Topic-icon Do you agree with this statement...

More
12 years 10 months ago #192688 by Gerrry
YoungColouredMale wrote:

Gerrry... that is a statement... Why does it stink to you?

What makes this statement different from:

All views have equal merit and none should be considered better than another."

Huh Gerrry?

BTW Gerrry, you are a smart man, tell me why should this thread go to the Religion forum.. It has nothing to do with religion? I've expressed 2 views?



Gerrry... you are letting bitterness get the better of you.


hahahahahaha! I'm not bitter at all, YCM.

This thread stinks because of the sneaky, devious way you wanted to evangelise by raising the issue of the Messiah . But you have been sneaky and predictable and it seems that religion is the only thing you can discuss. :ohmy:

Sadly, I was proved correct, as illustrated in my previous posting.

So yes, this thread belongs in the religious forum because talking about Christianity was your intention all along.

What is hard to understand about that?

;) :P

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192691 by Gerrry
YoungColouredMale wrote:

Gerrry wrote:

"....Eish, talk of casting pearls to swine."


In order for your statement to be true we have to consider the rest of the verse:

....lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.”


Now my question is: "At which point did I trample your views under foot and turn and tear you to pieces Gerrry?"





The answer to this question will highlight the contempt in your post. Unwarranted contempt I may add. Even if you meant it in a mildly sarcastic way, it'll still end up being disrespectful in light of the thread content.



I write English, not Bible. The expression "casting pearls to swine" is complete in itself as an English expression meaning that you would not appreciate the value of what I have to say to you...much like swine not appreciating pearls as valuable jewels. Your combative and aggressive attitude makes me think that you are the disrespectful person here, not I. Your devious new thread is disrespectful to everyone.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192693 by The South African
depending on what the view is, I agree that they all have merit, except when it comes to imaginary beings and imaginary places of course!

I am the man you do not want to see or why settle for a burger when you have steak at home.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192695 by YoungColouredMale
Gerrry wrote:

YoungColouredMale wrote:

Gerrry... that is a statement... Why does it stink to you?

What makes this statement different from:

All views have equal merit and none should be considered better than another."

Huh Gerrry?

BTW Gerrry, you are a smart man, tell me why should this thread go to the Religion forum.. It has nothing to do with religion? I've expressed 2 views?



Gerrry... you are letting bitterness get the better of you.


hahahahahaha! I'm not bitter at all, YCM.

This thread stinks because of the sneaky, devious way you wanted to evangelise by raising the issue of the Messiah . But you have been sneaky and predictable and it seems that religion is the only thing you can discuss. :ohmy:

Sadly, I was proved correct, as illustrated in my previous posting.

So yes, this thread belongs in the religious forum because talking about Christianity was your intention all along.

What is hard to understand about that?

;) :P


Gerrry, on what are you basing your assumption that I am trying to evangelise on this thread? And religion is actually not what I am trying to discuss here but rather tolerance. That's right Gerrry, tolerance. Something which you obviously completely lack. Don't feel bad Gerrry, this exercise would have shown that no one can be tolerant, or ever can be. Using the modern definition of "tolerance" that is.

So sadly, you jumped the gun and are proved incorrect.

There is a English expression, very grude, which comes to mind:

"Assumptions is the mother of all.... "

I'll leave you to fill in the blanks.



BTW. Where does the expression pearls before swine originate from Gerrry? Dink mooi asseblief?

And in closing this thread, because I don't have the stomach for it anymore... You defecated on this thread, but thank you Gerrry. You proved to be a real-time guinea-pig on tolerance.


(And Gerrry, truth be told, you are the antagonist. Don't transfer that by saying I am being combative and aggressive! I am appalled by your cowardice!)


Tusme, thank you for your very diplomatic answer.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192697 by tusme
Gerrry wrote:

Your combative and aggressive attitude makes me think that you are the disrespectful person here, not I. Your devious new thread is disrespectful to everyone.

Hi Gerrry,

I cannot speak for YCM, of-course :) ...however, rightly or wrongly, it was YCM's prerogative to choose whatever purpose his "statement" served...no!?

