corporal punishment

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
C'mon. I've seen this same act from RC plenty of times before: deny, deny, play the victim, deny, play the victim, deny, deny, deny, play the victim...

Seems like with your latest post there's a heavy emphasis on both...

Instead of continuing with it like he does, why don't you just admit it? Actually even RC eventually admitted to being a liar. Of course he later denied it, but that's RC. It doesn't have to be you.

The difference is that RC IS actually a liar.

I just can't see what you are getting at.


From my perspective that means that you are either wrong, Or I have just not got it yet.

The ONLY thing I can do in those circumstances is ask for you to explain yourself better, and
ask for more/better evidence.

Which is what I am doing, and have been doing this entire thread.


If you want me to admit I am wrong then PROVE IT.

Write a post explaining exactly what you think I am doing wrong and why with the 'evidence' to back it up.

If I don't 'see the light' then there are plenty of people here who will happily eviscerate me for it.



Till then I really truthfully can't see what you are getting at and will not 'just admit it' to make you feel better.



I would much rather actually debate the issue, which is where we have exactly the same problem in that people
keep asking you for evidence for/valid reasoning to support your contention that it is never ever ok to strike a child...
Evidence and reasoning you have steadfastly failed/refused to provide.

You seem intent on debating the debaters not the subject.


However you are currently accusing me (and others) of being stupid and/or a liar. As well as being ignorant, wrong-headed,
sickening, acting like RC, and being a hypocrite.

All claims you have not yet substantiated.

Please do so.

Originally posted by Agerg
Advice to googlefudge: you're better than ToO. Draw a line in the sand, cut your losses, and just walk away. He is a troll worthy of neither your time nor your annoyance.

I made one last effort.

EDIT:

I really do care about what I post and how I debate.

And so if I have been hypocritical I want to know.
If I have come across as hypocritical I want to know.
If I am wrong I want to know.

So I can not be wrong next time.

That's why I persist, perhaps longer than warranted.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Troll? Yeah, right. I'm one of the few posters on this thread who's been willing to genuinely discuss the thread topic.

BTW, are you playing G75 to GF's RC?

Oh this could be funny! And how am I like galveston75? 😵

Originally posted by googlefudge
The difference is that RC IS actually a liar.

I just can't see what you are getting at.


From my perspective that means that you are either wrong, Or I have just not got it yet.

The ONLY thing I can do in those circumstances is ask for you to explain yourself better, and
ask for more/better evidence.

Which is what I am doing, and have been , and being a hypocrite.

All claims you have not yet substantiated.

Please do so.

as mush as i hate to admit it and not wanting to get caught up in Too's Machiavellian
tactics, I think you two deserve each other and I see the beginnings of a blossoming
on-line romance. I hope you are happy together! You will have ready made and
contrite insults to hurl at each other during domestic disputes, 'you are a liar for
not agreeing with me', 'ok pluueeeze you are acting like robbie carrobie',

get over yourselves, you are not that important in the scheme of things, despite what
your egocentricities are telling you.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I'm one of the few posters on this thread who's been willing to genuinely discuss the thread topic.

Really?

In a real debate you answer questions posed to you.

So do you have any evidence that mild child swatting is harmful?

Fourth or fifth time of asking.

And you say others are disingenuous?

If you want a debate, just answer the question. You can always say 'no, but the question is irrelevant to my position.'

But it's a valid question, and you should answer it rather than keep ducking and diving because you think it undermines your position.

And then answer googlefudge's question, which he has politely asked you the same number if times.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Really?

In a real debate you answer questions posed to you.

So do you have any evidence that mild child swatting is harmful?

Fourth or fifth time of asking.

And you say others are disingenuous?

If you want a debate, just answer the question. You can always say 'no, but the question is irrelevant to my position.'

But it's a valid ques ...[text shortened]... hen answer googlefudge's question, which he has politely asked you the same number if times.

In fairness I have mainly asked it impolitely.

Originally posted by googlefudge
In fairness I have mainly asked it impolitely.

you should kiss and make up!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you should kiss and make up!

Why?

Also shouldn't you be more concerned that you are now being pretty universally
referred to as a byword for slipperiness, dishonesty, and poor debating tactics?

That your very name is now used as an insult.

That's quite a reputation you have built yourself there.

And it's why I give not a jot what you think I should do.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Why?

Also shouldn't you be more concerned that you are now being pretty universally
referred to as a byword for slipperiness, dishonesty, and poor debating tactics?

That your very name is now used as an insult.

That's quite a reputation you have built yourself there.

And it's why I give not a jot what you think I should do.

lol, even the Christ himself was mocked and held in derision, i care less for these types
of opinions than you think.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
lol, even the Christ himself was mocked and held in derision, i care less for these types
of opinions than you think.

Well I don't think you care at all... So I am not sure you really can care less than that.

My point was that you probably should care a bit more.

Also, Christ didn't exist (at least as described in the bible)... The mocking was as fictional as he was.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well I don't think you care at all... So I am not sure you really can care less than that.

My point was that you probably should care a bit more.

Also, Christ didn't exist (at least as described in the bible)... The mocking was as fictional as he was.

yes because lets face it, other fictional characters managed to leave a legacy that
changed the world and inspired millions of people to the most loft ideals? You have
really no idea, have you. All opinions of that nature are meaningless unless you have
empirical evidence, which you don't.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes because lets face it, other fictional characters managed to leave a legacy that
changed the world and inspired millions of people to the most loft ideals? You have
really no idea, have you. All opinions of that nature are meaningless unless you have
empirical evidence, which you don't.

Well yes actually, they have.

In fact the fictional characters in every other world religion with more than a million
adherents would qualify.

Unless you think the 800~1,000 million Hindu's god's are real that gives you at least
the best part of a billion people right there.

Or did you forget the billions of people throughout history that have believed in, worshipped,
and been inspired by, tales of all the other fictional gods, and myths and legends all over
the world that were not Christians?


Given that the number of people who could have possibly witnessed the events in the bible NT
is in the tens to hundreds of thousands, the remaining billions ONLY had the words, the stories,
of the bible to go on.



Now we know the stories in the bible are not true, because they defy the known laws of physics.
It's really that simple.

Oh it's possible, if unlikely, that there was a rabbi called JC who was the basis for the myth.
But the actual events as described in the bible, they didn't happen.

Physics says NO.


So try coming up with a better, and less obviously stupid argument next time.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well yes actually, they have.

In fact the fictional characters in every other world religion with more than a million
adherents would qualify.

Unless you think the 800~1,000 million Hindu's god's are real that gives you at least
the best part of a billion people right there.

Or did you forget the billions of people throughout history that ha says NO.


So try coming up with a better, and less obviously stupid argument next time.

That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so loft an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospel.

Historian Will Durant

http://frankviola.org/2012/09/10/willdurant/

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so loft an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospel.

Historian Will Durant

http://frankviola.org/2012/09/10/willdurant/

Can I have an example of a fictional character that took more than one generation to invent? 😵

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so loft an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospel.

All the best books I have read were written by one writer (in one generation, obviously).
The Bible however was written by many writers over many many generations and most of the writers borrowed extensively from earlier sources.
As for your ability to judge miracles, I find it wanting. Next you'll be telling me that rising from the dead is less miraculous than the writing of 'The Lord of the Rings'.