Poll: Waiting to kiss until you are married!

[NicePants42]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: NicePants42

Originally posted by: DaShen
Why? It wasn't a misprint.

Oh, the idiocy. Or, hopefully, sarcasm.

Umm, he was right.. did you even read it?

I never said he wasn't right, I said he was ironic. There are better things for you to debate in this thread.

EDIT: And I'd like to say that your first post was very good, and I agree with you on most points. However:

I don't think that people try to convert people only out of fear of other's beliefs. I think that they try to convert other people (and impose their own beliefs) out of fear of what their own beliefs say happens to non-believers. I hope I didn't mangle that sentence too badly. It's probably a mixed bag.

In either case, Ian's attitude that decisions are up to the idividual would be key to solving the problems you bring up. The problem is how to make people realize this; and while we're doing that, we might wonder if we're imposing our own beliefs on them.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: NicePants42

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: NicePants42

Originally posted by: DaShen
Why? It wasn't a misprint.

Oh, the idiocy. Or, hopefully, sarcasm.

Umm, he was right.. did you even read it?

I never said he wasn't right, I said he was ironic. There are better things for you to debate in this thread.

EDIT: And I'd like to say that your first post was very good, and I agree with you on most points. However:

I don't think that people try to convert people only out of fear of other's beliefs. I think that they try to convert other people (and impose their own beliefs) out of fear of what their own beliefs say happens to non-believers. I hope I didn't mangle that sentence too badly. It's probably a mixed bag.

In either case, Ian's attitude that decisions are up to the idividual would be key to solving the problems you bring up.

I believe you said it was idiotic, or sarcastic... yes it is ironic, too. But I fail to see how my statement, after you claim to have not said I wasn't right (double negative works in this case), makes the statement idiotic. I wouldn't have posted, but this thread keeps getting bumped, so oh well.

Yes, I can definitely be pompous and judgemental, but in no way am I trying to proselytize. I am just trying to explain my take on the original post. Whether you take offense to what I believe is your own problem because my intentions were not to be preachy.

 

[NicePants42]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: NicePants42

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: NicePants42

Originally posted by: DaShen
Why? It wasn't a misprint.

Oh, the idiocy. Or, hopefully, sarcasm.

Umm, he was right.. did you even read it?

I never said he wasn't right, I said he was ironic. There are better things for you to debate in this thread.

EDIT: And I'd like to say that your first post was very good, and I agree with you on most points. However:

I don't think that people try to convert people only out of fear of other's beliefs. I think that they try to convert other people (and impose their own beliefs) out of fear of what their own beliefs say happens to non-believers. I hope I didn't mangle that sentence too badly. It's probably a mixed bag.

In either case, Ian's attitude that decisions are up to the idividual would be key to solving the problems you bring up.

I believe you said it was idiotic, or sarcastic... yes it is ironic, too. But I fail to see how my statement, after you claim to have not said I wasn't right (double negative works in this case), makes the statement idiotic. I wouldn't have posted, but this thread keeps getting bumped, so oh well.

Yes, I can definitely be pompous and judgemental, but in no way am I trying to proselytize. I am just trying to explain my take on the original post. Whether you take offense to what I believe is your own problem because my intentions were not to be preachy.

OK. Let's try this slowly.

1. Your first post was ironic. I piont this out.

2. Your reply that it wasn't a mis-print conveyed that you did not see the irony. I poked fun, trying to use a word that meant 'stupid' but sounded like 'irony'. I got idiotic. I said the fact that you failed to see the irony was idiotic, not that your first statement was idiotic. Sorry if that upset you.

3. Shadow checks me (which is fine, since it's arguable that idiotic was harsh) and I reply that I found your statements slightly humorous. Nowhere did I say that I was offended by anything you said, because I was not. I also throw in something to try to move the discussion back to something interesting.

4. You reply again.

I did not find you preachy. I was not offended. I do not think that you are an inherintly pompous and judgemental person, or that you were trying to proselytize. I just poked fun at an ironic statement, and again at your apparent failure to recognize the irony. I regret that the thread was derailed arguing semantics.