Imho, the fact you chose, to presume YCM's motives, is what actually "caused/provoked" his "combative and aggressive attitudes"... :)

Otherwise, I think it's rather unfair to suggest, YCM is being "devious" and "disrecpetful"...at least, I don't think he was, anyway... :)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago - 12 years 10 months ago #192703 by YoungColouredMale
Tusme, you are 100 correct in your observation.

Gerrry... is especialy good at that... pushing the mark (when he falls short of it).

TSA... by agreeing with the initial statement, I assume, that you will disagree with the second, because you cannot agree with both (that would negate the fact that you agree with the first statement).

This exercise is called the "tolerance trick.”

If all views have equal merit, then the view that Christians have a better view on Jesus than other religions is just as true as the idea that other religions have a better view on Jesus than Christians. But this is hopelessly contradictory. If the first statement is what tolerance amounts to, then no one can be tolerant because “tolerance” turns out to be gibberish.

Verstaan jy nou die exercise Gerrry? Ek vra net ek baklei nie voor jy weer kleinseerig is..

To say I’m intolerant because I disagree with someone’s ideas (religious or otherwise) is confused. The view that one person’s ideas are no better or truer than another’s is simply absurd and contradictory. To argue that some views are false, immoral, or just plain silly does not violate any meaningful definition or standard of tolerance.

Nowadays if you think someone is wrong, you’re called intolerant no matter how you treat them.

Most of what passes for tolerance today is intellectual cowardice, a fear of intelligent engagement. Those who brandish the word “intolerant” are unwilling to be challenged by other views, to grapple with contrary opinions, or even to consider them. It’s easier to hurl an insult—“you intolerant bigot”—than to confront the idea and either refute it or be changed by it. In the modern era, “tolerance” has become intolerance.


The End.
Last Edit: 12 years 10 months ago by YoungColouredMale. Reason: Spelling mistakes

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago - 12 years 10 months ago #192709 by Gnarls
Please dude, when you've made bigoted statements you've been called out and told why. You're the one who calls names first and you're the one who usually says that you're not answering when you're cornered.

At least man up before you try laying the blame at others feet.
Last Edit: 12 years 10 months ago by Gnarls. Reason: the Gnarls has edited.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192710 by The South African
YCM you are quite correct, I would disagree with the 2nd statement, Jesus can help you on your journey to spiritual enlightenment and goodness, but he is not the sole method of reaching said goals.

I am the man you do not want to see or why settle for a burger when you have steak at home.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192714 by YoungColouredMale
Gnarls wrote:

Please dude, when you've made bigoted statements you've been called out and told why. You're the one who calls names first and you're the one who usually says that you're not answering when you're cornered.

At least man up before you try laying the blame at others feet.


Gnarls... you make me laugh... What are you ranting about?

I am extremely intolerant Gnarls where it concerns religion, that I have never tried to hide. In this thread, where have I denied being intolerant? Nowhere neh Gnarls, jy allow ook maar net dat jou bitterness die beter kry van jou neh? In that regard you show yourself also to be a bigot...

Unlike you Gnarls, I openly practice my "bigotry", this doesn't change the fact that you are also a bigot (by the truest definition of the word that is), just because you hide yours well?

What I am saying in this thread Gnarls... is that everyone is marginally intolerant (at the least).

Don't nitpick Gnarls.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192723 by Gnarls
YoungColouredMale wrote:

To say I’m intolerant because I disagree with someone’s ideas (religious or otherwise) is confused. The view that one person’s ideas are no better or truer than another’s is simply absurd and contradictory. To argue that some views are false, immoral, or just plain silly does not violate any meaningful definition or standard of tolerance.

Nowadays if you think someone is wrong, you’re called intolerant no matter how you treat them.

Most of what passes for tolerance today is intellectual cowardice, a fear of intelligent engagement. Those who brandish the word “intolerant” are unwilling to be challenged by other views, to grapple with contrary opinions, or even to consider them. It’s easier to hurl an insult—“you intolerant bigot”—than to confront the idea and either refute it or be changed by it. In the modern era, “tolerance” has become intolerance.


This is rubbish since I 've repeatedly invited you to engage with me. You're the one who resorts to name calling like you did now, calling me a bigot with no valid reason (show me where I've made myself guilty of it) . You're the one assuming I'm bitter when all I said was when you're wrong we've pointed it out and told you why.

Intellectual cowardice my bony ass.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192729 by YoungColouredMale
Gnarls.... for you to say my views are wrong, would mean that you are intolerant. Do you understand that Gnarls?

What is tolerance Gnarls? Regrettably, I have to ask you this question, in light of your response?!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago - 12 years 10 months ago #192734 by Gnarls
No, cause I've given you my reasons. And since we're having this debate it must mean that my view is open to being challenged ergo, if your view makes more sense than mine then I'm open to changing my stance.

P.S. If I really was intolerant your threads woulda been deleted if they views differed to mine.
Last Edit: 12 years 10 months ago by Gnarls. Reason: the Gnarls has edited.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192735 by LSOB
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Exactly what i thought was going to happen here..

Tolerance is respectfully listening to someone else's views and opinions without looking down on them, insulting their beliefs, insulting them personally or their gender.. which unfortunately, we have had pleasure of witnessing you, YCM, do on countless occasions.

Tolerance is the ability to look at someone and say.. you are a person, a human being with feelings no matter what your views on a certain topic is, i will respect that very fact..

Views and opinions are just that.. not a fact file.. and everyone will have their own valid reason for having a certain view.. whether you think it is wrong or not.. There is only one being that is allowed to judge, and the last time i checked.. His name was not YCM..

Now that is my VIEW.. have fun tearing it apart. ;)

ps.. thanks for the apology though

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192740 by YoungColouredMale
Gnarls wrote:

No, cause I've given you my reasons. And since we're having this debate it must mean that my view is open to being challenged ergo, if your view makes more sense than mine then I'm open to changing my stance.

P.S. If I really was intolerant your threads woulda been deleted if they views differed to mine.


You have been tempted to do so many times Gnarls, which brings me back to my previous post... You hide your intolerance (at least at me), but that doesn't change the fact that you are intolerant (at least to me).

And Gnarls, what is to debate.. I said I am intolerant? Are we going to debate your tolerance? That is a futile exercise Gnarls.. because everyone is intolerant. And it can be proven.

LSOB... You really really like me neh? Its beginning to show to the others... I also like you...

(But not in that way... you know mos I am married, and so are you. Even an emotional tie, would be wrong LSOB... let it go sister)

As for the apology, I meant it neh?!



PS. “Civility” is the only true tolerance LSOB. Tolerance does not apply to how we treat ideas we think false. Which is effectively what I am saying.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192741 by Gnarls
You're confusing disagreement with intolerance. And if you're asking what is to debate, what is the purpose of this thread? While I do agree that we're all intolerant to an extent saying that tolerance equates to intellectual cowardice is naive in the extreme.

Oh, and there's a huge difference between being tempted to do something and actually doing it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192748 by YoungColouredMale
Hehehe... The purpose of this thread was to show that all of us are guilty of intolerance?

And further I said: Most of what passes for tolerance today is intellectual cowardice,... Note most not all... Kan jy sien Gnarls... you making the same mistake Gerrry did... which is put words in my mouth... Hehehe...

I will stand on this statement Gnarls:
Nowadays if you think someone is wrong, you’re called intolerant no matter how you treat them.

And Gnarls... let me give you an example we all can relate to regarding racism...

If you say in your heart all blacks are crooks, are you not being racist? Does it mean because no one heard it that you are not racist? Same difference neh Gnarls?

Be honest.. being tempted to delete my post is not actually doing it but the mere fact that you wanted to do it, is what makes you intolerant towards me specifically.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192750 by tusme
Well Gnarls, you're being abit of a "pratt" yourself, mate...!!

Imho, it is quite unfair of you to simply ignore YCM's original post, yet, when he offers others a response because they deserve one, rightly or wrongly, you then seek to "nail" those responses...!? :S

Well, if you reckon it's fair, then, you and I have a very different viewpoint of what is considered fair...!!

Otherwise, I'm curious, as to just what your answer would be, re, YCM's original post...? :)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192758 by Gnarls
^I thought you was ignoring me? Anyways, why should I answer his original post if I'm debating a point which stems directly from it? A point which the OP made by the way.

