• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Engaged?

Ian Osborne said:
I reckon he's more like The Black Knight from the same film. He's been cut to pieces in this thread, but he constantly denies ever having been wounded and fights on, to his further detriment.
Click to expand...

Ha, yes, good call. I must admit that when he suddenly changed tack and started wittering on about Christmas that it was a hasty retreat, which I guess it was, but I wasn't expecting him to hop back and start bleeding on us.
 
What a versatile world we live in.

In Denmark, Christmas is December 24th. And while it is Thursday two days from now, it isn't Thursday in Japan.

Neither Christmas or Thursdays are as much "facts" as some would like them to be. Saturday isn't a celebration on Saturnus in Denmark, because we call it Lørdag - Laug Dagr - bathing day. No, we don't just bathe on Laug Dagrs, either. Germans should honor the sabbath, the Jewish day of rest, since Samstag derives from this.

Be very careful not to impose your own set of values as the established facts that everyone must succumb to - and if they don't, they are baaaaad people....
 
CFLarsen said:
What a versatile world we live in.

In Denmark, Christmas is December 24th. And while it is Thursday two days from now, it isn't Thursday in Japan.

Neither Christmas or Thursdays are as much "facts" as some would like them to be. Saturday isn't a celebration on Saturnus in Denmark, because we call it Lørdag - Laug Dagr - bathing day. No, we don't just bathe on Laug Dagrs, either. Germans should honor the sabbath, the Jewish day of rest, since Samstag derives from this.

Be very careful not to impose your own set of values as the established facts that everyone must succumb to - and if they don't, they are baaaaad people....
Click to expand...


Ok Claus, now you’ve really lost in. No one here is calling anyone a “baad person”, those are your value judgments. The English word for the time between Wednesday and Friday is Thursday, to deny that is to deny reality, that does not mean that it cannot be another time elsewhere, or that other languages have other words for that time.

If I were to ask someone what day it would be in two days time, in Greenwich, on the meridian. And they replied “it will be the day between Wednesday and Friday” and I replied “oh you mean Thursday”, and they shouted “Don’t you force your social values on ME!” I’d think they were quite, quiet mad. You however seem tot think that they would just be supporting their rights to their own view of reality and that I should stop oppressing them by using the word “Thursday”.
How odd.
 
And Claus, what's you're definition of 'engagement'? Do you accept the one formulated earlier and accepted by the rest of this thread?
 
brodski said:
Ok Claus, now you’ve really lost in. No one here is calling anyone a “baad person”, those are your value judgments.
Click to expand...

Being called a "liar" is hardly a "value judgment".

brodski said:
The English word for the time between Wednesday and Friday is Thursday, to deny that is to deny reality, that does not mean that it cannot be another time elsewhere, or that other languages have other words for that time. If I were to ask someone what day it would be in two days time, in Greenwich, on the meridian. And they replied “it will be the day between Wednesday and Friday” and I replied “oh you mean Thursday”, and they shouted “Don’t you force your social values on ME!” I’d think they were quite, quiet mad. You however seem tot think that they would just be supporting their rights to their own view of reality and that I should stop oppressing them by using the word “Thursday”.
How odd.
Click to expand...

Whoa. Where did anyone deny that the English word for Thursday is Thursday?
 
CFLarsen said:
Being called a "liar" is hardly a "value judgment".
Click to expand...
The fact that you have been accused of lying is because you have lied about what other posters have said, it ahs nothing to do with your desire to be engaged or not. It ahs been clearly pointed out where you have made false statements about what posters have said, the evidence has been shown to you and yet you continued to make those false statements.

Whoa. Where did anyone deny that the English word for Thursday is Thursday?
Click to expand...
Ok, son eth English word for Thursday is Thursday, but claiming that it is Thursday when we are between Wednesday and Friday is not "a fact". Is that your position?

Like the English word for the time between an agreement to marry and the end of that agreement is “engaged”, but it is not a fact that the time between the beginning of that agreement and the end of that agreement is “engaged”, unless some undefined magic happens, right?
 
brodski said:
The fact that you have been accused of lying is because you have lied about what other posters have said, it ahs nothing to do with your desire to be engaged or not. It ahs been clearly pointed out where you have made false statements about what posters have said, the evidence has been shown to you and yet you continued to make those false statements.
Click to expand...

Where have I made a false statement about what posters have said?

brodski said:
Ok, son eth English word for Thursday is Thursday, but claiming that it is Thursday when we are between Wednesday and Friday is not "a fact". Is that your position?

Like the English word for the time between an agreement to marry and the end of that agreement is “engaged”, but it is not a fact that the time between the beginning of that agreement and the end of that agreement is “engaged”, unless some undefined magic happens, right?
Click to expand...

