Homeless Solution

[Guest]

Dear Mr. thaiboxerken [/i]

Your positions in the posts give you away, god-believer.

Hardly Ken.

The fact that you believe I am religious is merely evidence of your bias. The fact that you are a self-proclaimed "anti-theist" means you are biased into thinking anyone who talks about anything from a religious viewpoint is a theist. You can't escape your current cultural norms.

I am free to argue both sides and commit to neither. Apparently you are uncapable of doing that or recognizing that skill in others.

Your silly "god-believer" taunt is grade-school. I never once mentioned my faith (if I even have any) in any god, gods, goddess, goddesses, or anything else. Quit with the strawmen, and moreover, quit with the strawgods! Thanks.

It is true, I'm anti-theistic. However, you are one of those that equivocate secularism with being "anti-theistic".

You are secular. You are anti-theistic. Gee, I wonder why I'd ever equate some peoples secularity (atheism in this case) with being their being anti-theistic.

Next Scoffer, step up. Stick a fork in Ken, ----E, he's done.

Sincerely,

S. H.

 

[Dancing David]

gee Mr. TB I have to disagree with you, the fwe local christian organizations that help people localy do not force the word on any body, they ask if you want to pray but they help you anyway, even if you don't.
The local Salvation Army does not preach to the men in the dorm and our local soup kitchen don't peach either.
So while your case may be valid (it is totaly unsupported, even anecdotaly) it is not true across the board.
So they teach compassion and humility in thai boxing?

Peace

 

[thaiboxerken]

Dear Mr. thaiboxerken [/i]



You may call me Reverend Thaiboxerken, thank you.

The fact that you believe I am religious is merely evidence of your bias. The fact that you are a self-proclaimed "anti-theist" means you are biased into thinking anyone who talks about anything from a religious viewpoint is a theist. You can't escape your current cultural norms.

You just gave yourself away, you talk from a religious viewpoint, therefore you are a theist.

I am free to argue both sides and commit to neither. Apparently you are uncapable of doing that or recognizing that skill in others.

You have yet to argue from the non-religious standpoint, you are a theist.

Your silly "god-believer" taunt is grade-school. I never once mentioned my faith (if I even have any) in any god, gods, goddess, goddesses, or anything else. Quit with the strawmen, and moreover, quit with the strawgods! Thanks.

You are a god-believer, why are you ashamed of your god?

You are secular. You are anti-theistic. Gee, I wonder why I'd ever equate some peoples secularity (atheism in this case) with being their being anti-theistic.

Secular and anti-theistic are different things. You are human, you are an ass, this doesn't mean I will equivocate all humans as asses.

Next Scoffer, step up. Stick a fork in Ken,
S. H.

The witless tend to applaud their meager attempts at wit. You applaud yourself well.

 

[thaiboxerken]

gee Mr. TB I have to disagree with you, the fwe local christian organizations that help people localy do not force the word on any body, they ask if you want to pray but they help you anyway, even if you don't.

I didn't say that these organizations force anything, I said that their motivation is to convert. Christians in the USA don't force religion as much, they use subterfuge. The goals of the christians is not to give charity, but to "save" them. It's part of the whole "spread the word" part of that religion.


The local Salvation Army does not preach to the men in the dorm and our local soup kitchen don't peach either.
So while your case may be valid (it is totaly unsupported, even anecdotaly) it is not true across the board.

I never made the arguement that any preaching or prayers were forced.

So they teach compassion and humility in thai boxing?

Nope, just boxing. Some thaiboxing camps do teach Buddhism with their martial arts though.

 

[Guest]

Dear Mr. thaiboxerken,

You just gave yourself away, you talk from a religious viewpoint, therefore you are a theist.

Nice try.

You basically say that I am religious, therefore I am religious.

You simply ignored what I said. No matter how many times you say it, it won't be true. One can argue both sides of an argument without committing to either. At least some of us have that ability.

You have yet to argue from the non-religious standpoint, you are a theist.

Uh huh. This probably makes sense to you. I have yet to argue from the viewpoint of a scientist, therefore I am not a scientist. Next fallacy please?

You are a god-believer, why are you ashamed of your god?

Ahh, so here we see you assigning me a belief. Interesting tactic. So, I believe in a god according to you. Please, astound us all and reveal which one.

This obvious tactic might work with the militant atheist intellectual lightweights that tend to frequent PalTalk (to be in control of something, a chat-room), but it doesn't impress many others. Fallacies are fallacies whether you commit them or anyone else does. You certainly don't get any special exemption.

