Quote:
Originally Posted by rebeccablack
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
you're actually kind of bad at reading other peoples' posts and responding to their actual points. instead you just kind of insert whatever non sequitur gets you to the point you'd like to make, which makes having a discussion with you pretty difficult since you don't actually respond to people. i'm sure it feels to you like you win every argument though.
|
No I just disagree with what he said, and already answered it in that way, so what is the point in saying it again to what he's already said before? He just doesn't like me calling atheism a religion or a different view of atheism than he has. So how long do we sit doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result? You want links or something? Plenty of pages that detail it out easily found with google, some points I have already shared here (as I just now read these), and while trying to keep it somewhat in the political/geopolitical realm as is the thread topic.
Differrent views:
http://reason.com/archives/2012/03/1...-is-a-religion
http://strangenotions.com/is-atheism-a-religion/
http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_is_a_religion
But yeah, I don't simply define atheism by the name, but the action. Not of all, but by it's core membership. Just like progressive-liberalism, plenty of useful idiots just there for their important use, keeping the faith alive by power of the vote/s etc.
edit: lol now I get walls of text on how to write. It will never be acceptable until I accept your view. If you know it's a cesspool, and want to be different, then why write in cesspool terms? I write fine. ...be it condensed, but legible. Attack the post, not the poster, be less cesspooly like then
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I don't expect to change your mind here an now, not how males function. Males are slow to change, which is a strength of the gender.