both you and Scuzzy are utterly incapable of accepting harsh criticism and prefer to pretend to yourself that the person criticising you is being unreasonable.

[halo]

Look a few posts up and see those that don't seem to understand the clear difference between "contempt" and "hatred".

The meaning of those two words is similar, besides, he posted an accurate dictionary definition of the word 'contempt' (the word that was used originally.) Arguing that it's not the same as hatred is beside the point. The point was that ekiM doesn't demonstrate anything fulfilling that definition towards Christians.

[Innoc]

Originally Posted by halo

The meaning of those two words is similar, besides, he posted an accurate dictionary definition of the word 'contempt' (the word that was used originally.) Arguing that it's not the same as hatred is beside the point. The point was that ekiM doesn't demonstrate anything fulfilling that definition towards Christians.

The only person I say posting a "dictionary definition" was Backstaber and it was my impression that he did so to illustrate that people did not understand the word. Hatred and contempt are not equivalent. If you cannot understand the difference then it's unlikely you understood the point being made when I commented on that.

So you either don't see it or you choose not to see it. Either way, why belabor this? We don't agree now and may never agree at any point. What value is there in continuing?

[halo]

Somebody said that ekiM showed contempt towards Christians so Backstaber posted a definition of the word 'contempt' and asked that you would demonstrate how ekiM showed anything that fits that definition towards Christians.

The idea originally seems to have been to discredit ekiM by claiming he had a prejudice against Christians. However the idea was flawed in that it was not true.

[ekiM]

Originally Posted by Innoc

So you either don't see it or you choose not to see it. Either way, why belabor this? We don't agree now and may never agree at any point. What value is there in continuing?

If my prejudice against Christians weren't a figment of your imagination you could end this rather quickly by posting a handful of quotations that prove your point.

Presumably halo believes that if the facts of your delusion are presented to you frequently enough you may snap out of it. I commend him for his unbounded optimism.

[YomMamasHouse]

Have it your way Innoc, keep pressing the definition thing. I am going to do something shocking.

I admit it, I made mistake, I hastily confused two words with absolutely different meanings, worlds and worlds apart. It was foolish to think that a human being could implicitly link the contempt you mentioned and the word "hate" I used between your posts and mine Innoc. Now that I have made that mistake I will fix it, I have read the definition of contempt. I am now going to rephrase my question and use the word contempt so you and the rest of the forum-goers can follow the logic in it, because it is an important question to a bold accusation.

Innoc, when has ekiM shown contempt for Christians as a whole? He has shown contempt for you and Scuzzy no doubt, but where has he shown this for Christians as a whole?

Scuzzy you can answer this as well since you used that quote he made as an example of his contempt for Christians. We have given you our explanations for what he was saying and I feel they are quite fair , he never once mentioned Christians as a whole, that was between him and Innoc, telling Innoc that he is not the most correct interpreter of the scripture.

[ekiM]

Innoc has quite cheerfully accused me of anti-semitism for no reason whatsoever before. I guess this is more of the same kind of thing. He's a fuckwit.

[Innoc]

YMH, see post 425 above. Explain to me the value in belaboring this issue. I don't see any. It's nothing more than tedious polarized bickering.

[ekiM]

What Innoc means is that he cannot come up with any evidence that I am prejudiced against Christians. At least he had the balls to apologize for calling me anti-semitic when he realised that shit wouldn't fly. I guess he's getting even worse in his old age.

[YomMamasHouse]

The value comes from the fact that you accused ekiM of being contemptuous towards Christians as a whole. I, along with others, say that is garbage, and we want you to support that claim. We believe the reason you say that is because he has contempt for you and are confusing that with being some sort of pan-Christian contempt so if you provide reasoning we can resolve it. I don't think we should just drop it, you are not above hounding people on proving something like that yourself, and you shouldn't be because claims like that are rather serious.

[Deadly Furby]

Gentlemen, this is going nowhere. Please start a new thread and call it "the reason I don't like" (insert forum member names here). "the reason I hold (insert forum member names here) in contempt"

And, don't forget to re-familiarize yourself with: This is a flame free forum - READ THIS BEFORE POSTING!



Edited in respect of YomMamasHouse comments below.

[YomMamasHouse]

FURBY HOLD IT RIGHT THERE. Don't confuse not linking with contempt. They might be very similar, but that would completely throw off anyone trying read your post. No one here doesn't like anyone else, they just hold them in contempt.

[Innoc]

Originally Posted by YomMamasHouse

The value comes from the fact that you accused ekiM of being contemptuous towards Christians as a whole. I, along with others, say that is garbage, and we want you to support that claim. We believe the reason you say that is because he has contempt for you and are confusing that with being some sort of pan-Christian contempt so if you provide reasoning we can resolve it. I don't think we should just drop it, you are not above hounding people on proving something like that yourself, and you shouldn't be because claims like that are rather serious.

That's not enough YMH. What you're describing only furthers the pointless bickering. This is not the first time this has been argued. You either can't or won't see it and given your personal history and professed views I believe it's the latter. We don't agree and won't agree. But, by all means continue your sad attempt to get in the last word and to pretend that you occupy some high moral ground.

[Innoc]

Originally Posted by YomMamasHouse

FURBY HOLD IT RIGHT THERE. Don't confuse not linking with contempt. They might be very similar, but that would completely throw off anyone trying read your post. No one here doesn't like anyone else, they just hold them in contempt.

Yeah, that says it all right there. Petty, very petty.

[halo]

The fact is if you make a serious accusation against someone then you'd better be prepared to prove it, otherwise you should keep quiet. I would say you can either prove he shows contempt towards Christians, you can apologise or you can be a slanderer.

[YomMamasHouse]

No it isn't pointless Innoc, now it is actually going to become good because we are talking on the same level. Now that we cleared up the inconsistency between my post and yours, ie one word, we can talk on the same level and address the fact that you think ekiM hat... i mean disli.... hold Christians in general in contempt.

[Innoc]

Originally Posted by halo

The fact is if you make a serious accusation against someone then you'd better be prepared to prove it, otherwise you should keep quiet. I would say you can either prove he shows contempt towards Christians, you can apologise or you can be a slanderer.

Go find the other threads and read them. You will either see it or you will not. Like I said, it was evident enough to several others to either comment on it in those threads or to PM me. If you think it's important then do your own research.

[halo]

You made the accusation, the onus is on you to prove it otherwise you are a slanderer and should apologise. Your repeated refusal to do so leads me to believe that you can't.