THE ROAD IS OUR AGONY, BUT ALSO OUR DAILY BREAD - -
- a series of memorable and forgettable rants, ramblings, and stories from the road. . .
What is the warning in regards to?
as the sunday school song goes, "the bee eye bee ell ee; yes that's the book for me! i stand alone on the word of god, the bee eye bee ell ee."or something like that. gideons. you've seen them; ubiquitous.or used to be.
The Bible? Your position is that it is an instrument of hate?
Kim, Kim, Kim, As Pete's best friends' mom used to say (with finger wagging)...."Hateful, hateful, hateful". You're gonna burn my friend. Repent!Kim: good lawyer & friend. But miguided soul.Lou
anonymous--read it carefully. it says that "exposure for extended periods ... may cause ... in extreme cases ... hatred."what the sticker suggests is that some extremists may twist the words, initially benign, into something terribly bad. not that the book itself is inherently bad or hate-filled.what i take this silly little sticker to suggest is that folks need to think about the things they are exposed to, whether it is the bible, or some little sticker intended to provoke a chuckle in some, and thoughtful discussion in many.that's still a noble effort, isn't it? but thanks, everyone, for reading, posting, and thinking.
Point awarded to Kim, people really do see what they want to see!Back to your studies everyone, be they Bible, reading or comprehension.gpickle
At what juncture was this blog a point scoring game? Asking questions exposes one to "lost points"? Why is it that this is about scoring points? What are the points being accumulated for? If we are engaging in a true game of intellecutal honesty there Gpickle, show me where it says "extremist" as your leader stipulates?Begin your reading comprehension-go.
oh, there are always points available, anonymous.tough guy points, style points, dumbass points, error-spotting points, and pointing points, for pointing out the obvious.cool points, too. did i say dumbass points, too?
Kim, where again does that "sticker" say extremist? Please answer a simple question.There is a bit of truth(iness) in your reply, but your equivocation of Bible exposure to human rights violations is much like GWB logic-you are becoming what you hate. Yes, I do believe you not only metioned dumb ass points but score several. :)Congrats
dear anonny--you are gaining dumbass points, and losing credibility points.what I SAID was this: "what the sticker suggests is that some extremists..."see, i didn't say the sticker said, i said "what the sticker suggests" and your suggestion that what I SAID is "what the sticker said" validates my point that people read the bible--A WORK OF FICTION--and construe it to be THE ACTUAL WORD OF GOD, and further that what they BELIEVE the book says is, in fact, what the bible [recall, a work of fiction] actually SAID.congrats for helping make my point.and as always, thanks for reading and posting, and adding to discussion.
Provide me evidence where it 'suggests' that counselor? Which portion of that "sticker" provides evidence for your claim of extremism? That is what I have been asking for evidence of this "suggestion" you claim. Once again just like GW, making claims without evidence and trying to feed us horse crap and call it yummy...If your point is you can equivocate with the likes of GW, and ad hominem attack someone who doesn't agree with you(ala Dick) point well made. Now, also show me where it says I do or don't read the Bible. I may be a person that just enjoys exposing fallicious reasoning-it is fun. It is all about the dialogue isn't it?
I got lost in this discussion at intellecutal honesty.Honestly!gpikcle
As did Kim.
isn't this lively?unfortunately, i'm going to be out of range until tomorrow.have fun.by the way, it's "fallacious."[and, no, i'm not lost, but i am a bit perplexed at the logical route you've chosen--kind of like winnie the pooh and the tree--but whatever. you seem to be claiming that when i suggest something that i therefore claim that it is fact. kind of like WMD and terrorist threats, speaking of dubyas and dicks. i'm only pointing out things that might be, not making claims of what is.]
You are now reduced to pointing out spelling errors as opposed to answering the question-please provide evidence for your claim of extremism. Where oh where was the extremist piece in your "sticker"?I am merely suggesting you provide evidence for your claims. Isn't that what you would ask for-evidence to back up your position.Point to WP or anything else you want to divert the conversation from your poor logic...it remains poor logic George...oops I mean Kim.
hey! Over here!I pointed out a spelling error too!gpickle, patiently waiting for the day (or night) when the good lord will see fit to reveal itself to me in all its majestic majesty. Until then I will just keep doing as best I can and hope that a well lived life can keep me from "burning". But really, my reward is my life well lived, so do with me what you will, Cosmos!
It occurs to me that if Mr. Annonymouse is so unconcerned with points, perhaps he/she should sign their name and become more known.Way to stir the pot!!
Darling nikki, it should occur to you that The MR shouldn't need my name to make a valid arguement. Kim you certainly don't need my name do you-I thought the dialogue was enough, isn't that what this is about? Nikki how very sexist of you, I could easily be a xx, couldn't I?
["argument," "an xx," not that we're keeping track. but it IS my forum, isn't it?]no, i don't need a name, not yours nor anyone's. that's one of the points of this place: you can comment, unlike some places, and you can do it without monitoring, without pre-approval, and without any identification.you are also free to make silly assumptions and logical leaps, too.but if gpickle or i catch you with a misspelled word, then heaven help you.you said: "...please provide evidence for your claim of extremism. Where oh where was the extremist piece in your 'sticker'?"earlier [see my comment of Thu Nov 29, 08:10:00 AM CST], i clarified what i said. i'm not going to repeat it, as i remain as satisfied with my response now as i was then, when i wrote it.you may continue to comment on this as you wish. if you make a new point, i'll respond.and as always, thanks for reading and commenting.
"an XX" would be two X chromosomes therefore a female, although the second X would be more accuratley known as a barr body which may have led to your confusion.I accept you saying that you don't have proof-that's cool.
Post a Comment