'Nothing beyond the constructs to cover the abyss...

[loCAtek]

No worries, Sean equates answering atheist or theist, to full name and date of birth; while arguing almost extensively the atheist position.

Apples and orangutans comparison really, to evade debate.

[Sean]

Actually I equate one request for personal information that I don't (understandably) wish to share with you with another request for personal information that you obviously (and understandably) don't wish to share with me.

Do you understand what the word 'personal' means?

And what would you know about debate?

[loCAtek]

Then why are debating personally related issues as if you had stake in them?


If you have a stake, what is it? And why you bring it up as a debate point?

[Sean]

Then why are debating personally related issues as if you had stake in them?


If you have a stake, what are they?

Could you try posting that in English please?

[Scooter]

That might be difficult looking thru the bottom of one's tenth bottle of beer.

[loCAtek]

Not answered;

Very well, I'm a Buddhist, thanks for asking; and you are ...?

[loCAtek]

Could you try posting that in English please?

Why did you bring up

You [Sean] wrote;

Where did I ever claim to be an atheist? I presume to speak for nobody, be they theist or non-theist, but myself.

If you did not feel it was relevant? Are you therefore theist or non-theist?

[Sean]

Then why are debating personally related issues as if you had stake in them?


If you have a stake, what is it? And why you bring it up as a debate point?

Interesting... your edit isn't tagged as such.

Are you really asking what my stake is in my personal information?
I mean, seriously? With a straight face and everything?

[loCAtek]

Granted, if you are neither theist nor non-theist, how do you describe yourself?

[loCAtek]

Yes

[loCAtek]

I'm interested in the debate, and you've made it contingent upon your atheist/non-theist position.

[Sean]

Could you try posting that in English please?

Why did you bring up

You [Sean] wrote;

Where did I ever claim to be an atheist? I presume to speak for nobody, be they theist or non-theist, but myself.

If you did not feel it was relevant? Are you therefore theist or non-theist?

To answer your first question:

I didn't bring it up. You did when you posted this:

Also as an atheist, how is it you presume to speak for theists?

I simply asked why you assumed that I was an aetheist.

To answer your second question:

It's none of your fucking business Loca!

[Sean]

I'm interested in the debate, and you've made it contingent upon your atheist/non-theist position.

No, YOU have. You are the one asking for that information. I have never troubled you or anybody else here by demanding to know their religious beliefs.

[Scooter]

Why did you bring up

You [Sean] wrote;

Where did I ever claim to be an atheist? I presume to speak for nobody, be they theist or non-theist, but myself.

If you did not feel it was relevant?

HE did not bring it up. YOU brought it up by asking him:

Also as an atheist, how is it you presume to speak for theists?

to which he replied with the statement you quoted above.

Now, are you going to continue to accuse Sean of introducing the subject of his belief/non-belief into this thread, or are you finally going to be an adult and admit that it was YOU who did so, and who have been trying to pin it on him ever since in order to justify your continuing intrusive questions into his personal life?

I was joking in the other thread, but have you really gone back on the sauce? Because NOTHING else would explain how you are behaving.

[loCAtek]

Very well, I can only assume/respond to your public support of atheistic beliefs.


Countering my responses with Non sequiturs, is therefore irrelevant.

ThX for the clarification, I'll carry on with relevant debate.

[Sean]

To use your technique...

Very well, I can only assume/respond to your public support of atheistic beliefs.


Countering my responses with Non sequiturs, is therefore irrelevant.

ThX for the clarification, I'll carry on with relevant debate. Oh bugger! I find myself in a position where even the use of the word 'strawman' won't save me. Therefore I'll try to chuck in some big words I don't understand and hope that nobody notices how much of a moron I am.

Fixed it for ya!

[Scooter]

[loCAtek]

To use your technique...

Very well, I can only assume/respond to your public support of atheistic beliefs.


Countering my responses with Non sequiturs, is therefore irrelevant.

ThX for the clarification, I'll carry on with relevant debate. Oh bugger! I find myself in a position where even the use of the word 'strawman' won't save me. Therefore I'll try to chuck in some big words I don't understand and hope that nobody notices how much of a moron I am.

Fixed it for ya!

Not my technique, that's usually understood as a joke, 'round here.LOL

Guess you missed that the first time.

[Sean]

By Jove I think she gets it!

Yes Loca, it is usually used as a joke; which is why I was annoyed when you used it to change the meaning of Strop's serious post to suit your own belief system.

Actually no... she probably doesn't get it at all and will come back at me with more inane and witless gibbering about evasion, debate, personal and other words she doesn't know the meaning of...

[loCAtek]

Um no, Strop, you and I had already discussed how fanatics are the problem and not just the religious.

However, Strop fell back on religious bigotry bashing, and I thought I'd jokingly correct/remind him.