Religion

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)

57. I'm sure this is going to be far too nuanced for you, but here it goes

Fri Sep 14, 2012, 08:57 AM

Sep 2012

You said "their only fight" is to exclude Christians. That indicates a MUCH DIFFERENT mind set than saying that inclusion is a lie (still disagree with that position greatly). Additionally, you did not denounce the bullshit position of the ACLJ as was done in the post above.

Those two things make it pretty clear that you are coming at this from a position of privilege whereas the other isn't. Add to that the posting history of the two of you and it is crystal clear.

And for the 4 years I competed in and the 15 years I coached college debate, one of my specialties was definitional arguments, so, come at me, bro, I'd love to discuss definitions with you.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

67 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Atheists continue battle against World Trade Center cross at memorial [View all] rug Sep 2012 OP

lol MrDiaz Sep 2012 #1

Are they going to include the crescent moon symbol of the Islam? How about the Star of David? rfranklin Sep 2012 #2

Were any of those things found in the rubble? Did any of those things take on cbayer Sep 2012 #11

I doubt any one would have noticed them. JoePhilly Sep 2012 #51

Who said anything a bout a god *allowing* or *leaving* anything. cbayer Sep 2012 #52

You suggested it. JoePhilly Sep 2012 #53

I in no way suggested that. If that is what you read, then I wasn't clear. cbayer Sep 2012 #54

Put it in the Museum, not at the Memorial HockeyMom Sep 2012 #3

It is at the museum. cbayer Sep 2012 #8

So an article with no new information published on Sept 10 Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #4

It gets his post count up... rexcat Sep 2012 #5

It's not my lawsuit. rug Sep 2012 #7

I didn't say it was... rexcat Sep 2012 #12

You did respond to him but you made the usual snide comment about me. rug Sep 2012 #14

Substance? See post 13. rexcat Sep 2012 #17

I did and it has no substance. rug Sep 2012 #18

This country and New York City in particular... rexcat Sep 2012 #20

I don't disagree with anything you wrote, with one exception. rug Sep 2012 #27

I will respectfully disagree with you... rexcat Sep 2012 #29

It's 9/11. rug Sep 2012 #6

No shit, Capt Obvious. Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #10

Yes shit, Capt. Persecuted. rug Sep 2012 #15

I'll talk about it whenever you want Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #16

I'll discuss it when you're in a less friable state. rug Sep 2012 #19

Maybe you can stop being passive aggressive about it Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #21

Maybe you can stop imputing motives to others that suit your world view. rug Sep 2012 #24

Then do tell. Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #30

What would the atheist group like displayed? They don't say. cbayer Sep 2012 #9

The "cross" is an aberration of the wreakage... rexcat Sep 2012 #13

My favorite line in the article "This case is about inclusion,....of everyone." Leontius Sep 2012 #22

For somebody who claims to not understand privilege Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #31

Sorry I couldn't stop the airplanes... onager Sep 2012 #23

Gee, God sounds so bitter and small. rug Sep 2012 #25

And you accuse me and others having no substance... rexcat Sep 2012 #26

I just responded to #20. rug Sep 2012 #28

Thanks! Nice to see you and Pat Robertson fighting Evil Atheists together. onager Sep 2012 #32

If that's what you see, you should have something checked. rug Sep 2012 #33

Do you distance yourself from the ACLJ? Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #34

Oh, please. rug Sep 2012 #35

I notice you didn't answer the question. Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #36

It's an insulting question, as well as a stupid one. rug Sep 2012 #37

No idea why it is insulting, but, here, I'll answer it first: Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #38

Let me see, why on earth is this insulting? rug Sep 2012 #39

If you answer the question Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #40

You really are in no position to bargain with me. rug Sep 2012 #41

I'm not bargaining with you. Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #42

No, you're not. rug Sep 2012 #43

Still no answer, huh? Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #44

"on record" rug Sep 2012 #45

Why would I need to guess? Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #46

Do you honestly not know the answer? rug Sep 2012 #47

I oppose the atheists on this one Fortinbras Armstrong Sep 2012 #48

So you support "Christian privilege" according to Leontius Sep 2012 #49

Nope that isn't privilege Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #50

Yes sir you are a real . Leontius Sep 2012 #55

I'm sure this is going to be far too nuanced for you, but here it goes Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #57

Which part of "the ACLJ argument is also bogus" do you have difficulty with? Fortinbras Armstrong Sep 2012 #56

Which part of the ACLJ argument do you think is bogus? cbayer Sep 2012 #58

From the article Goblinmonger Sep 2012 #59

This bit Fortinbras Armstrong Sep 2012 #61

I agree that that is bogus. cbayer Sep 2012 #62

Rev Brian Jordan Leontius Sep 2012 #67

Don't know anything about the ACLJ argument from this article Leontius Sep 2012 #66

Persecution! mr blur Sep 2012 #60

Except it's not theists here claiming persecution and filing a lawsuit. rug Sep 2012 #65

Look, the murderers didn't attack Christians on 9/11, they attacked Americans. mr blur Sep 2012 #63

If the symbol which you offer had been discovered in the rubble and become a central cbayer Sep 2012 #64