First, a thread recap, wherein Darth Rotor spends a very large number of words "not caring":
Interesting take on what I wrote. I too know how to play that game.
As the quotes above demonstrate, you are resolute that you "don't care" about God beliefs, inferring very strongly that criticising them is impolite and presumptuous.
No, you choose to read it that way. I want to know why it is assumed that a theist cares? Some do, we note that in the news frequently, but the OP was not so constructed.
Back to the OP, and my original query on why I should care about another's religious beliefs.
What's so special about theistic beliefs, of all the topics on this board, that makes them not worthy of discussion?
You tell me. I have never taken that position.
Why is the theistic world-view so sacrosanct that for Skepchick to even ask the question she did brings you out in hives?
If you read the OP, and I did, you see it for what it is. Skeptigirl has protested that her intentions are honorable.
I am skeptical. Skepticism is a tool, and a damned fine one. I don't find it appealing as a religion, or a universal principle. I realize Claus may bust me for that.
You must have a reason for being very willing to "go attack dog" on a Loose Changer's fallacy and their paranoid world-view, or on Oliver's politics and his anti-American world-view,
Yes I do. The first is centered emotionally, in my first career, and my loyalty to my group. As to my learned contempt of Eurotrash, I wasn't born with that. I learned it by interacting with Europeans during the 90's, most of whom were warm, fantastic, wonderful people, but some of whom were out and out, American bashing, Eurotrash. No, they weren't all French.
but all of a sudden when it comes to theistic questions we should all agree to disagree and move on? You're happy to "get your jollies" criticising others; you're more than willing to "bat ideas around" on a myriad of other topics, but all of a sudden you find a topic at which to loudly proclaim you disinterest?
Not quite. I have posted on this subforum for over a year. I have had any number of fruitful conversations with honest and open members about beliefs, and some of my approach.
I am wary of Greeks bearing gifts.
If that's not special pleading, I don't know what is.
Given that you have made up the position, call it what you like. It's yours.
Then why are you hissing at anyone who even asks you the question? Why give a childish response of "Who cares?" than attempt the adult, rational, interesting and nuanced response you're more than capable of. This could be a really interesting thread, but you're sabotaging it.
Because it is actually related to the opening question.
Why do you, or anyone, or our own hard working Skeptigirl, assume that I care enough about another person's religious beliefs to attempt to disprove them? That is on topic, and related to the OP.
If your belief is not above question, answer the OP!
Why, because you used an exclamation point?
I'd actually like to have a robust but sensible conversation where you actually take part rather than "playing" whatever game it is you fancy today, but if you're not up for that, then that's fine too.
Truth be told, I think my input into this thread is approaching zero value added, so I'll agree that my poking further holes in the topic cannot be added to, without once again repeating myself.
I have a great deal of respect for you Darth, and even where we disagree on issues, I always find your posts interesting and coherent. Why this thread has brought out the complete opposite in you, I'm at a loss to understand.
Not to worry. It took me a few months to discover the venom in the R & P forum, and took a bit longer to figure out what was worth discussing, and what wasn't.
That doesn't stop me from doing what a lot of posters here do, which is poking holes in assumptions embedded in premises. All of the sub forums see such action. Why is R & P sacred? Can't the game be played here?
I like your posts. We don't always agree, but I always read what you have to say with interest, even when I am in disagreement with you.
Let's quit the childishness. Just tell us why you reject all the other Gods and embrace whichever flavour of theism it is you subscribe to, and we can all have an adult discussion.
Since I never seriously considered pursuing any other God, what would be the point of discussing something I never did, and never have done? (Caveat: I have looked into the Tao, and I continue to do so, helped along by a Catholic friend of mine who also has an inquisitive nature.)
[/I]I am legitimately interested in "batting ideas around" with you; you're smart, sharp and normally quite cordial. Let's have a debate on this question in the manner that that you'd be perfectly willing to have on literally any other issue on the JREF.
I am not interested in
debating my world view. Who I am is not an abstraction, nor is it your play toy. Put another way, I don't care to be talked at. (I imagine some of my targets on the various sub forums don't care for it either. Such is the Internet. ) While I may often be cordial, I can also be a right prick.
I do not care for the open assumption, operational among some participants in this group, that distills down to "you are reasonable if you agree with me." I don't consider that a basis for discussion on much of anything.
My perspective took my whole life to develop. If I choose to discuss it with anyone here in other than a person to person encounter, I'll let you know. Here's one tidbit for you: the philosophy is far more appealing than the doctrine, which varies so broadly as to lose some of its value. As I noted months ago in a conversation here, I am not trained in Christian apologetics, and will not offer a rube's version of them. I can only speak for myself when it comes to faith, and from what I have observed.
Beyond that, for now, the answer is no.
I am still awaiting a response to why I should care about another religionist's beliefs. That is directly related to the OP. Given that this is page seven, I guess I'll accept I won't get an answer.
Cheers.
DR
) and its successful first flights a matter of prediction, risk, and pay off. 
