Judge: Iowa gay marriage ban unconstitutional

[Backstaber]

I tried looking for where Scuzzy said the word "hatred" recently. Didn't find it YomMamasHouse.

Contempt:

1. the feeling with which a person regards anything considered mean, vile, or worthless; disdain; scorn.
2. the state of being despised; dishonor; disgrace.
3. Law.
a. willful disobedience to or open disrespect for the rules or orders of a court (contempt of court) or legislative body.
b. an act showing such disrespect.

www.dictionary.com

Contempt =\= Hate

[Innoc]

YMH, you really need to work on your reading comprehension. I can only attribute your young age to that gap. First of all contempt and hatred are not synonyms so stay focused on what contempt actually means if you intend to criticize my comment. Secondly, I did not claim that the particular quote of ekiM that Scuzzy posted relating to me was evidence of his contempt. My point is that it was evidence of his pattern of doing nothing but bitch and nitpick without any worthwhile or meaningful exchange.

Now, with regard to reading scripture. As I recall in that thread I asked several times for what I stated about a particular passage to be intelligently refuted. It never was. Fact of the matter, the contempt you and ekiM routinely show for those of faith does not allow you to engage in intelligent and thoughtful discourse. That's a matter of public record here.

edit: Backstabber beat me to the punch...doh!

[Backstaber]

Originally Posted by Innoc

edit: Backstabber beat me to the punch...doh!

Backstaber

[FrenchToast]

Originally Posted by Innoc

My point is that it was evidence of his pattern of doing nothing but bitch and nitpick without any worthwhile or meaningful exchange.

Meh, sounds like that sums up every post in the whole thread, don't single ekiM for something like that.

[Innoc]

Originally Posted by FrenchToast

Meh, sounds like that sums up every post in the whole thread, don't single ekiM for something like that.

I agree.

[there's nothing here]

Well, you must be in contempt to hate something!

Or, vice versa.

He's not wrong!

But who cares.

[Zencheetah]

I love the people who add things that in their signatures after a thread that caused them pain, albit minor, mentally or physically depending on the type of person.

Like scuzzys, and I'm exaggerating here "Don't take what I say seriously (sarcasm) attack my clan (because it's been attacked a bunch due to its rules on this forum) and... blah blah blah I'm complaining without typing it, but damnit my signature makes me feel better at least"

Think, if you have to add that damn signature, then there must be something that you feel bad about or that you recognized happening all the time. If you don't feel anything about it, then think REALLY HARD about what you do on this wonderful internets of ours and ask yourself "Why does everything hate me to the point where I feel it's necessary to add something retarded to my signature?"

Someone who posted very recently just now made me think about it.

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by Zencheetah

I love the people who add things that in their signatures after a thread that caused them pain, albit minor, mentally or physically depending on the type of person.

Like scuzzys, and I'm exaggerating here "Don't take what I say seriously (sarcasm) attack my clan (because it's been attacked a bunch due to its rules on this forum) and... blah blah blah I'm complaining without typing it, but damnit my signature makes me feel better at least"

Think, if you have to add that damn signature, then there must be something that you feel bad about or that you recognized happening all the time. If you don't feel anything about it, then think REALLY HARD about what you do on this wonderful internets of ours and ask yourself "Why does everything hate me to the point where I feel it's necessary to add something retarded to my signature?"

Someone who posted very recently just now made me think about it.

I've had that line about attacking the clan in my signature for a loooooong time. That used to be the default attack when they didn't like what I said, once added they moved on to "pushing God", once I added that it became "you're ignoring my posts!"... blah blah blah. It's there to keep them thinking up new stuff.

In response to those who feel hate in their hearts for me:



booo freaking hoo.

Scuzzy

[Zencheetah]

Sigh, I'm done with you. No more from me. I'll let you pillow fight with the other brawlers.

[accrede]

Originally Posted by Innoc

Now, with regard to reading scripture. As I recall in that thread I asked several times for what I stated about a particular passage to be intelligently refuted. It never was.

What did you say? What post no. in what thread? I wanna have a look.

[halo]

You've apologized for making fun of Zen's personal description

He carried on doing it though in his stupid 7 point post. You could have added a whole mountain of hypocrisy to that list of condescension quotes.

[halo]

Originally Posted by Innoc

Fact of the matter, the contempt you and ekiM routinely show for those of faith does not allow you to engage in intelligent and thoughtful discourse. That's a matter of public record here.

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.

[YomMamasHouse]

Hmm more crotch punch insults Innoc, I guess will have to replace hatred with contempt. The point remains, ekiM does not have this CONTEMPT for Christians as a whole, he might have it for you but that is likely because you argue in a manner similar to Scuzzy. You answer questions with questions, commit ad hominum(or whatever latin word it was) fallacies by targeting the person instead of just giving their question or argument a response, and you like to make condescending insults at people but still have enough decency left to give people trouble for being insulting themselves.

And his arguments are not meaningless nitpickings, he has to break up your arguments into small parts because they lack the coherency that would allow for him to target them as a whole.

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by halo

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.

... but I'm not oppressing groups of people by forcing my marriage moralities upon them now am I? I'm not on a crusade.

Really, you have to find humor in the fact that the last, what, 14 pages have been the three or four of you attacking me? And it all started because I pointed out a character flaw in a few of you. Now that's insightful.

Scuzzy

[ekiM]

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

No, not really, I gave up being serious 10 pages back.

Oh, so you were just kidding when you tried to make out you aren't condescending. I guess it should have been obvious - no way you could claim that with a straight face.

