RWA - Omg, get real.

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
righteousness breeds intolerance, intolerance breeds hatred. RWA, why do you hate so much?

Is it fair to say then, given your chain of reasoning, that what bothers you is the strong convictions of others?

 

[_dmp_]

Why don't people who preach 'Tolerace' Tolerate INtolerance?

Intolerance does NOT breed hatred...TOLERANCE breeds apathy...which breeds spineless, worthless people afraid to take a stand for the hard 'right', in the face of the 'easy' wrong.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Though you still seem to think of me in a slightly negative way, it seems you have accepted my existence and developed at least some tolerance. I thank you for that DK. (I'm sure he needed a hint on where to take his line of questioning. He was beginning to falter and fail, as Bush pleged we as a nation would never do in our conquest of terrorism. )

RWA, I've developed a respect for you in some of the things that you have said both to me and my wife. I don't agree with most of the rest you say, but thats all good. Its allowed to be who we are.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Is it fair to say then, given your chain of reasoning, that what bothers you is the strong convictions of others?

Only so long as they don't expect me to accept those convictions being forced upon me on a personal level.

 

[Syntax_Divinity]

Hey Dmp. I'm not claiming to be more intelligent than the rest of you. You evidently disagree with the tone of my posts, and that's fine, but you're being ridiculous when you attribute things to me that you have no way of knowing. I attempt to engage RWA on a legitmate issue, happen to be articulate, and you jump all over me because either you disagree with me ideologically, or you simply don't like the tone of my posts. "You don't have wisdom." Give me a break. I'm not saying that I do, but how would you have any idea? "I just use big words to try to impress people." Wow, holy shit!!! How do you know these things?!?!?!?! Amazing! Come on, grow up. All I'm trying to do is get RWA to honestly address the substance of my posts, and he dodges around them, as he AGAIN did in this last post, and you then jump all over me accusing me of having an ego problem, and a lack of wisdom. I mean seriously, can you see how silly that looks?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by dmp
Why don't people who preach 'Tolerace' Tolerate INtolerance?

Intolerance does NOT breed hatred...TOLERANCE breeds apathy...which breeds spineless, worthless people afraid to take a stand for the hard 'right', in the face of the 'easy' wrong.

Yes. Yes. Excellent wordology.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by dmp
Why don't people who preach 'Tolerace' Tolerate INtolerance?

Intolerance does NOT breed hatred...TOLERANCE breeds apathy...which breeds spineless, worthless people afraid to take a stand for the hard 'right', in the face of the 'easy' wrong.

I disagree. Tolerance begets individuality, freedom, acceptance, and eventually harmony.

granted, there are those that are intolerant and are completely unaccepting of others, even to the point of violence. Its those that eventually bring about terrorism and must therefore be destroyed.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I disagree. Tolerance begets individuality, freedom, acceptance, and eventually harmony.

granted, there are those that are intolerant and are completely unaccepting of others, even to the point of violence. Its those that eventually bring about terrorism and must therefore be destroyed.

Tolerance has it's place. Tolerance toward terrorists and communists, is a perversion of tolerance.

 

[Syntax_Divinity]

Hey, RWA, are you going to reply to my post on the third page of this thread? I mean a genuine, and stand up reply? Or are you going to engage in your dodge and wuss tactics? I mean, if you really think that Fox News is fair and balanced, in the face of all the facts I laid out for you, then say so. Be a man, debate. Don't dodge the substance of my post.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by Syntax_Divinity
Hey, RWA, are you going to reply to my post on the third page of this thread? I mean a genuine, and stand up reply? Or are you going to engage in your dodge and wuss tactics? I mean, if you really think that Fox News is fair and balanced, in the face of all the facts I laid out for you, then say so. Be a man, debate. Don't dodge the substance of my post.

I'm trying to say this in love...


Who the hell are you that you feel you are OWED a reply? Who am I for that matter...If people choose to reply to ANYONE's tirades here, it's 'their' call. Stop baiting people.


Thanks, y0!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Syntax_Divinity
Hey, RWA, are you going to reply to my post on the third page of this thread? I mean a genuine, and stand up reply? Or are you going to engage in your dodge and wuss tactics? I mean, if you really think that Fox News is fair and balanced, in the face of all the facts I laid out for you, then say so. Be a man, debate. Don't dodge the substance of my post.

Your arguments are not persuasive. Your main tactic is to twist things out of proper perspective and proportion. You wouldn't know common sense if it explained fractions to you.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
You wouldn't know a good time if it fell out of the sky, landed on your face, and started to wiggle!

