Is there really a war on Christianity?

[The Big Dog]

These, like those you ask for.


Do you read your posts? I believe not.

Oh dear, I see, you want me to post examples of something that I said does not exist.

That is FASCINATING!

Thanks for posting

 

[JayUtah]

Of course, I do not often see the phrase.

Then you need to get out more. Notice how the phrase wasn't as obscure to everyone else as it seems to be to you. Thankfully you were told what you could do to correct your deficiency.

Not often I see the request for clarification being referred to as a red herring either.

A demand for examples of a commonplace thing is not a request for clarification.

 

[The Big Dog]

Then you need to get out more. Notice how the phrase wasn't as obscure to everyone else as it seems to be to you. Thankfully you were told what you could do to correct your deficiency.

A demand for examples of a commonplace thing is not a request for clarification.

COMMONPLACE! I expect that asking for substantiation will also be expertly met with accusations that asking for it is a red herring.

Well this thread is just chugging along with zero examples. Commonplace or otherwise

I freely admit that I have not posted a single example of the thing that I don't think really exists.

 

[JayUtah]

COMMONPLACE!

Yes. You're the only one questioning whether there are claims being made of a "war on Christianity." Everyone else seems to know what the OP is talking about.

I expect that asking for substantiation will also be expertly met with accusations that asking for it is a red herring.

No. Earlier it was a red herring. Now it's just the full-blown derail we've come to expect from you in any thread here in which religion is mentioned.

You were told how to correct your deficient understanding of whether claims were being made "in the wild" to the effect alluded to in the OP. Since you were the only deficient, it's not anyone else's responsibility to correct it. Once you have corrected yourself, then perhaps you can rejoin the conversation on the same footing as everyone else.

 

[The Big Dog]

Yes. You're the only one questioning whether there are claims being made of a "war on Christianity." Everyone else seems to know what the OP is talking about.



No. Earlier it was a red herring. Now it's just the full-blown derail we've come to expect from you in any thread here in which religion is mentioned.

You were told how to correct your deficient understanding of whether claims were being made "in the wild" to the effect alluded to in the OP. Since you were the only deficient, it's not anyone else's responsibility to correct it. Once you have corrected yourself, then perhaps you can rejoin the conversation on the same footing as everyone else.

Yes I FULLY understand that people in this post assume that it is commonplace. I have no doubt about it, but that is of course is NOT the same as it being commonplace like you claimed.

You don't want to or cannot support it. I get it. I also understand your anger at being asked to support your claim. That is fine too.

Commonplace folks, accept it.

 

[JayUtah]

Yes I FULLY understand that people in this post assume that it is commonplace. I have no doubt about it, but that is of course is NOT the same as it being commonplace like you claimed.

You don't want to or cannot support it. I get it. I also understand your anger at being asked to support your claim. That is fine too.

Commonplace folks, accept it.

The premise needs no support. Your denialism doesn't change that. The question that follows from the premise is certainly debatable, and I have contributed to it. Try addressing that.

 

[The Big Dog]

The premise needs no support. Your denialism doesn't change that. The question that follows from the premise is certainly debatable, and I have contributed to it. Try addressing that.

The premise needs no support.

And thus skepticism died, not with a bang but with a whimper.

 

[JayUtah]

The premise needs no support.

And thus skepticism died, not with a bang but with a whimper.

This particular premise needs no further support. Why? Because the only one questioning it is you, and because the factual nature of the premise can be established by anyone by a ten-second visit to Google. Hence your ongoing denial and demand for posted examples is a red herring, not skepticism.

 

[The Big Dog]

This particular premise needs no further support. Why? Because the only one questioning it is you, and because the factual nature of the premise can be established by anyone by a ten-second visit to Google. Hence your ongoing denial and demand for posted examples is a red herring, not skepticism.

And as such one can confidently assert that something is commonplace with zero basis and attack any request for support of that claim because no one else raised a question.

Well that way you are CERTAIN to avoid supporting your claim.

The lack of any attempt to support the positive claims in this thread is remarkable, and your whining about being challenged, amusing.