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

Did you know you typed 5280 characters in that message? 943 words all devoted to little old (creepy) me.

Oh. And how much have you typed on this forum in the last few months? How much of it in "debate" threads? More than I.

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

That took a lot of time and attention.

I did give your post a little time and attention. You seem to have your little rallying cry backwards here. Keep up. You're trying to make out that I'm only responding to you because I crave attention. But here you're pointing out that I am giving you attention.

I know your accusation is totally vacuous - because any conversation is a two way street and, besides, if I had to name one person on this forum as an attention whore it would be you - but you could at least try and remember which way around the little dig you keep repeating goes. Poor show.

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

I don't need a bunch of quotes to clarify my claims that you bash Christians and are condescending, I can roll those puppies into one quote:

This should be good. Note : I didn't deny that I am often condescending. It is hard not to be, with people like you around.

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

Wow. Hard to know where to start here. Well, more accurately it's hard to proceed without being massively condescending; your example is so incredibly weak.

See the thing is Scuzzy, old boy, bashing someone who describes themselves as Christian is not the same thing as bashing Christians.

Understand?

I'm not even being condescending in that quote. Look it up. Suggesting that someone is not the best theologian on the planet is hardly implying his inferiority. In fact I don't see how that quote is even bashing Innoc, let alone Christians. I'm saying "Your opinion on what scripture says is not the be-all and end-all". You'd have to be hyper-sensitive to criticism to take that as a personal attack. Oh, right

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

And remember kids, when someone views your public MySpace profile, they're invading your privacy.

I'm sorry ekiM, I just can't take you seriously... you're way to funny.

Scuzzy
(Fear me, wear tin foil hats, I'm creepy)

Yeah, you've already made it clear that you don't think searching out a forum user's myspace page and making a copy is at all untoward. Everyone else who responded to that thread disagreed and you didn't even understand why. You agreed there is nothing to discuss here so drop it.

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by ekiM

Oh. And how much have you typed on this forum in the last few months? How much of it in "debate" threads? More than I.
...
You agreed there is nothing to discuss here so drop it.

There hasn't been anything relavent to a debate to discuss in this thread for 15 pages. Thanks for finally getting off your high horse.

Scuzzy

[Jifcuits]

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

There hasn't been anything relavent to a debate to discuss in this thread for 15 pages. Thanks for finally getting off your high horse.

Scuzzy

This is true, what is also true is that you have posted on every single one of those pages

[ekiM]

Originally Posted by Innoc

I don't know that I had seen that particular ekiM quote previously. He is a perfect example of people I fire after a week of working for me. He continually bitches but has no answers. Someone like that is worthless. It's a good example of why he is alone on my ignore list.

Because you can't stand accurate and pointed criticism? I recall why you put me back on your ignore list after the crash. It was during the thread on abortion. You said that all pro-choice people knew that abortion was murder and they were pretending they didn't for their convenience. I called you out on that astoundingly arrogant, stupid and close-minded statement. You put me back on ignore because you do not want to be called out on your shit.

Whereas you were on my ignore list before the crash for this little gem :

"Mike, you're deranged. This twisted "through the looking glass" interpretation of "history" you lay out is sad. I am glad that the Israeli's do not share the same view as you. Why don't you come out and just admit you hate the Jewish people?"

I wonder how that'd be recieved if you said that around the watercooler at work? How about "pro-choice people know that abortion is murder, you know"?

Originally Posted by Innoc

edit: Circ, ekiM's contempt for Christians is pretty obvious.

No, you're imagining it because it makes you feel better about my contempt for you. What's obvious is that you and Scuzzy cannot stand criticism and delude yourselves so that you don't have to give it any credence.

[ekiM]

Scuzzy, am I to take it that you don't feel up to explaining how what you quoted was condescending or anti-Christian? Probably because it wasn't, right? Ignoring the entire content of my post is a very astute debating tactic - given that you don't have a leg to stand on.

[ekiM]

Originally Posted by Innoc

YMH, you really need to work on your reading comprehension. I can only attribute your young age to that gap.

That's hillarious. You attribute his young age to his gap in reading comprehension? His young age is a result of the gap in his reading comprehension? That is the wrong way around. Hoisted on your own petard, old man.

Originally Posted by Innoc

First of all contempt and hatred are not synonyms so stay focused on what contempt actually means if you intend to criticize my comment. Secondly, I did not claim that the particular quote of ekiM that Scuzzy posted relating to me was evidence of his contempt. My point is that it was evidence of his pattern of doing nothing but bitch and nitpick without any worthwhile or meaningful exchange.

This post http://www.fortress-forever.com/foru...&postcount=145 is just nitpicking? Seriously, get your head out of your own ass dude. I made a long and detailed post about interpretation of scripture and moral absolutism. You responded with http://www.fortress-forever.com/foru...&postcount=162 which could be summed up as "TL;DR".

Originally Posted by Innoc

Now, with regard to reading scripture. As I recall in that thread I asked several times for what I stated about a particular passage to be intelligently refuted. It never was.

You never named a passage. You suggested that, instead of addressing the point that all interpretations of Christianity are subjective we should find some Biblical passages to argue subjectively about. It was an irrelevant attempt to derail the conversation.

Originally Posted by Innoc

Fact of the matter, the contempt you and ekiM routinely show for those of faith does not allow you to engage in intelligent and thoughtful discourse. That's a matter of public record here.

Fact of the matter is I show contempt for you and Scuzzy not for your faith but for your style of argument and the logical and factual content of your arguments. That you both claim to have faith is neither here nor there. That you both fantasise that I have contempt for those of faith does not make it so.