YoungColouredMale wrote:

Hehehe... The purpose of this thread was to show that all of us are guilty of intolerance?


Of course! Would you tolerate pedophilia?

And further I said: Most of what passes for tolerance today is intellectual cowardice,... Note most not all... Kan jy sien Gnarls... you making the same mistake Gerrry did... which is put words in my mouth... Hehehe...


Fair enough, but who decides this? Cause what may be tolerable to you might be intolerable to me.

I will stand on this statement Gnarls:
Nowadays if you think someone is wrong, you’re called intolerant no matter how you treat them.


And I will stand by my statement that you're confusing dissent with intolerance.

And Gnarls... let me give you an example we all can relate to regarding racism...

If you say in your heart all blacks are crooks, are you not being racist? Does it mean because no one heard it that you are not racist? Same difference neh Gnarls?


But this is between this person and God cause if he don't show racism then how the hell do I know he's a racist?

Be honest.. being tempted to delete my post is not actually doing it but the mere fact that you wanted to do it, is what makes you intolerant towards me specifically.


So, when Jesus was tempted to sin by satan this automatically made him a sinner?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago #192759 by Gerrry
tusme wrote:

Gerrry wrote:

Your combative and aggressive attitude makes me think that you are the disrespectful person here, not I. Your devious new thread is disrespectful to everyone.

Hi Gerrry,

I cannot speak for YCM, of-course :) ...however, rightly or wrongly, it was YCM's prerogative to choose whatever purpose his "statement" served...no!?

Imho, the fact you chose, to presume YCM's motives, is what actually "caused/provoked" his "combative and aggressive attitudes"... :)

Otherwise, I think it's rather unfair to suggest, YCM is being "devious" and "disrecpetful"...at least, I don't think he was, anyway... :)


Thanks for your input, Tusme. This is our first interaction, I think.

:)

Perhaps you have not been exposed to YCM's AGE OF UNREASON AND INTOLERANCE for as long as I have. I presumed nothing. Nothing. I predicted a religious aspect to this thread and I was correct. The only example YCM could come up with of a statement testing his original statement was of a religious and highly contentious nature, given the diversity of religious understanding here on BO.

YCM is incapable of amiable, civil discourse and interaction. The moment he is challenged in any way then reason departs from his head and his dysfunction and intolerance is displayed for all to see. I have not come across one thread he initiated [or in which he participated], that did not rapidly deteriorate into ranting and raving, name calling, condemnation from YCM, resulting in general antipathy towards him.

YCM has a one-track mind and so far as he is concerned, if you do not agree with his take on religion then you will go to hell. He holds the monopoly on enlightenment and on the meaning of Christianity and all its complexities. I have pointed out on several occasions that YCM is devoid of love, the mark of a Christian.

So if I see through him and point out certain things about him it is because I know him well by now. I too am combative and aggressive at times but that is only because I do not suffer fools gladly. And whenever I debate an issue it is with solid logical argumentation and reason.


Finally, of course I agree that it is his prerogative to 'choose whatever purpose his "statement" served...no!?'. I have not denied him this right. I have said that, considering he was going to bring the Messiah into this, it ought to have been on the religious forum.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 years 10 months ago - 12 years 10 months ago #192761 by Gnarls
tusme wrote:

Well Gnarls, you're being abit of a "pratt" yourself, mate...!!

Imho, it is quite unfair of you to simply ignore YCM's original post, yet, when he offers others a response because they deserve one, rightly or wrongly, you then seek to "nail" those responses...!? :S

Well, if you reckon it's fair, then, you and I have a very different viewpoint of what is considered fair...!!

Otherwise, I'm curious, as to just what your answer would be, re, YCM's original post...? :)


Before you go catching a hissy fit, this being one of them relativity things and all. I believe that this question is impossible to affirm in the absence of context and thus, my answer is no. Ironically, my view is the same as yours.

And only a bit of a pratt? Nigger, I'm Mr. Pratt!

:D
Last Edit: 12 years 10 months ago by Gnarls. Reason: the Gnarls has edited.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.