I'll repeat: You are secular, atheist, and you are an admitted anti-theistic. Which is why it seems reasonable to equate some peoples secularity (atheism in this case) with being their being anti-theistic. You are the evidence, along with many others like you who have similar beliefs. Thanks.

Sincerely,

S. H.

 

[Guest]

So they teach compassion and humility in thai boxing?

Would you think they taught humility based on hearing one of its students saying they are completely anit-theist?

They may not teach it, I'm not sure, only knowing tae-kwon-do where they certainly do teach it, or they could teach it and Ken hasn't learned his lessons yet.

Sincerely,

S. H.

 

[thaiboxerken]

You basically say that I am religious, therefore I am religious.

No, I said you talk from the standpoint of a religious person, so you must be religious.


You simply ignored what I said. No matter how many times you say it, it won't be true. One can argue both sides of an argument without committing to either. At least some of us have that ability.

You've only argued from one, the theistic one.


Uh huh. This probably makes sense to you. I have yet to argue from the viewpoint of a scientist, therefore I am not a scientist. Next fallacy please?

A "scientific" viewpoint is non-sequitor to this thread. There are a couple viewpoints in this discussion, a religious one and a non-religious one. You only argue from a religious one, you must be religious. Why are you ashamed of your religion?


Ahh, so here we see you assigning me a belief. Interesting tactic. So, I believe in a god according to you. Please, astound us all and reveal which one.

Who knows? You are so ashamed of your theism that you won't even admit that you are theistic. But you don't like atheism so you give yourself away with your anti-atheistic comments.


This obvious tactic might work with the militant atheist intellectual lightweights that tend to frequent PalTalk (to be in control of something, a chat-room), but it doesn't impress many others. Fallacies are fallacies whether you commit them or anyone else does. You certainly don't get any special exemption.

It would be nice if it were true, however, you have yet to show any fallacies that I've actually committed. You are a theist, a god-believer, a superstitious fool.


I'll repeat: You are secular, atheist, and you are an admitted anti-theistic. Which is why it seems reasonable to equate some peoples secularity (atheism in this case) with being their being anti-theistic. You are the evidence, along with many others like you who have similar beliefs. Thanks.

You are an idiot, an ass, and a human. It would be no more reasonable to think a secular-atheist must be anti-theistic than to say that all humans are idiots simply because you are. Your equivocation fallacy cannot be justified, your generalizations are weak.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Would you think they taught humility based on hearing one of its students saying they are completely anit-theist?

My instructors know my stance on religion.

They may not teach it, I'm not sure, only knowing tae-kwon-do where they certainly do teach it, or they could teach it and Ken hasn't learned his lessons yet.

Just more ad-hominem, god-believer.

 

[Guest]

Dear Mr. thaiboxerken,

No, I said you talk from the standpoint of a religious person, so you must be religious.

Right, which is basically saying that I am religious, therefore I am religious. Considering you've already stated that I am a theist, this is obviously what you were doing.

You only argue from a religious one, you must be religious. Why are you ashamed of your religion?

Next fallacy please.

Please inform us of this mystery religion that I apparently (I didn't know!) belong to. You are simply inventing things for the sake of argument and everyone can see how pathetic that tactic is.

Who knows? You are so ashamed of your theism that you won't even admit that you are theistic.

I am ashamed that you call yourself a skeptic. And probably even more ashamed that we are both atheist, yet you are anti-them, which is irrational.

I haven't admitted the sports I play, maybe I am ashamed of that too! Oh my Ken, Fallacy Land residents must have made you mayor for the day or something.

But you don't like atheism so you give yourself away with your anti-atheistic comments.

No, quite wrong. I enjoy atheism. I don't like scoffers, pseudo atheists and skeptics who claim to be ultra-rational and at the same time assign beliefs to others and commit fallacies to bolster their own flawed worldview, probably out of insecurity due to their small organs (I'm talking about a church organ here..).

It would be nice if it were true, however, you have yet to show any fallacies that I've actually committed. You are a theist, a god-believer, a superstitious fool.

Right Ken, repeat it 100 more times and it is still false.

I am a theist? Which religion? A god-believer? Which one? Superstitious? Which ones? Let's see your stunning evidence. But, as is most likely, you never had any and simply assume these things, out of your obvious bias, hatred, and prejudice, to pat yourself on the back and further confirm your beliefs.

You are secular, atheist, and you are an admitted anti-theistic. Which is why it seems reasonable to equate some peoples secularity (atheism in this case) with being their being anti-theistic. This seems reasonable.

Sincerely yours,

S. H.

 

[Guest]

Dear Mr. thaiboxerken,

My instructors know my stance on religion.