 

[Syntax_Divinity]

YOU'RE DOING IT AGAIN!!! "You're arguments are not persuasive." If you truly believe that, and I don't think that you do, and you are browsing these forums to advocate particular issues and causes, then prove that they aren't persuasive. Engage me on the substance of my post. You are dodging. Anyone with any objectivity can see that you are avoiding answering my arguments. If you truly think that Fox News is fair and balanced, I say to you again, try to lay out the groundwork to refute my arguments. To just claim that my arguments are not persuasive is pathetic and does two things: It shows your lack of confidence or understanding in the things you believe, and shows your intellectual dishonesty. Come on, you have to know what you're doing. You're clearly not an idiot. And dmp, chill out. I don't feel I'm owed a reply. But if he claims to be able to refute my arguments, and is to advocate particular issues and causes, then don't you think that he should respond to the substance of a post he disagrees with instead of dancing around it and making claims without backing them up. Does anyone else see this wussiness?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by dmp

Hey that was sent to you in a PM. How could you violate my trust?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Syntax_Divinity
YOU'RE DOING IT AGAIN!!! "You're arguments are not persuasive." If you truly believe that, and I don't think that you do, and you are browsing these forums to advocate particular issues and causes, then prove that they aren't persuasive. Engage me on the substance of my post. You are dodging. Anyone with any objectivity can see that you are avoiding answering my arguments. If you truly think that Fox News is fair and balanced, I say to you again, try to lay out the groundwork to refute my arguments. To just claim that my arguments are not persuasive is pathetic and does two things: It shows your lack of confidence or understanding in the things you believe, and shows your intellectual dishonesty. Come on, you have to know what you're doing. You're clearly not an idiot. And dmp, chill out. I don't feel I'm owed a reply. But if he claims to be able to refute my arguments, and is to advocate particular issues and causes, then don't you think that he should respond to the substance of a post he disagrees with instead of dancing around it and making claims without backing them up. Does anyone else see this wussiness?

La di da skip ee skip eee doooo! tra la la la lal all along the merry path!

"Use your anger, Luke! Let it flow!"

 

[Syntax_Divinity]

Ok, that's all that I needed. You don't have the confidence to stand up for your beliefs in an honest way. This was what I suspected, but your insistence on dodging a debate you cannot win proves it. I seem to remember you saying something that liberals hate people that have convictions. What about conservatives that won't stand up for theirs? That's what I thought. It's okay, if you don't have the arguments, then I guess it is better for you to try to dodge an unwinnable debate in which you have so little confidence in your side.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Syntax_Divinity
Ok, that's all that I needed. You don't have the confidence to stand up for your beliefs in an honest way. This was what I suspected, but your insistence on dodging a debate you cannot win proves it. I seem to remember you saying something that liberals hate people that have convictions. What about conservatives that won't stand up for theirs? That's what I thought. It's okay, if you don't have the arguments, then I guess it is better for you to try to dodge an unwinnable debate in which you have so little confidence in your side.

I'm glad your needs have been met. Sorry your attack thread wasn't the solid victory you had hoped for. Welcome to the board.

:ali:

 

[Syntax_Divinity]

Actually, it was. I validated my claim that you won't stand up for a real debate and don't have enough confidence in your beliefs to engage in an honest debate on the substance of the issues. Okay. It was a solid victory, though unexpected. I imagined you would at least put up an effort to refute my claims instead of dodging and spinning, but no big deal. You prove my point either way. You can take away what you want from this thread, but any objective person reading this will realize that you were confronted with a number of arguments anathema to your beliefs, and you chose not to debate them due to lack of confidence. Thanks for the welcome.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Syntax_Divinity
Actually, it was. I validated my claim that you won't stand up for a real debate and don't have enough confidence in your beliefs to engage in an honest debate on the substance of the issues. Okay. It was a solid victory, though unexpected. I imagined you would at least put up an effort to refute my claims instead of dodging and spinning, but no big deal. You prove my point either way. You can take away what you want from this thread, but any objective person reading this will realize that you were confronted with a number of arguments anathema to your beliefs, and you chose not to debate them due to lack of confidence. Thanks for the welcome.

No. I've presented my side. I'm confident that most people out there reading this would side with me. I'm confident enough to shut the hell up sometimes. You should try it.

 

[Syntax_Divinity]

The thing is though, you never really did present your side. You just labeled my arguments as incoherent and not pursuasive. I reread the entire thing. You never once presented your side. Not once. I don't expect you to now, so I guess we can just let this thread die. You're tedious. Oh, well, no hard feelings.