Que sera sera, whatever will be, will be.

 

[imodium]

Until I see widespread Christian places of worship being vandalised almost daily and talk of bringing into law the banning of clothing and iconography I don't see a war.

 

[Slowvehicle]

<posing snip>

Read.

Read.

Read.

Watch & Read.

Read.

Read.

...and so forth...

(See also gratuitous accusations of "anti-theism...)

 

[Slowvehicle]

Yes I FULLY understand that people in this post assume that it is commonplace. I have no doubt about it, but that is of course is NOT the same as it being commonplace like you claimed.

You don't want to or cannot support it. I get it. I also understand your anger at being asked to support your claim. That is fine too.

Commonplace folks, accept it.

Or...

Read.

Read.

Read.

Read.

And so on...

(See also gratuitous accusations of 'anti-theism'...)

 

[Slowvehicle]

The premise needs no support.

And thus skepticism died, not with a bang but with a whimper.

Sigh.

Read.

Etc...

 

[Jim_MDP]

Read.

Read.

Read.

Watch & Read.

Read.

Read.

...and so forth...

(See also gratuitous accusations of "anti-theism...)

Or...

Read.

Read.

Read.

Read.

And so on...

(See also gratuitous accusations of 'anti-theism'...)

Sigh.

Read.

Etc...

Thanks SV.
I won't be following the links, but I was completely unsurprised to see O'Reilly's name on a couple of the URLs.

To me, he's the head cheerleader for the trend.
Every winter now, like clockwork, it's even odds whether he's going to stroke out on air over a handful of little towns being told to stop mixing church and state with their Xtian-exclusive holiday activities.

The other seasons usually bring random fun like multi-ton stone Commandments installations.

Honestly... he's going to do himself a mischief.

 

[fuelair]

I often see the term "war on Christianity". Is there really activity against Christians in the free world? I guess in Muslim countries there may be but not in America or Europe or anywhere else in the world.

Only to the extent I want them to follow their own (NEW TESTAMENT) rules on their own and not try to by political or other action force them on the rest of us.
Leave us alone or make nice with us and no problem. This applies to all other religions also - don't care what you choose to believe, but do not foist it off on others.

 

[fuelair]

Oh, on the you follow them part - unless it says /requires harming those who choose to leave for a real life or physical action against any you do not like. That makes, as it so well should, you a legitimate target for the good guys!!!

 

[Slowvehicle]

It should also be pointed out that accusations of a " 'war' against 'christianity' " are not always couched in that term. The same attitude can be identified when, for instance, pointing out that the magic acts of the Christ-god (the miracles, the crucifiction, etc.) are not onw meme less fabulously superstitious than the magic acts of the Mohammed-god (shattering the moon, flying to heaven on a wingéd horse), or the magic acts of the Isis-goddess (being fructified by the penis of the dead Osiris-god), or the magic acts of the Ganesha-god (bringing all into being by inscribing the firs "om" with his broken tusk), or any of the acts of any of the other 'gods'; is characterized as being "anti-theist", and "anti-religious".

 

[The Greater Fool]

Oh dear, I see, you want me to post examples of something that I said does not exist.

That is FASCINATING!

Thanks for posting

I must apologize.

Thanks to my Ambien, I don't remember even being on-line last night, let alone posting. Not the weirdest thing I've done.

Thanks for understanding.

 

[jakesteele]

I often see the term "war on Christianity". Is there really activity against Christians in the free world? I guess in Muslim countries there may be but not in America or Europe or anywhere else in the world.

Yes, there is a war on Christianity. You see it all over the place on this site in general in a bigoted, biased and hypocritical way. Bigot and biased you should understand easily; hypocritical in the sense that you never see anything bad about Islam or, especially, Judaism written about on these forums; especially the jews.

Haters will always hate whether it is rational, fair, right or just.

 

[Thermal]

I must apologize.

Thanks to my Ambien, I don't remember even being on-line last night, let alone posting. Not the weirdest thing I've done.

Thanks for understanding.

Don't ya hate that?