Interesting that it was even brought up, consider you only practice fighting. Perhaps you just had to share your worldview or respond to questions about it. Spreading the good word.

Just more ad-hominem, god-believer.

How is that ad-hominem? ahha, get some skin.

In any case, repeatedly calling me "god-believer" yet never ever showing any evidence, is absurd, and certainly not anywhere near skeptical. However, according to your sloppy definition of a skeptic (meaning 'the way Ken thinks'), it just might make sense.

Now, quit cluttering the thead, troll.

I challenge you to not reply. I bet you don't have the willpower.

Thanks for the last word.

Sincerely,

S. H.

 

[Man of jade]

thaiboxer...

Sorry but the logic is so bad its hurting... I just gotta butt in.

"No, I said you talk from the standpoint of a religious person, so you must be religious."
"You've only argued from one, the theistic one. "

Personally im a theist, but if I argue from an atheistic point of view that
does not make me an atheist. In the same way if say I was agnostic like Sherlock, and argued from a religous point of view, that wouldnt make me religious.
"Who knows? You are so ashamed of your theism that you won't even admit that you are theistic. But you don't like atheism so you give yourself away with your anti-atheistic comments."
He isnt theist, he is agnostic. Thinking he is does not make it so.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Sorry but the logic is so bad its hurting... I just gotta butt in.
Personally im a theist, but if I argue from an atheistic point of view that
does not make me an atheist. In the same way if say I was agnostic like Sherlock, and argued from a religous point of view, that wouldnt make me religious.

His zeal and fervor for religion has convinced me that he is theistic.

"Who knows? You are so ashamed of your theism that you won't even admit that you are theistic. But you don't like atheism so you give yourself away with your anti-atheistic comments."
He isnt theist, he is agnostic.

Some people call themselves agnostic, and yet they believe in a god. Sherlock has convinced me that he is one of these "closet" theists.

 

[Finella]

Dearest taiboxerken:

I'm afraid you are the zealot here. Which is fine. All of us pass through this kind of stage in our lives. I'm afraid no matter what people say to you right now, you will not be able to rationally converse with them.

Enjoy this stage in your spiritual development.

---,---'--{@

 

[Guest]

Hi Finella,

It might take him a while (read: his whole life) to remove his blinders.

All the time he'll probably be convinced that he is logical and everyone else is a theist. It is funny how that works!

Finella, what type of t'ai chi do you practice? (can PM if you want)

Damn enjoyable exercise!

Sincerely,

S. H.

 

[Yahzi]

Thaiboxerken has reached the conclusion that Sherlock Holmes is religious for these reasons:

1. He is an idiot.
2. He feels the need to pretend to be polite.
3. He is deceitful.
4. His actions on this board are those of a hostile troll.

I knew SH for a true believer from about the first post. You can argue with Thai and I's rush to judgement, or even our methods, but you can't deny the fact we are right.

Only a Christian can exude such a self-righteous, impervious to reason or common decency, childish, pretentious, and smug attitude in the few short lines characteristic of Sherlock Holmes' posts.

 

[Guest]

Dear Yahzi (another furvent militant atheist believer),

, but you can't deny the fact we are right.

Sure one can.

You only call me troll after I defend myself from militant atheists assuming that I am religious, even when I clearly say I am not.

Quit pretending to be a skeptic.

Only a Christian can exude (blah blah)

And there you go again, clearly demonstrating your obvious bias.

*yawn*

Sincerely,

S. H.

 

[lyghtningbyrd]

Sherlock,

I remember you specifically telling me that you are NOT AN ATHIEST in a different thread.. I will attept to locate that exact thread, but for now, do you remember telling me that? I'm like 99% positive it was you...

 

[lyghtningbyrd]

I can't find it... maybe it was someone else. If so, I apologize.

Well, the 64,000 dollar question Sherlock, are you religious or not?

 

[Finella]

Well, the thread's gone south anyway... might as well digress...

Finella, what type of t'ai chi do you practice? (can PM if you want)

Damn enjoyable exercise!

Sincerely,

S. H. [/B]

I would PM, but it seems your status has mysteriously changed. Long Yang form (108 posture) and I also do a short form (24 posture). I enjoy it as well, but I certainly don't practice it as much as I should...

---,---'--{@

 

[Dancing David]

I didn't say that these organizations force anything, I said that their motivation is to convert. Christians in the USA don't force religion as much, they use subterfuge. The goals of the christians is not to give charity, but to "save" them. It's part of the whole "spread the word" part of that religion.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

While that may be true for some Xians I don't think it is true for all Xians who are involved in doing good works, there are those of any persuasion who do good works without concern for the consequences.

Peace