Whoa, whoa. I did not claim that the English word for Thursday wasn't Thursday.

Perhaps you could stop making false claims yourself?
 
brodski said:
Like the English word for the time between an agreement to marry and the end of that agreement is “engaged”, but it is not a fact that the time between the beginning of that agreement and the end of that agreement is “engaged”, unless some undefined magic happens, right?
Click to expand...

Since when are we just discussing what engagement means in English?
 
CFLarsen said:
Where have I made a false statement about what posters have said?
Click to expand...
Jaggy ahs posted several.


Whoa, whoa. I did not claim that the English word for Thursday wasn't Thursday.

Perhaps you could stop making false claims yourself?
Click to expand...

I have never claimed that you have claimed that the English word for Thursday isn't Thursday, you claimed that "Thursday isn't as much a fact" as some here would have it. please stop making false statements about what I post especially when you quote my words in eth post in which you lie about them, it's just embarrassing for you.

Now, would you care to get back on topic, Is engagement the period between an agreement to marry and eth end of that agreement or not, if not what else specifically has to happen in order for it to be an engagement? And what is your objection to those specific actions which make you think the sue of the term engagement is pointless?
 
CFLarsen said:
Let's take a look back in time.



Yes. Post #29.

Does anyone feel stupid now?

Or, perhaps just a little awkward?
Click to expand...

So engagement is just eth period of time between an agreement to marry and the marriage occurring. So what about engagement do you object to?
 
CFLarsen said:
Name one lie.
Click to expand...


This one will do for illustrative purposes:

Originally posted by CFL
I didn't claim that you did not suggest using a representative sample.
Click to expand...

You know this, why you try and pretend not to is beyond me, but for the sake of anyone who might think it is a misunderstanding, here are the relevant posts, once again:



http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2915431&postcount=232


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2915081&postcount=209
 
Last edited:
CFLarsen said:
Let's take a look back in time.

Yes. Post #29.

Does anyone feel stupid now?

Or, perhaps just a little awkward?
Click to expand...

Ok, so 'engagement in Denmark is the same' is your definition? Seriously, that's it?

Obvious question, 'same as what'? Honestly, you've been debating woos for so long you're debating just like them. Getting information from you is like pulling teeth.

I'll go out on a limb and assume you mean 'same as the rest of the world' (based on my statements leading to post 29). Yet this still means nothing, as we've (we coming from numerous countries) told you that engagement in each of our respective communities means literally 'the period between deciding and getting married'. Values, ceremonie and hoo-haa can be added onto it, but engagement is a denotative definition that is not a value itself.

So, shall we assume you agree to this definition, then?

Athon
 
Last edited:
CFLarsen said:
Let's take a look back in time.

Engagement in Denmark is the same.
Click to expand...

Yes. Post #29.

Does anyone feel stupid now?

Or, perhaps just a little awkward?
Click to expand...

Let's look at what else you said in Post #29...

CFLarsen said:
But - again, like I said - people here don't "get engaged".
Click to expand...

Now, by 'the same', you must've been referring to Athon's statement that two people agreeing to get married is an engagement, which is precisely what you've been trying to deny ever since. And working to this definition, if Danes 'don't get engaged', they must either forego marriage altogether or blunder into the church accidentally on the way to the shops and come out with a spouse.

So perhaps you'd like to clarify your definition of 'engagement', which is the question you've been avoiding for at least two days?
 
athon said:
Ok, so 'engagement in Denmark is the same' is your definition? Seriously, that's it?

Obvious question, 'same as what'? Honestly, you've been debating woos for so long you're debating just like them. Getting information from you is like pulling teeth.

I'll go out on a limb and assume you mean 'same as the rest of the world'. Yet this still means nothing, as we've (we coming from numerous countries) told you that engagement in each of our respective communities means literally 'the period between deciding and getting married'. Values, ceremonie and hoo-haa can be added onto it, but engagement is a denotative definition that is not a value itself.

So, shall we assume you agree to this definition, then?

Athon
Click to expand...

This is Claus remember. He appears to have "accidentally" removed that quote from its context:

Originally posted by CF Larsen
"Engagement in Denmark is the same. But - again, like I said - people here don't "get engaged". We skip that. No rings (or ring), no ceremonials. Couples live together, and at some point, if they decide to get married, they get married. But no formal announcements of "engagement".
Click to expand...

So if his claim that engagement means the "same", then nobody in Denmark is getting married because people don't get engaged. (Or possibly they randomly turn up for weddings and marry whoever else happens to turn up because there is no prior agreement.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom